Remember Who We Are

[sparky]

The guy in question is an anti-American asshole. It is dumb of America to allow him to be here at all, let alone to engage in political agitation on our soil among our population.


DEPORT HIM AND EVERYONE LIKE HIM.

Agreed, but let's do it via means not constitutionally challenging Correll, his visa ran out, he violated visa standards, he double parked, jaywalked.....

Not because he's opining against the status quo.......because that might extend to including.....

~S~

 

[PoliticalChic]

Every Jewish student.

And why he wasn’t charged was because of prosecutors that put political expediency ahead of public safety.

So there are no charges, but you are fine with punishing him?

Disappointing.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Don't take shit too seriously, babe. It was actually kinda funny, something I would expect a Florida man to say.

You've probably noticed, I have a pretty high regard for myself.

 

[PoliticalChic]

When what happens?!

When you act your age.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Irrelevant bullshit is most definitely irrelevant to this situation here, girl. No.

Time for you to leave.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Do you defend radical Zionism?

The term is syncretic.

You better look that up.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Please answer with a YES or NO:

If his offense is saying things you don't agree with.......of course it is unconstitutional.

 

[PoliticalChic]

When they put him in jail for 3 years without a trial then you'd have a point.

If he is deported for saying unpopular things, I do as well.

 

[PoliticalChic]

He is not a student

The quote is from ABC News. Take it up with them.

Are you claiming that not being a student is deportable?

 

[Leo123]

1.I am speaking as a Trump voter, and a conservative. We are at this point, the power in America. Remember what the Democrats/Liberals did when they were the power......
....let's not become them.


2."Mahmoud Khalil was a graduate student at Columbia University's School of International and Public Affairs (SIPA) at the time of the 2024 Columbia University pro-Palestinian campus occupations.<a href="Detention of Mahmoud Khalil - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>6<span>]</span></a> He is a permanent U.S. resident with a green card.<a href="Detention of Mahmoud Khalil - Wikipedia

3. The detention is the first publicly known deportation effort related to pro-Palestine activism under President Donald Trump, who has promised to punish students and others he says support Hamas or promote antisemitism.<a href="Detention of Mahmoud Khalil - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>6<span>]</span></a><a href="Detention of Mahmoud Khalil - Wikipedia

4. There is no criminal charge against Khalil.


5. This individual, as abhorent as he and his views are, should be seen in the context of the reason we voted against the Democrats: they enforced censorship against those who didn't agree with their possitions. We cannot allow ourselves to use our power to become those Fascists.

This Khalil should not be deported for his views.

He supports terrorists. I believe he should be deported. Free speech is one thing, promoting terrorism with free speech is another.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Agreed, but let's do it via means not constitutionally challenging Correll, his visa ran out, he violated visa standards, he double parked, jaywalked.....

Not because he's opining against the status quo.......because that might extend to including.....

View attachment 1090482

~S~

Too bad there is no double trophy.

 

[PoliticalChic]

He supports terrorists. I believe he should be deported. Free speech is one thing, promoting terrorism with free speech is another.

Let's check:

In Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), the Supreme Court established the "imminent lawless action" test, limiting government restrictions on speech to cases where it is both directed at inciting imminent violence and likely to produce such action.

Here's a more detailed explanation:

• The Case:
  Clarence Brandenburg, a Ku Klux Klan leader, was convicted under an Ohio law that prohibited advocating for violence or crime.
  
  
• The Ohio Law:
  The law, known as the Criminal Syndicalism Act, made it a crime to advocate for violence or crime as a means of political reform.
  
  
• The Supreme Court Ruling:
  The Supreme Court overturned Brandenburg's conviction, finding that the Ohio law violated his First Amendment right to free speech.
  • The speech must be "directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action".
  • Google.

I thought only Democrats and Fascists punish people for unpopular views.

 

[eagle1462010]

Let's check:

In Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), the Supreme Court established the "imminent lawless action" test, limiting government restrictions on speech to cases where it is both directed at inciting imminent violence and likely to produce such action.

Here's a more detailed explanation:

• The Case:
  Clarence Brandenburg, a Ku Klux Klan leader, was convicted under an Ohio law that prohibited advocating for violence or crime.
  
