Not long ago, conservatives laughed at the idea that words are violence. Now, they're embracing the same concept. Is that a good idea, morally or politically?
Oversimplification? More like Kawaller simply ignores all the evidence so he can dismiss the issue entirely.
The media actually covering the protests (especially the NY Post), particularly at Columbia, have been clear that Jewish students were threatened to the point of being afraid to go to classes and certain areas of campus; illegal encampments were maintained, buildings were taken over and vandalized, and staff were assaulted and held against their will.
The perpetrators escaped punishment because Columbia shirked its duties under Title IX and NY County's woke Soros-sponsored DA, Alvin Bragg, declined to prosecute anyone on the laughable grounds that their faces were covered.
Yep. Anyone can say any words they want -- I may not like the words, may think the person is a jerk or worse, but speech is PROTECTED. Actions are NOT protected. What the anti-semetic jerks SAID is irrelevant (unless directly inciting someone to violence) -- but taking over buildings, blocking access to buildings, and physically harassing students because of their race and/or religion is the problem. I didn't follow the Columbia situation as closely as the UCLA situation (since I have a good friend whose daughter goes there). UCLA was just as bad as Columbia. There were pro-Hamas protestors preventing Jews from going into the library and the university did nothing to stop it for weeks. I'm a college drop-out and participated in my fair share of protests, and this has all gotten way out of hand.
Speech is protected. However foreign nationals, regardless of legal permanent residency status, are NOT permitted to promote terrorism, promote genocide, and.. FFS NOBODY is permitted to pour concrete down the toilets and plumbing of multistory buildings. The very bright and sneaky author of this article deliberately obfuscates, derides and completely ignores all of the many public posts, speeches, and direct communications in which our Syrian Algerian terrorist clearly and unmistakably called for the destruction of western civilization.
Gaslighting is not a very useful communication device. I’m personally a little disappointed that Matt promoted it.
Generally antisemites like you are resentful and insecure. Please give us your story about how 15 million people control 8 billion and other mysteries about how how Jews control your life or something. And don’t give me this BS about how people like you aren’t antisemites you’re just criticizing Israel. You are obsessed obviously. How many comments have you written in this thread?
Not paranoid if you know the truth about how hasbara functions, and how over the last 16 months they have ramped up their activities on social media platforms exponentially. It is not antisemitic to state was hasbara has been doing, and if you are unaware, then your're in the wrong arena.
Ms Kilgore. I actually checked out your link to the ACLU website with their one sided take on the UCLA encampment that claims among other things that their right to free speech has been violated.
For one, occupying the university property is not free speech. It’s a violation at the very least of University’s Code of Conduct. For this alone they should face suspension or expulsion.
As for your question of the harassment of other students the data is too large to share in this venue. Virtually every major news outlet has covered the harassment of Jewish and other students who were trying to simply get to classes
First, are you not aware of the thousands of Jewish students, Jewish professors and Jewish organizations like JVP, If Not Now, Not in Our Name, who were present at many of the demonstrations and stated unequivocally that they did not witness any acts of antisemitism, or harassment of Jewish students? Also, student demonstrations over the last 60 years have been responsible for affecting change to some of the worlds worst atrocities. More often then not, as in the case at UCLA when a group of zionist thugs showed up and initiated acts of violence against the protesters for over 5 hours before the police finally stepped in, these demonstrations for the most part have been peaceful.
Your reply has nothing to do with my point however.
Except you claim that “they” didn’t witness any anti Semitic acts or harassment Perhaps they didn’t but they definitely occurred and were frequent. Mostly peaceful means some were not. Occupation of university property and violence has consequences. That’s like telling a cop. Let me off it’s only my first time driving drunk in ten years.
As a Vietnam veteran who saw first hand the lies and deceit of America's role in the war, I joined Vietnam Veterans Against the War soon after I got back. I participated in some demonstrations that got out of hand, usually when law enforcement became aggressive, just as with some of the anti-genocide demonstrations on campuses, and many of us were arrested as well. If you think that all demonstrations should be peaceful to affect change, then you are no student of history. When American workers tried to unionize all throughout the 1800's and 1900's many were killed during demonstrations until they achieved their goals. The Civil Rights movement, or Occupy Wall Street, or the demonstrations in Hong Kong. I could go on, but there are times in history that the Establishment need to feel the wrath of the people when there is injustice taking place.
I don’t disagree with anything you say. What I am saying is simple. For one you are a citizen of the United States and do not fall under the jurisdiction of Title 8 of Deportation Laws obviously. Should someone like you destroy property or trespass you would only be subject to the penalty for those offenses under the law. As a student you sign a code of conduct because you now represent the university. That code far stricter than your constitutional rights. That code of conduct was most definitely violated by a lot of these and as I said they should face the consequences of suspension or expulsion. In the case of Mr Kahlil, not being a citizen is subject to the deportation laws as well as the discretion of the State Department who issued his green card. If you read the law he also has violated Section 8 by not only supporting a designated terrorist organization but taking action not in line with our foreign policy initiatives. As such he is subject to deportation. To reiterate neither the college student case or Mr Kahlil’s case have anything to do with freedom of speech nor constitutional rights
I don’t care at all about this narrative, however, it is naive to think a rage mob that’s all wound up isn’t going to turn on whoever. Just look at the videos of the summer of Floyd and see the mobs going at anyone who isn’t behaving like them. It had nothing to do with the issue (obvious since that behavior doesn’t serve anyone) but with the psychology and behavior of mobs. It’s the same ugliness that we’ve seen in history, the torches and pitchforks replaced by signs and apparently masks. It’s the modern day lynch mob in action. Sure, they’d never knowingly hurt a passing Jew, right? Sure. (Sarcasm)
Oh it was the mobs of Zionist Jews rampaging through the streets tearing shit up, vandalizing statues, smashing windows of Jewish Delis, shrieking “I am Hamas!”, protesting outside any building with a Jewish name on it, taking over campuses and crapping in the commons …. I totally thought it was the other way around. What a dummy I am. Thanks for setting the record straight. Moron.
A Columbia professor segregated and verbally assaulted students in his classroom for the crime of being Jewish. Individuals wearing dress associated with Judaism were confronted and excluded for the crime of walking past an illegal encampment. And I don’t think that any rational person believes that the NYPD is controlled by Israel.
"I'll wait" for about 1 second or in other words, about as long as it too to Google "Jewish students at Columbia". Nothing about assault, antisemitism, protests etc., simply "Jewish students at Columbia" pulled up multiple articles that you claim are lies.
What's next? Are you going to start throwing the word Nazi at those who oppose your lies?
No one here has to show you evidence of anything. Proof and evidence in the Khalil context are legal terms. Everyone else, including you and me, are just voicing opinions based on our assessment of
publicly available information. Some valid. Some not. But one thing is certain - the Khalil case will not be tried in the court of public opinion. Nor for that matter will the Arabs we now refer to as Palestinians' cause.
Lol - I,m not an “Israel defender” as regards the deportation of aliens. It seems plain common sense that guaranteed Constitutional protections apply only to citizens. The spectrum of non-citizen immigrants inhabit some grey area, perhaps informed by our Constitutional understanding, but in no way Constitutionally binding.
The article claims "U.S. law stipulates that an alien is deportable if he 'endorses or espouses terrorist activity or persuades others to endorse or espouse terrorist activity or support a terrorist organization.'" It further asserts that "The Syrian-born green-card recipient served as one of the ringleaders of the post-October 7 riots at his former university and functioned as the lead 'negotiator' for the student group known as Columbia United Apartheid Divest (CUAD). CUAD was one of the primary agents of chaos on Columbia’s campus during last spring’s 'encampment,' during which rioters smashed windows, defaced and occupied buildings, disrupted classes, and harassed and threatened Jewish students."
He was approved by Columbia to act as a negotiator between administration and the encampment. Now, suddenly, they throw him under the bus. Why? Do you believe every green card holder should be deported for saying things you don't like? And what about him when he was admitted do you object to?
This is not about free speech Megan. It’s about his support for a designated terrorist organization called Hamas. The man was handing out Hamas printed literature for one.
Under Title 8 of US Deportation Law that in and of itself is grounds for deportation
Apologies to others who read my pervious comment which includes the following:
"U.S. law stipulates that an alien is deportable if he 'endorses or espouses terrorist activity or persuades others to endorse or espouse terrorist activity or support a terrorist organization.'" It further asserts that "The Syrian-born green-card recipient served as one of the ringleaders of the post-October 7 riots at his former university and functioned as the lead 'negotiator' for the student group known as Columbia United Apartheid Divest (CUAD). CUAD was one of the primary agents of chaos on Columbia’s campus during last spring’s 'encampment,' during which rioters smashed windows, defaced and occupied buildings, disrupted classes, and harassed and threatened Jewish students."
This is a more specific example of an exception to the First Amendment right to free speech than the dumb and inaccurate "shouting 'fire' in a crowded theater" example preferred by NPCs everywhere.
There is much in the law that defies or encompasses more than "common sense," and often for good reason. If the whole thing actually rested on common sense, law school could be gotten through in a matter of weeks or months. When speaking of it, one should probably get informed on the specific subject at hand so as to not waste one, and others', time.
I've learned in my almost 80 years (60 of them married to a lawyer) that common sense is not so very common, less now than it ever was. I am well aware of the fact that law is like science - nothing much is set in stone.
You do not have to read or respond to comments which waste your time. There are lots of fools in this world..
Someone needs to research the psychosis that results when you convince a group that they are the world's ultimate victims always and forever. Must be a pretty heady trip, don't you think? And not in a healthy way...
Every accusation of oppression by pro Palestinian Islamist protesters is actually a confession of aggression by Hamas and its supporters including the terrorist state of Iran, which is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of Americans. You wonderful patriot. Go fishing.
She doesn't seem "threatened" or "afraid." These protests were surprisingly multi-cultural, with Jews, Christians, Muslims and even atheists! What you wrote is simply false. It's a falsehood that you're propagating in service of the wellbeing of a foreign government, to justify the abolition of the first amendment to the constitution.
OK, so I'll try to watch it tonight. However, I'll tell you right now that I will have no truck with the bullshit idea that anti-Zionism is antisemitism. The reviews suggest that the conflation of the 2 is the propagandistic purpose of the movie.
Everything I have read or seen suggests this is nonsense. I suspect that the claim here is the ludicrous notion that supporting Palestinians is supporting Hamas. Even if that were the case, however, it is not terrible to support freedom fighters.
I cannot wait until the Palestinians live with their compassionate Muslim brothers. You know, those who refuse them citizenship because, apparently they hate Palestinians. Only then will this cruel issue be put to bed. That or they can move to Sudan (another Muslim paradise.)
You're either willfully or inadvertently misinformed. It's the leaders of Arab countries that don't want several millions Palestinians flooding into their countries, for various reasons, one being that these leaders are more committed to staying in power than they are to solidarity with their Muslim brothers (sound like anyone you know?). In the case of Jordan, there is the issue of U.S. aid, to be sure, but it is also the third driest country in the world. There's simply not enough water to accommodate several million refugees, even if expelling them from Palestine were not a criminal act. The people of other Arab countries don't "hate Palestinians," as you so ardently wish to believe. The footage is out there of the people of quite a few Muslim/Arab countries flooding the streets in support of the Palestinians: Egypt, Jordan, Yemen, etc. It happens every Friday in Yemen. So quit this garbage "argument" that no one "wants" the Palestinian people and learn something about the real world. Muslims and Arabs know that Palestinians belong in Palestine and they don't intend to abet Israel in ethnically cleansing them. What happened to you in your life that you cannot comprehend that kind of solidarity?
You haven't seen the video of these guys, or pretend you haven't. They go right up to the Israeli tanks and blow them to bits. Israelis may not live in tunnels (yet), but they're horrible cowards. Even you must admit it takes no spine at all to drop a bomb on someone. I'd love to see resistance fighters challenge the IOF to hand-to-hand combat. The Israelis would be literally be shitting on themselves. No, this attempt to convince people that it's Hamas who's afraid is disproved by several hundred hours of fairly easily obtained video. I'd try a different argument if I were you, but I know how limited your choices are.
I live in California, jerk. Where do you live? You know someone is an antisemite whenever they use the word Hasbara. Or talk about his Israel unit 8200 when they know nothing about it other than what they’ve read from Islamist or antisemitic sources. Actually, this comment section is overrun by antisemitic jerks.
"Truly basement dwelling pussies." Well put. I think it's time for the Zios to rework their playbook. I can't believe they're still leaning so hard into "anti-Semitism," but then, genocide is a really hard thing to defend. I guess you have to give them credit for trying something so impossible. It'd be funny if it weren't people trying to get everyone to be as racist and heartless as they are.
Hello Megan. I am writing here to answer your comment which I can't find anywhere.
A French scientist going to a conference in the US and was deported: there seems to be a discussion ongoing with regard to put USA on a terror list. I keep hearing things from other countries but definitely people will not be going to the US. Then there is the potential of war with Iran.
Go online. At least you pretend to know how to use Google. Are any number of articles proving that Wikipedia is overrun by editors who are antisemites like you. You are so easily misled and you don’t even know it.
A question: is Israel the only country that can’t be questioned without being a bigot, or does it work with other countries? For instance, if I criticize India, am I automatically anti-Hindu? If I criticize Afghanistan, am I by definition anti-Muslim? How exactly does this phenomenon work?
As I have been looking at the reports on the situation at Columbia, including the reports of supposed antisemitism from the University's task force, what I see is a lot of fear from Jewish Zionist students. However, I see very little to suggest that fear was or is reasonable. Students report feeling ostracized from groups and by former friends. There is no indication of what inspired the fear aside from some groups' support for the BDS of Israel. Only a few direct (and deplorable) attacks on Jews are reported. Often, one gets. the impression that these attacks (though not justified) were for expressions of Zionism, not for being Jewish.
In the meantime, the US government supports the genocide of Palestinians; the Columbia admin calls in brutal repression squads of the NYPD; Palestinian supporters are called in the middle of the night and their families are threatened; former IOF soldiers attending Columbia or merely stopping by attack protesters physically and with impunity. Those Jewish Zionist students should know that the violent forces are all on their side. It is, however, a symptom of knowing you are wrong to be unreasonably fearful.
This is the most NPC thing I've read in this thread. This is little more than a dump of leftist cliches. "genocide of Palestinians", that's a myth. More fundamentally, you don't even know what Zionism is. "Jewish Zionist" students have no forces of violence on their side, in fact they have no forces at all, they're just Jewish students. The fear is quite reasonable since they have been threatened repeatedly by masked protesters. You arrogant assumption that their fear is based on knowing they're wrong is just a projection of your own ignorance.
Jewish Zionists have the entire force of the US military and state apparatus behind them, or haven't you noticed the way supporters of Palestinians are the first to be canceled; that supporters of Palestinians have been brutally treated; and Jewish Zionists have had right wingers make ludicrous apologias for them?
Ah, moving the goalposts, always a sign of bad faith argument. First you said Jewish Zionist *students*, now you've amended it to Jewish Zionist and dropped the word "student". But the fact remains: you don't know what the word Zionist means, so you are unable to understand what you wrote. I am a Jewish Zionist and I have no force at all behind me, let alone that of the US military. You are addicted to the silly leftist oppressor/oppressed binary, and for you all politics on the planet must be shoehorned into that hopelessly and destructively reductive box.
Now, you're just being silly. Jewish Zionist students are Jewish Zionists. The US government is supplying the arms to slaughter Palestinians and continue to take their land, the explicit goal of Jewish Zionists. Both the Biden and the Trump administrations have been silencing people who protest against the genocide.
I've given up trying to reason with people PostAmerican or Kilgore or Megan who are filled with hatred and racism. They are immune to logic or facts and will only fight back with more ignorance and idiocy. These people are unable to learn or admit error. Just ignore them and devote your time to more fruitful discussions. It's very disheartening to see Matt Taibbi give a voice to ignorant rants like this particular article. The level of falsehood and detachment from reality is very atypical of his columns.
You probably haven’t heard of John Spencer because you don’t read much outside of Al Jazeera or der sturmer. He is the head of urban warfare studies West Point. He is a 25 year veteran with combat experience. It is his studied opinion that Israel has not even come close to committing “genocide”. Are you going to claim his a Zionist tool or something? At some point you might wanna look into the mirror and ask yourself why am I obsessed with this thing and why do I call other people who disagree vile names?
And you are a toddler having a temper tantrum, mainly because your claim of genocide cannot be substantiated, for the obvious fact that it's not true. And how am I a liar? What did I lie about? I've always supported freedom of speech, so what are you referencing to contradict that?
Given that quite recently you could be punished for “micro aggressions “ on many campuses, why is the standard so much higher for Jewish students to feel threatened?
You could be punished for micro aggressions against certain protected groups. Do you think anyone ever was punished for a micro aggression against a hetero white or asian guy? We need less of that BS, not more.
Saying or doing anything that might hurt the feelings of someone else, whether deliberately or unintentionally, like "misgendering" someone for instance, addressing a man with falsies and a beard as a man when he demands to be addressed as a woman. Or asking a person who appears foreign where he's from.
Microaggressions are nonsense. You really could not be punished for them anyway. However, there is virtually no campus in the US where Palestinians had more support than Jews from the university and state apparatus.
Jewish students were and are taken very seriously when claiming they feel "unsafe," while Palestinian students have every reason to feel unsafe after the skunk chemical attack at Columbia. Having IOF vets on campus is much more threatening than Jewish students having to hear about BDS. I'm pretty cynical overall but I was shocked at the extremity of the double standard, but then, I didn't know that billionaire donors had come to own higher ed in the U.S., many of them Zionists.
I have just discovered that the film is still in theaters. I will not, therefore, be able to see it tonight. I will try to remember to see it if I find out it has become accessible to me.
There's a complete vacuum where the skunk attacks at Columbia should be, or the violent attacks on the encampment at UCLA, or dozens of other examples of violence by Zios and their police helpers. It's getting downright surreal to dialogue with these blinkered fanatics. Makes you understand how deeply fucked this country is, doesn't it?
I don’t know, violence, maybe? lslamists with keffiyehs calling for the destruction of Israel and the death of Jews? Encampments that prevented students thought to be Zionist or Jews from going, where they wanted to go on campus? You know stuff like violence and intimidation
Why do people think the federal government doesn’t have the right to say something to Columbia? If they want autonomy, then don’t take a penny of our fuckjng taxpayer money. When you accept taxpayers money, you’ve agreed to our wrath
Thank you. This was truly odious. The students facing deportation obviously lied to obtain their visa. I say if Prince Harry lied on his visa application about his drug use we should deport him as well.
Trump already said he doesn't want to deport him because he is already burdened by a very bad wife. It seems reasonable to me. There's only so much a man can take.
I don't think this is obvious. What was the lie? Could you prove that they committed visa fraud in court? If so, why do you decline to indict them or prosecute them for that crime? Could it be that you're bullshitting?
Well i ran the international program at a university. In order to get a student visa. Among the areas that they explore is whether the potential student has views that are contrary to the interests of the US. These students are guest in our country. If they are disruptive we do not owe them the same deference that is owed a citizen.
I don’t think he was disruptive. The videos that I’ve seen show him engaging in a time-honored American tradition: peacefully demonstrating against the decisions made by his institution, in his name, with his tuition money. Better than that, his actual words called for peace and freedom for Israelis and Palestinians: indeed, in insinuated (accurately) that the fates of these two peoples are intertwined, and the destruction of one will lead to the destruction of the other, so both should be elevated. Khalil is among the best of us, and it’s because of his virtue that he’s being targeted. This man is a guest in MY country, and I’m honored that he chose to be here.
I presume that he acted with utmost respect and obedience to the law, until proven otherwise in a court of law. I've seen no video evidence that runs counter to this conclusion. I didn't see him in the videos depicting violence or harassment. Nobody has been able to proffer evidence to that effect. That's why the Trump administration isn't charging him with a crime: they know he's innocent.
The second article is interesting. It identifies Khalil as the lead negotiator in a demonstration carefully organized in advance by a large group of people. It also describes efforts to nationalize the demonstrations that began at Columbia. It also quotes a Jewish student who professed his fear; so much for no Jews being bothered as you claimed in another comment. But overall this article does not support your position that Khalil is a naive student who just engaged in free speech. In fact it substantiates the illegal actions taken, substantiates an organized concerted effort to engage in a national.campaign that endorsed criminal conduct. More specifically it designates Khalil as the lead negotiator who pulled the plug on the negotiations when his demands were not met. His demand was that criminal conduct be excused. I would bet dollars to donuts ( and I only bet on sure things) the concerted effort to expand the Columbia protest nationwide is what triggered the "against national security interests" deportation. I further speculate that there is digital evidence, witness statements and other evidence of Khalil's involvement.
"so much for no Jews being bothered as you claimed in another comment." -- I never claimed that. However, I will say some Jews have been known to overplay the "victim" card, and that particular person's "fear" (the article actually said he "felt unsafe") is quite dubious.
"But overall this article does not support your position that Khalil is a naive student who just engaged in free speech." -- Go back and read the thread. You claimed I "couldn't possibly know" that Khalil was simply a liaison/negotiator between Columbia's administrators and the protesters. So, I was providing sources for how I know that.
"Khalil as the lead negotiator who pulled the plug on the negotiations when his demands were not met. His demand was that criminal conduct be excused." -- Where exactly in the article does it state that? Please provide specific quotes.
" the concerted effort to expand the Columbia protest nationwide is what triggered the 'against national security interests' deportation." -- It was not a "concerted effort." Here's the ACTUALLY quote from the article: "Months before they pitched their tents on Columbia University’s main lawn, INSPIRING a wave of protest encampments at college campuses nationwide" (emphasis mine).
Also, Khalil HIMSELF was not responsible for any of the other protests around the country; which would render the grounds for his deportation both dubious and invalid.
So the first article is wholly devoid of substantiated information. Interestingly the headline makes reference to arrest of Palestinian activist (Khalil) who helped lead Columbia protests which Khalil himself is quoted as denying "last week" within the body of the article. Sloppy journalism. While he now denies being an organizer that is what is known as a self-serving statement. My recollection is that he did label himself as an organizer or leader at the time although ICBW. If so that is indicia of conspiracy to engage in the criminal conduct committed, aiding or betting those who engaged in criminal conduct, and/or engaging in organized criminal activity.
Such a typical response and action. Dox.. really. How far did you make it through grade school? I round think far if this is how you handle a debate. You lost
Are we really going to pretend that Hitler did nothing wrong because he never hurt anyone himself and just spoke words? That the mob boss who tells his boys to "take care of him" is just exercising free speech?
The fact that left-wing people are dishonest enough to pretend not to know the difference between free speech and attacking people doesn't require the rest of us to pretend to be that stupid as well.
Here's the homework for Racket News, if they care to make a real difference: Write an article articulating where the line is. THEN talk about real-world examples.
I'm a right-wing people, and it appears that you are the one who does not know where the line between free speech and attacking people is, but I'll give you a hint. Khalil is accused only of saying things people don't like, he isn't accused of attacking anyone. It appears you need to do your own homework assignment. While you're at it, write an essay on guilt-by-association and why it's un-American.
He is accused as well as conducting, leading the Hamas group that he applies America citizens’ first amendment rights in addition. Sec of State Rubio is revoking the Green Card (not LPR) because he would never have received the gift of one from this nation had he indicated his intentions to act in support of terrorist Hamas prior to the US giving him that status.
Isn't he accused of helping to barricade the library (trespassing) and also of vandalism and destruction? Not just speech. Besides why should a non-American get the privilege of being a guest when he misbehaves and promotes Hamas?
If they had evidence of a crime he could have been charged with said crime. A White House official even said “the accusation here is not that he has a committed a crime.” He is being jailed for first amendment protected speech. The fact that he is a Green Card holder and not a citizen does not make him a more legitimate target for this. He’s a legal, permanent resident and he should not be subject to deportation without having committed a crime and being convicted under due process. Besides, any person on US soil has exactly the same speech rights as any citizen. If they can do it to him, they can do it to any of us. The Israelis on here may not understand it because they don’t live in a free and equal democracy, but in America this is antithetical to everything our country stands for. I think that’s the disconnect here, so many commenters aren’t even American.
Sure she did. ". . . he should not be deported without having committed a crime and being under due process." Admittedly the sentence is somewhat confusing but the implication is clear. And while it is true that criminal convictions can be the basis of deportation and are used therefor routinely, that is not the theory being deployed in the Khalil matter.
Are we really going to prosecute this whole fucking thing every time someone mentions that guy's name or says the word "Israel" out loud?
Let's all agree to save time, as NO ONE will be persuaded by ANYONE in these comments, one way or the other, and not drum through all this shit again and again.
I agree that prognosticating is a complete waste of time, except as an effort to clarify one's own thoughts, but it is an irresistible American pastime. The courts will decide - haha just like they settled RvW to everyone's satisfaction.
Well said sir. At its essence you are either inclined to support mass murder or you’re not. Seems pretty simple to me. Perhaps I am just a simpleton. 🤔
I think they know the difference, JD. I think they have this fundamental belief that this must be, it must exist, to protect the freedom. You know, the old "it's the speech we hate" mantra.
There is a line, and we've got to find it. I certainly don't know how, but I just recently went on a serious multi-rant because I found out that a subscriber had been libeled (section 230 exempted libel, of course) mutliple times with the words "Nazi cunt" on a Substack. We have to find a line, or one will be found for us.
I got news for you guys: Your freedom to say horrid and awful things to each other, lives on a knife's edge. That edge is called the Section 230 Exemption, and it is granted, and rescinded, totally at the government's pleasure. It's a ticking bomb that is at the last second, waiting for "the something" to happen.
And don't forget that when "the something" happens, and there is no more Free Press, and there is no more Substack, it will NOT be an infringement on your speech rights.
Apply this logic to Trump saying "you need to fight like hell or you won't have a country anymore" before a thousand of his most rabid sycophants violently attacked the capital building, resulting in multiple deaths.
I'm sure Trump supporters would understand why police had to use violence during that riot if they imagined foreigners attacking the capital building like that.
When the debate has devolved to the point of comparing Khalil (a liaison/negotiator between Columbia's administrators and the protesters) to Hitler and a mob boss, as Taibbi would say, you've lost the plot.
I haven’t lost anything. I’m using simple, obvious analogies to point out the absurdity of pretending that there’s no “speech” that’s ever criminal. You, meanwhile, are weasel-wording Khalil into something very different from what he is.
No, you just don't want to believe who he really is, and would rather believe the hasbara nonsense. And the only "pretending" going on is claiming he said anything "criminal."
The West is worth a road trip. Arizona, Nevada, Colorado, Utah, Washington are all beautiful, and people are open and mind their business and don't care to tell you about yours. You'll get some of that in Seattle, but it's not as bad as parts of California or most of Wyoming. And most have legal weed.
I had to miss it this year. The Sandhill crane migration at the Platte River in central Nebraska is a bucket list trip. One of the last great migrations left on the planet. You can’t describe it. You have to be there.
Nothing. Except I think it's an interesting comment regarding the topic. When I recommend travel to people, I don't think to include 'legal weed' in positive terms of places to visit. Don't get me wrong, I indulged quite a lot in my earlier years. It just seems to me that using 'legal weed' as a positive recommendation for travel is kind of weird...especially on this topic.
A terror list?! That is incredibly awesome, and probably way overdue. Can you share where you got this information? I've been saying since 10/7 that the world needs to stop traveling to the U.S. The revenue from tourism is more diluted here than in, say, Bora Bora, but many places rely heavily on it. Money is all Trump, Musk and their minions understand. The rest of the world needs to hit us as hard as it can.
YOu seem to speak for all of us in what we all stand for.. but i'll wager it's what you stand for and you want to shove it down our throats.... correct?
You're a fragile little snowflake. It's probably in your best interest to find news outlets that only confirm what you already believe. There's no shortage of them out there.
Hardly. I have a wide range of sources and am.pretty astute at weeding out bias/prejudice, mis-, dis-, and mal-information. But this piece does not even rise to that level. It is awful. Maybe it was supposed to be comedic. That is his lane. But it did not rise to that level either.
Yes. These procrastinating adolescents are just cosplaying Hamas warriors in order to skip college class on a sunny Friday afternoon. Just “costumes” of murderers who committed atrocities most of can’t and would not imagine, and filmed and posted on social media to share with the rest of us and to further traumatize and victimize. And continue to do so to this day.
Nothing to see here? He got here in December, 2022. Less than twenty-eight months in America, and he is an out-front player for Hamas - American Style.
It will be so moving to read his Letters From A Louisiana Jail, which Amy and the rest of his 19 attorneys will be sure to share with us on a regular basis.
It's a venue where soyboys can pick up chicks, too. 'Twas ever thus.
I'm reminded of a "Fabulous Furry Freak Brothers" comic in which Fat Freddy joins a demonstration and immediately barges into the library demanding to be shown where they keep the "fuck books." He's shown the door by a gigantic monstrous librarian who says "The university library will NEVER hold 'fuck books.' Now GET OUT!"
I tried to find an archived copy of the comic, but failed. I think it's in one of the first five issues or so, around 1969.
You're fake, right? This is a copy/paste from a Youtube comment or something, right? Nobody could be that stupid and also have found their way here naturally and managed to make a comment.
It strikes me as just another example of assigning no value to people who don’t think like you, or who don’t look like you, or who don’t share your history . . . Hmmm. What does that remind us of.
Of course you're not calling for mommy - she's out working to pay for your substack subscriptions while you're sitting on your ass in the basement. Meanwhile, you seem to be unable to respond coherently to someone's argument other than the sixth-grade level "you're stupid." Well, done, Einstein, well done...
Many of the TikTok atrocity videos were posted by IDF soldiers proud of what they had done (sort of like Americans in Abu Ghraib). Our brave fine Congress had a way to deal with such atrocities: They banned TikTok. And soon Trump's waiting period for TikTok will end and we will be shielded from anti-Semitic Zionist atrocity posts which put Israel in a bad light.
Saturday morning, Oct. 7, 2023, I turned on the morning news show on Fox (naturally, right?). They were showing a video of a young woman being dragged into a jeep-like vehicle by men with guns. Her pants were stained. She was driven away. During the day, photos of a dead naked woman in the back of a truck were making their way into media. Did the IDF film and publish those images?
Did the IDF release images of bloody babies’ beds, and evidence of other atrocities committed that day? Yes, and why? Did the Allies film the atrocities in WWII in the death camps. Yes. And how interesting any number of people are denying the existence of the Holocaust and the barbarity of Oct. 7.
