Speaking an opinion vs taking a leadership position resulting in inciting violent protests... where has Persuasion landed on that point related to Jan-6? I think if we are talking about hypocritical positions, there is a glaring one with Persuasion.
And let's not also forget the difference between 1A rights for a citizen verses a LPR. The LPR is a US resident on probation. The rules are different. Constitutional rights are different. As they should be.
Khalil is an alien and can be deported if he violates Terrorism-Related Inadmissibility Grounds (TRIG) law- see USCIS.gov. TRIG law applies only to aliens. The scope of this law is very broad, it was broadened after 9/11. An alien can be deported for any reason which, if known, would have denied him/her entry into the U.S. Khalil belongs to CUAD- Columbia University Apartheid Divestment- its stated aim is ''fighting for the total eradication of Western civilization'' with special emphasis on destroying the U.S. and Israel. Had Khalil stated that his purpose in entering the U.S. was to destroy the U.S. he would have been denied entry. An alien, when applying for a U.S. visa must promise to comply with U.S. laws and not engage in activities harmful to the U.S.. Clearly entering the U.S. with the purpose of destroying it violates the conditions of his visa and gives grounds for deportation. This is not a free speech issue.
The slippery slope is already happening. Right after Khalil, the Mayor of Miami Beach--a government official--threatened to terminate the lease of a movie theater because they showed No Other Land. They weren't supporting Hamas, he just didn't like that it criticized Israel.
The Mayor is local, not even a FL state official and has no power to deport anyone. Khalil violated Federal laws and will be deported by the Feds. One has nothing to do with the other. You are comparing apples to horses- ridiculous.
I completely agree with the substance of your essay. But by neglecting the antecedent "hate speech" rhetoric of the Woke Left, you omit an important component of the dynamic. I'd say that our current sad situation has developed under the auspices of an unhappy de facto alliance between the cultural Left and the MAGA Right, joined to extirpate the ideals of liberalism.
It seems to me you are arguing backwards. You would *like* to claim that "The Trump administration is contributing to a larger global free speech recession" - and you use one rather weak example to make your case. Khalil is here on a green card. As such, even providing support via speech for a US-designated terrorist organization may very well put you afoul of the law. A citizen may hand out flyers for Hamas and not be subject to sanction. The left is *against* free speech. Trump has written an Executive Order explicitly to protect free speech. Arguing that Khalil should be deported because he offered speech-based support for a terrorist organization may or may not fly with the Supreme Court. But it doesn't make the Trump administration hypocritical. It is making a legal argument in support of deporting him. Perhaps the courts will rule against the administration. But the administration has a colorable argument and it seems to me unserious to argue that it is hypocritical. It's not simply going after Khalil because it doesn't like him, or doesn't like what he's doing. It believes - and I think is quite likely right - that what in a citizen's case would count as unsanctionable speech is in his case sanctionable.
First Amendment is the First Amendment. This case has all sorts of legal problems and lots of potential for downstream effects on free speech. There are already reports that it is having a profound chilling effect on campuses across the US. This is equal and opposite reaction to woke cancellations, but that in no way makes it right…
This has nothing to do with the First Amendment. Khalil is an alien who violated the terms of his visa by being a leader and spokesman of CUAD, an organization that vows to destroy the U.S.. Given his activities and behavior towards this appalling goal, he has no right to be here. He will get a hearing, not a trial and hopefully be deported back to awesome Syria from whence he came.
If that was his purpose why was he given a green card? Thats a lot of filling in the blanks of info we don’t know… so that does mean if someone is here and protests Putin and his multiple political assasinations and his butchery of Ukrainians that we deport that person because its not in our “foreign policy interests”?!? Gross. You are moving goal posts legally, morally and politically to fit a particular narrative of someone you don’t like who doesn’t share your viewpoint.
You are ignoring his leadership role in CUAD which puts him in violation of TRIG law. He will be deported. Aliens do not have the same rights of citizens, they are subject to deportation even for ''moral turpitude''. Citizens cannot even be arrested for ''moral turpitude''.
He’s Algerian, but okay. Also he has green card status which means [checking notes] he has PERMANENT LAWFUL status to be in the US and is not on a visa. The legal issues will be worked out but let’s be honest about a) his actual legal status in the US and b) that he is being targeted for deportation mainly for what he SAID not any specific illegal activities. This is in no way a defense of any of his political stances but the beauty of America is that we respect difference and dissent as part of our liberal democratic tradition.
Only a fool living in the U.S. would respect someone who is a spokesman for an organization that is out to destroy the U.S.. That doesn't fall into the category of ''difference and dissent''. Algeria supports Hamas so Khalil can hate America from there, once he's deported. People who hold green cards are not citizens and are eligible for deportation and right now I can't think of a better poster boy for deportation than Khalil.
Whether he has a green card or a visa- at the time of his U.S. entry for which he applied for a visa, his purpose was to destroy the U.S... He then, as a leader of CUAD committed actions that supported terrorism. His rights are not those of a U.S. citizen. He does not have to commit a crime or give material support to terrorists to be deported. He can be deported for moral turpitude, handing out pro-terrorism literature, giving water or food to a terrorist. I think he will be deported and rightly so.
Apparently the Trump administration has not failed to catch Khalil in a crime but has studiously avoided trying to do so; the idea being to deport him on more elastic grounds, get away with it, and thereby set a conveniently broad precedent rather than an inconveniently narrow one.
Donald Trump has always looked for ways to do what he wants to do regardless of rules. Now, as a cult leader, he's got what he lacked as a mere shady businessman: followers who assiduously make up rationales for him.
Is there a difference between anti American speech and pro Terrorist speech? Handing out pro Hamas literature with their logo on it might qualify as promoting more terrorism. We will find out soon enough.