  
• The Ohio Law:
  The law, known as the Criminal Syndicalism Act, made it a crime to advocate for violence or crime as a means of political reform.
  
  
• The Supreme Court Ruling:
  The Supreme Court overturned Brandenburg's conviction, finding that the Ohio law violated his First Amendment right to free speech.
  • The speech must be "directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action".
  • Google.

I thought only Democrats and Fascists punish people for unpopular views.

Visa versus citizen.

Apples to Oranges

 

[Leo123]

Let's check:

In Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), the Supreme Court established the "imminent lawless action" test, limiting government restrictions on speech to cases where it is both directed at inciting imminent violence and likely to produce such action.

Here's a more detailed explanation:

• The Case:
  Clarence Brandenburg, a Ku Klux Klan leader, was convicted under an Ohio law that prohibited advocating for violence or crime.
  
  
• The Ohio Law:
  The law, known as the Criminal Syndicalism Act, made it a crime to advocate for violence or crime as a means of political reform.
  
  
• The Supreme Court Ruling:
  The Supreme Court overturned Brandenburg's conviction, finding that the Ohio law violated his First Amendment right to free speech.
  • The speech must be "directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action".
  • Google.

I thought only Democrats and Fascists punish people for unpopular views.

I'm not sure you can compare the KKK with Hamas. To me, they are two vastly different entities. Besides, the KKK, as racist as they were, did not advocate genocide like Hamas. Actually, Planned Parenthood did and does that.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Visa versus citizen.

Apples to Oranges

he is a legal resident, and that the Constitution applies to him.

Permanent legal residents are protected under the laws of the United States and all local jurisdictions. In addition, permanent legal residents are protected and maintain rights as given by the Constitution, including due process of law and equal protection under the law.
Howard University School of Law Library
https://library.law.howard.edu › immigration › rights
https://library.law.howard.edu/civi...are protected,equal protection under the law.
https://library.law.howard.edu/civi...are protected,equal protection under the law.
No statutes, case law, state laws, etc trump the Constitution. That's my position:
The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, ratified in 1791, protects fundamental freedoms, including freedom of religion, speech, the press, assembly, and the right to petition the government.

• Freedom of Speech:
  This protects the right to express oneself, even if the expression is unpopular or controversial.

https://library.law.howard.edu/civi...are protected,equal protection under the law.




I guess it's you versus the Constitution.

 

[sparky]

Visa versus citizen.

Apples to Oranges

then try this one eagle>

When the Supreme Court ruled to allow American flag burning | Constitution Center

On June 21, 1989, a deeply divided United States Supreme Court upheld the rights of protesters to burn the American flag in a landmark First Amendment decision.

constitutioncenter.org

~S~

 

[JGalt]

Do you defend radical Zionism?

Sure thing, brah. No Jews ever crashed an airliner into a NYC building.

Besides, Islam is a death cult and a fake religion cooked up 600 or so years after the birth, life, death, and ressurection of the one true savior of mankind.

Mohamed never performed any miracles, never healed the sick, or rose the dead. He was a murderer and a pedophile who married a 9 year old girl.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I'm not sure you can compare the KKK with Hamas. To me, they are two vastly different entities. Besides, the KKK, as racist as they were, did not advocate genocide like Hamas. Actually, Planned Parenthood did and does that.

So you don't believe a citizen or a permanent resident can have an opinion different from yours?


You really want to die on that hill?


Are you a Democrat? ff not, they'd love to have you.

 

[eagle1462010]

he is a legal resident, and that the Constitution applies to him.

Permanent legal residents are protected under the laws of the United States and all local jurisdictions. In addition, permanent legal residents are protected and maintain rights as given by the Constitution, including due process of law and equal protection under the law.
Howard University School of Law Library
https://library.law.howard.edu › immigration › rights
https://library.law.howard.edu/civi...are protected,equal protection under the law.
https://library.law.howard.edu/civi...are protected,equal protection under the law.
No statutes, case law, state laws, etc trump the Constitution. That's my position:
The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, ratified in 1791, protects fundamental freedoms, including freedom of religion, speech, the press, assembly, and the right to petition the government.