It's actually a very simple issue, Lynne. Destroying the first amendment for at the behest of a foreign government is likely to cause backlash against that government by freedom-loving Americans.
That is true, but it's also true that destroying the First Amendment for issues like wokism is not only likely, but did cause a backlash. The fundamental problem the author is pointing out is that various groups are attempting to destroy the First Amendment in order to advance their own agenda.
So BS your biases and prejudices are on full display. And like BK make a vast oversimplification. First, 1st A rights are civil rights and as such relate to a particular field of law. Civil rights issues can be raised in civil actions such as suing an entity for violation of civil rights. But they are more often raised as defense to criminal prosecution or as justification for criminal conduct. Significantly to do either the accused has to admit the offense, and your whole argument is Khalid did nothing wrong. Criminal conduct is not excused by labeling it free speech. Speech is protected. Some acts, such as peaceful protest, are protected. (At least here for now.) But vandalism and trespass are not excused (just ask the J6 protesters). False imprisonment (of the maintenance workers) is not excused. Threats, intimidation, and harassment of a group of students based on their religion or ethnicity is not excused. But Khalid is not charged with a crime nor is he required to be to be subject to deportation. As others have already told you if he is relying on a student visa and violated the terms thereof he is subject to deportation. If he is relying on a green card visa and violated the terms thereof he is subject to deportation. If he lied on the student or green card visa applications he is subject to deportation. But my understanding is that the basis of his deportation is a rarely used (til now anyway) method and is based on a State Department determination that he has engaged in conduct contrary to America's national interests. You know and I know the United States of America is a close ally of Israel. Since the inception of the modern nation of Israel. More importantly Khalid knew it. The entire purpose of the protests was to force divestment of investment in and aid to Israel, to turn the tide against Israel and weaken Israel. Nor was he a mere participant, rather he was an organizer and a negotiator. His conduct as an organizer raises the inference of conspiracy to commit [crimes] and engaging in organized criminal activity, both of which increase the classification of the underlying crime(s). As the negotiator he was the very public face of the organized protests. Protests In which others BTW were very careful not to disclose their identities. Which sort of refutes the notion that all was above board as hiding behind masks and hoods generally indicates nefariousness and a desire not to get caught so engaging. Additionally according to his wife's recent statements he was aware of the risk of being detained and deported as he had advised her what to do in the event thereof and had tapered his public appearances at the new protests. Additionally neither you nor I have any idea what his actions entailed. But he does. And various federal entities likely have a decent idea for him to have been summarily detained as he was. My guess is that they have digital records, surveillance footage, witness statements, and maybe transcripts if bugged conversations, etc.. Reportedly he may be an intelligence asset of a foreign entity or entities. If so most likely he will agree to deportation to avoid criminal prosecution. It sounds to me like he may have been trying to prepare his wife for his absence. Lastly it is disingenuous, to say the least, to argue that Gaza and Hamas are not synonymous with the Free Palestine movement. That is their entire point - from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free. You really need to try to see the big picture to have any possibility of intelligently assessing this matter.
Khalil is not charged with a crime because he committed no crime. He's an innocent man who did nothing wrong. I will believe that until the day he's convicted of a crime in a court of law because all humans subjected to American jurisdiction are presumed innocent until proven guilty. He used his free speech to advocate for a cause that he cares about. You think he's wrong, great, say so. That's your right. It was his right to speak his mind. It's your right to speak your mind. This is how America works. Detaining him without charge and deporting him based on unproven allegations of wrongdoing undermines the bill of rights, both the first and sixth amendments. He's a legal permanent resident. That means that if he violates no law then he gets to live here forever.
You pro-Israel types want to make him a free speech martyr? What a terrible idea. This will backfire. Two days ago Bernie Sanders said that we need to end arms shipments to Israel on the Senate floor. Today he held the largest rally of his entire political career. The man is 83 years old. The spell may eventually break on the Israel issue in America, and stunts like deporting a peaceful man who broke no law will contribute to that sea-change. Just ask Bill Maher or Andrew Sullivan, who are quite pro-Israel but oppose deporting Khalil without charge. You people are completely in the wrong on this issue, and it's very much to the detriment of your own movement.
He is subject to deportation without having been charged with or convicted of a crime. I do not think it was merely speaking his mind that caused his deportation.
State Dept and DHS are claiming it's because he's a "threat to national security." Hmm, where have we heard that before? Oh right, any time the government (led by EITHER party) seeks to silence its detractors. Look at what the Biden Admin did to the J6ers.
Because there have been abuses in the past does not mean it is being wrongfully applied to Khalil. That is the way everybody gets eaten by the wolf after the little boy cried wold too many times. But I think you have, perhaps inadvertently, hit on why so many people are troubled by this - because of the potential for abuse. I do not pretend to know the answer. Unlike most others commenting on the thread. The only thing I do know is the Khalil matter involves many areas of law and it is not a simple matter. Which was the gist of my original comment.
Nothing you are arguing makes legal sense. The issue is this is an arrest of someone who has not been charged with a crime by government entities acting outside their powers, using a wartime law outside wartime against a person who is a permanent legal resident of this country, based, apparently, on the content of his speech. If he is accused of specific crimes he could be charged with those crimes. Saying a civil rights issue can be raised in a lawsuit but not as a criminal defense is a nonsensical argument. If the very basis of a criminal case constitutes violating the defendant’s civil rights, the answer is not that the case goes on but the defendant can sue someone in civil court, the answer is the criminal case is invalidated. Most Americans would know that.
Re “intelligence asset”: he was a Chevenning scholar, meaning he was sponsored by the British, our ally, and would have been through a vetting process, making him less likely to have any kind of terrorist affiliation.
Re “national interests”: The allyship with Israel is what seems to be contrary to US interests at this point, and many Americans are realizing it, especially now with the attack on our first amendment, which Israelis may not understand is central to our concept of freedom and what it means to be American. The ways that Israel supposedly benefits us are all illusory. The terrorist threat we work together to combat is generated largely because of Israel. The military and spy tech is funded by us and they spy on us. Trump may be bought by Israel, but who’s to say we don’t elect a true America first leader next time, who campaigns on cutting Israel loose? We can only hope.
Sadly, hope is all we've got. Problem is, no one will even be considered for POTUS unless they pledge their undying fealty to Israel; a foreign country, no less. So much for "America First."
I don't think the issue is complicated at all. Hypocrisy is hypocrisy. All the author is pointing out is that the conservative right now claims that words are dangerous because it's about their issues, but when it's about the liberal left's issues, words are not dangerous at all. That is hypocritical.
But we, in the U.S., abound with hypocrisy. We claim to fight for democracy while overthrowing democratically elected leaders. We condemn abortion as murder while applauding the slaughter of 10's and 100's of thousands of people in foreign countries. We claim to be a peace loving nation while starting wars all over the world. We claim to be the land of the free, but we have the highest per capital prison population in the world. We claim to have the best healthcare in the world but we have the worst national health statistics of all the developed countries. And to top it off, we claim that the First Amendment protects our speech, but not speech that offends us.
This essay is short and simplified, that's for sure. But to me it seems sensible and makes issues accessible to folks who maybe can't handle all the nuances. The fact that the author is under the Free Press umbrella, which has been afforded some kind of privileged position here on Substack, helps me see it has been written for a mass audience of unsophisticated readers. Posing the core issue as Left and Right is the main instrument of the simplification. Demonstrating to stop a horrendous live case of genocide that seems by now to never stop, should elicit outrage from decent people across the political spectrum.
There is a lot of what you describe on Substack but to me this piece was worse than that. The Khalid deportation is stoking lots of flames but people are weighing in with zero knowledge much less understanding of the issues. Khalid's conduct - conduct, not speech - involves a number of fields of law. Immigration, civil rights, criminal and administrative. The but, but, but he hasn't been convicted of a crime!!! or he is being deported for his free speech!!! folks might as well tattoo stupid on their foreheads. And because of the national security angle we are not likely to ever know all the details. But the utter insensitivity to the concerns of the intimidated and harassed Jewish Columbia students is egregious. I see no other justification for that except Jews anywhere are fair game.
Yah. This case encapsulates so much of what is going on now. Khalil embodies a rallying point for the resistance. He is doing so as Trump goes off the deep end in his efforts to pay back the people who allowed him to seize power in the White House.
Kkalil, it seems, is spotlessly clean in his legal record, his academic record, and his negotiating record to date. The unwillingness to charge him as a political prisoner is a new US version of Israeli administrative detention. Khalil's current treatment definitely sends a signal where we are headed in the Trump era.
In the background of it all, is the fact that the current Israel-US partnership is led on the Israeli side by the most notoriously war criminal in the world right now, Benjamin Netanyahu. Netanyahu is walking around free as he fires his top officials who know too much about the PM's roles in the real genesis of the Oct 7 psy op. That bundle of issues is presently going by the name of Qatargate.
So right now we are dealt impunity as usual for the folks in high who are really responsible for the most horrific crimes against humanity (Covid too). Meanwhile Khalil is becoming a symbol of the wretched of the earth. The wretcheds are being criminalized along with lots of other folks who are resisting the march towards Greater Israel by means of mass slaughter. Who is next?
I think it likely there was. For example, harrassment statutes generally say anything intimidating or threatening is harrassment which makes sense but there are other statutes that cover those offenses so harrassment statutes usually include other things like annoying, embarrassing, or subjecting the victim thereof to public ridicule.
I was not there so I have no first hand knowledge, which I try to acknowledge by saying things like I think, I believe, etc.. . During the 2024 dem8nstration, which I believe forms the basis of Khalil's deportation, I did see first hand accounts at the time of the demonstration of people who said they were Columbia students and Jewish who expressed fear. But to be clear my last comment just dealt with what constitutes harrassment. Legally that is. And my point was that it does not take much to constitute harrassment.
"Demonstrating to stop a horrendous live case of genocide that seems by now to never stop, should elicit outrage from decent people across the political spectrum."
For a second or two I thought you were changing the subject to abortion.
At which point exactly do I state that Matt is the author this article. Please be precise. NB if I wanted to state that Matt is the author of the article the article, why don't I just say so? Use those great reading skills and work it out for yourself. BW below seems to have tripped into the same hole.
Because you said, "I get that Matt has to produce something on this issue." And btw, Matt HAS written pieces on this issue. Pretty sure I saw you in the comments sections under them.
Congratulations, you've confirmed your own levels of literacy. 'Produce' and 'write' are very different verbs with entirely different etymologies. Let me help.
When discussing media, media such as Racket News (the hint is in the title) 'producer' and 'writer' have critically important meanings. Examine the credits in a book, magazine, cd, film, tv program, radio program etc, etc, etc - the 'writer(s)' have to be distinguished from the producers. Why? Both for clarity, and because the producer gets all the money.
So, contra your well-intended if snarky remarks about the reading skills of others, appended to my own clear comment, I do not believe I'm in any need of correction, or remedial reading and writing advice, at least in this instance.
Re: your btw, Matt has written and has spoken on this topic, at least once, but not in recent memory, and certainly not in the manner of this article, in which Ben grins and leaps into this raging bonfire of a topic, akin only to jumping into a volcano wearing a ski goggles for protection.
Writing a piece dedicated to exploring the Israel/Palestinian conflict invites thermonuclear levels of abuse, irrespective of the stance. Hence, Ben's approach, which I think to be an imaginative, if ultimately futile, experiment in discourse. Did Matt say to Ben: 'ok, you do it, I'll pay you'? I've no idea.
I hope I've addressed both your points. Remember: write and produce don't mean the same thing when discussing media. Have a good one.
Agreed. Chanting From the River to the Sea is enough right there. It may be a simple chant but says annihilate the Jewish state. The students being useful idiots who want their version of the 60’s is not an excuse enough for harassment and endangering their Jewish fellow students. Or for being in favor of the real genocide that took place on October 7th. If only they were, as students, intellectually curious and aware enough know about Hamas parading the corpses of dead children through the street as Gazans cheered.
"It may be a simple chant but says annihilate the Jewish state." -- Only if you believe (and/or promulgate) the hasbara nonsense. The key part of that slogan is PALESTINE WILL BE FREE. Which ACTUALLY means no longer suffering under apartheid policies, occupation, indefinite detention without charge, human rights abuses, and indiscriminate killing.
And oh by the way, Israel's zionist leadership uses that slogan, too, but for the ACTUAL purpose of annihilating the Palestinians as a means to their zionist goal of a Eretz Yisrael (Greater Israel):
"harassment and endangering their Jewish fellow students" -- There's ZERO evidence of this.
"the real genocide that took place on October 7th" -- Oh, so when only a few hundred are killed by Hamas, it's genocide. But when TENS OF THOUSANDS are killed by Israel, it's not genocide. Double-standard much?
If only YOU were "intellectually curious and aware enough [to] know" about the region's history going back to the 1917 Balfour Declaration.
Thank you! Forgive me, but I'm a WASP male. Actually, my Mom made sure I was baptized Catholic... soooo, I got that goin for me, lol!
I don't understand why there has to be this anti-Zionism. I'm getting that anti-Zionism is kind of like anti-Americanism, but no one conflates that with anything. Am I making any sense?
Although I appreciate your time, you really didn't answer my question. However, for the record, I feel that Khalil represented enough of a danger, and he had clearly violated his green card agreement. He should've moved on the side of caution, he did not. That says a lot to me. I feel he should be sent home.
I hate to beat a dead horse, but again (not again for you, but again in this thread), you didn't answer my question. So, maybe I'm asking this:
Is this a place for haters to primarily hurl insults at one another, or can I, a open-minded, God believing, non-secular, American veteran boomer, get some info? You want me to read Google? You KNOW I'm not gonna get the real story! You want me to go on a search of obscure websites? Forget it! What is Zionism apart from Americanism?
EDIT: See, here I go again! Not realizing that everyone just wants to fight! That's what it's all about isn't it? It's all about, "I'm gonna tell this jerk a thing or two!", isn't it?
Civil discourse can ONLY be maintained with a designated AUTHORITY. In sports, they're often called "refs", but they are NECESSARY! What would you're favorite sporting event be, without the refs?
Am I though? Typically when someone attacks me personally I just ignore them, but I feel like I should point out that American citizens aren’t being punished for their speech. Non citizens are being sent home for supporting terrorist regimes. Even if it’s moral support, it’s still support.
If I were to say "bin Laden had a point", it seems like a stretch to say that would be moral support for Al-Qaeda.
By this standard, anyone "parroting Russian talking points" is guilty of providing Russia moral support, and only a simple executive order stands in the way of severe consequences.
And, as that "spokesperson" he was making demands of Columbia in exchange for a cessation of illegal activities. As Andrew McCarthy pointed out, that's the crime of extortion.
Or more recently like al-Julani, a headchopper of ISIS, who was reviled by State Media until they found out, as with Hillary from Sullivan, that the headchopper offspring of al Qaeda were working FOR the US. Biden and Israel just made al-Julani head of Syria to rid the country of "undesirables". Today's terrorist is tomorrow's freedom fighter.
And the NAZI-oriented Azov Battalion that was on the State Departments watch list for a couple of years... until the Russia-Ukraine War started, then, suddenly, they were "reformed" and declared heroes.
Closer to what? Right about what? As I recall, the Bin Laden letter was an illumination of the perceptions of the Arab World about the United States’ support for Israel. That support in itself is, by any measure, a support for terrorism. (Please refer to Leon Pinetta’s characterization of the pager attack last year).
I don’t think you can say that his opinions were ‘wrong’. They were opinions.
We’re talking about two different things. I saw nothing in Khalil’s writing which defended or supported the 9/11 bombings. If I’m in error, please show me where.
But he has every right, and reason, to defend his people against genocide, no matter where he’s from or where he lives. I like him very much.
You can say anything you like Mr. Blair, as long as you are a citizen you are one of us. As a guest on the other hand, one is wise to be a little circumspect in one’s public statements. Perhaps saying “Bin Laden had a point” would not be out of line for a guest at a dinner party, but to stand out in front of your house with a mega phone and start shouting it to the neighborhood might be a little bit beyond the pale sir. Guests are expected to behave. I expect it of my guests and we should expect it of all of our guests.
(This comment thread has gotten a bit unpleasant so I’ll just address one of the more reasonable people here.)
You’re right about the issue of free speech and its fundamental importance to or culture. What I find interesting is how few people know what the man actually said and did.
He is clearly a victim of the Israel Lobby, plain and simple. He is not charged with anything. So, as you said, it has to be a free speech issue only.
I think it gets tricky with Hamas as well, as they are also the Palestinian government. The situation reminds me a bit of Northern Ireland, when we commonly had supporters of the IRA and Sinn Fein here.
There would even be collections in pubs to send them money. I believe prosecutions of that did ratchet up, but some people weren't convicted because they made the case it was for humanitarian aid.
It does not. A green card is a visa you don’t have to renew. It does not give you the same rights as a citizen. The man should have been smart enough to wait until he was a citizen before sympathizing with a terrorist group that is currently holding an American citizens hostage.
The Biz - he's sympathizing with the Palestinians in Gaza who are getting slaughtered. That's another way of looking at it, which I think is surely valid.
If he sympathized with the Palestinians, he would demand that Hamas surrender and release the remaining hostages, most of whom are dead. He would also condemn the grotesque atrocities that started this war. None of these "pro Palestinian" protesters give a shit about the Palestinians.
So? Note that not one Arab nation is willing to take in the Gazans. Not one. Because when they did in the past it did not work out well for those welcoming nation. Which raises the thought that maybe the Gazans are a special problem. And let's be honest the Sunni Arab nations are between the Jewish rock and the Iranian Shia hard place. We all know that Iran is funding and trying to control the Arabs we now refer to as Palestinian attacks on Israel. My belief is that if those attackers succeed in destroying Israel then Iran will target the Middle Eastern Sunni Arab nations on its quest for world domination via Caliphate. My instinct is this is what drove the Abraham Accords. As for the other western nations I do not give a hoot what the European, Canadian, and Aussie leadership thinks or wants. And that is particularly true of the EU. What a bunch of smug, sanctimonious fools. Those people are not the friends of people like you and me. Nor of their own people like you and me. The world is re-aligning. I am excited for it.
"the grotesque atrocities that started this war" -- First, it's a mass slaughter and ethnic cleansing, not a "war." Second, it started with the 1917 Balfour Declaration, LONG BEFORE 10/7/23.
No. He is a Palestinian who organized protests and negotiated demands to achieve divestment of investment in Israel, boycotts of Israeli goods and services, and sanction on Israel to weaken Israel. Israel is a longstanding ally of the US and recipient of a lot of US aid including military assistance. So Khalid's conduct was contrary to US interests. That is the basis of his deportation.
Green Card Holders of which I was one before I left this begnited country 20 yrs ago have the same free speech rights as citizens. Put that in your pipe and smoke it!
How long did it take you to get a green card? Were you here on an F1 first? Or did a company sponsor you with a work visa? What's the work visa you would need? Oh Jenny, let's dig into this!!
How did a student on an F1 visa get a full Green Card in 18 months? Where did his team of attorneys come from? There are A LOT of suspect things with this guy.
Unless a person is otherwise ineligible or the marriage is a sham, you absolutely can get a green card based on marriage alone. But, what is interesting as it applies to Khalil is that a green card through marriage is conditional if the marriage is less than 2 years old at the time of green card application. Reports say Khalil married his US citizen wife in 2023. Therefore, in all likelihood, Khalil's green card is "conditional." How that might affect the entire analysis I am not sure.
What does that mean? The US 'head hunted' him? You need to write more clearly. The government or a company? And if he was 'head hunted' he most likely got a work visa. But you should know this. Because you're saying it was your husband.
Ok, that's fair. But the fact that he got it from *somewhere* still stands, so his rights are his rights regardless.
Also, to address something I didn't before, the guy could have "shady" backing for his lawyers, sure, but that's kind of irrelevant to the charges against him, no?
You are still off here and so is Glenn. I usually agree with him but he's been wrong on this issue all along. And there is an underlying problem in that our university instructors are nearly teaching that if you are oppressed, you have a right to violence that their "oppressors" do not have. all hogwash.
The problem of the universities teaching bullshit is irrelevant to the case of Khalil and his deportation though, no?
If anything, it can be used as defense of Khalil where he can claim he was simply advocating what he was taught. (though don't pay too much attention on this last sentence, it's just me brainstorming a possible tie)
Why should he be "radicalized"? Supposing we take the "Palestinian cause" as something dangerously foolish, you can't rule out the possibility of him just being dumb. You would have to find some way to show he doesn't just believe in something stupid, but is aware of its possible ramifications and supportive of them. That's borderline unprovable and a stretch to even begin to try and prove.
I agree a lot of things here are fishy. But we'ld be going after intent and not plain words spoken. I wouldn't wanna live in a world where intent, as deemed by someone, is legally punishable. It would seem like pre-crime to me.
It wouldn't be difficult to review his many video appearances and reach a conclusion either way. Since he broadcast his many views and actions at Columbia, to your point, he may have been too dumb to realize he was digging his own hole. Or too naive or bigoted to care. Again, there is a lot wrong with this guy's story.
It did not matter who the foreigner was, where from, and why they came - under the Biden administration there was no vetting. Heck, they flew 30 thousand foreigners here every month for almost 4 years saying they were asylum seekers. Tax payers paid for that. None of the Afghans flown here on tax dollars were vetted either.
There are several categories for Green Card eligibility and one of the quickest is marriage to an American Citizen. This provision has been in place for decades, not something new.
People should look up the various differences in Green cards and eligibility before they spout off.
There are student visas, green card visas and LPR Status Visas through marriage -> LPR - Lawful Permanent Resident
Like it or not, his arrest and deportation is technically illegal since he has not been charged with any crime. His arrest has been solely because he participated, non-violently, in protests against the extreme level of killing taking place in Gaza and the West Bank. a protest, whether effective or not, is not illegal.
As Matt clearly pointed out , the government has failed "to identify a single crime he has committed. Rather, it’s all guilt by association: he has “helped propel” episodes of “anonymous violence,” and has led a movement that “has involved everything from erecting encampments on school property to directing death wishes at Zionists"
And before anyone jumps on me because I, like Matt, feel his arrest is bullshit, anti-Zionism (a political issue) is not equivalent to anti-semetism ( freedom of religion issue).
It does give him the same rights (I think Glenn did a video on that). Also, the guy didn't participate in the demonstrations or the break in Hamilton Hall himself. He was simply supportive of the cause that the people who did the break-in also support. (Or at least purport to support). If you wanna call him a "spokesperson" for speaking at the rally, then so be it, but then can a guy who speaks in support of curved immigration be considered a spokesperson for racists or Nazis, because they too support the same thing?
Glenn is off on this and has been a long time. Of COURSE, it's different. A citizen cannot be deported. A green card holder CAN be deported for heading a group that broke our laws. Hello. NO non citizen has the same rights as citizens. Period.
His group broke the laws and he was negotiating for them. That makes him personally responsible. He was negotiating that certain things had to be done by Columbia in order for them to stop. They don't have to break laws to be deported, either. We don't have to put up with him fronting a group (and probably being funded by far left crazies).
Not anywhere near the same thing. He specifically told them to be peaceful. They didn't. Thisi guy negotiated with Columbia claiming they wouldn't stop until they met their demands. NOT the same.
No, Trump urged people to "peacefully and patriotically" have their voices heard and, once it became clear that matters had spiraled out of control (the how-and-why of that being an entire discussion on its own), Trump urged people to disperse.
In particular, Trump didn't "negotiate" on behalf of law-breakers at the Capitol (and again, per the above, it's still not clear the who, how and why of the initial agitation, or the reason the Capitol Police were so severely under-staffed, or why Trump's offer of the National Guard was turned down -- see former Police Chief Sund's description of that).
So, no, Trump in no way acted in a fashion analogous to Khalil, who appears to have been involved in and negotiated for the organization(s) that occupied campus buildings.
You don't know his funding, so you can't deport someone for "probably" having shady backing or claiming that as proof of malicious intent.
Also, I think you do have to put up with him, since this is a dangerous standard you would be setting. Just like Bridges v. Wixon said one can't be deported for being a communist, without beign a member of the communist party, one can't be outted as a terrorist, without having been part of a terrorist organisation. You could say he advocates the same goals and is therefore a "terrorist supporter", but then you would be in a position where you would also have to call anyone whose opinions align with the goals of the Russian state as a Putin-propagandist and deport for that fact, no?
Sorry, but we CAN deport people for this. He lied on his application that he would not do this kind of stuff. He does not have equal rights. we would have denied his application as Marco Rubio says. And we CAN deport people for this kind of thing. He was holding Columbia hostage.
Hilarious. Yes, Glenn's coverage is "accurate" which is why I subscribe and support him. And yes, I believe is conclusions are "off" which is my right.
And no they do NOT have exactly the same rights because a citizen can't be deported and there ARE ways in which a green card can be revoked, regardless of what Glenn says. It says so right on the US gov. site.
No, the site says there are times when they will not get due process. And I taught argument classes. Obama removed illegal immigrants without due process. Every president does it. It's all fine if it's not Donald Trump. Do some real research.
Yes, absolutely he can. If I went to a foreign country, I'd be very careful not to advocate for a group that is breaking laws! So his rights ARE different than ours. It's likely he's being funded by some huge activist group, too. So he's not very smart to do this at all.
It's "likely" isn't a valid cause for deportation.
Also, unless he said something to the tune of "the Hamilton break-in is good", simply advocating something that the people who did participate in the break-in also claim to support isn't cause for deportation either, regardless of how "dangerously foolish" that cause may be.
In his spokesperson role he made demands of Columbia in exchange for an end to unlawful activities of the CUAD protesters. Obvious extortion. But your overall tone suggests that you think he needs to be convicted of some crime to have his green card revoked and to be deported to Syria. That is not the case.
I didn't know of the demands to Columbia, so I'm willing to cede that point.
Ok, he doesn't need to commit a crime to be deported, but is throwing people (who are not just randomly here, but are legal and have permanent resident status) out of the country for views they might hold that we don't like and are "dumb" or "dangerously dumb" a thing to be in support of?
I guess if it comes down to simply throwing people out whose views we don’t like, which seems so capricious and cruel, I’d still have to say, throw them out! While I don’t suppose we can expect all our guests to swear allegiance to and belief in the concepts expressed in our constitution, we should certainly kick them out if they do the least thing that indicates they might wish to under mine those concepts or that document.
And I would add that the burden of proof is not on us but on the guest. That’s how it is with guests, and I think that’s made pretty clear when they come here.
Donald Trump, no matter what you can say about him as if you didn’t ever commit a sin or live in a glass house yourself, understands these very basic facts about reality and the state of the human soul. Perhaps he learned the hard way, but he has learned; that’s a lot more than we can say for most of us.
Since the guy came here legally and went through all the bureaucratic bullshit to do so and then also to obtain a green card, the government can be more attentive to him.
Other than that, I don't think there's much to say against your point. Ok, it's valid. I just find it a bit cruel and discouraging for people that want to enter the US.
Since when did speech start getting compared to physical acts of violence/felonies?
...this guy has been arrested (and in all likelihood will also be deported) for expressing his opinions...no crime committed, no violence perpetrated (unless being made uncomfortable by someone feels "violent" to you).
All I have heard is people *speculating* that he "encouraged" others to occupy a building (not at all convinced that's illegal anyway), and that he told the school they would continue protesting if the groups demands weren't met (i.e., exactly how a protest works, and, conveniently, also not illegal).
--and you want to know how I know this?....They did NOT and still have NOT CHARGED him with ANY crimes. ...if they had charged him with a crime (almost anything would do), they would have easy grounds to revoke his green card/deport him and no one could complain. The very fact they have not done this should be all the proof you need.
Well, the Trump Administration can't be accused of subtlety; they're probably not charging Khalil with anything so as to better send the message to everyone that criticizing Israel IS the crime. Hurting the feelings of Jewish students is also now a crime, unless they're Jewish students holding a Seder in an encampment (THAT'S a bad Jew). They don't have much time to chill speech or further bury news of war crimes against Palestinians because support for the genocidal state in the U.S. is tanking, ha ha. My guess is that Trump's handler, Miriam Adelson, will make him ban TikTok for that reason.
I guess you haven't been paying attention to developments in the U.S.: it's now illegal to say anything negative about Israel. You can say "Fuck the U.S.!" until you're blue in the face, but criticizing Israel is verboten. Looks like all our Congress critters are repaying AIPAC what it cost to buy them, if not more.
Lawbreaking is not a guilt-by-association thing, it's something individuals do. If one person in the group broke the law, that's on them. If everyone in the group except Khalil broke the law, that's still on them and not one iota falls on Khalil.
Sorry, but this guy told Columbia they would not stop breaking the law unless they capitulated certain things. And he's no citizen. If you h ave a green card, this is a very bad idea. That is inciting violence. Period.
No. You're basing all your theories on your own definitions of things rather than the legal definitions. He is not guilty of inciting violence according to the legal definition of incitement, nor has he been charged with incitement.
Not true. Conspiracy, aiding and betting, and engaging in organized criminal activity all involve someone else doing the criminal deed to some extent. Otherwise you could never convict mafia bosses, drug kingpins, or cartel leaders.
Of course, but those are actual crimes. Just being the neighbor or relative of a lawbreaker is not a crime, nor is being a member of a group in which other members committed crimes. And merely accusing someone of those things is not good enough. Mafia bosses are not sent to jail by presidential decree.
But as an organizer Khalil as a minimum aided and abetted, conspired to, and or engaged in organized criminal activity which resulted in trespassing, false imprisonment, vandalism, and harrassment of Jewish students.
Amazing how many people conflate a Green Card with Citizenship. Its NOT. All that a green card is a resident visa, but a visa nonetheless. And like any visa, it can be revoked by the issuing authority after an appropriate determination by the Sec of State. And actively supporting a designated terrorist organization Hamas why Khalil is deservedly in the process of being sent back to wherever he came from.
This is just straight-up false, you don't know what you're talking about. A permanent resident alien (LPR) *cannot* be deported solely by a determination by the Secretary of State.
You are wrong. One can if the activities of the holder are contrary to US interests. (And whether you, or I, or anyone else likes it, US interests are closely aligned with Israel. ) I think it likely that there is sufficient evidence thereof, as well as plain old criminal conduct, against Khalil and that he will agree to deportation rather than face prosecution.
False, that case does not have any impact on the First Amendment rights of green card holders. Demore v. Kim dealt solely with the lawfulness of holding without bail an already *convicted* criminal pending deportation. And notably, it did not say the Congress could violate his 5th Amendment rights because he was not a citizen, it said that the detention without bail *was not a violation of 5A*.
