He is lucky to have been a douchebag in America. If he were in Syria, Jordan or Egypt, he'd already have been executed by those governments who have outlawed the Muslim Brotherhood and therefore Hamas.
He exploits free speech and uses it as an instrument to spread his intense hate of Israel and Jews because he is consumed by a bitter antisemitism since childhood…
A magician succeeds by distracting our attention long enough to achieve the effect of the trick. I say this because IMO the President has steered this argument…he signed the EO against antisemitism, he wants to believe he has the authority to make change happen, and so he suggested that ICE arrested Khalil because of the Columbia protest. This furthers his idea of himself as strongman/President. However, the comments made by the DHS representative suggest that there is something much more concrete that this guy has done providing material support to Hamas. Activities that absolutely will get him deported. I think the President is happy to have us all believe it’s just about the protest. It makes him look better.
That is an interesting take. That it’s only a Trump power play. By deception. Nahh…. Not buying it. Maybe, and I know that this is hard concept to believe, that maybe, just maybe, he’s doing it because he thinks it’s actually the right thing to do. That its actually good for the country. Which it is.
No, I think you misunderstood. I believe he thinks this is correct. What I was suggesting was Trump wants to take credit…if DHS and the FBI have dug up more activity on this guy…they’re doing their jobs, but Trump,likes to take credit and tying the arrest to the protest alone with the promises to go after protesters makes him look good which is what he wants in the end. It will be interesting to see how it plays out in the end. Stronger evidence that is clear cut or expanding the definition of “material support.” The next step,is the hearing tomorrow.
The definition of “terrorist activity” in section 1182(a)(3)(B)(iii) includes “any activity which is unlawful under the laws of the place where it is committed,” including “The use of any… explosive [or] firearm… with intent to endanger, directly or indirectly, the safety of one or more individuals or to cause substantial damage to property.”
So, by that broad definition, any permanent resident who represents a group that supports the Palestinian resistance, the Israeli occupation, or either side in the Ukraine War is subject to deportation as a supporter of “terrorist activity” under your rationale. Are you OK with that?
The beginning of the definition says "any activity which is unlawful under the laws of the place where it is committed (or which, if it had been committed in the United States, would be unlawful under the laws of the United States or any State) AND which involves any of the following. " Your definition requires the first part.
So, no, army actions are not unlawful unless they violate the laws of armed conflict.
It is obvious that the legislators (and lawyers) want to leave some room for interpretation by a judge. That doesn’t mean however that the other person in this thread isn’t right and that you aren’t wrong.
The Supreme Court is going to have to decide if “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech” doesn’t apply to the immigration laws Congress passes.
Even if the statute permits his deportation (and I agree that it probably does), it is still subject to a challenge under the First Amendment. In other words, it’ll be up to the courts. My guess is they’ll overturn the speech-specific provisions of the statute with respect to green card holders. We’ll see.
But you’re right that this is not clearly and flagrantly illegal as many of the commentators are saying. It’s been in the Patriot Act for 23 years.
He exploits free speech and uses it as an instrument to spread his intense hate of Israel and Jews because he is consumed by a bitter antisemitism since childhood…
In their Substack, CUAD emphatically defends Hamas a "progressive force." https://cuapartheiddivest.substack.com/p/haniyeh-martyred-by-zionist-forces?utm_source=publication-search. And they called the October 1 Tel Aviv terror attack "a significant act of resistance." Their pretense that it was aimed at "settlers" proves that they consider all Israeli civilians to be "settlers" - meaning that they knowingly and enthusiastically praise terror attacks against civilians.
There is no honest debate on the topic - their own words are clear.
Thanks for the link. I agree with you, I think it is pretty obvious, I just couldn't find anything when I did some light Googling, didn't think to check substack. Appreciate the response and link.
As far as I can tell, not under this specific subparagraph. More often the general law was used for membership in terror groups themselves, not representing a group that supports terror. This case is a perfect fit with the stated law, though.
He is lucky to have been a douchebag in America. If he were in Syria, Jordan or Egypt, he'd already have been executed by those governments who have outlawed the Muslim Brotherhood and therefore Hamas.
He exploits free speech and uses it as an instrument to spread his intense hate of Israel and Jews because he is consumed by a bitter antisemitism since childhood…
I may be mistaken but I believe he has a student visa and he has finished his graduate work.
Let him go to Gaza and let him try Mukawama there with the Chara-kat.
The Constitution gives you the right to be a racist. It does not give you the right to ACT on that racism. Deport him.
A magician succeeds by distracting our attention long enough to achieve the effect of the trick. I say this because IMO the President has steered this argument…he signed the EO against antisemitism, he wants to believe he has the authority to make change happen, and so he suggested that ICE arrested Khalil because of the Columbia protest. This furthers his idea of himself as strongman/President. However, the comments made by the DHS representative suggest that there is something much more concrete that this guy has done providing material support to Hamas. Activities that absolutely will get him deported. I think the President is happy to have us all believe it’s just about the protest. It makes him look better.