• Freedom of Speech:
  This protects the right to express oneself, even if the expression is unpopular or controversial.

https://library.law.howard.edu/civi...are protected,equal protection under the law.




I guess it's you versus the Constitution.

I guess we shoiuld throw his as in prison for Inciting Violense.

What OATH DID HE TAKE TO COME HERE AS A VilSITOR? Is he in Violation of that Oath?

Why do we keep those here who came here to piss on our flag?

 

[IM2]

What an interesting, if inconsistent, post.

"highly intelligent Asian sector who get admitted into Ivy League schools because they are sooo much smarter than everybody else."
OK, I'm gonna plead guilty as charged.

Columbia is my alma mater.

그리고, 네, 저는 아시아인입니다

Now....smarter than everyone else....you decide:
African-American students with scores of 1100 had the same chance of getting into an elite school as white students who had a score of 1410…but Asian-Americans needed a 1550 SATscore.
Is there a bias against college applications from Asian students



Notice that the author of the post to which I am replying, who supposedly read and understood the OP to which he voluntarily subscribed, wrote nothing about it.


Kind of make the charge of "imbecile" a boomerang.

And here is the problem with your lie Ms I graduated from Columbia.

Selective Bias: Asian Americans, Test Scores, and Holistic Admissions evaluates the common arguments made by affirmative action critics and Students for Fair Admissions, which is suing Harvard University and has lawsuits pending against the University of North Carolina and the University of Texas at Austin over their admissions practices. The report finds no strong evidence of discrimination against Asian American applicants in admissions to highly selective colleges.

Critics claim that if colleges considered only academic merit, Asian American applicants would gain a greater number of seats. SFFA and other affirmative action critics often base their allegations on three factors:

• stagnant enrollment shares for Asian American students
• relatively low acceptance rates of Asian American applicants
• differences in SAT scores between Asian American and non–Asian American students at the most selective colleges.

We find all of these arguments to be unconvincing. Here’s why:

The Asian American Enrollment Share at the Most Selective Colleges Has Remained Stable Over the Past Decade​

The enrollment share of Asian American and Pacific Islander students at Harvard and at the 90 other most selective colleges has kept pace with their growing share of the four-year college-going population. In fact, the Asian American and Pacific Islander share of enrollments at the most selective colleges grew by 4 percentage points even while their enrollment share at all four-year colleges grew by just 2 percentage points between 1999 and 2018.

Asian American Students are More Likely to Apply to Highly Selective Colleges Regardless of Test Scores​

Among students who scored 1300 or above on the SAT, 65% of Asian American students applied to one of the most selective colleges in the country, compared to 50% of non–Asian American students. And among students who scored below 1300, 12% of Asian American students took a chance and applied to one of the most selective colleges, compared to only 5% of non–Asian American students. Since more Asian American students apply to selective colleges, they are more likely to be denied a seat, which is not evidence of bias.

The Gain for Asian American Applicants Would Be Marginal in a Test-only Admissions System​

Overall, in a test-only admissions system, Asian American college applicants would gain a total of fewer than 3,000 seats at the most selective colleges, compared to the nearly 14,500 seats they typically capture in an admissions year. The share of Asian American high school students in a class attending these colleges would increase from 12% to 14%.

Many Asian American Applicants Already Benefit Greatly from Holistic Admissions​

In a test-only admissions system, 21% of Asian American students and 39% of non–Asian American students would lose their seats in the most selective colleges to students with higher test scores. While it is the case that Asian American students who would not make the cut in a test-only approach overall have higher test-scores, they are also nearly twice as likely as their non–Asian American counterparts to have the lowest scores in the selective college applicant pool.

Conclusion​

These facts combined tell us that while a test-only admissions standard would affect fewer current Asian American students than non-Asian American students, Asian American students are more likely to be among those who received the largest “boost” from holistic admissions.

Selective Bias: Asian Americans, Test Scores, and Holistic Admissions - CEW Georgetown

There’s no strong evidence of discrimination against Asian American applicants in admissions to highly selective colleges.

cew.georgetown.edu

We learn how to do research in the Big 12.