And it also said that Congress may make rules as to aliens that would be unacceptable if applied to citizens. Now, jump ahead to reality and read the clear language of the Immigration and Nationality Act which is unequivocal about the powers of the State Department; "An alien whose presence or activities in the United States the Secretary of State has reasonable ground to believe would have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States is deportable."
Subsequent cases state that "A letter from the Secretary of State conveying the Secretary’s determination that an alien’s presence in this country would have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States, and stating facially reasonable and bona fide reasons for
that determination, is presumptive and sufficient evidence that the alien is deportable under section 241(a)(4)(C)(i) of the Act, and the Service is not required to present additional evidence of deportability.
Would this apply to a citizen? NO! It is clearly a rule that would be unacceptable for a citizen who has full constitutional rights. Which SCOTUS allows. Get a grip - green card holders can be deported for failing to report a change of address; why would you think Khalil's behavior is not more detrimental than that?
There is nothing about that ruling that states that Congress may make rules that restrict the First Amendment rights of LPR aliens. The INA is subordinate to the First Amendment; anything in the INA that contradicts the Constitution is illegal. But it does require the Secretary of State to state "...facially reasonable and bona fide reasons for
that determination ...", and merely exercising one's First Amendment rights is facially *unreasonable*.
Get a grip. Failing to report a change of address is a violation; exercising your 1A rights is not.
Your belief that Khalil is in trouble for exercising 1st Amendment rights is as childishly naive as your apparent belief that the lawyers who prepare the SOS's letter would in anyway suggest that it was based on that.
Childishly naive? My 'belief', as you describe, it based on the only reason the Trump administration has provided: that is, Khalil's role in organizing and speaking at Palestinian protest events at Columbia University. That's the only reason provided, so it's not naive to rely on that.
Hmmm, yeah you think the Trump admin has stated that their deportation justification is Khalil exercising his 1st amendment rights. Do not you see why your position is naive?
Here is what has been documented
From the Notice to Appear "“The Secretary of State has determined that your presence or activities in the United States would have serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United State"
From Rubio, [the State Department] "will be revoking the visas and/or green cards of Hamas supporters in America so they can be deported."
Homeland Security, [Khalil] "led activities aligned to Hamas, a designated terrorist organization.”
You are leaping to the conclusion that his protected speech is the cause of these accusations but not all "support" falls under that category. For example, the organization of the protest (riots) is fraught with activities that are not protected speech. The violence, the kidnapping of custodians, the harassment of students (Jewish or otherwise), vandalism , etc. are all illegal and can be linked to him through conspiracy, accessory, or accountability laws. BTW, material support of a terrorist organization can include "... any action that can assist a terrorist organization or one of its members in any way, such as providing food, helping to set up tents, distributing literature, or making a small monetary contributions"
The bottom line is that Khalil's actions are the cause of the deportation effort.
Well, define abuse. Being a little bit sarcastic on that one but let me try to explain. I am not a lawyer but I have been researching this for the last few days because of the controversy and it seems there are a few principles that are different for green card holders and other foreign nationals that make the deportation in question legal.
1) Only citizens have a right to be in the US, all others are guests granted the privilege of being here (bear in mind that rights/privilege are defined by law differently than common usage)
2) The Federal government has substantial powers, generally through the State department, to determine who will be granted this privilege. Their standards for admission are often more demanding of personal behavior than could be demanded of a citizen and the application process can include assurances that you don't do certain things and promises that you won't. If you do not agree with these conditions, you are not admitted, If you lie about it, not admitted either.
3) Deportation can hinge on illegal behavior OR behaviors proscribed by the standards. As far as I can tell, decisions by the State department (and, I think in certain circumstances, DOJ) are not subject to appeal to the judicial system. It is, in essence, as if when your behavior is contrary to your promises, then you are returned to the status of an applicant and they are rejecting the original application.
This is probably not the right terminology and over simplistic but while I (as a citizen) can espouse support for a terrorist organization (as long as I do not give them material support or openly incite illegal behavior) a foreign national who has stated (in order to be admitted to the US) that they do not and will not espouse support for terrorist organizations cannot renege on their promise without being subject to deportation.
Moreover, as they are not citizens, the State department has the authority to determine if the "contract has been broken" - not the judiciary. So, the freedom of speech is curtailed for them by the terms of admission and the due process is in the form of the state department review (which may be a very short and informal hearing, without representation)
As far as I can tell in the case of Khalil, it is a stronger case (his relationship with Hamas may be much stronger than just espousing and his organization of the Columbia protests/riots may rise to the level of conspiracy or accessory). Again, this would be determined by State, not the courts..
"Support for terrorists"? Really? Based on what, exactly? If they had any evidence that this man actually supported Hamas -- you don't think Trump, Rubio, and others would have been blasting it all over the internet?
I don't like Khalil, and I wish he'd never come to this country, but "support of terrorists" is protected by the 1st amendment. What's not protected is "material support to terrorists". Rhetorical support is protected, and, as a permanent legal resident, Khalil gets the benefits of 1A.
It did not matter who the foreigner was, where from, and why they came - under the Biden administration there was no vetting. Heck, they flew 30 thousand foreigners here every month for almost 4 years saying they were asylum seekers. Tax payers paid for that. None of the Afghans flown here on tax dollars were vetted either.
The Tsarnaev brothers were terrorist and the FBI knew because Russia told them so. Yet, the did nothing but make a big spectacle locking down the entire city and asking if anyone recognized their pictures so everyone would believe the FBI had no idea.
I am not saying Khalil is a terrorist but why was he working as a soft tool for the UK's M16 except to rabble-rouse in America.
There are a lot of good points made in this opinion piece. However, any nation (foreign or otherwise) that engages in intentional mass slaughter of civilians is knowingly creating it's own bad optics. Further, It is painfully obvious that the US government is acting unconstitutionally when it acts IN ANY WAY to censor or chill a Constitutional right of it's citizens by silencing their criticism of misconduct regardless of: who has committed the misconduct, whose feelings get hurt, or who might feel threatened. This is especially true when the speech is the most highly protected form of the First Amendment right of free speech (aka 'political speech'). Instead, the government should represent the sentiments of it's citizens and act accordingly. THAT is what an actual America First policy would reflect.
Obviously, it's not just Cheerleaders of Khalil’s deportation that see things in black-and-white. Clearly, all the sympathy for suffering Palestinians is, in reality, support for terrorists. There can't be anything in between full support of genocide on the one hand and full support for terrorists on the other. If you are not my friend, you are my enemy. There is nothing else.
Life is so easy when everything is black and white.
I'm interested in seeing how everything plays out in the courts, but there's something very distasteful about foreign nationals coming to this country only to make demands of our government. It seems Khalil is acting on behalf of foreign interests; terrorist or not, is this someone we should be granting permanent residency?
I do agree with the sentiment that putting everything under this "antisemitism" umbrella doesn't seem helpful. It seems like preferential treatment of a particular group, and given stereotypes about Jews, this definitely does not seem helpful to them. I think the administration should stick with the more generic branding of immigration reform.
I do share MT's concerns about this type of legal action eventually being taken against citizens, although I'm not sure how that would work when it's based around deportation (to where would they deport citizens?).
He wasn't making "demands of our government." He was NEGOTIATING with Columbia University administrators on behalf of a fully authorized Columbia student group protesting Columbia's investments in Israel.
"It seems Khalil is acting on behalf of foreign interests" -- By negotiating that a university divest from Israel? For decades, U.S. citizens have protested for the public & private sector divestment from other countries. Many of those citizens were once permanent residents. Permanent residents have the same constitutional protections as citizens, including the First Amendment right to protest.
I can't even with this guy. Last seen cherrypicking the few lunatics he could roust up at RFK's Nicole Shanahan announcement in Oakland to make fun of "conspiracy theorists" in the Free Press. Oooh, bold take, Ben. (I attended and can attest the event was nothing at all like the way Ben made it look.) Now describing those Columbia protests as: "... a bunch of kids camped out and…wished?" SMH. Matt, please, don't do this to us.
Yes, I have devotedly followed Matt for almost a decade and rarely see him making coverage mistakes like this. There are a lot of facts about Khalil’s case yet to come out in the deportation proceedings that could well leave everyone presenting Khalil as a speech martyr with a big egg on their face. (They might not, either, but why is a veteran investigative reporter like Matt staking such a strong claim on an issue where key facts are not yet known?)
The Alien Enemies Act issue is, in my opinion, much more worth Matt’s time and attention. The administration is claiming domestic wartime law enforcement powers without judicial oversight, a la warrantless surveillance/Snowden.
Since moving to the U.S. in 2015, the issue of Jewish anti-Americanism (for a lack of a better term) has become a thorn in my side. While living abroad, mostly in Israel, this issue never concerned me—I had other challenges to deal with. But now, I see it front and center, and it deeply bothers me. On a daily basis I see my fellow Jews tell the world about their made-up version of Judaism "Tikun Islam", or rather "Tikun Olam", which is a make believe idea of fixing the world. This would be like declaring a BLT sandwich kosher: It isn't, but it is tasty.
Nowhere in the world have Jews had it as good as they do in America. Even in Israel, life is harder. Israelis work longer hours and endure greater hardships than their American counterparts. In fact, in Israel, there is a term for something extraordinary: America. It signifies the pinnacle of excellence, a level of success that cannot be surpassed. That is how highly America is regarded by Israelis.
Yet in America, many Reform and Conservative Jews seem to do nothing but complain. From historical figures like Emma Goldman to modern-day religious leaders, such as the rabbi at my old Synagogue in Raleigh, NC (where I live) the focus is often on criticizing the administration of President Trump while turning a blind eye to the alarming rise of antisemitism during the Biden era.
If that weren’t enough, consider the activist judges spearheading legal campaigns against President Trump—many of whom happen to be Reform or Conservative Jews, primarily appointed by Democrats. And when it came to the "lawfare" strategy against Trump, the leading politicians pressing the attack were also Jewish. Nancy Pelosi herself avoided direct involvement, instead deploying willing allies to do the work for her.
When one steps back and looks at the bigger picture, it becomes clear that American Jews, as a group, have benefited tremendously from this country. Yet, many fail to appreciate the opportunities it has provided them. Just recently, Senator Chuck Schumer mocked wealthy individuals, calling them greedy—despite the fact that his own son-in-law, Michael Shapiro, secured a high-powered role as a Managing Director at BlackRock shortly after leaving the Biden administration.
According to ChatGPT, only about 1.09% of active-duty U.S. military personnel are Jewish—a statistically small contribution to the defense of a nation that has provided so much. As an Israeli who served (like most Israelis) this is akin to spitting on the hand that feeds you. This is a stark the contrast to the tens of thousands of Israelis who made their way back to fight right after the October 7 attacks, while so many Reform Jews went to protest and hold Shabbat dinners together with terrorist sympathizers at Columbia. They have no allegiance to anything; not even their own people.
Jews only represent 2.4% of Americans. If you remove the Jewish children, the Jews older than 35, most Jewish women of fighting age (only 17% of American military is female), than 1.09 percent of active-duty U.S. military that are Jews is a pretty good percentage.
I forget to discuss this, a statement of yours that I totally disagree with, "When one steps back and looks at the bigger picture, it becomes clear that American Jews, as a group, have benefited tremendously from this country. Yet, many fail to appreciate the opportunities it has provided them."
I was born a decade after WWII ended. The appreciation of American Jews for American troops who helped liberate them from Nazism was profound. My father was one of those soldiers, a Jew, who later went to medical school with the help of the GI Bill. He would never have been able to afford it otherwise, even though he waited tables throughout college and during summers to pay for his college tuition. An American flag is placed on my father's grave every Memorial Day by members of his synagogue.
My sister and her husband have just recently retired to Raleigh (NC) and have joined your synagogue. They are New Jersey liberal Democrats, and seem to enjoy their experience so far, including the rabbi's sermons. I on the other hand have a conservative leaning ideologically...meaning that Jews come in all shapes and sizes, we're not monolithic in belief.
And yet, the campuses are full of Jewish Voice for Peace antisemites who held a memorial for Sinwar. The Rabbi in Raleigh wanted to travel to take people of the community to visit Arafat’s tomb, see where I am going? Your father was of another generation, they were different.
They are a microcosm of the 7.5 million Jews who live in the United States. Most Jews are living their lives without public protest... they go to work, studying in classrooms, take care of their families, and are positive contributors to their communities, nationwide.
Without a doubt, but I see no sign of Jewish leadership doing anything to distance itself from this “microcosm”, on the contrary, they play right along with them wearing their kippot and talitot. Perhaps they should ask someone to play the Schindler’s List soundtrack in the background. No other Jewish community on the planet has had sympathy marches, not Europe, not Australia, not Canada, not Latin America, not Asia, not South Africa. Please explain it, why is it that the ONLY microcosm is with US reform and conservative DEMOCRAT Jews?
JVP are not anti-semites. They are anti-Israeli treatment of the Palestinians and tired of ALWAYS pretending to be the victims when they are the ones with genocidal intentions against Palestinians. I know many JVP members
Really? Go watch everything from Douglas Murray, you don’t have to take my word for it. JVP reminds me of the German Jews who could not understand why the Nazis would compare them to the dirty Polish Jews, after all, they were better German Jews! You need new friends.
True but it is very clear that the democratic party is much less interested in supporting Israel than the Republicans. Maybe time for Jews to follow black Americans and Hispanics to the right.
And if you keep removing people, then you have no people and no need to serve! As for your family living in Raleigh, welcome! No idea what synagogue they joined, but when you say liberal there are basically 1 reform and 1 Progressive, formerly Conservative, so I would rather be disenfranchised that belong to either of those. Your fathers’ generation as the rest of “The Greatest Generation” were people we don’t have anymore, no comparison can be made to them, especially to Gen Z and Millennials who are just immature to the extreme in my opinion. Jews might come in all flavors as you say, US Jews need to grow up.
Your final paragraph echoes a thought I have had since I saw these sympathizers in the news. They have aligned themselves with a toxic political position that is in direct opposition to their own culture, history, religion and their own amazing Jewish people. This political thing seems like a bizarre religion that requires a hateful allegiance, replacing ancient, valuable beliefs and actions.
Thank you Alex. I grew up in America and have lived here all my life. And I’ve watched in horror as the American Jewish community has committed suicide for all the reasons you noted. In fact, one of my liberal Jewish American friends of 45 years recently said to me: I’m not sure I can support project Israel any longer. Well, my respect for my friend is now zero. I visited Israel for the first time in the spring of 2022 and really enjoyed the experience. I believe that the cause of what you write are many and would point you to the book: Betrayal, Compiled and Edited by Charles Jacobs and Ari Goldwasser, for an in depth analysis. My two cents: American Jews live very far away from Israel and have been lulled into complacency by their success and comfort in America. Add to that, too many have replace their Judaism with liberalism. It’s a toxic mix that will surely reduce the Jewish population in the US over the coming years. And to be honest, after meeting so many proud Israelis on my visit there, I’d prefer that Israelis carry the torch forward over my fellow American Jews.
I understand. Yes, a term limit for the PM and a Supreme Court that is appointed by the people (via the PM) would go along way in reducing the intensity of the rhetoric. Both sides of this debate have made grave mistakes.
The US has a great constitution but many faults too. If I had to point to one thing that has undermined the US democracy the most, I would say that it is money. It’s a republic, if you can keep it.
Now do Howard Zinn and Herbert Marcuse (History's least grateful refugee).
I'm not Jewish but my wife is, and every year we host her family for Christmas. I decorate the tree, arrange the presents, make the plans for eating—and the moment I turn my back, they change and re-do everything.
Jews are a very restless and anxious people, they can't sit still and relax, they have to always be in charge.
Or in the words of the great IB Singer:
"Jews remain forever Jews with their energy and their rage to mind everybody’s business."
Boy, I’ll bet the Holiday times at your house must be exhilarating. With your wife’s relatives rearranging everything when you turn your back. This comment wins first prize in passive aggressive comment of the year.
I grew up in New Jersey, ie: surrounded by Jewish people. I have Jewish friends I love and have a fascination with Jewish history, but I have never met a Jewish family that wasn't dysfunctional. In fairness, a very high percentage of nuclear families are dysfunctional, but I've met a few people who had happy childhoods. They weren't Jewish.
Remember the words: In order to create a more perfect union! This country started as a project to create a union of States that strives to be more perfect, the process is ongoing, no one said we are done, and yes, corruption will destroy everything, that is why the work of DOGE is so important in my opinion.
Actually the $4B is for military assistance only, and it has to be spent in US weapons and products. it cannot be used to purchase any weapon or service that is not made in the US by a US company.
Perhaps MAGA is in direct contention with the one world government which was planned by and will be led by the Jewish banksters who probably do not trace to Israelites from Judea, but rather Hebrew through the Edom line. The only real Jews are descendants from Judea who I understand are not Zionists.
I don’t mind reading pieces on racket that I disagree with. That’s part of the reason I subscribe. But this was just plain intellectually empty. The author, and I have no idea who he is, comes off as a high school senior in terms of his logic and thought process. Very disappointing that racket would actually post this.
Ben Kawaller doesn't speak for American Jews. I haven't met a single American Jew, including myself, who doesn't want Mahmoud Khalil to be deported back to Syria. I live in the epicenter of Jewish America...the NY-metro area.
Khalil is a guest in America...a bad guest. Somehow he received a green card within a couple of years of having established residency. I know people, some married to Americans, who have waited decades to get a green card...and many still haven't received one despite yearly application and legal representation.
Mr. Khalil's green card can be revoked, and I hope it will be. He's a domestic terrorist...he's inciting violence against Jewish Americans, and it's only a matter of time before that incitement morphs into physical action against his targeted groups, Zionists and Jews. His harassment of Jewish students on the Columbia University campus, barring them from of freedom of movement to enter their classrooms, is immoral if not illegal. Again, he's a bad guest. You kick bad guests out of your home.
That was tongue in cheek. My face-to-face reaction to Khalil would be more like, " Hey idiot, get the f--k off my lawn ". I promise you, he would take one look at me and move quickly. Then again, I'm an old Jew, an "alter kocker" with little patience for asswipes like him.
Exactly. These people are our guests and should mind their manners. Which includes staying out of familyts squabbles. It is very rude. I am a bit of a free speech absolutist but the idea of groups of foreigners coming to our country and holding events that can range from protests to riots does not seem correc
You live in a bubble and you surround yourself with likeminded people. That’s fine.
I hope you understand that making exceptions to civil liberties (and yes civil liberties are extended to non-US born citizens) will lead to further erosions of said liberties.
I get that you are hurt and you want vengeance but this isn’t the way. Khalil isn’t even accused of a crime. This is a way to chill speech. Please think about the larger implications.
I disagree with you wholeheartedly. I'm as well read and broadminded as anybody subscribing to Racket News.
Of course Khalil is accused of a crime. He's overtly undermined the national security of the United States of America through his support and promotion of a terrorist organization while trying to impinge on the rights of American citizens. His arrest was just. His deportation will be just. The application of U.S. law upon a non-citizen isn't vengeance. Once he's returned to his homeland he can spew as much antisemitic garbage as his heart desires.
Lastly, THIS NOT A FREE SPEECH ISSUE! It's about this asshole trying to undermine the civil liberties of Jewish students who attend Columbia University by actively attempting to impede their freedom of movement on campus, and their ability to the attend classes that they've paid for, and have the right to attend without fear or harassment. And, it's about his support of Hamas, undeniable support by all accounts, which the U.S. State Department deemed to be a terrorist organization in 1997. As of last week, Columbia University, after pulling the foot of the Trump administration out of its ass, has promised to keep their campus clear of pernicious characters like Mahmoud Khalil.
"his support and promotion of a terrorist organization while trying to impinge on the rights of American citizens." -- There is ZERO evidence Khalil did either of those things.
There was enough evidence to initiate action against Mahmoud Khalil by both The Department of Homeland Security and The Secretary of State. Homeland Security says, Khalil participated in "activities aligned to Hamas, a designated terrorist organization” and was distributing pro-Hamas propaganda. The White House has explained, “This administration is not going to tolerate individuals having the privilege of studying in our country and then siding with pro-terrorist organizations that have killed Americans,”.
If you think Khalil has been arrested without evidence, then protest peacefully on his behalf. Send money to his wife. Petition your congressman or congresswoman to help free Khalil. I personally think he's guilty at minimum of being a pest guest of the United States, and should be deported posthaste, and his green card revoked.
Lastly: "Under New York Penal Law § 490.10, providing material support to a designated terrorist organization is classified as a class D felony. The maximum sentence for a class D felony in New York is up to 7 years in prison." There no denying that Khalil broke this law.
Last year there were 1,126,690 international students studying at American universities and colleges, nationwide. Very few were arrested and/or deported by the Federal government. I'll trust our government rhetoric over the support Khalil is getting from shady NGO's or his team of attorneys who've in the past volunteered to represent al Qaida terrorists.
UNRWA (which is a corrupt anti-Israel UN affiliated agency)
CLEAR (which is an NGO actively supporting Khalil)
You're right. The Biden administration was anti-Israel and generally antisemitic, and I say that as somebody who comes from a multigenerational family of NY-metro Democrats. The Trump administration is pro-Israel and anti-Hamas. Them's the facts.
You consider the BILLIONS in weapons and aid Israel received from the Biden Admin, along with allowing Israel's unimpeded onslaught of Gaza, as well as the crusade against the university presidents who "didn't do enough to combat antisemitism on campus" to be "anti-Israel and generally antisemitic"? Geez, there's no pleasing you people.
Regarding the NGOs, I was asking for citations of evidence of the alleged support you claim they were providing Khalil. IOW, how are/were UNRWA and CLEAR specifically and directly supporting him?
You want citations...do your own homework. It's not my job.
Israel gives back as much as they get from the United States (eg. Iron Dome technology, Improved Tactical Air Launched Decoys, 120 mm mortar developed by Soltam Systems, advanced surface to air weaponry, facial recognization software, unmatched Middle East intelligence information, and boots on the ground in the form of the IDF). The U.S. needs a strong Israel, and Israel needs the U.S. to be an unwavering ally...it's a win-win situation.
Israel has a $20 billion industrial weapons industry. They can manufacture almost anything they need other than fighter planes and bombers. They produce the most advance tank in the world for battle in the desert.
As someone born and raised in the Adirondacks, I appreciate your screen name. Outside of that, I don’t think there’s much of a discussion we are going to have. Have a good day.
" this grandson of a Palestinian refugee had the dignity to show his face while protesting, presumably because he has a sincere belief in the righteousness of his cause."
Or he thought he wouldn't be held accountable. Just like the pro-Hamas protesters chanting "from the river to the sea" for the last 4 years. They weren't wrong. Until they were.
What does the grandson comment have to do with anything, other than Ben's inability to objectively report rather than injecting his opinion into the story?
I have no problem if this bigot wants to express his racist views, so long as he's not threatening anyone or committing crimes like breaking into buildings on colleges, destroying property or preventing students from getting to class. But we know he's done all of that. And he still has apologists like Ben pretending he doesn't know.
He thought it would be fine because he's exactly the kind of person the Biden Administration WANTED to import. And, he was fast tracked for that reason.
I hear ya. There are some known zionist trolls I avoid because I know there's no getting through to them. But the sheer amount of hasbara on these threads kills me, so for those not yet identified as trolls, I feel the need to counter them. Because maybe, just maybe, they have a modicum of humanity and rationale.
I admire your faith and forbearance. I had a screed from Catskill Mountain Man today in my inbox that was so alternate reality I would have been at a complete loss as to where to start if I were willing to pursue a dialogue. The only thing more remarkable than the creativity of their personal set of "facts" is how deeply convinced they are that they're true. Is this what it's like to work in a state hospital?
Wouldn't know about the hospital thing (I'm a private school administrator), but yeah, I've had encounters with that particular commenter, as well. He (like all rabid pro-zionists, I've learned) definitely lives in an alternate reality. It's mind-boggling how deeply entrenched the hasbara is with those folks.
Ah yes……the same Ben Kawaller of The Free Press who publishes some of the most painful video interview pieces imaginable. If you haven’t thrown up in your mouth lately, just take a couple of minutes to watch little gem.
Wish I had the Kool-Aid concession at the rally in that video. Those people are main lining it (except for about one or two more or less rational interviewees.
“For all I know, some of these demonstrations may be advocating for peaceful coexistence between Jews and Arabs.”
To include this statement in your article you lose all credibility. You’re a journalist? If you have evidence of any demonstrations advocating for the peaceful coexistence between Jews and Arabs then write about it, show it to us. But instead you include this lame statement of “for all I know”. Surprised, and disappointed that Matt would publish this on Racket.
The way it works is that the government should provide evidence of their claim that Khalil personally supports Hamas or that he's actually a threat to the government's foreign policy objectives - a claim that would be absurd except for the fact that Trump wants to forcibly get all Palestinians out of Gaza (and probably all of Israel), making anyone who supports their rights a "threat".
At a press conference on April 23, 2024 (1), Khalil says (starting at 27:07) "We are here to affirm that we believe that the struggle to achieve liberation - Palestinian and Jewish liberation - is intertwined and go hand-by-hand. And after all, this is a movement of equality, social justice, and liberation for Palestine and the rest of the world."
That's inconsistent with the claims made here, wholly without evidence, that he supports terrorism, the destruction of Israel and/or Jews, etc.
As another example, a woman at a pro-Palestinian protest at Columbia University said (2; 0:38 - 0:45) "Clearly we're all against violence, but we're just asking for the lives of Palestinian civilians to be acknowledged as well."
So there's some evidence for you. Do you have any evidence supporting the claims made by the majority of readers here? Don't you find it curious that they don't present any such evidence?
The blatant indifference to facts and truth is most egregious on Canary Mission's web page on Khalil. For example, they condemn him for standing next to Maryam Iqbal at a protest, claiming that Iqbal led the chant calling for Israel’s destruction. In the video, neither of them is leading a chant, and the fact that Khalil happens to be standing next to Iqbal, among many other people, obviously proves nothing - it's a pathetically weak "guilt by association" argument.
Thank you for bringing facts to this otherwise fact-free thread. Very refreshing. It's telling that after 3 days, none of the pro-zionists have bothered to try refuting your comment.
Kinda shocking. I had to read that over and over, looking for the obvious typo or something that would let my boy off the hook. Teaches me another valuable lesson: don’t be too keen to fall in line behind someone. Thanks for jolting me back to reality, Matt. You can say some stupid shit just like the rest of us.
The author's intense hatred for President Trump and his folding this irrelevancy into his narrative as if all would agree makes one distrust anything he has to say. I am surprised you would select this as a guest post, Matt.
Kids ( your word ) chanting from the river to the sea find it inspirational. Few of the chanters are kids. What would fulfillment of the inspirational chant look like? I suggest Genocide.
You're lucky you only have to "suggest" or imagine genocide. The people of Palestine have lived it every day for near on a hundred years. I suspect you couldn't handle for 10 minutes what Palestinian children endure year after year after fucking year, for fuck's sake.
You know how I know it isn’t genocide? Because it has lasted “near on a hundred years” and there are more Palestinians now than ever. They are born and raised with the entire goal of hurting Israel, and many die to hurt Israel and are celebrated by their families for doing so.
I see. Can we have your list of authors and historians who've informed your views? I assume you've looked at the work of Israelis like Milo Peled and Ilan Pappe, as well as Chris Hedges (who speaks Arabic and lived in the Middle East as a journalist), Max Blumenthal, Aaron Mate, and too many others to list? How do you square your views with theirs?
Tell me about the population of Gaza and the changes since 2005... you know since Hamas took over, err, was voted in, killed their political rivals in Fatah (and anyone else they deemed undesirable like gay people) and stolen the money given by the dupes internationally for torture tunnels. Yes, they are so misunderstood innocents those Hamasniks.
Do you have an actual point? Naming people that disagree with me isn’t even an argument, and it took you at most a few minutes to do but would take probably at least hours to try to counter in detail. What specifically do you even disagree with?
You're unfamiliar with the definition of "genocide." No one even has to die for the definition to be met. If you're going to say that Palestinians are "born and raised with the entire goal of hurting Israel," you should be able to support it. That it is Israelis who are raised to despise and want to hurt and/or kill Palestinians was brought home to me by Max Blumenthal's book "Goliath," which he wrote after spending months in Israel. He documents the indoctrination--reminiscent of how the Nazis talked about Jews--that Israelis undergo from a very young age against Palestinians, as does Nurit Peled, the daughter of an IDF general during the 1967 war. As for the supposed Palestinian hatred for Jews, I've listened to many hours of interviews with Palestinians, quite a few of whom express gratitude for American and European Jews who call for an end to the genocide. That said, think about this: some Jews have regularly come to Gaza, ever since you were born, to "mow the lawn." Some of them have tanks with the Star of David on them. How would you feel about Jews under those circumstances? I understand how important it is for defenders of Israel to deny Palestinian suffering and magnify Jewish suffering, which has indeed been considerable throughout history, but it was not Palestinians who committed the Jewish holocaust. It was Europeans, and they're the ones who should pay for that crime instead supporting Israelis in taking the land and lives of Palestinians.
Er, there are many definitions of some of which are very self-serving. The Britannica, however, defines it as follows, "Genocide is the deliberate and systematic destruction of a group of people because of their ethnicity, nationality, religion, or race. Learn about the history, legal aspects, and criticisms of this crime against humanity from Britannica's experts." I would say destruction contemplates people dying. The "cide" is the giveaway as in homicide, patricide, matricide, infanticide, regicide, etc.
I'll go with the Genocide Convention, crafted in response to the Nazi holocaust against the Jews (and others):
The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG), or the Genocide Convention, is an international treaty that criminalizes genocide and obligates state parties to pursue the enforcement of its prohibition. It was the first legal instrument to codify genocide as a crime and the first human rights treaty unanimously adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 9 December 1948, during the third session of the United Nations General Assembly.[1] The Convention entered into force on 12 January 1951 and has 153 state parties as of February 2025.[2]
The Convention defines genocide as any of five "acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group." These five acts include killing members of the group, causing them serious bodily or mental harm, imposing living conditions intended to destroy the group, preventing births, and forcibly transferring children out of the group. Victims are targeted because of their real or perceived membership of a group, not randomly.[6] The convention further criminalizes "complicity, attempt, or incitement of its commission." Member states are prohibited from engaging in genocide and obligated to pursue the enforcement of this prohibition. All perpetrators are to be tried regardless of whether they are private individuals, public officials, or political leaders with sovereign immunity.
As previously stated, there are more Palestinians now than there have ever been. The category is in no danger of ceasing to exist, which only allows genocide to be happening if people are trying to destroy them but failing, hence the question.
