- Joined
- Mar 3, 2021
Pro or Con, Good or bad? Constitutional or not?
-
Guests may view all public nodes. However, you must be registered to post.
Deportation of green card holding immigrants that support Americas enemies
- Thread starter william
- Start date
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2017
- Location
- Perth Western Australia
@william I would call it cautious supported by credible evidence of potential threat.
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2021
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2021
Yeah, but are they taking over any building or getting violent. They're just marching around looking stupid.
- Joined
- May 15, 2022
Too vague to answer. What kind of "support" are we talking about? Who are "America's enemies" and who gets to determine that? Are those people violating any laws? Is due process ensured?
If all of that is undefined or left for the executive to decide, then it's what I would call lawlessness - except in extreme circumstances (e.g. martial law).
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2022
Can you point to what in this thread is particularly interesting?
I see him disagreeing with Israel, which is his right. I see him protesting, and saying the protesters won't back down until they achieve their demands, and very eloquently stating exactly what those demands are, whether or not I agree with him. I see him articulating the way he sees the situation in Gaza extremely clearly from a place of empathy (even if misplaced, it's not for me to say, I am no expert on the middle east), and this is a pretty common way born Americans view the situation too.
I see a lot of insane framing around this in the tweets, but nothing particularly bad in the videos.
The school should be free to expel him if this is against policy, but he had a green card too anyway, not just a student visa, and has graduated.
Nothing about this guy screams credible terror threat. Just dissident student protester.
Which very much looks like this is persecution of a political opponent for his beliefs and his speech, not for any plans or actions, not for any misdemeanors committed in the protest, but rather to revoke it months later without due process for his pivotal role in spreading potentially dangerous ideas.
Is it a requirement of the green card that you forego any beliefs critical of Israel and/or refrain from expressing them?
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2021
I think any group or person proclaiming, "Death to America or From the River to the Sea" and you are not a US citizen you are eligible to be deported. Taking over college building and denying entrance to individuals is a crime isn't it. I know this is a touchy subject with strong feelings on both sides. That's why I asked the original question of is this constitutional or not. It might not be, I am not sure.
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2018
Biden’s ‘violent settler’ Israeli visa ban would bar those who simply disagree with his terrible policies
Secretary of State Antony Blinken has announced visa restrictions on Israelis in response to “settler violence.”
nypost.com
I thought this was an interesting article from Dec 2023 even though it is about Visa not Green Card holders
a vastly vague prohibition that gives the administration discretion to exclude Israelis whose mere beliefs, place of residence or religious practices don’t comport with the Bidenites’ foreign-policy views.
The administration can ban anyone “involved in undermining of peace, security or stability in the West Bank.”
The restrictions are not limited to criminal or violent acts.
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2022
Yeah, it's pretty reprehensible no matter who is using the immigration system to target and expel political dissidents for their views and activism.Biden’s ‘violent settler’ Israeli visa ban would bar those who simply disagree with his terrible policies
Secretary of State Antony Blinken has announced visa restrictions on Israelis in response to “settler violence.”
I thought this was an interesting article from Dec 2023 even though it is about Visa not Green Card holders
a vastly vague prohibition that gives the administration discretion to exclude Israelis whose mere beliefs, place of residence or religious practices don’t comport with the Bidenites’ foreign-policy views.
The administration can ban anyone “involved in undermining of peace, security or stability in the West Bank.”
The restrictions are not limited to criminal or violent acts.
I think the key thing is if this was over whatever simple crimes were committed via the protest itself, he'd be arrested for that crime specificalyl, tried with due process and then his status revoked as part of sentencing.
Instead, he woke up to find his green card revoked months and months later without a word and found himself suddenly in this situation with no process.
It seems targeted based on the speech, not a crime.
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2021
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2021
Two different viewpoints 
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 15, 2022
Meh; America has seen far worse and survived. This is nothing compared to 1968.
PS. "Crime" is not actually a legal category. Illegally entering a public building and denying entrance to others will typically get you charged with disorderly conduct, disturbing the peace and/or trespassing - all of which are misdemeanors (at least in most jurisdictions). If you attack someone - that's assault (which would be a felony), but IDK if that happened in this case.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2022
I see. I thought you were referring to the videos of him directly and not the tweeter's framing of it, and admittedly after the first couple videos were pretty much entirely tame I skimmed the rest.If any of this is true and not just spin it doesn't look good for him.