I did misunderstand. And, I agree. And, it sounds like every other politician.
Yes, spin.
That is an interesting take. That it’s only a Trump power play. By deception. Nahh…. Not buying it. Maybe, and I know that this is hard concept to believe, that maybe, just maybe, he’s doing it because he thinks it’s actually the right thing to do. That its actually good for the country. Which it is.
No, I think you misunderstood. I believe he thinks this is correct. What I was suggesting was Trump wants to take credit…if DHS and the FBI have dug up more activity on this guy…they’re doing their jobs, but Trump,likes to take credit and tying the arrest to the protest alone with the promises to go after protesters makes him look good which is what he wants in the end. It will be interesting to see how it plays out in the end. Stronger evidence that is clear cut or expanding the definition of “material support.” The next step,is the hearing tomorrow.
The definition of “terrorist activity” in section 1182(a)(3)(B)(iii) includes “any activity which is unlawful under the laws of the place where it is committed,” including “The use of any… explosive [or] firearm… with intent to endanger, directly or indirectly, the safety of one or more individuals or to cause substantial damage to property.”
So, by that broad definition, any permanent resident who represents a group that supports the Palestinian resistance, the Israeli occupation, or either side in the Ukraine War is subject to deportation as a supporter of “terrorist activity” under your rationale. Are you OK with that?
The beginning of the definition says "any activity which is unlawful under the laws of the place where it is committed (or which, if it had been committed in the United States, would be unlawful under the laws of the United States or any State) AND which involves any of the following. " Your definition requires the first part.
So, no, army actions are not unlawful unless they violate the laws of armed conflict.
So when Ukraine attacks Russian targets inside Russia, or Israel attacks targets inside Gaza, that ISN’T illegal in Russia or Gaza?
It is obvious that the legislators (and lawyers) want to leave some room for interpretation by a judge. That doesn’t mean however that the other person in this thread isn’t right and that you aren’t wrong.
The Supreme Court is going to have to decide if “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech” doesn’t apply to the immigration laws Congress passes.
Even if the statute permits his deportation (and I agree that it probably does), it is still subject to a challenge under the First Amendment. In other words, it’ll be up to the courts. My guess is they’ll overturn the speech-specific provisions of the statute with respect to green card holders. We’ll see.
But you’re right that this is not clearly and flagrantly illegal as many of the commentators are saying. It’s been in the Patriot Act for 23 years.
This is what I’ve been wondering. Just because a law is on the books doesn’t mean it’s constitutional
Thank you
https://marlowe1.substack.com/p/happy-purim-2025?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=sllf3&fbclid=IwY2xjawJBh3pleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHSgWRu0UWfUpDEx8zR4HdUz3AfU5-hrxkv8gL-Y7SF0Tz182Z4JnK5dKGA_aem_oWHvzeI8JsK7Y85f2V4V4w&triedRedirect=true
To do about?
Jihadist CNT
ITT: Hoes mad
He exploits free speech and uses it as an instrument to spread his intense hate of Israel and Jews because he is consumed by a bitter antisemitism since childhood…
CUAD's public statements and goals do not explicitly call for violence or support Hamas. It's debated that CUAD may support Hamas or "resistance".
In their Substack, CUAD emphatically defends Hamas a "progressive force." https://cuapartheiddivest.substack.com/p/haniyeh-martyred-by-zionist-forces?utm_source=publication-search. And they called the October 1 Tel Aviv terror attack "a significant act of resistance." Their pretense that it was aimed at "settlers" proves that they consider all Israeli civilians to be "settlers" - meaning that they knowingly and enthusiastically praise terror attacks against civilians.
There is no honest debate on the topic - their own words are clear.
Thanks for the link. I agree with you, I think it is pretty obvious, I just couldn't find anything when I did some light Googling, didn't think to check substack. Appreciate the response and link.
👋 Buh-bye
Has it ever been used in this way before though?
As far as I can tell, not under this specific subparagraph. More often the general law was used for membership in terror groups themselves, not representing a group that supports terror. This case is a perfect fit with the stated law, though.
I assume that prior cases were a lot farther along the “material support” continuum than this, if any.
I doubt. This is a very dangerous conflation of campus speech with “terrorism” in a way that I doubt Congress had in mind.
Congress has no mind.
We are in WW3 and this bastard is an enemy combatant on our soil.
I'd put him in front of a firing squad.
Thanks for lowering the collective IQ of this thread.
Thanks for being a Jew Hating skidmark.
Who gives a flying fuck? That little Faksetinian shit is lucky Trump and the courts are deciding his fate, and not me.