Oh please, Jews have experienced it forever. Nobody knows what started this nightmare. They both talk a good story. Palestinians are far from peace loving people.
That's the logic of a woman who beats her child and says "Shut the fuck up! I had it worse as a kid!" If resisting the theft of your land and the killing of your people by violent settlers makes you not a "peace loving people," so be it. The Israelis should have a tiny fraction of the honor and courage Palestinians have.
Oh please. Listen to you attacking Jewish people with no understanding of their historical plight. Nobody knows for sure what started this and I doubt highly you were there. Were you there when Hamas murdered those people, raped children and women and filmed it? And the "child" parallel is absurd.
Let's assume all of the bigoted things Megan believes are true, and that all of those events led up to the cease fire that existed on 10/6/23. On 10/7, Hamas and the Palestinians broke through a fence and tortured and murdered farmers, foreign workers, people at a concert and Arab and Druze and Jewish Israelis. Megan, likely due to her bigotry, is unwilling to come to terms with the video that Hamas and the Palestinians gleefully posted on Signal. They were euphoric - their voices are as disturbing as their barbarism - as they murdered and raped and tortured and kidnapped these people. That's who Megan is defending.
Again, let's see the links, the specific sources, and the documentation, of which there would be a mountain if all this happened. I'm willing to look at your sources if only you'll provide them. And for the record, the Palestinians broke through the barrier keeping them trapped in Gaza a barrier erected by Israel in violation of international law. (This was directly analogous to the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising during World War II.) If you have sources who disagree with that framing, you should be able to cite at least a few. If you persist without doing so, I'll know that you're counting on readers here to believe your inflammatory accusations without a shred of credible evidence, as many have been duped into doing since October 2023, though with steadily diminishing success.
You're not going to believe anything that challenges your preconceived bigotry. There will always be people who believe as you do. No evidence, video, testimony will change your mind. It's akin to talking to someone in a cult and trying to convince them they're in a cult. Since you have a problem with walls, you should research what was happening prior to the walls being built, Megan. Interestingly, Egypt though the idea was so good, they built one of their own, but much more secure.... to make sure none of the Palestinians got there either.
Answering a request for sources in an era in which every major event is immortalized electronically with "You're not going to believe anything that challenges your preconceived bigotry" is a straight-up admission that you cannot support your views.
I believe you ARE correct that Israel was barring them from traveling which gave them a grievance. Though I think this had to do with Hamas's behaviors. And they still cannot do what they did. It has not been "debunked." It was so heinous that it isn't being shown on even conservative venues because it was too upsetting to victims. So you are not right about that.
All of the alleged rape victims are "dead." Any footage of atrocities by Hamas is "too upsetting" to be aired publicly. I think it's time to go into a Hasbara huddle and rework the playbook, cause this garbage is looking like a loser in the high school debate class.
Ok, there is video of this that I've seen. I didn't save the site and couldn't watch the whole thing. But I can promise you this is a no-win position to take. And it is NOT accurate.
A young Jewish woman said she got "stabbed" by a Palestinian flag during a demonstration. She was not stabbed but accidentally poked and she was all over the media with this nonsense. If there were video taken of Hamas atrocities it would be EVERYWHERE. Many hundreds of thousands of people not only would have seen it but be able to describe its contents in detail, a far cry from "I didn't save the site..." I'm not saying Hamas didn't commit war crimes on October 7th, but the Israeli government and Zionists in the west invented a number of dramatic lies and tried to sell them without credible evidence, and some of this has been debunked by people in the Israeli media or the government themselves. Case in point: the Hannibal Directive is now understood to have accounted for a large number of the victims that day. (Another: the family of one of the supposed victims of rape that day asked the New York Times to stop saying that she had been raped. The timeline of events made clear that it could not have happened and they resented being used in that way.) It's getting tiresome to argue with someone in 2025 who wants everyone to believe we have the media landscape and technology of 1955.
Yes, this is true. Megan is correct, though, that Palestinians were being kept from leaving Gaza. Maybe due to Hamas' activities. But I didn't like that. Megan is wrong about a lot of this if she wants peace. And certainly she is wrong about the barbarism they committed.
I would certainly bring peace to the situation if I could. I can't, so I do what I can and I'm proud of it. I know for a fact that committing a Kristallnacht every night in the West Bank and dropping yet more bombs on Palestinian children in Gaza is an exceedingly perverse way to pursue "peace." It's also bound to fail.
No doubt. Trump is trying for a cease fire. But your version is not accurate. And Israel has to be able to defend herself if they aren't going to stop. This has gone on forever like the Hatfields and McCoys. Same in Ireland/England. Russia/Ukraine. Just stop it all. Nobody is blameless here.
I don't think I said exactly that anyone is blameless here, but a group of European Jews colonized that land, and historically people don't like to have their land taken away. I don't know how someone could blame them for that. As for the "self-defense" argument, according to international law Israel does NOT have a right to defend itself against the people it's occupying. This would be like saying the Nazis had a right to defend themselves against the Jews, or Belgium, or Poland. It's nonsensical and morally revolting. Trump is most certainly not trying for a ceasefire, any more than Biden did. When you provide weapons and all kinds of support to a regime that has committed so much violence that the Pre-Trial Chamber 1 of the International Criminal Court has issued arrest warrants for its leaders, you're clearly complicit in genocide, not working for a ceasefire. For whatever reason Trump wanted the rampage to stop during his coronation--I mean, inauguration. He's changed his tune dramatically since then.
The "colonizing Jews" say that is not true. They both make good cases. I've read both versions. You have no idea which version is true because nobody does. You are taking a side. WATCH THE VIDEO, Megan.
Trump still wants it all to stop but Hamas broke the deal. Hamas is a terrorist organization. Any point of view Palestinians have should not include them after they did this. WATCH THE VIDEO.
But the reality is neither of them is ever going to concede to the other who was there first. So we have to not take sides on that if we ever want peace there. Though I doubt that will ever happen.
The "rape" allegations from October 7th have been thoroughly debunked by journalists a great deal more credible than anyone you lean into. Aaron Mate and Max Blumenthal are an excellent source for the correction of this lie. As for "Were you there....?": I wasn't there when the Nazis murdered the Jews either, but I know that happened. I obviously in no way attacked Jewish people, but I get how important the "anti-Semitism" schtick is to people trying to defend Israeli genocide. As for how you would know whether or not I have any understanding of the historical plight of Jews, it doesn't really matter to you, does it? The hyperventilating of you and countless others in response to supremely reasonable objections to cold-blooded murder betrays your lack of actual arguments. You wouldn't pass an American public high school debate class with that kind of "reasoning."
Have you heard about the Israeli dungeons? The torture and inhuman treatment inflicted there is well-documented. You want to try to convince me that the people who do that wouldn't hurt a fly and it's the Palestinians who are the barbarians? Sorry, that shit don't fly anymore.
If that's true, and I doubt it, you should be on nobody's side, because Hamas have been barbarians. If you said that, I'd be persuaded. But this is just left wing propaganda. I don't know or care who started it. Because nobody will ever know and that won't be a solution. I want it to stop, but attacking Jews is not going to do that. And violence is not justified because you perceive yourself oppressed. Or if it is, expect the reverse in kind. It's war. That's how it works. And get real about Jews being oppressors and not oppressed.
There's far too much that's unsupportable in your comments for me to attend to all of them. That said, even CNN did a piece about the Israeli dungeons. You should look it up. As for women being the most oppressed people in history, you're wrong. It's children. My views are firmly leftwing but I'm not an orthodox leftist. In any case, pretending you know me and telling me that all of my views reflect hollow grievances....well, that's not an argument. It just isn't.
I know you well enough to know your ideas will not achieve peace, and you should rethink your approach. There is no right and wrong in this mid-east nightmare. And you aren't answering because you can't. And I'll still maintain it's women. Male children had it pretty good historically. FEMALE children, I'll maybe go along with. But things just need to be fair and move forward. Assigning blame especially in the middle east will never achieve it. So this guy should know better than head up a group breaking laws and telling Columbia they won't stop until it capitulates. Not very smart.
ps. Where is y our evidence that before Oct. 7, Jews were annihilating Palestinians, unprovoked, with no violence perpetrated on them first. And who did it "first" anyway? They can both make a great case of it. And for who was there first. Jews were not committing genocide anymore than Hamas is. Hamas is on Israel's back door and they DID commit atrocities on Israel. You will certainly be no diplomat achieving peace saying stuff like you do. I imagine you HAVE gone through our universities, are somewhat youngish, where our university professors are teaching this oppressed/oppressor garbage and condoning violence for those who perceive themselves the former. It's wrong. You are a woman. You h ave been "oppressed." Does that give you a right to kill all men because of it? Women are the most discriminated group on the planet, though it gets better all the time, and that is not the way to solve it. Just get equal treatment as much as is possible, and move on. You can't fix racism or sexism with more racism and sexism. And this problem in the middle east will never be solved to anyone's satisfaction. You ought to be able to see that.
"The Hundred Years' War on Palestine: A History of Settler Colonialism and Resistance, 1917–2017," Rashid Khalidi; "The Biggest Prison on Earth: A History of the Occupied Territories;" "The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine," Ilan Pappe (Israeli); "Gaza: An Inquest Into Its Martyrdom," "Method and Madness: The Hidden Story of Israel's Assaults on Gaza," Norman Finklestein; the opinion issued last year by the International Court of Justice that Israel is guilty of Apartheid and ethnic cleansing and should stop immediately. These are just a few sources as to the treatment of the Israelis toward the Palestinians over time.
Oh yes, Colonialism--the big justification for violence all over the world. Ethnic cleansing. There is NO evidence of any of that. And there's plenty that it was done to them. This stuff has been brainwashed into students in our universities and it's just not all true. It's not this one sided. Ridiculous. And if you think this kind of propaganda will lead to peace, think again. It's victimhood and reverse discrimination and it's about power. This is certainly the case in the US. The one thing I know is that there is no way in hell this is all the fault of either Palestine OR Israel and if you think it is, you are very naive.
So what are your sources? Are you telling me you've never read a book about this conflict, never seen an interview with or by someone you find credible?? Are you limiting yourself to State Department press releases? Or do you live in Israel, or have you lived there for some time? Where do you get your views? I've stated who has informed mine, but you refuse to do the same, despite making some preposterous statements. Why so reticent?
I managed to get a terminal MFA degree and teach at a university 9 years, teachers asked me to take their classes in grad school because I was "a critical thinker." I would look in the mirror.
You mean the rape and murder that Hamas and Palestinians recorded and posted online? That's what you're saying doesn't exist. Wow, you're lost. And apparently blind. Or unwilling to admit you've been conned by Max B and Mate and his pops.
Provide a link or a way to find it. If it exists you should be able to do this. You should also be able to provide documentation of these acts by multiple independent and credible sources (ie: those not associated with Israel itself or the U.S. government), so go ahead and name them for me and I'll look into them.
I asked for sources not associated with Israel or the U.S. government. The source for this is the IDF. Would you accept footage provided by Hamas or any Palestinians? "You can't trust them" is not an answer; it's an evasion.
As for Blumenthal and Mate, who are your sources? Anyone not living over there or having traveled there very recently requires sources in order to speak knowledgeably about what's going on. I've provided a few of mine. Who are yours?
Then you disagree with the vast majority of scholars, experts, and professionals on the subject. Personally I don't care what you call it when civilians, journalists, aid workers, and doctors are being deliberately targeted with horrific weapons and a medieval siege.
If this was supposed to be a genocide, then someone has seriously fucked up because the "Palestinian" population has multiplied many times over since 1948, right up to recent years.
Look up the definition of "genocide" since you're clearly unfamiliar with it. But nice try defending violence backed up explicitly genocidal statements made by Yoav Gallant and plenty of other Israelis. These are well-documented by South Africa in its petition to the ICJ more than a year ago.
Oh no, I am not the one who is misusing this gravely serious word.
I didn't defend any violence - take a few deep breaths and re-read my comment. I merely pointed out that the "Palestinian" population is larger than ever, after 80 years of this "genocide."
Calling the word "genocide" a "leftist buzzword" says all one needs to know about you and your concern for human life. Listing people who've lived and worked in the Middle East and written books about the situation, some of whom are actual Israelis, is not mere "name-dropping" because you don't like their views. I can't imagine what you know about winning an argument.
The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG), or the Genocide Convention, is an international treaty that criminalizes genocide and obligates state parties to pursue the enforcement of its prohibition. It was the first legal instrument to codify genocide as a crime and the first human rights treaty unanimously adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 9 December 1948, during the third session of the United Nations General Assembly.[1] The Convention entered into force on 12 January 1951 and has 153 state parties as of February 2025.[2]
The Convention defines genocide as any of five "acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group." These five acts include killing members of the group, causing them serious bodily or mental harm, imposing living conditions intended to destroy the group, preventing births, and forcibly transferring children out of the group. Victims are targeted because of their real or perceived membership of a group, not randomly.[6] The convention further criminalizes "complicity, attempt, or incitement of its commission." Member states are prohibited from engaging in genocide and obligated to pursue the enforcement of this prohibition. All perpetrators are to be tried regardless of whether they are private individuals, public officials, or political leaders with sovereign immunity.
"Any of five," meaning not all of them but any one of them, though of course multiple acts may be committed together. Both meet the definition.
If the definition of genocide is "acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group" then Hamas committed genocide on October 7.
Look up the Genocide Convention written in response to the Nazi holocaust, and look up the voluminous documentation provided by South Africa in its petition to find Israel guilty of genocide as presented to the ICJ.
No, he disagrees with a collection of leftist anti-western Jew haters. That's a far cry from the unearned labels of Scholar and Expert. I'm sure however you have cherrypicked your data to support your own predisposition of hatred of Jews.
OK, is there any other nation that can't be criticized without being a hater of a religious or ethnic group? If I criticize India, am I an anti-Hindu? If I criticize Albania, am I anti-Muslim AND anti-Orthodox? Exactly how does this work?
Oh, please. Twenty percent of Israel is Palestinian Arab. The Palestinian population in Judea and Samaria and Gaza has quintupled since 1948. Some "genocide." But you are right in one regard. I couldn't endure being taught to hate and kill people from my earliest age like "Palestinian children are.
If this was supposed to be a genocide, then someone has seriously fucked up because the "Palestinian" population has multiplied many times over since 1948, right up to recent years.
Bingo. I commented above that this as much as anything is why I’m shocked Matt put all his cards on the table over the Khalil case. Matt is almost always an inveterate investigative journalist—but here he staked out a maximalist position on an issue before key facts ever came out. Very unlike him.
I haven't read the court documents, but I've read dozens of comments, here and elsewhere, by people claiming that Khalil personally supports Hamas, terrorism, the destruction of Israel, etc., but not a single one that provided a single piece of evidence as opposed to mere "guilt by association" arguments. Yet these same people demand evidence that Khalil is innocent of the government's charges, rather than citing evidence that he's guilty. This indifference to facts and evidence is very disturbing. It's the same attitude I argued against with Democrats during the Biden administration.
I will only make one reply and leave it at that because it was almost impossible to make progress with people on Matt’s post about this last week. Khalil was a known leader of an organization that committed violent and illegal acts at Columbia. Rubio has alluded to evidence that he was involved in planning these actions (used the term “mastermind”). So let’s see the state’s evidence. And we can all attach disclaimers to those statements that he lime anyone has the presumption of innocence. But nor do people have blanket immunity from having allegations made against them by the state, so long as they have due process (which Khalil has had).
My comment focused on articles and reader comments about Khalil, none of which (among those I've seen) provided any evidence supporting their claims against Khalil. It's remarkable to see how certain people can be of things they apparently have no evidence of. It remains to be seen if the government has any such evidence, but based on what I've seen so far, I doubt it.
Khalil explicitly denied being a "leader" of CUAD in the sense of directing the protestors. CUAD is a coalition of about 80 student groups. Some of the protestors explicitly called for peaceful means, others called for or used violence. He described himself as a spokesman and negotiator for a student protest groups (1). The claim that that means he supports everything that any of the protestors support or did isn't even logically consistent, given the wide range of viewpoints among the protestors. It's analogous to claiming that Donald Trump was personally responsible for the Jan. 6 protestors who were violent, a claim that I argued against though I don't support him. Some of those protestors were violent, some were peaceful. Does the fact that Trump called for the protest make him guilty of the violence?
The statements I have seen from Khalil are contrary to the claims made abuot him. For example, he says in an interview (2 at 27:07), "We are here to affirm that we believe that the struggle to achieve liberation - Palestinian and Jewish liberation - is intertwined and go hand-by-hand."
Columbia University's graduate student union is demanding the Ivy League institution establish a "sanctuary campus" where public safety officers are barred from patrolling "organizing spaces, including classrooms." The union, which is embroiled in active contract negotiations with Columbia, also wants the school to provide free "legal support" for student visa holders, destroy "all records" related to campus protest participants, and sue the Trump administration "and other anti-immigrant actors."
Student Workers of Columbia, which boasts roughly 3,000 members and is affiliated with the United Auto Workers, shared an internal document outlining the demands during a Saturday Zoom meeting, which the Washington Free Beacon attended. The document, written by a "working group" of the union's international members, cites the "unprecedented detainment of former student-worker Mahmoud Khalil by the Department of Homeland Security while in a Columbia University apartment building and the ongoing presence of ICE around campus" before making "immediate demands of Columbia University."
That's interesting, but I'm not sure what your point is. My point was that none of the articles or reader comments I've seen denouncing Khalil provided any evidence whatsoever that he is guilty of the things the Trump administration has alleged. The article you cited, while relevant to the general issue, doesn't provide any such evidence either.
This type of discussion often change focus from a specific question (e.g., Khalil's arrest and whether there's evidence of his guilt) to more general issues (what Columbia student groups are demanding, how they view Khalil, etc.).
I understand your point. I'm just tired of activists taking over the public square, making Universities hotbeds of unrest, fomenting others to take actions that threaten or harms others. Khalil uses his position to do just that. He is a shill for the British government and the Biden admin knew that when he was given a green card.
Thanks for posting the link to the court documents regarding Mahmoud Khalil. Do you know if any of them contain the government's evidence, if there is any, that Khalil did anything meriting his arrest and deportation? I've read quite a few articles and watched some videos with him at protests or interviews, and I've seen no evidence whatsoever of the government's claims.
Huge difference. These people are NOT citizens and they are compromising Jewish students who ARE citizens. And this guy was the spokesperson for a group who broke laws. Way over simplified here. Ridiculous, actually.
This is pro-Israeli money doing it's work -- the big donors like Miriam Adelson and others of the pro-Israeli lobby. Trump isn't the first to mouth their words -- Biden funded the deaths of thousands of innocent children and civilians, and almost all of Congress is beholden to the lobby.
The evidence is simple: not a single charge has been filed against this man -- because there likely is no evidence he had anything to do with Hamas. If they had any evidence, they would have bombarded us with it.
I understand you *believe* that he was doing that. My point is about *evidence* -- the law of the land we live in does not operate on what anyone thinks or believes, and certainly our government must have evidence -- and file charges in a court of law -- before deporting a legal resident.
But there does need to be SOLID EVIDENCE that he violated his permanent resident status. So far, DHS and State Dept have not provided any. And their public claims that Khalil is a "threat to national security" is rhetoric, NOT evidence.
This is awful. I could not finish it. The issue presented is very complicated and oversimplification as done here does readers a great disservice.
Oversimplification? More like Kawaller simply ignores all the evidence so he can dismiss the issue entirely.
The media actually covering the protests (especially the NY Post), particularly at Columbia, have been clear that Jewish students were threatened to the point of being afraid to go to classes and certain areas of campus; illegal encampments were maintained, buildings were taken over and vandalized, and staff were assaulted and held against their will.
The perpetrators escaped punishment because Columbia shirked its duties under Title IX and NY County's woke Soros-sponsored DA, Alvin Bragg, declined to prosecute anyone on the laughable grounds that their faces were covered.
Yep. Anyone can say any words they want -- I may not like the words, may think the person is a jerk or worse, but speech is PROTECTED. Actions are NOT protected. What the anti-semetic jerks SAID is irrelevant (unless directly inciting someone to violence) -- but taking over buildings, blocking access to buildings, and physically harassing students because of their race and/or religion is the problem. I didn't follow the Columbia situation as closely as the UCLA situation (since I have a good friend whose daughter goes there). UCLA was just as bad as Columbia. There were pro-Hamas protestors preventing Jews from going into the library and the university did nothing to stop it for weeks. I'm a college drop-out and participated in my fair share of protests, and this has all gotten way out of hand.
Speech is protected. However foreign nationals, regardless of legal permanent residency status, are NOT permitted to promote terrorism, promote genocide, and.. FFS NOBODY is permitted to pour concrete down the toilets and plumbing of multistory buildings. The very bright and sneaky author of this article deliberately obfuscates, derides and completely ignores all of the many public posts, speeches, and direct communications in which our Syrian Algerian terrorist clearly and unmistakably called for the destruction of western civilization.
Gaslighting is not a very useful communication device. I’m personally a little disappointed that Matt promoted it.
Oh my God. Students were unruly. People couldn't get to the library. There was civil disobedience all about. It's insane!!!
Generally antisemites like you are resentful and insecure. Please give us your story about how 15 million people control 8 billion and other mysteries about how how Jews control your life or something. And don’t give me this BS about how people like you aren’t antisemites you’re just criticizing Israel. You are obsessed obviously. How many comments have you written in this thread?
Why are you labeling Kilgore Trout an antisemite?
Nothing in his post was antisemitic.
"...your fellow paid hasbara Israel-first troll army that infests Racket's commentariat."
That's mighty paranoid, anti-semitism neighbor.
Not paranoid if you know the truth about how hasbara functions, and how over the last 16 months they have ramped up their activities on social media platforms exponentially. It is not antisemitic to state was hasbara has been doing, and if you are unaware, then your're in the wrong arena.
It's as nutty as believing that you battle Russian agents on The Racket News comment threads.
Said like a true hasbara.
🙄
Who knows? Kilgore might be Matt.
Ms Kilgore. I actually checked out your link to the ACLU website with their one sided take on the UCLA encampment that claims among other things that their right to free speech has been violated.
For one, occupying the university property is not free speech. It’s a violation at the very least of University’s Code of Conduct. For this alone they should face suspension or expulsion.
As for your question of the harassment of other students the data is too large to share in this venue. Virtually every major news outlet has covered the harassment of Jewish and other students who were trying to simply get to classes
First, are you not aware of the thousands of Jewish students, Jewish professors and Jewish organizations like JVP, If Not Now, Not in Our Name, who were present at many of the demonstrations and stated unequivocally that they did not witness any acts of antisemitism, or harassment of Jewish students? Also, student demonstrations over the last 60 years have been responsible for affecting change to some of the worlds worst atrocities. More often then not, as in the case at UCLA when a group of zionist thugs showed up and initiated acts of violence against the protesters for over 5 hours before the police finally stepped in, these demonstrations for the most part have been peaceful.
1000’s. ?? Really sounds like a lot to me
Your reply has nothing to do with my point however.
Except you claim that “they” didn’t witness any anti Semitic acts or harassment Perhaps they didn’t but they definitely occurred and were frequent. Mostly peaceful means some were not. Occupation of university property and violence has consequences. That’s like telling a cop. Let me off it’s only my first time driving drunk in ten years.
As a Vietnam veteran who saw first hand the lies and deceit of America's role in the war, I joined Vietnam Veterans Against the War soon after I got back. I participated in some demonstrations that got out of hand, usually when law enforcement became aggressive, just as with some of the anti-genocide demonstrations on campuses, and many of us were arrested as well. If you think that all demonstrations should be peaceful to affect change, then you are no student of history. When American workers tried to unionize all throughout the 1800's and 1900's many were killed during demonstrations until they achieved their goals. The Civil Rights movement, or Occupy Wall Street, or the demonstrations in Hong Kong. I could go on, but there are times in history that the Establishment need to feel the wrath of the people when there is injustice taking place.
I don’t disagree with anything you say. What I am saying is simple. For one you are a citizen of the United States and do not fall under the jurisdiction of Title 8 of Deportation Laws obviously. Should someone like you destroy property or trespass you would only be subject to the penalty for those offenses under the law. As a student you sign a code of conduct because you now represent the university. That code far stricter than your constitutional rights. That code of conduct was most definitely violated by a lot of these and as I said they should face the consequences of suspension or expulsion. In the case of Mr Kahlil, not being a citizen is subject to the deportation laws as well as the discretion of the State Department who issued his green card. If you read the law he also has violated Section 8 by not only supporting a designated terrorist organization but taking action not in line with our foreign policy initiatives. As such he is subject to deportation. To reiterate neither the college student case or Mr Kahlil’s case have anything to do with freedom of speech nor constitutional rights
I don’t care at all about this narrative, however, it is naive to think a rage mob that’s all wound up isn’t going to turn on whoever. Just look at the videos of the summer of Floyd and see the mobs going at anyone who isn’t behaving like them. It had nothing to do with the issue (obvious since that behavior doesn’t serve anyone) but with the psychology and behavior of mobs. It’s the same ugliness that we’ve seen in history, the torches and pitchforks replaced by signs and apparently masks. It’s the modern day lynch mob in action. Sure, they’d never knowingly hurt a passing Jew, right? Sure. (Sarcasm)
Oh it was the mobs of Zionist Jews rampaging through the streets tearing shit up, vandalizing statues, smashing windows of Jewish Delis, shrieking “I am Hamas!”, protesting outside any building with a Jewish name on it, taking over campuses and crapping in the commons …. I totally thought it was the other way around. What a dummy I am. Thanks for setting the record straight. Moron.
A Columbia professor segregated and verbally assaulted students in his classroom for the crime of being Jewish. Individuals wearing dress associated with Judaism were confronted and excluded for the crime of walking past an illegal encampment. And I don’t think that any rational person believes that the NYPD is controlled by Israel.
🙄
"I'll wait" for about 1 second or in other words, about as long as it too to Google "Jewish students at Columbia". Nothing about assault, antisemitism, protests etc., simply "Jewish students at Columbia" pulled up multiple articles that you claim are lies.
What's next? Are you going to start throwing the word Nazi at those who oppose your lies?
https://www.yahoo.com/news/jewish-columbia-students-were-chased-194401690.html
https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/30/us/columbia-task-force-finds-troubling-pattern-of-behavior-toward-jewish-students-on-campus/index.html
https://nypost.com/2024/08/31/us-news/columbia-antisemitism-task-force-details-student-assaults-targeting-after-oct-7/
No one here has to show you evidence of anything. Proof and evidence in the Khalil context are legal terms. Everyone else, including you and me, are just voicing opinions based on our assessment of
publicly available information. Some valid. Some not. But one thing is certain - the Khalil case will not be tried in the court of public opinion. Nor for that matter will the Arabs we now refer to as Palestinians' cause.
Make way! Make way! Shitloads of Israel defenders coming through very soon!
Lol - I,m not an “Israel defender” as regards the deportation of aliens. It seems plain common sense that guaranteed Constitutional protections apply only to citizens. The spectrum of non-citizen immigrants inhabit some grey area, perhaps informed by our Constitutional understanding, but in no way Constitutionally binding.
This makes the argument: https://www.city-journal.org/article/columbia-student-mahmoud-khalil-hamas-deport-legal
If Columbia had properly accused him of trespass and damage, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
I believe courts have determined that those Constitutional protections do indeed apply to non-citizens. Take it up with them
Judicial interpretation of the Law is like denominational interpretation of the Bible.
Re taking it up with the courts, that process of reexamination has already been started. It will be interesting to see where it ends up this time.
The article claims "U.S. law stipulates that an alien is deportable if he 'endorses or espouses terrorist activity or persuades others to endorse or espouse terrorist activity or support a terrorist organization.'" It further asserts that "The Syrian-born green-card recipient served as one of the ringleaders of the post-October 7 riots at his former university and functioned as the lead 'negotiator' for the student group known as Columbia United Apartheid Divest (CUAD). CUAD was one of the primary agents of chaos on Columbia’s campus during last spring’s 'encampment,' during which rioters smashed windows, defaced and occupied buildings, disrupted classes, and harassed and threatened Jewish students."
If this is true, then deport Khalil. QED.
He can't be gone too soon imo. I question why he was admitted in the first place. Catnip to Columbia.
He was approved by Columbia to act as a negotiator between administration and the encampment. Now, suddenly, they throw him under the bus. Why? Do you believe every green card holder should be deported for saying things you don't like? And what about him when he was admitted do you object to?
This is not about free speech Megan. It’s about his support for a designated terrorist organization called Hamas. The man was handing out Hamas printed literature for one.
Under Title 8 of US Deportation Law that in and of itself is grounds for deportation
I have not seen video or photos of that.
look harder
You can’t point me in the right direction?
HE did not personally hand out that literature.
Free speech EXCEPT
I love woke maga so much. Best part of this timeline.
Apologies to others who read my pervious comment which includes the following:
"U.S. law stipulates that an alien is deportable if he 'endorses or espouses terrorist activity or persuades others to endorse or espouse terrorist activity or support a terrorist organization.'" It further asserts that "The Syrian-born green-card recipient served as one of the ringleaders of the post-October 7 riots at his former university and functioned as the lead 'negotiator' for the student group known as Columbia United Apartheid Divest (CUAD). CUAD was one of the primary agents of chaos on Columbia’s campus during last spring’s 'encampment,' during which rioters smashed windows, defaced and occupied buildings, disrupted classes, and harassed and threatened Jewish students."
This is a more specific example of an exception to the First Amendment right to free speech than the dumb and inaccurate "shouting 'fire' in a crowded theater" example preferred by NPCs everywhere.
So you're a free-speech absolutist? Fine. But don't pretend there are no exceptions to the First Amendment right to free speech.
Yes.
You do know you have the right to yell “fire” in a crowded theater, right?
There are plenty of natural born citizens I wouldn't mind getting rid of too, truth be told.
Thank god you’re not in control then.
Haha - you figure you'd be first in line??
There is much in the law that defies or encompasses more than "common sense," and often for good reason. If the whole thing actually rested on common sense, law school could be gotten through in a matter of weeks or months. When speaking of it, one should probably get informed on the specific subject at hand so as to not waste one, and others', time.
I've learned in my almost 80 years (60 of them married to a lawyer) that common sense is not so very common, less now than it ever was. I am well aware of the fact that law is like science - nothing much is set in stone.
You do not have to read or respond to comments which waste your time. There are lots of fools in this world..
Fair enough.
But HE did not trespass. And HE did no damage. He was a liaison/negotiator between Columbia administrators and the protesters. Period.