I think it would be reasonable to arrest him for crimes committed while occupying the school, try him, and deport him for those crimes if he is guilty in a court of law.
But the fact that his green card was simply silently revoked months later, when he is a figurehead of a political movement diametrically opposed to the current admin, makes it clear this is political and about his speech and the beliefs he shares.
I also think ie "Death to America" largely became a politically powerful soundbyte regarding perceived American imperial reign moreso than most of the people chanting it in the US literally believe in eradicating the western way of life but that is mostly conjecture on my part being someone around the same age as him who frequently has to talk with people with similar positions as him.
It's also much less than born-American citizens did while protesting vietnam.
Now this is a slight side tangent that doesn't impact on the morality of HIS actions at all, but rather to view it from a more big picture perspective, and think about solutions long-term:
I think the bigger question the US should be asking itself in general though, if this is all true, "What the hell are we doing to give such a significant portion of the world pretty good reasons to hate us enough to dedicate their lives to destroying us?"
More often than not history shows these kinds of "terrorist" movements are a reliable, consistent, predictable outcome of policy from years prior and IMO they should be dismantled from two angles - one, destroy the organization militarily, but two, as importantly if not more importantly, support the population that otherwise would be part of that group and nation-build to build US influence in these regions instead of subjugating and isolating them further, so that they don't create more terrorists out of the collateral damage.
I guarantee you if it weren't simply for childish holy war insanity the best solution to Israel/Gaza would be to establish a strong border between them and build up Gaza into a modern nation over time in exchange for restraining them militarily.
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2021
Tell that to the J6ers. Some of them were jailed just for being there.
- Joined
- May 15, 2022
Sure, you can be arrested for trespassing. They will then typically take you to county and book you. They won't keep you jailed, but you may have to appear in court. If it's a second- or third-degree trespassing (i.e. you did not enter a private dwelling and had no intention of committing a felony) then chances are it'll be a slap on the wrist.
I'm not familiar with the specifics of this particular case; I don't regard it as important news given everything else that's going on around the world.
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2016
- Location
- Indiana, US
I believe that in the United States of America that I support, people who are arrested or detained by US law enforcement are entitled to due process and access to an attorney. The man was arrested without a warrant and has been detained without being charged with a crime since his arrest. He has been given very restricted access to his attorney.
This is a violation of due process. This is a violation of First Amendment rights, which do apply to permanent residents with green cards. This is a violation of Fourth Amendment rights, which do apply to permanent residents with green cards. This is a violation of everything Americans fought and died for to win their independence from England.
If he is guilty of committing a crime, then follow the rules and file charges or let him go. In the United States of America that I support, no one gets yanked off the street in front of their wife, handcuffed, shoved into an unmarked car, and shipped halfway across the country to be detained without charges indefinitely. No one. Ever.
So, yes, this IS important, despite everything else that's going on around the world.
This is a violation of due process. This is a violation of First Amendment rights, which do apply to permanent residents with green cards. This is a violation of Fourth Amendment rights, which do apply to permanent residents with green cards. This is a violation of everything Americans fought and died for to win their independence from England.
If he is guilty of committing a crime, then follow the rules and file charges or let him go. In the United States of America that I support, no one gets yanked off the street in front of their wife, handcuffed, shoved into an unmarked car, and shipped halfway across the country to be detained without charges indefinitely. No one. Ever.
And that's how it starts. It starts with a group of people no one regards as important enough to care about. Then, when people get used to that, it suddenly expands to another group of people no one regards as important enough to care about. Run this through a few cycles and what do you have now? "Legal precedent." Now it can be expanded even further, and all of a sudden it's no longer foreigners who are legal residents being detained, it's US citizens born on American soil who are proven to be associated with a group of people no one regards as important enough to care about. Then THAT becomes normal, and more legal precedent is set. Fast forward two years, and now anyone can be arrested and detained without being charged simply at the whim of those who can issue those orders. And I'm not referring to President Trump. This will start happening at the local level, with orders issued by governors, mayors, or even sheriffs.
So, yes, this IS important, despite everything else that's going on around the world.
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2021
It HAS happened before, and we should learn from history lest we repeat it.
I do believe in Habeas corpus, however, does anyone really think a jury of his peers in NYC would ever find this man guilty. I have lost faith in the judicial system because of the persecution of Donald Trump and anyone around him. Which is sad.
The current federal A.G. claims he is going to clean it up. We'll see.