Speaking an opinion vs taking a leadership position resulting in inciting violent protests... where has Persuasion landed on that point related to Jan-6? I think if we are talking about hypocritical positions, there is a glaring one with Persuasion.
And let's not also forget the difference between 1A rights for a citizen verses a LPR. The LPR is a US resident on probation. The rules are different. Constitutional rights are different. As they should be.
Khalil is an alien and can be deported if he violates Terrorism-Related Inadmissibility Grounds (TRIG) law- see USCIS.gov. TRIG law applies only to aliens. The scope of this law is very broad, it was broadened after 9/11. An alien can be deported for any reason which, if known, would have denied him/her entry into the U.S. Khalil belongs to CUAD- Columbia University Apartheid Divestment- its stated aim is ''fighting for the total eradication of Western civilization'' with special emphasis on destroying the U.S. and Israel. Had Khalil stated that his purpose in entering the U.S. was to destroy the U.S. he would have been denied entry. An alien, when applying for a U.S. visa must promise to comply with U.S. laws and not engage in activities harmful to the U.S.. Clearly entering the U.S. with the purpose of destroying it violates the conditions of his visa and gives grounds for deportation. This is not a free speech issue.
The slippery slope is already happening. Right after Khalil, the Mayor of Miami Beach--a government official--threatened to terminate the lease of a movie theater because they showed No Other Land. They weren't supporting Hamas, he just didn't like that it criticized Israel.
The Mayor is local, not even a FL state official and has no power to deport anyone. Khalil violated Federal laws and will be deported by the Feds. One has nothing to do with the other. You are comparing apples to horses- ridiculous.
I completely agree with the substance of your essay. But by neglecting the antecedent "hate speech" rhetoric of the Woke Left, you omit an important component of the dynamic. I'd say that our current sad situation has developed under the auspices of an unhappy de facto alliance between the cultural Left and the MAGA Right, joined to extirpate the ideals of liberalism.
It seems to me you are arguing backwards. You would *like* to claim that "The Trump administration is contributing to a larger global free speech recession" - and you use one rather weak example to make your case. Khalil is here on a green card. As such, even providing support via speech for a US-designated terrorist organization may very well put you afoul of the law. A citizen may hand out flyers for Hamas and not be subject to sanction. The left is *against* free speech. Trump has written an Executive Order explicitly to protect free speech. Arguing that Khalil should be deported because he offered speech-based support for a terrorist organization may or may not fly with the Supreme Court. But it doesn't make the Trump administration hypocritical. It is making a legal argument in support of deporting him. Perhaps the courts will rule against the administration. But the administration has a colorable argument and it seems to me unserious to argue that it is hypocritical. It's not simply going after Khalil because it doesn't like him, or doesn't like what he's doing. It believes - and I think is quite likely right - that what in a citizen's case would count as unsanctionable speech is in his case sanctionable.
First Amendment is the First Amendment. This case has all sorts of legal problems and lots of potential for downstream effects on free speech. There are already reports that it is having a profound chilling effect on campuses across the US. This is equal and opposite reaction to woke cancellations, but that in no way makes it right…
This has nothing to do with the First Amendment. Khalil is an alien who violated the terms of his visa by being a leader and spokesman of CUAD, an organization that vows to destroy the U.S.. Given his activities and behavior towards this appalling goal, he has no right to be here. He will get a hearing, not a trial and hopefully be deported back to awesome Syria from whence he came.
If that was his purpose why was he given a green card? Thats a lot of filling in the blanks of info we don’t know… so that does mean if someone is here and protests Putin and his multiple political assasinations and his butchery of Ukrainians that we deport that person because its not in our “foreign policy interests”?!? Gross. You are moving goal posts legally, morally and politically to fit a particular narrative of someone you don’t like who doesn’t share your viewpoint.
You are ignoring his leadership role in CUAD which puts him in violation of TRIG law. He will be deported. Aliens do not have the same rights of citizens, they are subject to deportation even for ''moral turpitude''. Citizens cannot even be arrested for ''moral turpitude''.
He’s Algerian, but okay. Also he has green card status which means [checking notes] he has PERMANENT LAWFUL status to be in the US and is not on a visa. The legal issues will be worked out but let’s be honest about a) his actual legal status in the US and b) that he is being targeted for deportation mainly for what he SAID not any specific illegal activities. This is in no way a defense of any of his political stances but the beauty of America is that we respect difference and dissent as part of our liberal democratic tradition.
Only a fool living in the U.S. would respect someone who is a spokesman for an organization that is out to destroy the U.S.. That doesn't fall into the category of ''difference and dissent''. Algeria supports Hamas so Khalil can hate America from there, once he's deported. People who hold green cards are not citizens and are eligible for deportation and right now I can't think of a better poster boy for deportation than Khalil.
Whether he has a green card or a visa- at the time of his U.S. entry for which he applied for a visa, his purpose was to destroy the U.S... He then, as a leader of CUAD committed actions that supported terrorism. His rights are not those of a U.S. citizen. He does not have to commit a crime or give material support to terrorists to be deported. He can be deported for moral turpitude, handing out pro-terrorism literature, giving water or food to a terrorist. I think he will be deported and rightly so.
Apparently the Trump administration has not failed to catch Khalil in a crime but has studiously avoided trying to do so; the idea being to deport him on more elastic grounds, get away with it, and thereby set a conveniently broad precedent rather than an inconveniently narrow one.
Donald Trump has always looked for ways to do what he wants to do regardless of rules. Now, as a cult leader, he's got what he lacked as a mere shady businessman: followers who assiduously make up rationales for him.
Defend freedom against Trump, Vance, Musk!
Is there a difference between anti American speech and pro Terrorist speech? Handing out pro Hamas literature with their logo on it might qualify as promoting more terrorism. We will find out soon enough.