Unfair!! They are the victims here... always will be no matter what!
Someone needs to research the psychosis that results when you convince a group that they are the world's ultimate victims always and forever. Must be a pretty heady trip, don't you think? And not in a healthy way...
Shit is the accurate image here.
Every accusation of oppression by pro Palestinian Islamist protesters is actually a confession of aggression by Hamas and its supporters including the terrorist state of Iran, which is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of Americans. You wonderful patriot. Go fishing.
How insightful
Proof?
Here's an interview with a Jewish student in the middle of one of those "anti-Semitic protests" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DM1SPHTsdyY
She doesn't seem "threatened" or "afraid." These protests were surprisingly multi-cultural, with Jews, Christians, Muslims and even atheists! What you wrote is simply false. It's a falsehood that you're propagating in service of the wellbeing of a foreign government, to justify the abolition of the first amendment to the constitution.
What made the Jewish students afraid?
Go see the film October 8 and you will see exactly what it was like on campus.
OK, so I'll try to watch it tonight. However, I'll tell you right now that I will have no truck with the bullshit idea that anti-Zionism is antisemitism. The reviews suggest that the conflation of the 2 is the propagandistic purpose of the movie.
Khalil is a vocal supporter of Hamas, and lauded the Oct 7th attack. Etc. No thanks.
Everything I have read or seen suggests this is nonsense. I suspect that the claim here is the ludicrous notion that supporting Palestinians is supporting Hamas. Even if that were the case, however, it is not terrible to support freedom fighters.
You may want to read something other than Al Jazeera or Der Sturmer
I cannot wait until the Palestinians live with their compassionate Muslim brothers. You know, those who refuse them citizenship because, apparently they hate Palestinians. Only then will this cruel issue be put to bed. That or they can move to Sudan (another Muslim paradise.)
You're either willfully or inadvertently misinformed. It's the leaders of Arab countries that don't want several millions Palestinians flooding into their countries, for various reasons, one being that these leaders are more committed to staying in power than they are to solidarity with their Muslim brothers (sound like anyone you know?). In the case of Jordan, there is the issue of U.S. aid, to be sure, but it is also the third driest country in the world. There's simply not enough water to accommodate several million refugees, even if expelling them from Palestine were not a criminal act. The people of other Arab countries don't "hate Palestinians," as you so ardently wish to believe. The footage is out there of the people of quite a few Muslim/Arab countries flooding the streets in support of the Palestinians: Egypt, Jordan, Yemen, etc. It happens every Friday in Yemen. So quit this garbage "argument" that no one "wants" the Palestinian people and learn something about the real world. Muslims and Arabs know that Palestinians belong in Palestine and they don't intend to abet Israel in ethnically cleansing them. What happened to you in your life that you cannot comprehend that kind of solidarity?
You might want to live in a tunnel with all the other Hamas rats.
You haven't seen the video of these guys, or pretend you haven't. They go right up to the Israeli tanks and blow them to bits. Israelis may not live in tunnels (yet), but they're horrible cowards. Even you must admit it takes no spine at all to drop a bomb on someone. I'd love to see resistance fighters challenge the IOF to hand-to-hand combat. The Israelis would be literally be shitting on themselves. No, this attempt to convince people that it's Hamas who's afraid is disproved by several hundred hours of fairly easily obtained video. I'd try a different argument if I were you, but I know how limited your choices are.
Source? I've seen Khalil call for the safety and liberation of both Israelis and Palestinians. Are you alleging that this is what Hamas wants too?
You respectfully decline free speech. Got it.
Please refer to his exact statements along those lines, or share where we can find them.
I a too.
I live in California, jerk. Where do you live? You know someone is an antisemite whenever they use the word Hasbara. Or talk about his Israel unit 8200 when they know nothing about it other than what they’ve read from Islamist or antisemitic sources. Actually, this comment section is overrun by antisemitic jerks.
"Truly basement dwelling pussies." Well put. I think it's time for the Zios to rework their playbook. I can't believe they're still leaning so hard into "anti-Semitism," but then, genocide is a really hard thing to defend. I guess you have to give them credit for trying something so impossible. It'd be funny if it weren't people trying to get everyone to be as racist and heartless as they are.
Hello Megan. I am writing here to answer your comment which I can't find anywhere.
A French scientist going to a conference in the US and was deported: there seems to be a discussion ongoing with regard to put USA on a terror list. I keep hearing things from other countries but definitely people will not be going to the US. Then there is the potential of war with Iran.
Is Wikipedia anti-Semitic? Yes. Look at the bios of many of its editors. Wikipedia is a woke entity and in sympathy with all the woke ideologies.
You are absolutely correct - numerous articles in many publications. Trout man says its controlled by Mossad which is actually hilarious.
Go online. At least you pretend to know how to use Google. Are any number of articles proving that Wikipedia is overrun by editors who are antisemites like you. You are so easily misled and you don’t even know it.
A question: is Israel the only country that can’t be questioned without being a bigot, or does it work with other countries? For instance, if I criticize India, am I automatically anti-Hindu? If I criticize Afghanistan, am I by definition anti-Muslim? How exactly does this phenomenon work?
How much do these Israelis operatives get paid?
I don't know. Ask your buddy Adolph.
🙄 Just brilliant!
As I have been looking at the reports on the situation at Columbia, including the reports of supposed antisemitism from the University's task force, what I see is a lot of fear from Jewish Zionist students. However, I see very little to suggest that fear was or is reasonable. Students report feeling ostracized from groups and by former friends. There is no indication of what inspired the fear aside from some groups' support for the BDS of Israel. Only a few direct (and deplorable) attacks on Jews are reported. Often, one gets. the impression that these attacks (though not justified) were for expressions of Zionism, not for being Jewish.
In the meantime, the US government supports the genocide of Palestinians; the Columbia admin calls in brutal repression squads of the NYPD; Palestinian supporters are called in the middle of the night and their families are threatened; former IOF soldiers attending Columbia or merely stopping by attack protesters physically and with impunity. Those Jewish Zionist students should know that the violent forces are all on their side. It is, however, a symptom of knowing you are wrong to be unreasonably fearful.
This is the most NPC thing I've read in this thread. This is little more than a dump of leftist cliches. "genocide of Palestinians", that's a myth. More fundamentally, you don't even know what Zionism is. "Jewish Zionist" students have no forces of violence on their side, in fact they have no forces at all, they're just Jewish students. The fear is quite reasonable since they have been threatened repeatedly by masked protesters. You arrogant assumption that their fear is based on knowing they're wrong is just a projection of your own ignorance.
Jewish Zionists have the entire force of the US military and state apparatus behind them, or haven't you noticed the way supporters of Palestinians are the first to be canceled; that supporters of Palestinians have been brutally treated; and Jewish Zionists have had right wingers make ludicrous apologias for them?
Ah, moving the goalposts, always a sign of bad faith argument. First you said Jewish Zionist *students*, now you've amended it to Jewish Zionist and dropped the word "student". But the fact remains: you don't know what the word Zionist means, so you are unable to understand what you wrote. I am a Jewish Zionist and I have no force at all behind me, let alone that of the US military. You are addicted to the silly leftist oppressor/oppressed binary, and for you all politics on the planet must be shoehorned into that hopelessly and destructively reductive box.
Now, you're just being silly. Jewish Zionist students are Jewish Zionists. The US government is supplying the arms to slaughter Palestinians and continue to take their land, the explicit goal of Jewish Zionists. Both the Biden and the Trump administrations have been silencing people who protest against the genocide.
I've given up trying to reason with people PostAmerican or Kilgore or Megan who are filled with hatred and racism. They are immune to logic or facts and will only fight back with more ignorance and idiocy. These people are unable to learn or admit error. Just ignore them and devote your time to more fruitful discussions. It's very disheartening to see Matt Taibbi give a voice to ignorant rants like this particular article. The level of falsehood and detachment from reality is very atypical of his columns.
"filled with hatred and racism" -- Yet YOU hold no hatred or racism for Arabs/Muslims, right?
"The level of falsehood and detachment from reality" -- Take a look in the mirror.
You probably haven’t heard of John Spencer because you don’t read much outside of Al Jazeera or der sturmer. He is the head of urban warfare studies West Point. He is a 25 year veteran with combat experience. It is his studied opinion that Israel has not even come close to committing “genocide”. Are you going to claim his a Zionist tool or something? At some point you might wanna look into the mirror and ask yourself why am I obsessed with this thing and why do I call other people who disagree vile names?
Like Spencer, Richard Kemp is another excellent source. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JM0fTss0UX4
And you are a toddler having a temper tantrum, mainly because your claim of genocide cannot be substantiated, for the obvious fact that it's not true. And how am I a liar? What did I lie about? I've always supported freedom of speech, so what are you referencing to contradict that?
If you are tired of "antisemite," how about "Nazi"? Would you be more proud of that?
Given that quite recently you could be punished for “micro aggressions “ on many campuses, why is the standard so much higher for Jewish students to feel threatened?
You could be punished for micro aggressions against certain protected groups. Do you think anyone ever was punished for a micro aggression against a hetero white or asian guy? We need less of that BS, not more.
What is a micro aggression?
Saying or doing anything that might hurt the feelings of someone else, whether deliberately or unintentionally, like "misgendering" someone for instance, addressing a man with falsies and a beard as a man when he demands to be addressed as a woman. Or asking a person who appears foreign where he's from.
Microaggressions are nonsense. You really could not be punished for them anyway. However, there is virtually no campus in the US where Palestinians had more support than Jews from the university and state apparatus.
History would be one.
Jewish students were and are taken very seriously when claiming they feel "unsafe," while Palestinian students have every reason to feel unsafe after the skunk chemical attack at Columbia. Having IOF vets on campus is much more threatening than Jewish students having to hear about BDS. I'm pretty cynical overall but I was shocked at the extremity of the double standard, but then, I didn't know that billionaire donors had come to own higher ed in the U.S., many of them Zionists.
I have just discovered that the film is still in theaters. I will not, therefore, be able to see it tonight. I will try to remember to see it if I find out it has become accessible to me.
How do we tell the difference?
There's a complete vacuum where the skunk attacks at Columbia should be, or the violent attacks on the encampment at UCLA, or dozens of other examples of violence by Zios and their police helpers. It's getting downright surreal to dialogue with these blinkered fanatics. Makes you understand how deeply fucked this country is, doesn't it?
I don’t know, violence, maybe? lslamists with keffiyehs calling for the destruction of Israel and the death of Jews? Encampments that prevented students thought to be Zionist or Jews from going, where they wanted to go on campus? You know stuff like violence and intimidation
Hasbara nonsense. There's no evidence for any of it.
What made you stupid?
What specific harmful actions did Khalil commit? Or incite to be committed?
Why do people think the federal government doesn’t have the right to say something to Columbia? If they want autonomy, then don’t take a penny of our fuckjng taxpayer money. When you accept taxpayers money, you’ve agreed to our wrath
absolutely. This is terrible reporting. It belongs in the National Inquirer, not here.
The New York Post? That's your Northstar? Hilarious...
Lol
Thank you. This was truly odious. The students facing deportation obviously lied to obtain their visa. I say if Prince Harry lied on his visa application about his drug use we should deport him as well.
Trump already said he doesn't want to deport him because he is already burdened by a very bad wife. It seems reasonable to me. There's only so much a man can take.
I think President Trump is being considerate of the Royal Family who don’t want Prince Harry and family back.
Like Alec Baldwin?
I don't think this is obvious. What was the lie? Could you prove that they committed visa fraud in court? If so, why do you decline to indict them or prosecute them for that crime? Could it be that you're bullshitting?
Well i ran the international program at a university. In order to get a student visa. Among the areas that they explore is whether the potential student has views that are contrary to the interests of the US. These students are guest in our country. If they are disruptive we do not owe them the same deference that is owed a citizen.
I don’t think he was disruptive. The videos that I’ve seen show him engaging in a time-honored American tradition: peacefully demonstrating against the decisions made by his institution, in his name, with his tuition money. Better than that, his actual words called for peace and freedom for Israelis and Palestinians: indeed, in insinuated (accurately) that the fates of these two peoples are intertwined, and the destruction of one will lead to the destruction of the other, so both should be elevated. Khalil is among the best of us, and it’s because of his virtue that he’s being targeted. This man is a guest in MY country, and I’m honored that he chose to be here.
Lol really wasn’t disruptive he was one of the ringleaders. If your a guest in this country act like one.
I presume that he acted with utmost respect and obedience to the law, until proven otherwise in a court of law. I've seen no video evidence that runs counter to this conclusion. I didn't see him in the videos depicting violence or harassment. Nobody has been able to proffer evidence to that effect. That's why the Trump administration isn't charging him with a crime: they know he's innocent.
Dont need to charge him with a crime. He is simply persona non grata.
No, he was simply a liaison/negotiator between Columbia's administrators and the protesters. Nothing more.
You cannot possibly know that.
https://www.ktvb.com/article/news/nation-world/ice-arrest-palestinian-activist-who-helped-lead-columbia-protests/507-2e5feed9-8582-4ec4-8f60-0c6fda2a8731#
https://apnews.com/article/inside-columbia-protest-movement-0b35ff55f18d0bf4b2c8c0a27b1dbe04
The second article is interesting. It identifies Khalil as the lead negotiator in a demonstration carefully organized in advance by a large group of people. It also describes efforts to nationalize the demonstrations that began at Columbia. It also quotes a Jewish student who professed his fear; so much for no Jews being bothered as you claimed in another comment. But overall this article does not support your position that Khalil is a naive student who just engaged in free speech. In fact it substantiates the illegal actions taken, substantiates an organized concerted effort to engage in a national.campaign that endorsed criminal conduct. More specifically it designates Khalil as the lead negotiator who pulled the plug on the negotiations when his demands were not met. His demand was that criminal conduct be excused. I would bet dollars to donuts ( and I only bet on sure things) the concerted effort to expand the Columbia protest nationwide is what triggered the "against national security interests" deportation. I further speculate that there is digital evidence, witness statements and other evidence of Khalil's involvement.
"so much for no Jews being bothered as you claimed in another comment." -- I never claimed that. However, I will say some Jews have been known to overplay the "victim" card, and that particular person's "fear" (the article actually said he "felt unsafe") is quite dubious.
"But overall this article does not support your position that Khalil is a naive student who just engaged in free speech." -- Go back and read the thread. You claimed I "couldn't possibly know" that Khalil was simply a liaison/negotiator between Columbia's administrators and the protesters. So, I was providing sources for how I know that.
"Khalil as the lead negotiator who pulled the plug on the negotiations when his demands were not met. His demand was that criminal conduct be excused." -- Where exactly in the article does it state that? Please provide specific quotes.
" the concerted effort to expand the Columbia protest nationwide is what triggered the 'against national security interests' deportation." -- It was not a "concerted effort." Here's the ACTUALLY quote from the article: "Months before they pitched their tents on Columbia University’s main lawn, INSPIRING a wave of protest encampments at college campuses nationwide" (emphasis mine).
Also, Khalil HIMSELF was not responsible for any of the other protests around the country; which would render the grounds for his deportation both dubious and invalid.
So the first article is wholly devoid of substantiated information. Interestingly the headline makes reference to arrest of Palestinian activist (Khalil) who helped lead Columbia protests which Khalil himself is quoted as denying "last week" within the body of the article. Sloppy journalism. While he now denies being an organizer that is what is known as a self-serving statement. My recollection is that he did label himself as an organizer or leader at the time although ICBW. If so that is indicia of conspiracy to engage in the criminal conduct committed, aiding or betting those who engaged in criminal conduct, and/or engaging in organized criminal activity.
Speculation and strawmen is all you have.
No moron. I ran it for a midwestern university. Do you still move your lips when you think?
Such a typical response and action. Dox.. really. How far did you make it through grade school? I round think far if this is how you handle a debate. You lost
Night moron
Night douche bag. Ooops little to close to pussy for you
He is both. And both can be revoked by the Sec of State
Are we really going to pretend that Hitler did nothing wrong because he never hurt anyone himself and just spoke words? That the mob boss who tells his boys to "take care of him" is just exercising free speech?
The fact that left-wing people are dishonest enough to pretend not to know the difference between free speech and attacking people doesn't require the rest of us to pretend to be that stupid as well.
Here's the homework for Racket News, if they care to make a real difference: Write an article articulating where the line is. THEN talk about real-world examples.
I'm a right-wing people, and it appears that you are the one who does not know where the line between free speech and attacking people is, but I'll give you a hint. Khalil is accused only of saying things people don't like, he isn't accused of attacking anyone. It appears you need to do your own homework assignment. While you're at it, write an essay on guilt-by-association and why it's un-American.
He is accused as well as conducting, leading the Hamas group that he applies America citizens’ first amendment rights in addition. Sec of State Rubio is revoking the Green Card (not LPR) because he would never have received the gift of one from this nation had he indicated his intentions to act in support of terrorist Hamas prior to the US giving him that status.
Hasbara nonsense. There's ZERO evidence that Khalil supports Hamas.
Isn't he accused of helping to barricade the library (trespassing) and also of vandalism and destruction? Not just speech. Besides why should a non-American get the privilege of being a guest when he misbehaves and promotes Hamas?
If they had evidence of a crime he could have been charged with said crime. A White House official even said “the accusation here is not that he has a committed a crime.” He is being jailed for first amendment protected speech. The fact that he is a Green Card holder and not a citizen does not make him a more legitimate target for this. He’s a legal, permanent resident and he should not be subject to deportation without having committed a crime and being convicted under due process. Besides, any person on US soil has exactly the same speech rights as any citizen. If they can do it to him, they can do it to any of us. The Israelis on here may not understand it because they don’t live in a free and equal democracy, but in America this is antithetical to everything our country stands for. I think that’s the disconnect here, so many commenters aren’t even American.
It is simply not true that the only way he can be deported is to be convicted of a crime.
That's not what she said.
Sure she did. ". . . he should not be deported without having committed a crime and being under due process." Admittedly the sentence is somewhat confusing but the implication is clear. And while it is true that criminal convictions can be the basis of deportation and are used therefor routinely, that is not the theory being deployed in the Khalil matter.
So many here misbehave and support violence... just over there not over here.
No, he has not been accused of any of that.
Very nicely done.
Imagine an American student as a guest in a mideastern college behaving like this but pro Israel. Prison I’m sure
I'm sure also, but we're supposed to be much better than that.
Are we really going to prosecute this whole fucking thing every time someone mentions that guy's name or says the word "Israel" out loud?
Let's all agree to save time, as NO ONE will be persuaded by ANYONE in these comments, one way or the other, and not drum through all this shit again and again.
I agree that prognosticating is a complete waste of time, except as an effort to clarify one's own thoughts, but it is an irresistible American pastime. The courts will decide - haha just like they settled RvW to everyone's satisfaction.
Word.
You telling me to shut up?
Pretty sure I didn't. I rarely tell anyone to shut up, but when I do, they know for sure what just happened.
Well said sir. At its essence you are either inclined to support mass murder or you’re not. Seems pretty simple to me. Perhaps I am just a simpleton. 🤔
Problem is, each side is accusing the other of "mass murder."
"he doth protest too much"
??
All you need to do, dude, is move on. But, nope. Here you are...
Spot on!
Where can I join? I'm not Israeli or Jewish, but I could use some extra $.
Contact AIPAC.
I think they know the difference, JD. I think they have this fundamental belief that this must be, it must exist, to protect the freedom. You know, the old "it's the speech we hate" mantra.
There is a line, and we've got to find it. I certainly don't know how, but I just recently went on a serious multi-rant because I found out that a subscriber had been libeled (section 230 exempted libel, of course) mutliple times with the words "Nazi cunt" on a Substack. We have to find a line, or one will be found for us.
I got news for you guys: Your freedom to say horrid and awful things to each other, lives on a knife's edge. That edge is called the Section 230 Exemption, and it is granted, and rescinded, totally at the government's pleasure. It's a ticking bomb that is at the last second, waiting for "the something" to happen.
And don't forget that when "the something" happens, and there is no more Free Press, and there is no more Substack, it will NOT be an infringement on your speech rights.
Freedom doesn.t last long without self-discipline.
Those are beautiful words! Thank you, so much! I wish.... lol!
I wish too.
I wish too.
Apply this logic to Trump saying "you need to fight like hell or you won't have a country anymore" before a thousand of his most rabid sycophants violently attacked the capital building, resulting in multiple deaths.
The only deaths were those of Trump supporters. . .
The crowd only became violent after police fired rubber bullets into their faces.
I'm sure Trump supporters would understand why police had to use violence during that riot if they imagined foreigners attacking the capital building like that.
Especially if police fire rubber bullets into their faces.
When the debate has devolved to the point of comparing Khalil (a liaison/negotiator between Columbia's administrators and the protesters) to Hitler and a mob boss, as Taibbi would say, you've lost the plot.
I haven’t lost anything. I’m using simple, obvious analogies to point out the absurdity of pretending that there’s no “speech” that’s ever criminal. You, meanwhile, are weasel-wording Khalil into something very different from what he is.
No, you just don't want to believe who he really is, and would rather believe the hasbara nonsense. And the only "pretending" going on is claiming he said anything "criminal."
You're a big, tough guy at the typewriter. Probably a complete wuss when confronted with an actual person. The truth hurts.
Kawaller: "For all I know, some of these demonstrations may be advocating for peaceful coexistence between Jews and Arabs."
🎶 And love may grow
For all we know. 🎶
But I kinda doubt it. Which Arabs have you seen lately willing to risk the wrath of other Arabs through public demonstrations?
The first amendment is not a suicide pact. We DO NOT HAVE TO TOLERATE guests who hate us and hate what we stand for. Out!
YOU stupid people.
I don't know if you know this but USA is on a 'terror list' for many countries.
NOT many people will be coming to the USA.
Your tourist industry is dead!
Oh no! Whatever will we do? My entire industry is dependent on the vast wealth of Ceylon.
We are missing out on Terrorism Tourism!?! Probably USAID has a grant for that.
We have fifty states, I've only been to seven. Seems like a good time to tour the USA
The West is worth a road trip. Arizona, Nevada, Colorado, Utah, Washington are all beautiful, and people are open and mind their business and don't care to tell you about yours. You'll get some of that in Seattle, but it's not as bad as parts of California or most of Wyoming. And most have legal weed.
I had to miss it this year. The Sandhill crane migration at the Platte River in central Nebraska is a bucket list trip. One of the last great migrations left on the planet. You can’t describe it. You have to be there.
Sounds pretty cool. I’ll check it out.
You must be overjoyed re: legal weed. What fine way to virtue signal.
Who am I virtue signaling to? Normal people who like to get high now and then?
Can you add a bit of context to your comment?
What's wrong with legal weed?
Nothing. Except I think it's an interesting comment regarding the topic. When I recommend travel to people, I don't think to include 'legal weed' in positive terms of places to visit. Don't get me wrong, I indulged quite a lot in my earlier years. It just seems to me that using 'legal weed' as a positive recommendation for travel is kind of weird...especially on this topic.
Iran, North Korea, Syria, Cuba, Venezuela—they accuse the US of terrorism.
That where you're from, Jenny?
If for some reason you don’t Love/Like America??? GET THE FUCK OUT, put the your money , where your mouth shits
A terror list?! That is incredibly awesome, and probably way overdue. Can you share where you got this information? I've been saying since 10/7 that the world needs to stop traveling to the U.S. The revenue from tourism is more diluted here than in, say, Bora Bora, but many places rely heavily on it. Money is all Trump, Musk and their minions understand. The rest of the world needs to hit us as hard as it can.
YIKES!!!
But how many of us "stand for" Israel?
YOu seem to speak for all of us in what we all stand for.. but i'll wager it's what you stand for and you want to shove it down our throats.... correct?
Correct. But Khalil isn't one of them.
By disrupting your echo chamber?
No. By being wholly incompetent.
I would say that Ben is more naive than incompetent...
In this case, I think the phrase you were looking for is "willfully naive".
I like that even better!
You're a fragile little snowflake. It's probably in your best interest to find news outlets that only confirm what you already believe. There's no shortage of them out there.
Hardly. I have a wide range of sources and am.pretty astute at weeding out bias/prejudice, mis-, dis-, and mal-information. But this piece does not even rise to that level. It is awful. Maybe it was supposed to be comedic. That is his lane. But it did not rise to that level either.
Stay mad.
Yes. These procrastinating adolescents are just cosplaying Hamas warriors in order to skip college class on a sunny Friday afternoon. Just “costumes” of murderers who committed atrocities most of can’t and would not imagine, and filmed and posted on social media to share with the rest of us and to further traumatize and victimize. And continue to do so to this day.
Nothing to see here? He got here in December, 2022. Less than twenty-eight months in America, and he is an out-front player for Hamas - American Style.
It will be so moving to read his Letters From A Louisiana Jail, which Amy and the rest of his 19 attorneys will be sure to share with us on a regular basis.
It's a venue where soyboys can pick up chicks, too. 'Twas ever thus.
I'm reminded of a "Fabulous Furry Freak Brothers" comic in which Fat Freddy joins a demonstration and immediately barges into the library demanding to be shown where they keep the "fuck books." He's shown the door by a gigantic monstrous librarian who says "The university library will NEVER hold 'fuck books.' Now GET OUT!"
I tried to find an archived copy of the comic, but failed. I think it's in one of the first five issues or so, around 1969.
I loved that issue. Must have read it 30 times. Also when Phineas decides he’s NOT paranoid. And the Thanksgiving “Turkey was already stuffed” story.
Ha!
Love the Fabulous Furry Freak Brothers!
Dealer McDope and Fat Freddy's Cat. Man that was a long time ago...
You're fake, right? This is a copy/paste from a Youtube comment or something, right? Nobody could be that stupid and also have found their way here naturally and managed to make a comment.
So much for toleration of free speech - isn't calling someone stupid an insult designed to shut them up?
Thank you! Smiling sun emoji
It strikes me as just another example of assigning no value to people who don’t think like you, or who don’t look like you, or who don’t share your history . . . Hmmm. What does that remind us of.
Responding to stupidity by calling it stupid is how free speech is supposed to work. Notice I’m not calling for mommy to come and silence anyone.
Of course you're not calling for mommy - she's out working to pay for your substack subscriptions while you're sitting on your ass in the basement. Meanwhile, you seem to be unable to respond coherently to someone's argument other than the sixth-grade level "you're stupid." Well, done, Einstein, well done...
See, you used words. You didn't need a moderator to come and make you safe.
And I read your words and concluded that you're a dunce and will never say anything of value, and I can safely mute you forever. Free speech works!
Many of the TikTok atrocity videos were posted by IDF soldiers proud of what they had done (sort of like Americans in Abu Ghraib). Our brave fine Congress had a way to deal with such atrocities: They banned TikTok. And soon Trump's waiting period for TikTok will end and we will be shielded from anti-Semitic Zionist atrocity posts which put Israel in a bad light.
Saturday morning, Oct. 7, 2023, I turned on the morning news show on Fox (naturally, right?). They were showing a video of a young woman being dragged into a jeep-like vehicle by men with guns. Her pants were stained. She was driven away. During the day, photos of a dead naked woman in the back of a truck were making their way into media. Did the IDF film and publish those images?
Did the IDF release images of bloody babies’ beds, and evidence of other atrocities committed that day? Yes, and why? Did the Allies film the atrocities in WWII in the death camps. Yes. And how interesting any number of people are denying the existence of the Holocaust and the barbarity of Oct. 7.
It's actually a very simple issue, Lynne. Destroying the first amendment for at the behest of a foreign government is likely to cause backlash against that government by freedom-loving Americans.
That is true, but it's also true that destroying the First Amendment for issues like wokism is not only likely, but did cause a backlash. The fundamental problem the author is pointing out is that various groups are attempting to destroy the First Amendment in order to advance their own agenda.
So BS your biases and prejudices are on full display. And like BK make a vast oversimplification. First, 1st A rights are civil rights and as such relate to a particular field of law. Civil rights issues can be raised in civil actions such as suing an entity for violation of civil rights. But they are more often raised as defense to criminal prosecution or as justification for criminal conduct. Significantly to do either the accused has to admit the offense, and your whole argument is Khalid did nothing wrong. Criminal conduct is not excused by labeling it free speech. Speech is protected. Some acts, such as peaceful protest, are protected. (At least here for now.) But vandalism and trespass are not excused (just ask the J6 protesters). False imprisonment (of the maintenance workers) is not excused. Threats, intimidation, and harassment of a group of students based on their religion or ethnicity is not excused. But Khalid is not charged with a crime nor is he required to be to be subject to deportation. As others have already told you if he is relying on a student visa and violated the terms thereof he is subject to deportation. If he is relying on a green card visa and violated the terms thereof he is subject to deportation. If he lied on the student or green card visa applications he is subject to deportation. But my understanding is that the basis of his deportation is a rarely used (til now anyway) method and is based on a State Department determination that he has engaged in conduct contrary to America's national interests. You know and I know the United States of America is a close ally of Israel. Since the inception of the modern nation of Israel. More importantly Khalid knew it. The entire purpose of the protests was to force divestment of investment in and aid to Israel, to turn the tide against Israel and weaken Israel. Nor was he a mere participant, rather he was an organizer and a negotiator. His conduct as an organizer raises the inference of conspiracy to commit [crimes] and engaging in organized criminal activity, both of which increase the classification of the underlying crime(s). As the negotiator he was the very public face of the organized protests. Protests In which others BTW were very careful not to disclose their identities. Which sort of refutes the notion that all was above board as hiding behind masks and hoods generally indicates nefariousness and a desire not to get caught so engaging. Additionally according to his wife's recent statements he was aware of the risk of being detained and deported as he had advised her what to do in the event thereof and had tapered his public appearances at the new protests. Additionally neither you nor I have any idea what his actions entailed. But he does. And various federal entities likely have a decent idea for him to have been summarily detained as he was. My guess is that they have digital records, surveillance footage, witness statements, and maybe transcripts if bugged conversations, etc.. Reportedly he may be an intelligence asset of a foreign entity or entities. If so most likely he will agree to deportation to avoid criminal prosecution. It sounds to me like he may have been trying to prepare his wife for his absence. Lastly it is disingenuous, to say the least, to argue that Gaza and Hamas are not synonymous with the Free Palestine movement. That is their entire point - from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free. You really need to try to see the big picture to have any possibility of intelligently assessing this matter.