You can go back even further with the persecution on native Americans in the US western expansion.
I do believe in Habeas corpus, however, does anyone really think a jury of his peers in NYC would ever find this man guilty. I have lost faith in the judicial system because of the persecution of Donald Trump and anyone around him. Which is sad.
The current federal A.G. claims he is going to clean it up. We'll see.
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2022
Most here questioned the extraordinary lengths hamas and Palestinian protestors went to in disrupting daily life on their campuses and some targeting of Jewish groups and individuals.
It was never a challenge or questioning of the lengths they went to.
I of course can’t know the specifics of what this man was involved with or any direct tie he might or might have had to Hamas.
Green card holders are in a peculiar position. They do have rights as citizens. But their is case law and particular instances where they can clearly loose those protects. They are in a path way to citizenship, did the commit a felony, do they have material ties to terrorist organization. It’s vague the AG has pretty wide powers to act if there is cause.
Protesting or even leading protest is one thing. Organizing and figure heading a group which is involved in the disruption of an educational institution for weeks, seizing a public building, then demanding terms for its return. Targeting religious minorities in educational communities. If this is coupled with the knowledge that he was acting as an agent of a terrorist Group no matter how loosely affiliated.
It very well might be there is cause to yank his status. It’s to the courts now so there will be discovery and the system will decide.
It was never a challenge or questioning of the lengths they went to.
I of course can’t know the specifics of what this man was involved with or any direct tie he might or might have had to Hamas.
Green card holders are in a peculiar position. They do have rights as citizens. But their is case law and particular instances where they can clearly loose those protects. They are in a path way to citizenship, did the commit a felony, do they have material ties to terrorist organization. It’s vague the AG has pretty wide powers to act if there is cause.
Protesting or even leading protest is one thing. Organizing and figure heading a group which is involved in the disruption of an educational institution for weeks, seizing a public building, then demanding terms for its return. Targeting religious minorities in educational communities. If this is coupled with the knowledge that he was acting as an agent of a terrorist Group no matter how loosely affiliated.
It very well might be there is cause to yank his status. It’s to the courts now so there will be discovery and the system will decide.
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2016
- Location
- Indiana, US
Except that there are legal deadlines on filing charges against a person who has been arrested. Usually 48 to 72 hours. We're beyond that, which means his rights have been violated. The government is not allowed to suspend Constitutional rights just because they don't like someone. If he committed a felony, fine. Charge him, prosecute him, and give him a speedy trial before a jury of his peers. If guilty, deport him. I'll drive the bus.
But they don't get to hold him indefinitely without filing charges and limiting his access to his attorney. Again, that's just one reason this country fought England for independence. And now we're doing it to people. Short memories.
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2022
While I understand the arguments for freedom of speech of green card holders and the right to legal protections.
SOS Rubio lays out the real world issues involved in this case.
It’s a rumble post, sorry I don’t like the front end ads either. But he makes a compelling argument. One that I believe supports the actions taken against this individual.
He has a gree card but he is not yet a full citizen, green card holders are in probationary status. As I have mentioned the AG and state dept do have leeway in what constitutes reason for expulsion. And it is not limited to felony convictions alone.
rumble.com
The state department can revoke a persons status simply for security and public safety and order issues.
Leading or organizing the activities that we saw on universities like Columbia can certainly be interpreted as falling into this category. Seizing public buildings, disrupting university day to day operations, organized harassment activities of particular religious backgrounds.
SOS Rubio lays out the real world issues involved in this case.
It’s a rumble post, sorry I don’t like the front end ads either. But he makes a compelling argument. One that I believe supports the actions taken against this individual.
He has a gree card but he is not yet a full citizen, green card holders are in probationary status. As I have mentioned the AG and state dept do have leeway in what constitutes reason for expulsion. And it is not limited to felony convictions alone.
Case Closed: Marco Rubio Weighs in on 'Free Speech' of Pro-Hamas 'Visitor' Mahmoud Khalil
*** The Liberty Daily benefits when you shop using the following links and Code: TLD _ The Liberty Daily Recommends ONE Honest, America-First Precious Metals Company - Our Gold Guy! https://ourgoldguy
rumble.com
The state department can revoke a persons status simply for security and public safety and order issues.
Leading or organizing the activities that we saw on universities like Columbia can certainly be interpreted as falling into this category. Seizing public buildings, disrupting university day to day operations, organized harassment activities of particular religious backgrounds.