Khalil is not charged with a crime because he committed no crime. He's an innocent man who did nothing wrong. I will believe that until the day he's convicted of a crime in a court of law because all humans subjected to American jurisdiction are presumed innocent until proven guilty. He used his free speech to advocate for a cause that he cares about. You think he's wrong, great, say so. That's your right. It was his right to speak his mind. It's your right to speak your mind. This is how America works. Detaining him without charge and deporting him based on unproven allegations of wrongdoing undermines the bill of rights, both the first and sixth amendments. He's a legal permanent resident. That means that if he violates no law then he gets to live here forever.
You pro-Israel types want to make him a free speech martyr? What a terrible idea. This will backfire. Two days ago Bernie Sanders said that we need to end arms shipments to Israel on the Senate floor. Today he held the largest rally of his entire political career. The man is 83 years old. The spell may eventually break on the Israel issue in America, and stunts like deporting a peaceful man who broke no law will contribute to that sea-change. Just ask Bill Maher or Andrew Sullivan, who are quite pro-Israel but oppose deporting Khalil without charge. You people are completely in the wrong on this issue, and it's very much to the detriment of your own movement.
Amen!
He is subject to deportation without having been charged with or convicted of a crime. I do not think it was merely speaking his mind that caused his deportation.
State Dept and DHS are claiming it's because he's a "threat to national security." Hmm, where have we heard that before? Oh right, any time the government (led by EITHER party) seeks to silence its detractors. Look at what the Biden Admin did to the J6ers.
Because there have been abuses in the past does not mean it is being wrongfully applied to Khalil. That is the way everybody gets eaten by the wolf after the little boy cried wold too many times. But I think you have, perhaps inadvertently, hit on why so many people are troubled by this - because of the potential for abuse. I do not pretend to know the answer. Unlike most others commenting on the thread. The only thing I do know is the Khalil matter involves many areas of law and it is not a simple matter. Which was the gist of my original comment.
Nothing you are arguing makes legal sense. The issue is this is an arrest of someone who has not been charged with a crime by government entities acting outside their powers, using a wartime law outside wartime against a person who is a permanent legal resident of this country, based, apparently, on the content of his speech. If he is accused of specific crimes he could be charged with those crimes. Saying a civil rights issue can be raised in a lawsuit but not as a criminal defense is a nonsensical argument. If the very basis of a criminal case constitutes violating the defendant’s civil rights, the answer is not that the case goes on but the defendant can sue someone in civil court, the answer is the criminal case is invalidated. Most Americans would know that.
Re “intelligence asset”: he was a Chevenning scholar, meaning he was sponsored by the British, our ally, and would have been through a vetting process, making him less likely to have any kind of terrorist affiliation.
Re “national interests”: The allyship with Israel is what seems to be contrary to US interests at this point, and many Americans are realizing it, especially now with the attack on our first amendment, which Israelis may not understand is central to our concept of freedom and what it means to be American. The ways that Israel supposedly benefits us are all illusory. The terrorist threat we work together to combat is generated largely because of Israel. The military and spy tech is funded by us and they spy on us. Trump may be bought by Israel, but who’s to say we don’t elect a true America first leader next time, who campaigns on cutting Israel loose? We can only hope.
Sadly, hope is all we've got. Problem is, no one will even be considered for POTUS unless they pledge their undying fealty to Israel; a foreign country, no less. So much for "America First."
I don't think the issue is complicated at all. Hypocrisy is hypocrisy. All the author is pointing out is that the conservative right now claims that words are dangerous because it's about their issues, but when it's about the liberal left's issues, words are not dangerous at all. That is hypocritical.
But we, in the U.S., abound with hypocrisy. We claim to fight for democracy while overthrowing democratically elected leaders. We condemn abortion as murder while applauding the slaughter of 10's and 100's of thousands of people in foreign countries. We claim to be a peace loving nation while starting wars all over the world. We claim to be the land of the free, but we have the highest per capital prison population in the world. We claim to have the best healthcare in the world but we have the worst national health statistics of all the developed countries. And to top it off, we claim that the First Amendment protects our speech, but not speech that offends us.
I hope I haven't offended you.
Amen!
We hope you recover soon.
This essay is short and simplified, that's for sure. But to me it seems sensible and makes issues accessible to folks who maybe can't handle all the nuances. The fact that the author is under the Free Press umbrella, which has been afforded some kind of privileged position here on Substack, helps me see it has been written for a mass audience of unsophisticated readers. Posing the core issue as Left and Right is the main instrument of the simplification. Demonstrating to stop a horrendous live case of genocide that seems by now to never stop, should elicit outrage from decent people across the political spectrum.
Here my takes on the matter
https://anthonyjhall.substack.com/p/from-america-first-to-israel-first
There is a lot of what you describe on Substack but to me this piece was worse than that. The Khalid deportation is stoking lots of flames but people are weighing in with zero knowledge much less understanding of the issues. Khalid's conduct - conduct, not speech - involves a number of fields of law. Immigration, civil rights, criminal and administrative. The but, but, but he hasn't been convicted of a crime!!! or he is being deported for his free speech!!! folks might as well tattoo stupid on their foreheads. And because of the national security angle we are not likely to ever know all the details. But the utter insensitivity to the concerns of the intimidated and harassed Jewish Columbia students is egregious. I see no other justification for that except Jews anywhere are fair game.
Yah. This case encapsulates so much of what is going on now. Khalil embodies a rallying point for the resistance. He is doing so as Trump goes off the deep end in his efforts to pay back the people who allowed him to seize power in the White House.
Kkalil, it seems, is spotlessly clean in his legal record, his academic record, and his negotiating record to date. The unwillingness to charge him as a political prisoner is a new US version of Israeli administrative detention. Khalil's current treatment definitely sends a signal where we are headed in the Trump era.
In the background of it all, is the fact that the current Israel-US partnership is led on the Israeli side by the most notoriously war criminal in the world right now, Benjamin Netanyahu. Netanyahu is walking around free as he fires his top officials who know too much about the PM's roles in the real genesis of the Oct 7 psy op. That bundle of issues is presently going by the name of Qatargate.
So right now we are dealt impunity as usual for the folks in high who are really responsible for the most horrific crimes against humanity (Covid too). Meanwhile Khalil is becoming a symbol of the wretched of the earth. The wretcheds are being criminalized along with lots of other folks who are resisting the march towards Greater Israel by means of mass slaughter. Who is next?
Thousands of people who support Palestine have protested. Few have been arrested and fewer still subjected to deportation measures.
"the utter insensitivity to the concerns of the intimidated and harassed Jewish Columbia students is egregious." -- Because there was none.
I think it likely there was. For example, harrassment statutes generally say anything intimidating or threatening is harrassment which makes sense but there are other statutes that cover those offenses so harrassment statutes usually include other things like annoying, embarrassing, or subjecting the victim thereof to public ridicule.
Now you "think it likely" there was. Yet your last comment claimed it as fact.
I was not there so I have no first hand knowledge, which I try to acknowledge by saying things like I think, I believe, etc.. . During the 2024 dem8nstration, which I believe forms the basis of Khalil's deportation, I did see first hand accounts at the time of the demonstration of people who said they were Columbia students and Jewish who expressed fear. But to be clear my last comment just dealt with what constitutes harrassment. Legally that is. And my point was that it does not take much to constitute harrassment.
"Demonstrating to stop a horrendous live case of genocide that seems by now to never stop, should elicit outrage from decent people across the political spectrum."
For a second or two I thought you were changing the subject to abortion.
All I needed to see was the lede. When that's nonsense, don't waste your time.
I didn't.
Unfortunately, I'm compelled to agree.
'Conservative' and 'liberal' have become almost meaningless markers. I get that Matt has to produce something on this issue, but this piece ain't it.
Reading through a number of comments, it's apparent that many people do not read for comprehension and some people don't read at all.
The author of this article is Ben Kawaller, not Matt Taibbi.
And I'm glad the First Amendment was intended to protect all of us.
At which point exactly do I state that Matt is the author this article. Please be precise. NB if I wanted to state that Matt is the author of the article the article, why don't I just say so? Use those great reading skills and work it out for yourself. BW below seems to have tripped into the same hole.
Because you said, "I get that Matt has to produce something on this issue." And btw, Matt HAS written pieces on this issue. Pretty sure I saw you in the comments sections under them.
Congratulations, you've confirmed your own levels of literacy. 'Produce' and 'write' are very different verbs with entirely different etymologies. Let me help.
When discussing media, media such as Racket News (the hint is in the title) 'producer' and 'writer' have critically important meanings. Examine the credits in a book, magazine, cd, film, tv program, radio program etc, etc, etc - the 'writer(s)' have to be distinguished from the producers. Why? Both for clarity, and because the producer gets all the money.
So, contra your well-intended if snarky remarks about the reading skills of others, appended to my own clear comment, I do not believe I'm in any need of correction, or remedial reading and writing advice, at least in this instance.
Re: your btw, Matt has written and has spoken on this topic, at least once, but not in recent memory, and certainly not in the manner of this article, in which Ben grins and leaps into this raging bonfire of a topic, akin only to jumping into a volcano wearing a ski goggles for protection.
Writing a piece dedicated to exploring the Israel/Palestinian conflict invites thermonuclear levels of abuse, irrespective of the stance. Hence, Ben's approach, which I think to be an imaginative, if ultimately futile, experiment in discourse. Did Matt say to Ben: 'ok, you do it, I'll pay you'? I've no idea.
I hope I've addressed both your points. Remember: write and produce don't mean the same thing when discussing media. Have a good one.
This article was not written by Matt Taibbi; it was written by Ben Kawaller.
He can't be gone too soon imo. I question why he was admitted in the first place. Catnip to Columbia.
Where is he wrong?
Agreed. Chanting From the River to the Sea is enough right there. It may be a simple chant but says annihilate the Jewish state. The students being useful idiots who want their version of the 60’s is not an excuse enough for harassment and endangering their Jewish fellow students. Or for being in favor of the real genocide that took place on October 7th. If only they were, as students, intellectually curious and aware enough know about Hamas parading the corpses of dead children through the street as Gazans cheered.
"It may be a simple chant but says annihilate the Jewish state." -- Only if you believe (and/or promulgate) the hasbara nonsense. The key part of that slogan is PALESTINE WILL BE FREE. Which ACTUALLY means no longer suffering under apartheid policies, occupation, indefinite detention without charge, human rights abuses, and indiscriminate killing.
And oh by the way, Israel's zionist leadership uses that slogan, too, but for the ACTUAL purpose of annihilating the Palestinians as a means to their zionist goal of a Eretz Yisrael (Greater Israel):
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/original-party-platform-of-the-likud-party
https://newrepublic.com/post/178243/benjamin-netanyahu-literally-says-from-the-river-to-the-sea
"harassment and endangering their Jewish fellow students" -- There's ZERO evidence of this.
"the real genocide that took place on October 7th" -- Oh, so when only a few hundred are killed by Hamas, it's genocide. But when TENS OF THOUSANDS are killed by Israel, it's not genocide. Double-standard much?
If only YOU were "intellectually curious and aware enough [to] know" about the region's history going back to the 1917 Balfour Declaration.
Thank you! Forgive me, but I'm a WASP male. Actually, my Mom made sure I was baptized Catholic... soooo, I got that goin for me, lol!
I don't understand why there has to be this anti-Zionism. I'm getting that anti-Zionism is kind of like anti-Americanism, but no one conflates that with anything. Am I making any sense?
Khalil is a Hamas supporter, and loved the Oct 7 attack, on and on. No thanks.
Although I appreciate your time, you really didn't answer my question. However, for the record, I feel that Khalil represented enough of a danger, and he had clearly violated his green card agreement. He should've moved on the side of caution, he did not. That says a lot to me. I feel he should be sent home.
There's ZERO evidence of this.
You don't understand why people should oppose genocide?
You'd understand if you knew the real meaning of zionism.
I hate to beat a dead horse, but again (not again for you, but again in this thread), you didn't answer my question. So, maybe I'm asking this:
Is this a place for haters to primarily hurl insults at one another, or can I, a open-minded, God believing, non-secular, American veteran boomer, get some info? You want me to read Google? You KNOW I'm not gonna get the real story! You want me to go on a search of obscure websites? Forget it! What is Zionism apart from Americanism?
EDIT: See, here I go again! Not realizing that everyone just wants to fight! That's what it's all about isn't it? It's all about, "I'm gonna tell this jerk a thing or two!", isn't it?
Civil discourse can ONLY be maintained with a designated AUTHORITY. In sports, they're often called "refs", but they are NECESSARY! What would you're favorite sporting event be, without the refs?
I don’t think it’s the words as much as the support of terrorists. I’m pretty sure that’s what the non citizens are being sent home for.
Pretty sure you’re clueless.
Am I though? Typically when someone attacks me personally I just ignore them, but I feel like I should point out that American citizens aren’t being punished for their speech. Non citizens are being sent home for supporting terrorist regimes. Even if it’s moral support, it’s still support.
Isn't moral support just words?
If I were to say "bin Laden had a point", it seems like a stretch to say that would be moral support for Al-Qaeda.
By this standard, anyone "parroting Russian talking points" is guilty of providing Russia moral support, and only a simple executive order stands in the way of severe consequences.
He's not a citizen, that matters. And he was spokesperson of a group that did commit violence. That matters.
No it doesn't.
But if you hand out flyers about how bin Laden was right, we're getting closer.
Right he was the spokesperson of a group who broke laws and were violent. And he is NOT a citizen.
And, as that "spokesperson" he was making demands of Columbia in exchange for a cessation of illegal activities. As Andrew McCarthy pointed out, that's the crime of extortion.
Exactly. There in lies the rub. Extortion. “ nice school you got here. Would be a shame if something happened to it.”
Sort of like cutting off grant funding if you allow free speech?
Hasbara nonsense. He was simply NEGOTIATING with Columbia's administrators, on behalf of one of Columbia's (fully authorized) student groups.
Doesn't that constrain our ability to debate our nation's foreign policy?
For example, the KLA were on our terror list until we decided to take their side in the conflict in Serbia.
One day you can't say the KLA are right, the next day you can?
Seems arbitrary considering that the only thing needed to declare something a terrorist group is an executive order.
Or more recently like al-Julani, a headchopper of ISIS, who was reviled by State Media until they found out, as with Hillary from Sullivan, that the headchopper offspring of al Qaeda were working FOR the US. Biden and Israel just made al-Julani head of Syria to rid the country of "undesirables". Today's terrorist is tomorrow's freedom fighter.
And the NAZI-oriented Azov Battalion that was on the State Departments watch list for a couple of years... until the Russia-Ukraine War started, then, suddenly, they were "reformed" and declared heroes.
Closer to what? Right about what? As I recall, the Bin Laden letter was an illumination of the perceptions of the Arab World about the United States’ support for Israel. That support in itself is, by any measure, a support for terrorism. (Please refer to Leon Pinetta’s characterization of the pager attack last year).
I don’t think you can say that his opinions were ‘wrong’. They were opinions.
About how Bin Laden was right to murder a bunch of people because he didn't approve of US foreign policy.
This case is even worse because the flyers contain outright lies.
https://archive.org/details/hamas-our-narrative
We’re talking about two different things. I saw nothing in Khalil’s writing which defended or supported the 9/11 bombings. If I’m in error, please show me where.
But he has every right, and reason, to defend his people against genocide, no matter where he’s from or where he lives. I like him very much.
He's talking about my example.
No one is saying bin Laden was "right to murder a bunch of people." They're saying his REASONS for doing so were correct. Big difference.
Also, I read through the Hamas pamphlet, and don't see any "outright lies."
You can say anything you like Mr. Blair, as long as you are a citizen you are one of us. As a guest on the other hand, one is wise to be a little circumspect in one’s public statements. Perhaps saying “Bin Laden had a point” would not be out of line for a guest at a dinner party, but to stand out in front of your house with a mega phone and start shouting it to the neighborhood might be a little bit beyond the pale sir. Guests are expected to behave. I expect it of my guests and we should expect it of all of our guests.
We used to believe that free speech was a human right.
Our country was founded on that.
It seems we no longer respect our guests human rights.
Shows how much we value free speech.
Also, keep in mind these are permanent residents, which are usually a spouse of an American citizen.
Is it worth destroying an American family over speech, which hurts nobody?
I'm sure if we look, we'll find many that supported Trump that "parroted Russian talking points" to deport.
Now, if there is proof he committed violence, I can understand deporting him on those grounds. But not for speech.
(This comment thread has gotten a bit unpleasant so I’ll just address one of the more reasonable people here.)
You’re right about the issue of free speech and its fundamental importance to or culture. What I find interesting is how few people know what the man actually said and did.
He is clearly a victim of the Israel Lobby, plain and simple. He is not charged with anything. So, as you said, it has to be a free speech issue only.
Have a good day!
I think it gets tricky with Hamas as well, as they are also the Palestinian government. The situation reminds me a bit of Northern Ireland, when we commonly had supporters of the IRA and Sinn Fein here.
There would even be collections in pubs to send them money. I believe prosecutions of that did ratchet up, but some people weren't convicted because they made the case it was for humanitarian aid.
All we do know is: Fuck the British!!
He did have a green card though, so that entitles him to the same rights as citizens as far as I know.
It does not. A green card is a visa you don’t have to renew. It does not give you the same rights as a citizen. The man should have been smart enough to wait until he was a citizen before sympathizing with a terrorist group that is currently holding an American citizens hostage.
The Biz - he's sympathizing with the Palestinians in Gaza who are getting slaughtered. That's another way of looking at it, which I think is surely valid.
If he sympathized with the Palestinians, he would demand that Hamas surrender and release the remaining hostages, most of whom are dead. He would also condemn the grotesque atrocities that started this war. None of these "pro Palestinian" protesters give a shit about the Palestinians.
Penny Adrian. Who was fighting for the Palestinians? Certainly not the Western world.
When the Palestinians are 'cleansed' how will you feel?
Cleansed? Relocated.
Jenny is making this up as she goes along.
Ethnic cleansing = relocation.
Nor the other Arab nations either. Curious, huh?
Most of the Arab nations (as well as most non-Western countries) have condemned Israel's post-10/7 actions.
So? Note that not one Arab nation is willing to take in the Gazans. Not one. Because when they did in the past it did not work out well for those welcoming nation. Which raises the thought that maybe the Gazans are a special problem. And let's be honest the Sunni Arab nations are between the Jewish rock and the Iranian Shia hard place. We all know that Iran is funding and trying to control the Arabs we now refer to as Palestinian attacks on Israel. My belief is that if those attackers succeed in destroying Israel then Iran will target the Middle Eastern Sunni Arab nations on its quest for world domination via Caliphate. My instinct is this is what drove the Abraham Accords. As for the other western nations I do not give a hoot what the European, Canadian, and Aussie leadership thinks or wants. And that is particularly true of the EU. What a bunch of smug, sanctimonious fools. Those people are not the friends of people like you and me. Nor of their own people like you and me. The world is re-aligning. I am excited for it.
I think you meant to write "If he sympathized with the Israelis he would demand..." Since that is what Israel is demanding.
"the grotesque atrocities that started this war" -- First, it's a mass slaughter and ethnic cleansing, not a "war." Second, it started with the 1917 Balfour Declaration, LONG BEFORE 10/7/23.
clampdown sympathize all you want but do it from Syria or whatever gutter country he's from.
Fuck the Palestinians. I have no sympathy for them.
ATTENTION: Hate Speech has entered the building. REPEAT: Hate Speech has entered the building.
News flash! Hate speech is also free speech.
duh, everyone knows that except Tim Walz. It's just a fun way to acknowledge the complete lack of inhibition.
Please, it's Tampon Tim. He worked hard for that name.
Unless it criticizes Israel.
The Biz - he's sympathizing with the Palestinians in Gaza who Fucked Around and are Finding Out.
-There, I fixed it for you...
No. He is a Palestinian who organized protests and negotiated demands to achieve divestment of investment in Israel, boycotts of Israeli goods and services, and sanction on Israel to weaken Israel. Israel is a longstanding ally of the US and recipient of a lot of US aid including military assistance. So Khalid's conduct was contrary to US interests. That is the basis of his deportation.
And the fact that "US interests" determine whether or not he can truly exercise free speech.
Green Card Holders of which I was one before I left this begnited country 20 yrs ago have the same free speech rights as citizens. Put that in your pipe and smoke it!
How long did it take you to get a green card? Were you here on an F1 first? Or did a company sponsor you with a work visa? What's the work visa you would need? Oh Jenny, let's dig into this!!
I for one am glad that you left. Stay away.
you have to renew a green card every 10 years
How did a student on an F1 visa get a full Green Card in 18 months? Where did his team of attorneys come from? There are A LOT of suspect things with this guy.
Pretty sure I read he got married and got it from there.
I’m a recent green card holder. You don’t get one through marriage.
Well, actually you do. As quickly as Khalil got one, of that I am not sure.
No you don’t. Receiving a green card is predicated on several things, marriage can play a role. But marriage alone will not produce one.
Unless a person is otherwise ineligible or the marriage is a sham, you absolutely can get a green card based on marriage alone. But, what is interesting as it applies to Khalil is that a green card through marriage is conditional if the marriage is less than 2 years old at the time of green card application. Reports say Khalil married his US citizen wife in 2023. Therefore, in all likelihood, Khalil's green card is "conditional." How that might affect the entire analysis I am not sure.
Well, that’s a new one on me. Because I couldn’t get a green card based on my marriage to an American. Must have changed the rules.
NO>. My husband got a Green Card because the USA 'head hunted' him.
What you do not realise you 'cretins' on here is that: Green Card Holders work in the USA to help their failing industry.
How nice. We all LOVE being called 'cretins' by people like you.
Jenny despises Americans.
What does that mean? The US 'head hunted' him? You need to write more clearly. The government or a company? And if he was 'head hunted' he most likely got a work visa. But you should know this. Because you're saying it was your husband.
Not Khalid. He was an activist.
Ok, that's fair. But the fact that he got it from *somewhere* still stands, so his rights are his rights regardless.
Also, to address something I didn't before, the guy could have "shady" backing for his lawyers, sure, but that's kind of irrelevant to the charges against him, no?
You are still off here and so is Glenn. I usually agree with him but he's been wrong on this issue all along. And there is an underlying problem in that our university instructors are nearly teaching that if you are oppressed, you have a right to violence that their "oppressors" do not have. all hogwash.
The problem of the universities teaching bullshit is irrelevant to the case of Khalil and his deportation though, no?
If anything, it can be used as defense of Khalil where he can claim he was simply advocating what he was taught. (though don't pay too much attention on this last sentence, it's just me brainstorming a possible tie)
That depends. Did he lie on his I485? Or are we supposed to believe he got 'radicalized' here.... in 6 months. In New York City.
Why should he be "radicalized"? Supposing we take the "Palestinian cause" as something dangerously foolish, you can't rule out the possibility of him just being dumb. You would have to find some way to show he doesn't just believe in something stupid, but is aware of its possible ramifications and supportive of them. That's borderline unprovable and a stretch to even begin to try and prove.
I agree a lot of things here are fishy. But we'ld be going after intent and not plain words spoken. I wouldn't wanna live in a world where intent, as deemed by someone, is legally punishable. It would seem like pre-crime to me.
It wouldn't be difficult to review his many video appearances and reach a conclusion either way. Since he broadcast his many views and actions at Columbia, to your point, he may have been too dumb to realize he was digging his own hole. Or too naive or bigoted to care. Again, there is a lot wrong with this guy's story.
You can be dumb and radicalized.
It did not matter who the foreigner was, where from, and why they came - under the Biden administration there was no vetting. Heck, they flew 30 thousand foreigners here every month for almost 4 years saying they were asylum seekers. Tax payers paid for that. None of the Afghans flown here on tax dollars were vetted either.
There are several categories for Green Card eligibility and one of the quickest is marriage to an American Citizen. This provision has been in place for decades, not something new.
Always a good idea to do one's research before making definitive statements online. https://www.uscis.gov/green-card/green-card-eligibility-categories
Yes! Also Look at Form I-485 section 9 and you can see the many questions one must answer truthfully.
Actually one can, and that route is a lot quicker than going thru for example the H1B to Green Card route.
That will give you an opportunity to get a green card. It usually takes a much longer time to receive one. Years, typically.
And was this 30 year old actually even enrolled as a student?
People should look up the various differences in Green cards and eligibility before they spout off.
There are student visas, green card visas and LPR Status Visas through marriage -> LPR - Lawful Permanent Resident
Like it or not, his arrest and deportation is technically illegal since he has not been charged with any crime. His arrest has been solely because he participated, non-violently, in protests against the extreme level of killing taking place in Gaza and the West Bank. a protest, whether effective or not, is not illegal.
As Matt clearly pointed out , the government has failed "to identify a single crime he has committed. Rather, it’s all guilt by association: he has “helped propel” episodes of “anonymous violence,” and has led a movement that “has involved everything from erecting encampments on school property to directing death wishes at Zionists"
And before anyone jumps on me because I, like Matt, feel his arrest is bullshit, anti-Zionism (a political issue) is not equivalent to anti-semetism ( freedom of religion issue).
NO, it does not give him same rights. He was the spokesperson for a group who broke the laws and he CAN be deported if he does that.
It does give him the same rights (I think Glenn did a video on that). Also, the guy didn't participate in the demonstrations or the break in Hamilton Hall himself. He was simply supportive of the cause that the people who did the break-in also support. (Or at least purport to support). If you wanna call him a "spokesperson" for speaking at the rally, then so be it, but then can a guy who speaks in support of curved immigration be considered a spokesperson for racists or Nazis, because they too support the same thing?
Glenn is off on this and has been a long time. Of COURSE, it's different. A citizen cannot be deported. A green card holder CAN be deported for heading a group that broke our laws. Hello. NO non citizen has the same rights as citizens. Period.
So what laws did he break, exactly? I think that is the question.
His group broke the laws and he was negotiating for them. That makes him personally responsible. He was negotiating that certain things had to be done by Columbia in order for them to stop. They don't have to break laws to be deported, either. We don't have to put up with him fronting a group (and probably being funded by far left crazies).
By that logic, Donald Trump should be arrested for January 6th.
Not anywhere near the same thing. He specifically told them to be peaceful. They didn't. Thisi guy negotiated with Columbia claiming they wouldn't stop until they met their demands. NOT the same.
apples and oranges
No, Trump urged people to "peacefully and patriotically" have their voices heard and, once it became clear that matters had spiraled out of control (the how-and-why of that being an entire discussion on its own), Trump urged people to disperse.
In particular, Trump didn't "negotiate" on behalf of law-breakers at the Capitol (and again, per the above, it's still not clear the who, how and why of the initial agitation, or the reason the Capitol Police were so severely under-staffed, or why Trump's offer of the National Guard was turned down -- see former Police Chief Sund's description of that).
So, no, Trump in no way acted in a fashion analogous to Khalil, who appears to have been involved in and negotiated for the organization(s) that occupied campus buildings.
By your logic, Donald Trump is a green card holder…🤦♂️
You don't know his funding, so you can't deport someone for "probably" having shady backing or claiming that as proof of malicious intent.
Also, I think you do have to put up with him, since this is a dangerous standard you would be setting. Just like Bridges v. Wixon said one can't be deported for being a communist, without beign a member of the communist party, one can't be outted as a terrorist, without having been part of a terrorist organisation. You could say he advocates the same goals and is therefore a "terrorist supporter", but then you would be in a position where you would also have to call anyone whose opinions align with the goals of the Russian state as a Putin-propagandist and deport for that fact, no?
Plus the Trump-J6 comment below.
Sorry, but we CAN deport people for this. He lied on his application that he would not do this kind of stuff. He does not have equal rights. we would have denied his application as Marco Rubio says. And we CAN deport people for this kind of thing. He was holding Columbia hostage.
Glenn's coverage is accurate. Just because you don't agree with it, doesn't mean it's "off."
Permanent residents have the SAME CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS as citizens, which includes the right to DUE PROCESS.
Hilarious. Yes, Glenn's coverage is "accurate" which is why I subscribe and support him. And yes, I believe is conclusions are "off" which is my right.
And no they do NOT have exactly the same rights because a citizen can't be deported and there ARE ways in which a green card can be revoked, regardless of what Glenn says. It says so right on the US gov. site.
You're arguing a strawman. Read my last sentence again.
p.s. They wouldn't have been here longer than two weeks if not for Biden. Blame him.
No, the site says there are times when they will not get due process. And I taught argument classes. Obama removed illegal immigrants without due process. Every president does it. It's all fine if it's not Donald Trump. Do some real research.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/13/politics/obama-trump-deportations-illegal-immigration/index.html
So, he can be deported for being devil's advocate, without taking part in the illegal activity?
Even if the patriot act allows for this thing (I haven't read the law to be certain), is that really something one wants?
Yes, absolutely he can. If I went to a foreign country, I'd be very careful not to advocate for a group that is breaking laws! So his rights ARE different than ours. It's likely he's being funded by some huge activist group, too. So he's not very smart to do this at all.
It's "likely" isn't a valid cause for deportation.
Also, unless he said something to the tune of "the Hamilton break-in is good", simply advocating something that the people who did participate in the break-in also claim to support isn't cause for deportation either, regardless of how "dangerously foolish" that cause may be.
In his spokesperson role he made demands of Columbia in exchange for an end to unlawful activities of the CUAD protesters. Obvious extortion. But your overall tone suggests that you think he needs to be convicted of some crime to have his green card revoked and to be deported to Syria. That is not the case.
I didn't know of the demands to Columbia, so I'm willing to cede that point.
Ok, he doesn't need to commit a crime to be deported, but is throwing people (who are not just randomly here, but are legal and have permanent resident status) out of the country for views they might hold that we don't like and are "dumb" or "dangerously dumb" a thing to be in support of?
I guess if it comes down to simply throwing people out whose views we don’t like, which seems so capricious and cruel, I’d still have to say, throw them out! While I don’t suppose we can expect all our guests to swear allegiance to and belief in the concepts expressed in our constitution, we should certainly kick them out if they do the least thing that indicates they might wish to under mine those concepts or that document.
And I would add that the burden of proof is not on us but on the guest. That’s how it is with guests, and I think that’s made pretty clear when they come here.
Donald Trump, no matter what you can say about him as if you didn’t ever commit a sin or live in a glass house yourself, understands these very basic facts about reality and the state of the human soul. Perhaps he learned the hard way, but he has learned; that’s a lot more than we can say for most of us.
Since the guy came here legally and went through all the bureaucratic bullshit to do so and then also to obtain a green card, the government can be more attentive to him.
Other than that, I don't think there's much to say against your point. Ok, it's valid. I just find it a bit cruel and discouraging for people that want to enter the US.
Charles Manson didn't participate in the murder of Sharon Tate either.
Since when did speech start getting compared to physical acts of violence/felonies?
...this guy has been arrested (and in all likelihood will also be deported) for expressing his opinions...no crime committed, no violence perpetrated (unless being made uncomfortable by someone feels "violent" to you).
If (if) he encouraged the others to break into buildings, etc he could be held responsible even though he didn't physically break in himself.
That is simply not so. How you can’t see that is as hard to square as saying men can have babies.
@JB
Do you have a specific example I am unaware of?
All I have heard is people *speculating* that he "encouraged" others to occupy a building (not at all convinced that's illegal anyway), and that he told the school they would continue protesting if the groups demands weren't met (i.e., exactly how a protest works, and, conveniently, also not illegal).
--and you want to know how I know this?....They did NOT and still have NOT CHARGED him with ANY crimes. ...if they had charged him with a crime (almost anything would do), they would have easy grounds to revoke his green card/deport him and no one could complain. The very fact they have not done this should be all the proof you need.
Well, the Trump Administration can't be accused of subtlety; they're probably not charging Khalil with anything so as to better send the message to everyone that criticizing Israel IS the crime. Hurting the feelings of Jewish students is also now a crime, unless they're Jewish students holding a Seder in an encampment (THAT'S a bad Jew). They don't have much time to chill speech or further bury news of war crimes against Palestinians because support for the genocidal state in the U.S. is tanking, ha ha. My guess is that Trump's handler, Miriam Adelson, will make him ban TikTok for that reason.
I guess you haven't been paying attention to developments in the U.S.: it's now illegal to say anything negative about Israel. You can say "Fuck the U.S.!" until you're blue in the face, but criticizing Israel is verboten. Looks like all our Congress critters are repaying AIPAC what it cost to buy them, if not more.
Lawbreaking is not a guilt-by-association thing, it's something individuals do. If one person in the group broke the law, that's on them. If everyone in the group except Khalil broke the law, that's still on them and not one iota falls on Khalil.
Sorry, but this guy told Columbia they would not stop breaking the law unless they capitulated certain things. And he's no citizen. If you h ave a green card, this is a very bad idea. That is inciting violence. Period.
No. You're basing all your theories on your own definitions of things rather than the legal definitions. He is not guilty of inciting violence according to the legal definition of incitement, nor has he been charged with incitement.
Stop making sense.
Not true. Conspiracy, aiding and betting, and engaging in organized criminal activity all involve someone else doing the criminal deed to some extent. Otherwise you could never convict mafia bosses, drug kingpins, or cartel leaders.
Of course, but those are actual crimes. Just being the neighbor or relative of a lawbreaker is not a crime, nor is being a member of a group in which other members committed crimes. And merely accusing someone of those things is not good enough. Mafia bosses are not sent to jail by presidential decree.
But as an organizer Khalil as a minimum aided and abetted, conspired to, and or engaged in organized criminal activity which resulted in trespassing, false imprisonment, vandalism, and harrassment of Jewish students.
Amazing how many people conflate a Green Card with Citizenship. Its NOT. All that a green card is a resident visa, but a visa nonetheless. And like any visa, it can be revoked by the issuing authority after an appropriate determination by the Sec of State. And actively supporting a designated terrorist organization Hamas why Khalil is deservedly in the process of being sent back to wherever he came from.
This is just straight-up false, you don't know what you're talking about. A permanent resident alien (LPR) *cannot* be deported solely by a determination by the Secretary of State.
You are wrong. One can if the activities of the holder are contrary to US interests. (And whether you, or I, or anyone else likes it, US interests are closely aligned with Israel. ) I think it likely that there is sufficient evidence thereof, as well as plain old criminal conduct, against Khalil and that he will agree to deportation rather than face prosecution.
No, only a citizen has the full rights of a citizen.
SCOTUS Demore v. Kim, Congress may make rules as to aliens that would be unacceptable if applied to citizens
False, that case does not have any impact on the First Amendment rights of green card holders. Demore v. Kim dealt solely with the lawfulness of holding without bail an already *convicted* criminal pending deportation. And notably, it did not say the Congress could violate his 5th Amendment rights because he was not a citizen, it said that the detention without bail *was not a violation of 5A*.
And it also said that Congress may make rules as to aliens that would be unacceptable if applied to citizens. Now, jump ahead to reality and read the clear language of the Immigration and Nationality Act which is unequivocal about the powers of the State Department; "An alien whose presence or activities in the United States the Secretary of State has reasonable ground to believe would have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States is deportable."
Subsequent cases state that "A letter from the Secretary of State conveying the Secretary’s determination that an alien’s presence in this country would have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States, and stating facially reasonable and bona fide reasons for
that determination, is presumptive and sufficient evidence that the alien is deportable under section 241(a)(4)(C)(i) of the Act, and the Service is not required to present additional evidence of deportability.
Would this apply to a citizen? NO! It is clearly a rule that would be unacceptable for a citizen who has full constitutional rights. Which SCOTUS allows. Get a grip - green card holders can be deported for failing to report a change of address; why would you think Khalil's behavior is not more detrimental than that?
There is nothing about that ruling that states that Congress may make rules that restrict the First Amendment rights of LPR aliens. The INA is subordinate to the First Amendment; anything in the INA that contradicts the Constitution is illegal. But it does require the Secretary of State to state "...facially reasonable and bona fide reasons for
that determination ...", and merely exercising one's First Amendment rights is facially *unreasonable*.
Get a grip. Failing to report a change of address is a violation; exercising your 1A rights is not.
Your belief that Khalil is in trouble for exercising 1st Amendment rights is as childishly naive as your apparent belief that the lawyers who prepare the SOS's letter would in anyway suggest that it was based on that.
Childishly naive? My 'belief', as you describe, it based on the only reason the Trump administration has provided: that is, Khalil's role in organizing and speaking at Palestinian protest events at Columbia University. That's the only reason provided, so it's not naive to rely on that.
Hmmm, yeah you think the Trump admin has stated that their deportation justification is Khalil exercising his 1st amendment rights. Do not you see why your position is naive?
Here is what has been documented
From the Notice to Appear "“The Secretary of State has determined that your presence or activities in the United States would have serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United State"
From Rubio, [the State Department] "will be revoking the visas and/or green cards of Hamas supporters in America so they can be deported."
Homeland Security, [Khalil] "led activities aligned to Hamas, a designated terrorist organization.”
You are leaping to the conclusion that his protected speech is the cause of these accusations but not all "support" falls under that category. For example, the organization of the protest (riots) is fraught with activities that are not protected speech. The violence, the kidnapping of custodians, the harassment of students (Jewish or otherwise), vandalism , etc. are all illegal and can be linked to him through conspiracy, accessory, or accountability laws. BTW, material support of a terrorist organization can include "... any action that can assist a terrorist organization or one of its members in any way, such as providing food, helping to set up tents, distributing literature, or making a small monetary contributions"
The bottom line is that Khalil's actions are the cause of the deportation effort.
He has the same rights against government abuse, though, no?
(I admit I'm not properly informed on this, so I'm willing to concede this)
Well, define abuse. Being a little bit sarcastic on that one but let me try to explain. I am not a lawyer but I have been researching this for the last few days because of the controversy and it seems there are a few principles that are different for green card holders and other foreign nationals that make the deportation in question legal.
1) Only citizens have a right to be in the US, all others are guests granted the privilege of being here (bear in mind that rights/privilege are defined by law differently than common usage)
2) The Federal government has substantial powers, generally through the State department, to determine who will be granted this privilege. Their standards for admission are often more demanding of personal behavior than could be demanded of a citizen and the application process can include assurances that you don't do certain things and promises that you won't. If you do not agree with these conditions, you are not admitted, If you lie about it, not admitted either.
3) Deportation can hinge on illegal behavior OR behaviors proscribed by the standards. As far as I can tell, decisions by the State department (and, I think in certain circumstances, DOJ) are not subject to appeal to the judicial system. It is, in essence, as if when your behavior is contrary to your promises, then you are returned to the status of an applicant and they are rejecting the original application.
This is probably not the right terminology and over simplistic but while I (as a citizen) can espouse support for a terrorist organization (as long as I do not give them material support or openly incite illegal behavior) a foreign national who has stated (in order to be admitted to the US) that they do not and will not espouse support for terrorist organizations cannot renege on their promise without being subject to deportation.
Moreover, as they are not citizens, the State department has the authority to determine if the "contract has been broken" - not the judiciary. So, the freedom of speech is curtailed for them by the terms of admission and the due process is in the form of the state department review (which may be a very short and informal hearing, without representation)
As far as I can tell in the case of Khalil, it is a stronger case (his relationship with Hamas may be much stronger than just espousing and his organization of the Columbia protests/riots may rise to the level of conspiracy or accessory). Again, this would be determined by State, not the courts..
This is all false and, worse, completely ridiculous.
This is lack of education. No, a green card holder does NOT have the same rights as citizens. They can't even vote.
They have the same rights against government abuse, though, I think, no?
No, not exactly. He is classed as a “ US person” . Do your homework on this matter. You will learn something
They have equal rights against government abuse, though, no?
Yes, of course
Ok, then my bad for saying equal rights in general in the first comment.
Citizens cannot be deported.
Well, native citizens cannot be deported. But naturalized citizens can have their citizenship revoked and can then be deported.
Against government abuse***
No, it does not.
Moral support? So no even speech, but pure thought?
Yes.
Ok, the support of "freedom fighters" who rape and murder civilians. Whatever you want to call them.
The Israelis have been and are doing most of the raping and murdering of civilians. And it isn’t close.
Some people (freedom fighters) did something.
Why are they clueless? Give evidence don’t just insult.
Just ignore it. It's a troll. It lives under a bridge.
What a cogent argument!
Your well reasoned response has convinced me that "The Biz" is wrong.
Great argument, Tom High.
Ok. Support that!
"Support for terrorists"? Really? Based on what, exactly? If they had any evidence that this man actually supported Hamas -- you don't think Trump, Rubio, and others would have been blasting it all over the internet?
I don't like Khalil, and I wish he'd never come to this country, but "support of terrorists" is protected by the 1st amendment. What's not protected is "material support to terrorists". Rhetorical support is protected, and, as a permanent legal resident, Khalil gets the benefits of 1A.
No he doesn’t. He’s not a citizen, he’s a visitor/resident. He has 1a rights in Syria and Gaza. Oh, that’s right, they don’t bother with that stuff.
Are all of you commenters aware of this?
It did not matter who the foreigner was, where from, and why they came - under the Biden administration there was no vetting. Heck, they flew 30 thousand foreigners here every month for almost 4 years saying they were asylum seekers. Tax payers paid for that. None of the Afghans flown here on tax dollars were vetted either.
The Tsarnaev brothers were terrorist and the FBI knew because Russia told them so. Yet, the did nothing but make a big spectacle locking down the entire city and asking if anyone recognized their pictures so everyone would believe the FBI had no idea.
I am not saying Khalil is a terrorist but why was he working as a soft tool for the UK's M16 except to rabble-rouse in America.
Delightfully absurd and utterly emasculated reasoning. Bravo Mr Stark.!
There are a lot of good points made in this opinion piece. However, any nation (foreign or otherwise) that engages in intentional mass slaughter of civilians is knowingly creating it's own bad optics. Further, It is painfully obvious that the US government is acting unconstitutionally when it acts IN ANY WAY to censor or chill a Constitutional right of it's citizens by silencing their criticism of misconduct regardless of: who has committed the misconduct, whose feelings get hurt, or who might feel threatened. This is especially true when the speech is the most highly protected form of the First Amendment right of free speech (aka 'political speech'). Instead, the government should represent the sentiments of it's citizens and act accordingly. THAT is what an actual America First policy would reflect.
Obviously, it's not just Cheerleaders of Khalil’s deportation that see things in black-and-white. Clearly, all the sympathy for suffering Palestinians is, in reality, support for terrorists. There can't be anything in between full support of genocide on the one hand and full support for terrorists on the other. If you are not my friend, you are my enemy. There is nothing else.
Life is so easy when everything is black and white.
I'm interested in seeing how everything plays out in the courts, but there's something very distasteful about foreign nationals coming to this country only to make demands of our government. It seems Khalil is acting on behalf of foreign interests; terrorist or not, is this someone we should be granting permanent residency?
I do agree with the sentiment that putting everything under this "antisemitism" umbrella doesn't seem helpful. It seems like preferential treatment of a particular group, and given stereotypes about Jews, this definitely does not seem helpful to them. I think the administration should stick with the more generic branding of immigration reform.
I do share MT's concerns about this type of legal action eventually being taken against citizens, although I'm not sure how that would work when it's based around deportation (to where would they deport citizens?).
He wasn't making "demands of our government." He was NEGOTIATING with Columbia University administrators on behalf of a fully authorized Columbia student group protesting Columbia's investments in Israel.
"It seems Khalil is acting on behalf of foreign interests" -- By negotiating that a university divest from Israel? For decades, U.S. citizens have protested for the public & private sector divestment from other countries. Many of those citizens were once permanent residents. Permanent residents have the same constitutional protections as citizens, including the First Amendment right to protest.
I can't even with this guy. Last seen cherrypicking the few lunatics he could roust up at RFK's Nicole Shanahan announcement in Oakland to make fun of "conspiracy theorists" in the Free Press. Oooh, bold take, Ben. (I attended and can attest the event was nothing at all like the way Ben made it look.) Now describing those Columbia protests as: "... a bunch of kids camped out and…wished?" SMH. Matt, please, don't do this to us.
Yes, I have devotedly followed Matt for almost a decade and rarely see him making coverage mistakes like this. There are a lot of facts about Khalil’s case yet to come out in the deportation proceedings that could well leave everyone presenting Khalil as a speech martyr with a big egg on their face. (They might not, either, but why is a veteran investigative reporter like Matt staking such a strong claim on an issue where key facts are not yet known?)
The Alien Enemies Act issue is, in my opinion, much more worth Matt’s time and attention. The administration is claiming domestic wartime law enforcement powers without judicial oversight, a la warrantless surveillance/Snowden.
Since moving to the U.S. in 2015, the issue of Jewish anti-Americanism (for a lack of a better term) has become a thorn in my side. While living abroad, mostly in Israel, this issue never concerned me—I had other challenges to deal with. But now, I see it front and center, and it deeply bothers me. On a daily basis I see my fellow Jews tell the world about their made-up version of Judaism "Tikun Islam", or rather "Tikun Olam", which is a make believe idea of fixing the world. This would be like declaring a BLT sandwich kosher: It isn't, but it is tasty.
Nowhere in the world have Jews had it as good as they do in America. Even in Israel, life is harder. Israelis work longer hours and endure greater hardships than their American counterparts. In fact, in Israel, there is a term for something extraordinary: America. It signifies the pinnacle of excellence, a level of success that cannot be surpassed. That is how highly America is regarded by Israelis.
Yet in America, many Reform and Conservative Jews seem to do nothing but complain. From historical figures like Emma Goldman to modern-day religious leaders, such as the rabbi at my old Synagogue in Raleigh, NC (where I live) the focus is often on criticizing the administration of President Trump while turning a blind eye to the alarming rise of antisemitism during the Biden era.
If that weren’t enough, consider the activist judges spearheading legal campaigns against President Trump—many of whom happen to be Reform or Conservative Jews, primarily appointed by Democrats. And when it came to the "lawfare" strategy against Trump, the leading politicians pressing the attack were also Jewish. Nancy Pelosi herself avoided direct involvement, instead deploying willing allies to do the work for her.
When one steps back and looks at the bigger picture, it becomes clear that American Jews, as a group, have benefited tremendously from this country. Yet, many fail to appreciate the opportunities it has provided them. Just recently, Senator Chuck Schumer mocked wealthy individuals, calling them greedy—despite the fact that his own son-in-law, Michael Shapiro, secured a high-powered role as a Managing Director at BlackRock shortly after leaving the Biden administration.
According to ChatGPT, only about 1.09% of active-duty U.S. military personnel are Jewish—a statistically small contribution to the defense of a nation that has provided so much. As an Israeli who served (like most Israelis) this is akin to spitting on the hand that feeds you. This is a stark the contrast to the tens of thousands of Israelis who made their way back to fight right after the October 7 attacks, while so many Reform Jews went to protest and hold Shabbat dinners together with terrorist sympathizers at Columbia. They have no allegiance to anything; not even their own people.
Jews only represent 2.4% of Americans. If you remove the Jewish children, the Jews older than 35, most Jewish women of fighting age (only 17% of American military is female), than 1.09 percent of active-duty U.S. military that are Jews is a pretty good percentage.
I forget to discuss this, a statement of yours that I totally disagree with, "When one steps back and looks at the bigger picture, it becomes clear that American Jews, as a group, have benefited tremendously from this country. Yet, many fail to appreciate the opportunities it has provided them."
I was born a decade after WWII ended. The appreciation of American Jews for American troops who helped liberate them from Nazism was profound. My father was one of those soldiers, a Jew, who later went to medical school with the help of the GI Bill. He would never have been able to afford it otherwise, even though he waited tables throughout college and during summers to pay for his college tuition. An American flag is placed on my father's grave every Memorial Day by members of his synagogue.
My sister and her husband have just recently retired to Raleigh (NC) and have joined your synagogue. They are New Jersey liberal Democrats, and seem to enjoy their experience so far, including the rabbi's sermons. I on the other hand have a conservative leaning ideologically...meaning that Jews come in all shapes and sizes, we're not monolithic in belief.
And yet, the campuses are full of Jewish Voice for Peace antisemites who held a memorial for Sinwar. The Rabbi in Raleigh wanted to travel to take people of the community to visit Arafat’s tomb, see where I am going? Your father was of another generation, they were different.
They are a microcosm of the 7.5 million Jews who live in the United States. Most Jews are living their lives without public protest... they go to work, studying in classrooms, take care of their families, and are positive contributors to their communities, nationwide.
Without a doubt, but I see no sign of Jewish leadership doing anything to distance itself from this “microcosm”, on the contrary, they play right along with them wearing their kippot and talitot. Perhaps they should ask someone to play the Schindler’s List soundtrack in the background. No other Jewish community on the planet has had sympathy marches, not Europe, not Australia, not Canada, not Latin America, not Asia, not South Africa. Please explain it, why is it that the ONLY microcosm is with US reform and conservative DEMOCRAT Jews?
I share your perspective on American Reform/Conservative Jews. I used to be one of them until I woke up.
JVP are not anti-semites. They are anti-Israeli treatment of the Palestinians and tired of ALWAYS pretending to be the victims when they are the ones with genocidal intentions against Palestinians. I know many JVP members
Really? Go watch everything from Douglas Murray, you don’t have to take my word for it. JVP reminds me of the German Jews who could not understand why the Nazis would compare them to the dirty Polish Jews, after all, they were better German Jews! You need new friends.
He wants you to go watch Douglas Murray, the guy who talked about how the Nazis had a conscience.
True but it is very clear that the democratic party is much less interested in supporting Israel than the Republicans. Maybe time for Jews to follow black Americans and Hispanics to the right.
And if you keep removing people, then you have no people and no need to serve! As for your family living in Raleigh, welcome! No idea what synagogue they joined, but when you say liberal there are basically 1 reform and 1 Progressive, formerly Conservative, so I would rather be disenfranchised that belong to either of those. Your fathers’ generation as the rest of “The Greatest Generation” were people we don’t have anymore, no comparison can be made to them, especially to Gen Z and Millennials who are just immature to the extreme in my opinion. Jews might come in all flavors as you say, US Jews need to grow up.
I found your take on this interesting. Thanks for sharing.
Thank you for a thoughtful comment.
Your final paragraph echoes a thought I have had since I saw these sympathizers in the news. They have aligned themselves with a toxic political position that is in direct opposition to their own culture, history, religion and their own amazing Jewish people. This political thing seems like a bizarre religion that requires a hateful allegiance, replacing ancient, valuable beliefs and actions.
This was very interesting. Thanks for your pov on this.
Thank you Alex. I grew up in America and have lived here all my life. And I’ve watched in horror as the American Jewish community has committed suicide for all the reasons you noted. In fact, one of my liberal Jewish American friends of 45 years recently said to me: I’m not sure I can support project Israel any longer. Well, my respect for my friend is now zero. I visited Israel for the first time in the spring of 2022 and really enjoyed the experience. I believe that the cause of what you write are many and would point you to the book: Betrayal, Compiled and Edited by Charles Jacobs and Ari Goldwasser, for an in depth analysis. My two cents: American Jews live very far away from Israel and have been lulled into complacency by their success and comfort in America. Add to that, too many have replace their Judaism with liberalism. It’s a toxic mix that will surely reduce the Jewish population in the US over the coming years. And to be honest, after meeting so many proud Israelis on my visit there, I’d prefer that Israelis carry the torch forward over my fellow American Jews.
Why self exiled ?
Because Israel is at a crossroads itself. We lack a constitution and terms limits, you can’t have the same person in power forever.
I understand. Yes, a term limit for the PM and a Supreme Court that is appointed by the people (via the PM) would go along way in reducing the intensity of the rhetoric. Both sides of this debate have made grave mistakes.
The US has a great constitution but many faults too. If I had to point to one thing that has undermined the US democracy the most, I would say that it is money. It’s a republic, if you can keep it.
I thought it was bad for Israel to carry out a genocide but then I visited Israel and I had a great time!
You're not a real person. No way. Fake account. Some kind of "message multiplier" botnet. Must be.
You are the one who is FAKE
Yeah okay there @bd12207922
"spitting on the hand that feeds you..."
Now do Howard Zinn and Herbert Marcuse (History's least grateful refugee).
I'm not Jewish but my wife is, and every year we host her family for Christmas. I decorate the tree, arrange the presents, make the plans for eating—and the moment I turn my back, they change and re-do everything.
Jews are a very restless and anxious people, they can't sit still and relax, they have to always be in charge.
Or in the words of the great IB Singer:
"Jews remain forever Jews with their energy and their rage to mind everybody’s business."
Boy, I’ll bet the Holiday times at your house must be exhilarating. With your wife’s relatives rearranging everything when you turn your back. This comment wins first prize in passive aggressive comment of the year.
thanks i love prizes! but is ok my people are just as annoying. ahh the joys of family...
My maternal grandparents were Albanians, who make the Jews look happy-go-lucky.
lol agreed. Same here
Im thnking our in-laws are related LOL
ha! lol
I can attest to that CP. They are in charge even when they are in your home for dinner. They are also talkative and good listeners and animated too.
u just described my wife perfectly ;)
I grew up in New Jersey, ie: surrounded by Jewish people. I have Jewish friends I love and have a fascination with Jewish history, but I have never met a Jewish family that wasn't dysfunctional. In fairness, a very high percentage of nuclear families are dysfunctional, but I've met a few people who had happy childhoods. They weren't Jewish.
That is like saying: “I never met an ____ who wasn’t an alcoholic”. I don’t accept that statement.
Remember the words: In order to create a more perfect union! This country started as a project to create a union of States that strives to be more perfect, the process is ongoing, no one said we are done, and yes, corruption will destroy everything, that is why the work of DOGE is so important in my opinion.
I'm moving back to Israel in August. Totally agree with you.
Actually the $4B is for military assistance only, and it has to be spent in US weapons and products. it cannot be used to purchase any weapon or service that is not made in the US by a US company.
I thought the U.S. was highly regarded in Israel because we cut it huge welfare checks every other week. Hmmm....
Perhaps MAGA is in direct contention with the one world government which was planned by and will be led by the Jewish banksters who probably do not trace to Israelites from Judea, but rather Hebrew through the Edom line. The only real Jews are descendants from Judea who I understand are not Zionists.
I don’t mind reading pieces on racket that I disagree with. That’s part of the reason I subscribe. But this was just plain intellectually empty. The author, and I have no idea who he is, comes off as a high school senior in terms of his logic and thought process. Very disappointing that racket would actually post this.
I’ll bet Bari Weiss and TFP rejected it.
My first thought exactly
They would have rejected it for insufficiently kissing of Netanyahu's ass.
🤣
Ditto. I was disappointed.
I agree.
Ben Kawaller doesn't speak for American Jews. I haven't met a single American Jew, including myself, who doesn't want Mahmoud Khalil to be deported back to Syria. I live in the epicenter of Jewish America...the NY-metro area.
Khalil is a guest in America...a bad guest. Somehow he received a green card within a couple of years of having established residency. I know people, some married to Americans, who have waited decades to get a green card...and many still haven't received one despite yearly application and legal representation.
Mr. Khalil's green card can be revoked, and I hope it will be. He's a domestic terrorist...he's inciting violence against Jewish Americans, and it's only a matter of time before that incitement morphs into physical action against his targeted groups, Zionists and Jews. His harassment of Jewish students on the Columbia University campus, barring them from of freedom of movement to enter their classrooms, is immoral if not illegal. Again, he's a bad guest. You kick bad guests out of your home.
Please refrain from addressing this pawn of Hamas as “Mr.” That implies some level of status that he has not earned. Thanks for your comments.
That was tongue in cheek. My face-to-face reaction to Khalil would be more like, " Hey idiot, get the f--k off my lawn ". I promise you, he would take one look at me and move quickly. Then again, I'm an old Jew, an "alter kocker" with little patience for asswipes like him.
Excellent. I was also poking fun at you. Blessings to you….
He lives in New York and probably reads the Times. (I say that in sympathy not as insult.) So he's probably just used to using honorifics.
Exactly. These people are our guests and should mind their manners. Which includes staying out of familyts squabbles. It is very rude. I am a bit of a free speech absolutist but the idea of groups of foreigners coming to our country and holding events that can range from protests to riots does not seem correc
“I am a free speech absolutist”
No you’re not.
You live in a bubble and you surround yourself with likeminded people. That’s fine.
I hope you understand that making exceptions to civil liberties (and yes civil liberties are extended to non-US born citizens) will lead to further erosions of said liberties.
I get that you are hurt and you want vengeance but this isn’t the way. Khalil isn’t even accused of a crime. This is a way to chill speech. Please think about the larger implications.
I disagree with you wholeheartedly. I'm as well read and broadminded as anybody subscribing to Racket News.
Of course Khalil is accused of a crime. He's overtly undermined the national security of the United States of America through his support and promotion of a terrorist organization while trying to impinge on the rights of American citizens. His arrest was just. His deportation will be just. The application of U.S. law upon a non-citizen isn't vengeance. Once he's returned to his homeland he can spew as much antisemitic garbage as his heart desires.
Lastly, THIS NOT A FREE SPEECH ISSUE! It's about this asshole trying to undermine the civil liberties of Jewish students who attend Columbia University by actively attempting to impede their freedom of movement on campus, and their ability to the attend classes that they've paid for, and have the right to attend without fear or harassment. And, it's about his support of Hamas, undeniable support by all accounts, which the U.S. State Department deemed to be a terrorist organization in 1997. As of last week, Columbia University, after pulling the foot of the Trump administration out of its ass, has promised to keep their campus clear of pernicious characters like Mahmoud Khalil.
"his support and promotion of a terrorist organization while trying to impinge on the rights of American citizens." -- There is ZERO evidence Khalil did either of those things.
There was enough evidence to initiate action against Mahmoud Khalil by both The Department of Homeland Security and The Secretary of State. Homeland Security says, Khalil participated in "activities aligned to Hamas, a designated terrorist organization” and was distributing pro-Hamas propaganda. The White House has explained, “This administration is not going to tolerate individuals having the privilege of studying in our country and then siding with pro-terrorist organizations that have killed Americans,”.
If you think Khalil has been arrested without evidence, then protest peacefully on his behalf. Send money to his wife. Petition your congressman or congresswoman to help free Khalil. I personally think he's guilty at minimum of being a pest guest of the United States, and should be deported posthaste, and his green card revoked.
Lastly: "Under New York Penal Law § 490.10, providing material support to a designated terrorist organization is classified as a class D felony. The maximum sentence for a class D felony in New York is up to 7 years in prison." There no denying that Khalil broke this law.
Ah yes, the government rhetoric "participated in activities aligned with Hamas," whatever the hell that means. As I said, ZERO evidence.
Last year there were 1,126,690 international students studying at American universities and colleges, nationwide. Very few were arrested and/or deported by the Federal government. I'll trust our government rhetoric over the support Khalil is getting from shady NGO's or his team of attorneys who've in the past volunteered to represent al Qaida terrorists.
Last year there was a completely different administration in power.
Pray tell, what "shady NGOs" are supporting Khalil? Provide citations.
Btw, trusting government rhetoric is never a good idea.
UNRWA (which is a corrupt anti-Israel UN affiliated agency)
CLEAR (which is an NGO actively supporting Khalil)
You're right. The Biden administration was anti-Israel and generally antisemitic, and I say that as somebody who comes from a multigenerational family of NY-metro Democrats. The Trump administration is pro-Israel and anti-Hamas. Them's the facts.
You consider the BILLIONS in weapons and aid Israel received from the Biden Admin, along with allowing Israel's unimpeded onslaught of Gaza, as well as the crusade against the university presidents who "didn't do enough to combat antisemitism on campus" to be "anti-Israel and generally antisemitic"? Geez, there's no pleasing you people.
Regarding the NGOs, I was asking for citations of evidence of the alleged support you claim they were providing Khalil. IOW, how are/were UNRWA and CLEAR specifically and directly supporting him?
You want citations...do your own homework. It's not my job.
Israel gives back as much as they get from the United States (eg. Iron Dome technology, Improved Tactical Air Launched Decoys, 120 mm mortar developed by Soltam Systems, advanced surface to air weaponry, facial recognization software, unmatched Middle East intelligence information, and boots on the ground in the form of the IDF). The U.S. needs a strong Israel, and Israel needs the U.S. to be an unwavering ally...it's a win-win situation.
Israel has a $20 billion industrial weapons industry. They can manufacture almost anything they need other than fighter planes and bombers. They produce the most advance tank in the world for battle in the desert.
As someone born and raised in the Adirondacks, I appreciate your screen name. Outside of that, I don’t think there’s much of a discussion we are going to have. Have a good day.
I'm having a good day. Thanks.
I agree.
Doesn’t speak for me either.
Not buying it, sorry. Misplaced empathy got us where we are.
" this grandson of a Palestinian refugee had the dignity to show his face while protesting, presumably because he has a sincere belief in the righteousness of his cause."
Or he thought he wouldn't be held accountable. Just like the pro-Hamas protesters chanting "from the river to the sea" for the last 4 years. They weren't wrong. Until they were.
What does the grandson comment have to do with anything, other than Ben's inability to objectively report rather than injecting his opinion into the story?
I have no problem if this bigot wants to express his racist views, so long as he's not threatening anyone or committing crimes like breaking into buildings on colleges, destroying property or preventing students from getting to class. But we know he's done all of that. And he still has apologists like Ben pretending he doesn't know.
He thought it would be fine because he's exactly the kind of person the Biden Administration WANTED to import. And, he was fast tracked for that reason.
He entered with a student visa and married a US citizen. That's typical, not "fast tracked."
Please do not tease or feed the Zionists. It only encourages them.
I hear ya. There are some known zionist trolls I avoid because I know there's no getting through to them. But the sheer amount of hasbara on these threads kills me, so for those not yet identified as trolls, I feel the need to counter them. Because maybe, just maybe, they have a modicum of humanity and rationale.
I admire your faith and forbearance. I had a screed from Catskill Mountain Man today in my inbox that was so alternate reality I would have been at a complete loss as to where to start if I were willing to pursue a dialogue. The only thing more remarkable than the creativity of their personal set of "facts" is how deeply convinced they are that they're true. Is this what it's like to work in a state hospital?
Wouldn't know about the hospital thing (I'm a private school administrator), but yeah, I've had encounters with that particular commenter, as well. He (like all rabid pro-zionists, I've learned) definitely lives in an alternate reality. It's mind-boggling how deeply entrenched the hasbara is with those folks.
Ah yes……the same Ben Kawaller of The Free Press who publishes some of the most painful video interview pieces imaginable. If you haven’t thrown up in your mouth lately, just take a couple of minutes to watch little gem.
🙄🙄🙄
https://x.com/benkawaller/status/1894100930389254555?s=46
Just watched .. what a joke. What a shill. What a grifter.
Seriously. His voice is nails on chalkboard painful.
Wish I had the Kool-Aid concession at the rally in that video. Those people are main lining it (except for about one or two more or less rational interviewees.
I got a good chuckle at "if you haven't thrown up in your mouth lately..."
It reminded me of a comedian who had a bit about someone tasting milk that had gone sour, saying "that's disgusting, taste it"
“For all I know, some of these demonstrations may be advocating for peaceful coexistence between Jews and Arabs.”
To include this statement in your article you lose all credibility. You’re a journalist? If you have evidence of any demonstrations advocating for the peaceful coexistence between Jews and Arabs then write about it, show it to us. But instead you include this lame statement of “for all I know”. Surprised, and disappointed that Matt would publish this on Racket.
This made me laugh out loud, I gotta say.
The way it works is that the government should provide evidence of their claim that Khalil personally supports Hamas or that he's actually a threat to the government's foreign policy objectives - a claim that would be absurd except for the fact that Trump wants to forcibly get all Palestinians out of Gaza (and probably all of Israel), making anyone who supports their rights a "threat".
At a press conference on April 23, 2024 (1), Khalil says (starting at 27:07) "We are here to affirm that we believe that the struggle to achieve liberation - Palestinian and Jewish liberation - is intertwined and go hand-by-hand. And after all, this is a movement of equality, social justice, and liberation for Palestine and the rest of the world."
That's inconsistent with the claims made here, wholly without evidence, that he supports terrorism, the destruction of Israel and/or Jews, etc.
As another example, a woman at a pro-Palestinian protest at Columbia University said (2; 0:38 - 0:45) "Clearly we're all against violence, but we're just asking for the lives of Palestinian civilians to be acknowledged as well."
So there's some evidence for you. Do you have any evidence supporting the claims made by the majority of readers here? Don't you find it curious that they don't present any such evidence?
The blatant indifference to facts and truth is most egregious on Canary Mission's web page on Khalil. For example, they condemn him for standing next to Maryam Iqbal at a protest, claiming that Iqbal led the chant calling for Israel’s destruction. In the video, neither of them is leading a chant, and the fact that Khalil happens to be standing next to Iqbal, among many other people, obviously proves nothing - it's a pathetically weak "guilt by association" argument.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/live/kI3VrmZCVfY?t=2190s
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kL-pIpnaixA&t=5s
Thank you for bringing facts to this otherwise fact-free thread. Very refreshing. It's telling that after 3 days, none of the pro-zionists have bothered to try refuting your comment.
Arguing with Zionists makes pushing sharp sticks under your fingernails sound fun.
Matt has a one-sided view on Israel/Palestine, sadly.
But you don't, right?
Kinda shocking. I had to read that over and over, looking for the obvious typo or something that would let my boy off the hook. Teaches me another valuable lesson: don’t be too keen to fall in line behind someone. Thanks for jolting me back to reality, Matt. You can say some stupid shit just like the rest of us.
The author's intense hatred for President Trump and his folding this irrelevancy into his narrative as if all would agree makes one distrust anything he has to say. I am surprised you would select this as a guest post, Matt.
Kids ( your word ) chanting from the river to the sea find it inspirational. Few of the chanters are kids. What would fulfillment of the inspirational chant look like? I suggest Genocide.
You're lucky you only have to "suggest" or imagine genocide. The people of Palestine have lived it every day for near on a hundred years. I suspect you couldn't handle for 10 minutes what Palestinian children endure year after year after fucking year, for fuck's sake.
You know how I know it isn’t genocide? Because it has lasted “near on a hundred years” and there are more Palestinians now than ever. They are born and raised with the entire goal of hurting Israel, and many die to hurt Israel and are celebrated by their families for doing so.
I see. Can we have your list of authors and historians who've informed your views? I assume you've looked at the work of Israelis like Milo Peled and Ilan Pappe, as well as Chris Hedges (who speaks Arabic and lived in the Middle East as a journalist), Max Blumenthal, Aaron Mate, and too many others to list? How do you square your views with theirs?
Tell me about the population of Gaza and the changes since 2005... you know since Hamas took over, err, was voted in, killed their political rivals in Fatah (and anyone else they deemed undesirable like gay people) and stolen the money given by the dupes internationally for torture tunnels. Yes, they are so misunderstood innocents those Hamasniks.
Do you have an actual point? Naming people that disagree with me isn’t even an argument, and it took you at most a few minutes to do but would take probably at least hours to try to counter in detail. What specifically do you even disagree with?
You're unfamiliar with the definition of "genocide." No one even has to die for the definition to be met. If you're going to say that Palestinians are "born and raised with the entire goal of hurting Israel," you should be able to support it. That it is Israelis who are raised to despise and want to hurt and/or kill Palestinians was brought home to me by Max Blumenthal's book "Goliath," which he wrote after spending months in Israel. He documents the indoctrination--reminiscent of how the Nazis talked about Jews--that Israelis undergo from a very young age against Palestinians, as does Nurit Peled, the daughter of an IDF general during the 1967 war. As for the supposed Palestinian hatred for Jews, I've listened to many hours of interviews with Palestinians, quite a few of whom express gratitude for American and European Jews who call for an end to the genocide. That said, think about this: some Jews have regularly come to Gaza, ever since you were born, to "mow the lawn." Some of them have tanks with the Star of David on them. How would you feel about Jews under those circumstances? I understand how important it is for defenders of Israel to deny Palestinian suffering and magnify Jewish suffering, which has indeed been considerable throughout history, but it was not Palestinians who committed the Jewish holocaust. It was Europeans, and they're the ones who should pay for that crime instead supporting Israelis in taking the land and lives of Palestinians.
Er, there are many definitions of some of which are very self-serving. The Britannica, however, defines it as follows, "Genocide is the deliberate and systematic destruction of a group of people because of their ethnicity, nationality, religion, or race. Learn about the history, legal aspects, and criticisms of this crime against humanity from Britannica's experts." I would say destruction contemplates people dying. The "cide" is the giveaway as in homicide, patricide, matricide, infanticide, regicide, etc.
I'll go with the Genocide Convention, crafted in response to the Nazi holocaust against the Jews (and others):
The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG), or the Genocide Convention, is an international treaty that criminalizes genocide and obligates state parties to pursue the enforcement of its prohibition. It was the first legal instrument to codify genocide as a crime and the first human rights treaty unanimously adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 9 December 1948, during the third session of the United Nations General Assembly.[1] The Convention entered into force on 12 January 1951 and has 153 state parties as of February 2025.[2]
The Convention defines genocide as any of five "acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group." These five acts include killing members of the group, causing them serious bodily or mental harm, imposing living conditions intended to destroy the group, preventing births, and forcibly transferring children out of the group. Victims are targeted because of their real or perceived membership of a group, not randomly.[6] The convention further criminalizes "complicity, attempt, or incitement of its commission." Member states are prohibited from engaging in genocide and obligated to pursue the enforcement of this prohibition. All perpetrators are to be tried regardless of whether they are private individuals, public officials, or political leaders with sovereign immunity.
So you are claiming they intend to destroy Palestinians but are just really bad at it?
So you are claiming they haven't destroyed Palestinians?
As previously stated, there are more Palestinians now than there have ever been. The category is in no danger of ceasing to exist, which only allows genocide to be happening if people are trying to destroy them but failing, hence the question.
I don't think the word genocide means what you think it means.
It was defined further up the thread; feel free to read.
...combining the Greek word "genos" (meaning "race" or "tribe") with the Latin suffix "-cide" (meaning "killing")
You beat me to it.
Oh please, Jews have experienced it forever. Nobody knows what started this nightmare. They both talk a good story. Palestinians are far from peace loving people.
That's the logic of a woman who beats her child and says "Shut the fuck up! I had it worse as a kid!" If resisting the theft of your land and the killing of your people by violent settlers makes you not a "peace loving people," so be it. The Israelis should have a tiny fraction of the honor and courage Palestinians have.
Oh please. Listen to you attacking Jewish people with no understanding of their historical plight. Nobody knows for sure what started this and I doubt highly you were there. Were you there when Hamas murdered those people, raped children and women and filmed it? And the "child" parallel is absurd.
Let's assume all of the bigoted things Megan believes are true, and that all of those events led up to the cease fire that existed on 10/6/23. On 10/7, Hamas and the Palestinians broke through a fence and tortured and murdered farmers, foreign workers, people at a concert and Arab and Druze and Jewish Israelis. Megan, likely due to her bigotry, is unwilling to come to terms with the video that Hamas and the Palestinians gleefully posted on Signal. They were euphoric - their voices are as disturbing as their barbarism - as they murdered and raped and tortured and kidnapped these people. That's who Megan is defending.
Again, let's see the links, the specific sources, and the documentation, of which there would be a mountain if all this happened. I'm willing to look at your sources if only you'll provide them. And for the record, the Palestinians broke through the barrier keeping them trapped in Gaza a barrier erected by Israel in violation of international law. (This was directly analogous to the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising during World War II.) If you have sources who disagree with that framing, you should be able to cite at least a few. If you persist without doing so, I'll know that you're counting on readers here to believe your inflammatory accusations without a shred of credible evidence, as many have been duped into doing since October 2023, though with steadily diminishing success.
You're not going to believe anything that challenges your preconceived bigotry. There will always be people who believe as you do. No evidence, video, testimony will change your mind. It's akin to talking to someone in a cult and trying to convince them they're in a cult. Since you have a problem with walls, you should research what was happening prior to the walls being built, Megan. Interestingly, Egypt though the idea was so good, they built one of their own, but much more secure.... to make sure none of the Palestinians got there either.
Answering a request for sources in an era in which every major event is immortalized electronically with "You're not going to believe anything that challenges your preconceived bigotry" is a straight-up admission that you cannot support your views.
I believe you ARE correct that Israel was barring them from traveling which gave them a grievance. Though I think this had to do with Hamas's behaviors. And they still cannot do what they did. It has not been "debunked." It was so heinous that it isn't being shown on even conservative venues because it was too upsetting to victims. So you are not right about that.
All of the alleged rape victims are "dead." Any footage of atrocities by Hamas is "too upsetting" to be aired publicly. I think it's time to go into a Hasbara huddle and rework the playbook, cause this garbage is looking like a loser in the high school debate class.
Ok, there is video of this that I've seen. I didn't save the site and couldn't watch the whole thing. But I can promise you this is a no-win position to take. And it is NOT accurate.
A young Jewish woman said she got "stabbed" by a Palestinian flag during a demonstration. She was not stabbed but accidentally poked and she was all over the media with this nonsense. If there were video taken of Hamas atrocities it would be EVERYWHERE. Many hundreds of thousands of people not only would have seen it but be able to describe its contents in detail, a far cry from "I didn't save the site..." I'm not saying Hamas didn't commit war crimes on October 7th, but the Israeli government and Zionists in the west invented a number of dramatic lies and tried to sell them without credible evidence, and some of this has been debunked by people in the Israeli media or the government themselves. Case in point: the Hannibal Directive is now understood to have accounted for a large number of the victims that day. (Another: the family of one of the supposed victims of rape that day asked the New York Times to stop saying that she had been raped. The timeline of events made clear that it could not have happened and they resented being used in that way.) It's getting tiresome to argue with someone in 2025 who wants everyone to believe we have the media landscape and technology of 1955.
"We must expel the Arabs and take their place." David Ben Gurion
Yes, this is true. Megan is correct, though, that Palestinians were being kept from leaving Gaza. Maybe due to Hamas' activities. But I didn't like that. Megan is wrong about a lot of this if she wants peace. And certainly she is wrong about the barbarism they committed.
I would certainly bring peace to the situation if I could. I can't, so I do what I can and I'm proud of it. I know for a fact that committing a Kristallnacht every night in the West Bank and dropping yet more bombs on Palestinian children in Gaza is an exceedingly perverse way to pursue "peace." It's also bound to fail.
So war is kristallnacht? Any war? Or just this one?
No doubt. Trump is trying for a cease fire. But your version is not accurate. And Israel has to be able to defend herself if they aren't going to stop. This has gone on forever like the Hatfields and McCoys. Same in Ireland/England. Russia/Ukraine. Just stop it all. Nobody is blameless here.
I don't think I said exactly that anyone is blameless here, but a group of European Jews colonized that land, and historically people don't like to have their land taken away. I don't know how someone could blame them for that. As for the "self-defense" argument, according to international law Israel does NOT have a right to defend itself against the people it's occupying. This would be like saying the Nazis had a right to defend themselves against the Jews, or Belgium, or Poland. It's nonsensical and morally revolting. Trump is most certainly not trying for a ceasefire, any more than Biden did. When you provide weapons and all kinds of support to a regime that has committed so much violence that the Pre-Trial Chamber 1 of the International Criminal Court has issued arrest warrants for its leaders, you're clearly complicit in genocide, not working for a ceasefire. For whatever reason Trump wanted the rampage to stop during his coronation--I mean, inauguration. He's changed his tune dramatically since then.
The "colonizing Jews" say that is not true. They both make good cases. I've read both versions. You have no idea which version is true because nobody does. You are taking a side. WATCH THE VIDEO, Megan.
Trump still wants it all to stop but Hamas broke the deal. Hamas is a terrorist organization. Any point of view Palestinians have should not include them after they did this. WATCH THE VIDEO.
But the reality is neither of them is ever going to concede to the other who was there first. So we have to not take sides on that if we ever want peace there. Though I doubt that will ever happen.
The "rape" allegations from October 7th have been thoroughly debunked by journalists a great deal more credible than anyone you lean into. Aaron Mate and Max Blumenthal are an excellent source for the correction of this lie. As for "Were you there....?": I wasn't there when the Nazis murdered the Jews either, but I know that happened. I obviously in no way attacked Jewish people, but I get how important the "anti-Semitism" schtick is to people trying to defend Israeli genocide. As for how you would know whether or not I have any understanding of the historical plight of Jews, it doesn't really matter to you, does it? The hyperventilating of you and countless others in response to supremely reasonable objections to cold-blooded murder betrays your lack of actual arguments. You wouldn't pass an American public high school debate class with that kind of "reasoning."
Oh please. They filmed releasing dead hostages and celebrated it in the streets. They did not debunk a thing. Israeli genocide. Get real.
Have you heard about the Israeli dungeons? The torture and inhuman treatment inflicted there is well-documented. You want to try to convince me that the people who do that wouldn't hurt a fly and it's the Palestinians who are the barbarians? Sorry, that shit don't fly anymore.
Dungeons? And dragons?
If that's true, and I doubt it, you should be on nobody's side, because Hamas have been barbarians. If you said that, I'd be persuaded. But this is just left wing propaganda. I don't know or care who started it. Because nobody will ever know and that won't be a solution. I want it to stop, but attacking Jews is not going to do that. And violence is not justified because you perceive yourself oppressed. Or if it is, expect the reverse in kind. It's war. That's how it works. And get real about Jews being oppressors and not oppressed.
There's far too much that's unsupportable in your comments for me to attend to all of them. That said, even CNN did a piece about the Israeli dungeons. You should look it up. As for women being the most oppressed people in history, you're wrong. It's children. My views are firmly leftwing but I'm not an orthodox leftist. In any case, pretending you know me and telling me that all of my views reflect hollow grievances....well, that's not an argument. It just isn't.
I know you well enough to know your ideas will not achieve peace, and you should rethink your approach. There is no right and wrong in this mid-east nightmare. And you aren't answering because you can't. And I'll still maintain it's women. Male children had it pretty good historically. FEMALE children, I'll maybe go along with. But things just need to be fair and move forward. Assigning blame especially in the middle east will never achieve it. So this guy should know better than head up a group breaking laws and telling Columbia they won't stop until it capitulates. Not very smart.
ps. Where is y our evidence that before Oct. 7, Jews were annihilating Palestinians, unprovoked, with no violence perpetrated on them first. And who did it "first" anyway? They can both make a great case of it. And for who was there first. Jews were not committing genocide anymore than Hamas is. Hamas is on Israel's back door and they DID commit atrocities on Israel. You will certainly be no diplomat achieving peace saying stuff like you do. I imagine you HAVE gone through our universities, are somewhat youngish, where our university professors are teaching this oppressed/oppressor garbage and condoning violence for those who perceive themselves the former. It's wrong. You are a woman. You h ave been "oppressed." Does that give you a right to kill all men because of it? Women are the most discriminated group on the planet, though it gets better all the time, and that is not the way to solve it. Just get equal treatment as much as is possible, and move on. You can't fix racism or sexism with more racism and sexism. And this problem in the middle east will never be solved to anyone's satisfaction. You ought to be able to see that.
"The Hundred Years' War on Palestine: A History of Settler Colonialism and Resistance, 1917–2017," Rashid Khalidi; "The Biggest Prison on Earth: A History of the Occupied Territories;" "The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine," Ilan Pappe (Israeli); "Gaza: An Inquest Into Its Martyrdom," "Method and Madness: The Hidden Story of Israel's Assaults on Gaza," Norman Finklestein; the opinion issued last year by the International Court of Justice that Israel is guilty of Apartheid and ethnic cleansing and should stop immediately. These are just a few sources as to the treatment of the Israelis toward the Palestinians over time.
Oh yes, Colonialism--the big justification for violence all over the world. Ethnic cleansing. There is NO evidence of any of that. And there's plenty that it was done to them. This stuff has been brainwashed into students in our universities and it's just not all true. It's not this one sided. Ridiculous. And if you think this kind of propaganda will lead to peace, think again. It's victimhood and reverse discrimination and it's about power. This is certainly the case in the US. The one thing I know is that there is no way in hell this is all the fault of either Palestine OR Israel and if you think it is, you are very naive.
So what are your sources? Are you telling me you've never read a book about this conflict, never seen an interview with or by someone you find credible?? Are you limiting yourself to State Department press releases? Or do you live in Israel, or have you lived there for some time? Where do you get your views? I've stated who has informed mine, but you refuse to do the same, despite making some preposterous statements. Why so reticent?
I managed to get a terminal MFA degree and teach at a university 9 years, teachers asked me to take their classes in grad school because I was "a critical thinker." I would look in the mirror.
You mean the rape and murder that Hamas and Palestinians recorded and posted online? That's what you're saying doesn't exist. Wow, you're lost. And apparently blind. Or unwilling to admit you've been conned by Max B and Mate and his pops.
Provide a link or a way to find it. If it exists you should be able to do this. You should also be able to provide documentation of these acts by multiple independent and credible sources (ie: those not associated with Israel itself or the U.S. government), so go ahead and name them for me and I'll look into them.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/israel-video-of-hamas-terror-attacks-war-in-gaza/
I asked for sources not associated with Israel or the U.S. government. The source for this is the IDF. Would you accept footage provided by Hamas or any Palestinians? "You can't trust them" is not an answer; it's an evasion.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/15/middleeast/bodycam-video-hamas-massacre-tunnels-intl/index.html
Also from the IDF.
https://www.ynetnews.com/article/s1gwdnawt
Yet again...
As for Blumenthal and Mate, who are your sources? Anyone not living over there or having traveled there very recently requires sources in order to speak knowledgeably about what's going on. I've provided a few of mine. Who are yours?
There is no genocide in Palestine
Then you disagree with the vast majority of scholars, experts, and professionals on the subject. Personally I don't care what you call it when civilians, journalists, aid workers, and doctors are being deliberately targeted with horrific weapons and a medieval siege.
If this was supposed to be a genocide, then someone has seriously fucked up because the "Palestinian" population has multiplied many times over since 1948, right up to recent years.
Look up the definition of "genocide" since you're clearly unfamiliar with it. But nice try defending violence backed up explicitly genocidal statements made by Yoav Gallant and plenty of other Israelis. These are well-documented by South Africa in its petition to the ICJ more than a year ago.
Oh no, I am not the one who is misusing this gravely serious word.
I didn't defend any violence - take a few deep breaths and re-read my comment. I merely pointed out that the "Palestinian" population is larger than ever, after 80 years of this "genocide."
Then you don't understand the definition of "genocide." Look it up and get back to me.
Name dropping authors, insults, profanity and using the latest leftist buzzword Genocide are not means to winning an argument.
Calling the word "genocide" a "leftist buzzword" says all one needs to know about you and your concern for human life. Listing people who've lived and worked in the Middle East and written books about the situation, some of whom are actual Israelis, is not mere "name-dropping" because you don't like their views. I can't imagine what you know about winning an argument.
Try a real dictionary.
The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG), or the Genocide Convention, is an international treaty that criminalizes genocide and obligates state parties to pursue the enforcement of its prohibition. It was the first legal instrument to codify genocide as a crime and the first human rights treaty unanimously adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 9 December 1948, during the third session of the United Nations General Assembly.[1] The Convention entered into force on 12 January 1951 and has 153 state parties as of February 2025.[2]
The Convention defines genocide as any of five "acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group." These five acts include killing members of the group, causing them serious bodily or mental harm, imposing living conditions intended to destroy the group, preventing births, and forcibly transferring children out of the group. Victims are targeted because of their real or perceived membership of a group, not randomly.[6] The convention further criminalizes "complicity, attempt, or incitement of its commission." Member states are prohibited from engaging in genocide and obligated to pursue the enforcement of this prohibition. All perpetrators are to be tried regardless of whether they are private individuals, public officials, or political leaders with sovereign immunity.
"Any of five," meaning not all of them but any one of them, though of course multiple acts may be committed together. Both meet the definition.
If the definition of genocide is "acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group" then Hamas committed genocide on October 7.
Genocide is a concerted plan to exterminate a race , there is zero evidence Israel has done that
Look up the Genocide Convention written in response to the Nazi holocaust, and look up the voluminous documentation provided by South Africa in its petition to find Israel guilty of genocide as presented to the ICJ.
No, he disagrees with a collection of leftist anti-western Jew haters. That's a far cry from the unearned labels of Scholar and Expert. I'm sure however you have cherrypicked your data to support your own predisposition of hatred of Jews.
OK, is there any other nation that can't be criticized without being a hater of a religious or ethnic group? If I criticize India, am I an anti-Hindu? If I criticize Albania, am I anti-Muslim AND anti-Orthodox? Exactly how does this work?
Oh, please. Twenty percent of Israel is Palestinian Arab. The Palestinian population in Judea and Samaria and Gaza has quintupled since 1948. Some "genocide." But you are right in one regard. I couldn't endure being taught to hate and kill people from my earliest age like "Palestinian children are.
Look up the actual definition of "genocide" and see my comment above in response to Charre.
You go look it up, since you keep misusing and abusing this word. Try a real dictionary.
If this was supposed to be a genocide, then someone has seriously fucked up because the "Palestinian" population has multiplied many times over since 1948, right up to recent years.
Here in our Country, all citizens have the right to speak.
Interesting that he should compare it to lyrics from Woody Guthrie, a shill for Stalin.
I think the issue is much more complicated than laid out here. Unfortunately, we don't have the details of what these people have actually done or not done (though you can go through the trial documents here: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69719040/mahmoud-khalil-v-william-p-joyce/)
The issue is obviously complicated by the fact these people are here as guests and hosts typically don't need much reason to throw out a guest.
Bingo. I commented above that this as much as anything is why I’m shocked Matt put all his cards on the table over the Khalil case. Matt is almost always an inveterate investigative journalist—but here he staked out a maximalist position on an issue before key facts ever came out. Very unlike him.
I haven't read the court documents, but I've read dozens of comments, here and elsewhere, by people claiming that Khalil personally supports Hamas, terrorism, the destruction of Israel, etc., but not a single one that provided a single piece of evidence as opposed to mere "guilt by association" arguments. Yet these same people demand evidence that Khalil is innocent of the government's charges, rather than citing evidence that he's guilty. This indifference to facts and evidence is very disturbing. It's the same attitude I argued against with Democrats during the Biden administration.
I will only make one reply and leave it at that because it was almost impossible to make progress with people on Matt’s post about this last week. Khalil was a known leader of an organization that committed violent and illegal acts at Columbia. Rubio has alluded to evidence that he was involved in planning these actions (used the term “mastermind”). So let’s see the state’s evidence. And we can all attach disclaimers to those statements that he lime anyone has the presumption of innocence. But nor do people have blanket immunity from having allegations made against them by the state, so long as they have due process (which Khalil has had).
My comment focused on articles and reader comments about Khalil, none of which (among those I've seen) provided any evidence supporting their claims against Khalil. It's remarkable to see how certain people can be of things they apparently have no evidence of. It remains to be seen if the government has any such evidence, but based on what I've seen so far, I doubt it.
Khalil explicitly denied being a "leader" of CUAD in the sense of directing the protestors. CUAD is a coalition of about 80 student groups. Some of the protestors explicitly called for peaceful means, others called for or used violence. He described himself as a spokesman and negotiator for a student protest groups (1). The claim that that means he supports everything that any of the protestors support or did isn't even logically consistent, given the wide range of viewpoints among the protestors. It's analogous to claiming that Donald Trump was personally responsible for the Jan. 6 protestors who were violent, a claim that I argued against though I don't support him. Some of those protestors were violent, some were peaceful. Does the fact that Trump called for the protest make him guilty of the violence?
The statements I have seen from Khalil are contrary to the claims made abuot him. For example, he says in an interview (2 at 27:07), "We are here to affirm that we believe that the struggle to achieve liberation - Palestinian and Jewish liberation - is intertwined and go hand-by-hand."
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/16/nyregion/mahmoud-khalil-columbia-university.html
[2] https://www.youtube.com/live/kI3VrmZCVfY?t=2190s
Columbia University's graduate student union is demanding the Ivy League institution establish a "sanctuary campus" where public safety officers are barred from patrolling "organizing spaces, including classrooms." The union, which is embroiled in active contract negotiations with Columbia, also wants the school to provide free "legal support" for student visa holders, destroy "all records" related to campus protest participants, and sue the Trump administration "and other anti-immigrant actors."
Student Workers of Columbia, which boasts roughly 3,000 members and is affiliated with the United Auto Workers, shared an internal document outlining the demands during a Saturday Zoom meeting, which the Washington Free Beacon attended. The document, written by a "working group" of the union's international members, cites the "unprecedented detainment of former student-worker Mahmoud Khalil by the Department of Homeland Security while in a Columbia University apartment building and the ongoing presence of ICE around campus" before making "immediate demands of Columbia University."
tps://freebeacon.com/campus/in-internal-documents-columbia-grad-student-union-spells-out-demands-for-sanctuary-campus-free-from-public-safety-patrols-and-protest-records/
That's interesting, but I'm not sure what your point is. My point was that none of the articles or reader comments I've seen denouncing Khalil provided any evidence whatsoever that he is guilty of the things the Trump administration has alleged. The article you cited, while relevant to the general issue, doesn't provide any such evidence either.
This type of discussion often change focus from a specific question (e.g., Khalil's arrest and whether there's evidence of his guilt) to more general issues (what Columbia student groups are demanding, how they view Khalil, etc.).
I understand your point. I'm just tired of activists taking over the public square, making Universities hotbeds of unrest, fomenting others to take actions that threaten or harms others. Khalil uses his position to do just that. He is a shill for the British government and the Biden admin knew that when he was given a green card.
It's worth pointing out this isn't Matt's writing, it's a guest post.
Yes - but he editorially approved it and made a post with a similar thrust about the First Amendment and its relation to the Khalil case last week.
Thanks for posting the link to the court documents regarding Mahmoud Khalil. Do you know if any of them contain the government's evidence, if there is any, that Khalil did anything meriting his arrest and deportation? I've read quite a few articles and watched some videos with him at protests or interviews, and I've seen no evidence whatsoever of the government's claims.
🎯
Huge difference. These people are NOT citizens and they are compromising Jewish students who ARE citizens. And this guy was the spokesperson for a group who broke laws. Way over simplified here. Ridiculous, actually.
This is pro-Israeli money doing it's work -- the big donors like Miriam Adelson and others of the pro-Israeli lobby. Trump isn't the first to mouth their words -- Biden funded the deaths of thousands of innocent children and civilians, and almost all of Congress is beholden to the lobby.
The evidence is simple: not a single charge has been filed against this man -- because there likely is no evidence he had anything to do with Hamas. If they had any evidence, they would have bombarded us with it.
The comments here look like pro-Israel money doing some work as well. No way are there actual human beings behind all of these genocide apologetics.
I’m pro Israel and did t get any money from Israel. How do I get in on that pro Israel money. DM me.
Contact AIPAC.
He was distributing Hamas literature, and helped organize mob vandalizing and intimidation.
I understand you *believe* that he was doing that. My point is about *evidence* -- the law of the land we live in does not operate on what anyone thinks or believes, and certainly our government must have evidence -- and file charges in a court of law -- before deporting a legal resident.
No, Khalil himself did NONE of those things.
Indeed. THAT is material.
So how long you, and your kind, been on Qatari payroll ?
Exactly.
There doesn’t need to be a criminal charge for him to be deported.
But there does need to be SOLID EVIDENCE that he violated his permanent resident status. So far, DHS and State Dept have not provided any. And their public claims that Khalil is a "threat to national security" is rhetoric, NOT evidence.
Very mushy and scattered logic. Pointless post.