Serowbot wrote on 06/02/25 at 12:08:19:


So you’re just repeating talking points? You have nothing specific.

And don’t say I don’t respond to specific points because I do. Remember, I’m the one who repeatedly says Trump’s faults. I don’t deny them.

Answer one, what protester did he deport, what and how is he forcing teachers to teach or what and how is he blocking scientific information.

I’ll answer you on each point you list. (Like I always do)

Ok, so again, who did Trump deport for just protesting, of which  peaceably assembling is protected speech of course.

JOG wrote on 06/03/25 at 03:42:45:



misleading
the policy deals with a select group of undocumented FELONS

Serowbot wrote on 06/02/25 at 07:24:57:



I saw this in Manhattan contrarian today and was wondering if one of these people were the protesters you were referring to?

Yesterday in Boulder, Colorado, a perpetrator sprayed a flammable liquid on a group of mostly elderly Jews protesting the continued holding of hostages in Gaza.  Then he threw Molotov cocktails to set several of the demonstrators on fire.  The New York Post reports here that 8 were injured, ranging in age from 52 to 88 years old.  Police arrested a man named named Mohamed Sabry Soliman, who was caught on video committing the acts.  Oh, and also shouting slogans, including “They are killers!  How many children you killed?” and “End Zionists.”

It quickly emerged that Soliman was an Egyptian illegally in the country.  He had originally entered legally in 2022 on a tourist visa, but then overstayed.  In 2023 he was granted a permit to work in the U.S. by the Biden administration.  That expired in March 2025, after which he stayed on illegally.

Which raises the question, why was Soliman in the country in the first place, or granted permission to stay and work, or not thrown out when the permission expired?  Whatever you might think about the illegal immigration situation, why on earth do we welcome into the country people who hate us?  Did anybody vet this guy, even a little?

Add Soliman to a long list of Middle Easterners in the U.S. at the grace of the government who make no secret of their hatred of the U.S. and of Israel.  And who are only too happy to lead groups in acts of trespass, vandalism, and violence.  To refresh you on some of the names and roles, here is a May 15 piece from Al-Jazeera with a brief list of some of the most prominent:  

Mohsen Mahdawi, Rumeysa Ozturk, Mahmoud Khalil and Badar Khan Suri are among the students targeted by US President Donald Trump.

These four are all student leaders of pro-Hamas, anti-Israel, and pro-BDS movements at elite university campuses — Mahdawi and Khalil at Columbia, Ozturk at Tufts, and Suri at Georgetown.  

Consider Khalil.  Al-Jazeera identifies him as the “lead negotiator” for the group called Columbia University Apartheid Divest.  Isn’t “lead negotiator” the same thing as head of the group?  Looking around, I can’t find the name of anyone else owning up to being the leader of this group, and it looks to me like calling himself “lead negotiator” is a thinly-veiled way to preserve some kind of argument that he can avoid responsibility for acts of violence and vandalism carried out by the group.

What has CUAD been up to this past year or so?  Read articles about the mayhem at Columbia since the October 7, 2023 Hamas massacres, and you find CUAD intimately involved in all of it.  For example, there was the statement put out by CUAD on the one-year anniversary of the massacre, as reported in the New York Times of October 9, 2024:

“We support liberation by any means necessary, including armed resistance,” the group, Columbia University Apartheid Divest . . . .  The group marked the anniversary of the Oct. 7 attack on Israel by distributing a newspaper with a headline that used Hamas’s name for it: “One Year Since Al-Aqsa Flood, Revolution Until Victory,” it read, over a picture of Hamas fighters breaching the security fence to Israel. And the group posted an essay calling the attack a “moral, military and political victory” and quoting Ismail Haniyeh, the assassinated former political leader of Hamas.

In January 2025, as reported here in the Columbia Spectator, a Columbia building called Kravis Hall, housing the business school, was vandalized by protesters pouring a cement-like substance down multiple toilets all over the building.  Somebody just happened to record an anonymous video of the vandalism, which then got posted on the Instagram accounts of CUAD and another group called New York City resists.  Text accompanying the Instagram post described the vandalism as some kind of righteous response to actions of the Israeli military in Gaza.

Or, just a few weeks ago, in early May, protesters occupied Columbia’s main library in the middle of exam time.  Here is a May 8 report in Time Magazine.  Excerpt:

A Substack post that appeared to be from Columbia University Apartheid Divest, a coalition of student groups supporting the Palestinian cause, said the protesters “renamed” the library the “Basel Al-Araj Popular University” after a Palestinian activist and writer who died in 2017.  “The flood shows that as long as Columbia funds and profits from imperialist violence, the people will continue to disrupt Columbia’s profits and legitimacy,” the Substack post added, also reiterating calls for the University to divest from companies with business links to Israel.            

Time reports that several Columbia public safety officers were injured attempting to restore order.

These are just examples of numerous disruptive and violent activities at Columbia in which CUAD appears to be intimately involved.

According to the Al-Jazeera piece, Mr. Khalil was granted a green card at some point.  I can’t imagine why.  Now that the Trump administration is seeking to revoke that and deport Mr. Khalil, his attorneys are spinning the situation as an issue of “free speech.”  

I disagree.  American citizens are completely entitled to express views that are anti-Israel, anti-semitic, and pro-Hamas (short of the First Amendment limit, which is something like immediate incitement to violence).  They are entitled to hate the United States, and to say so.  But there is no reason that we must be required to invite foreigners and aliens who express such views into the United States.  

The individuals listed in the Al-Jazeera article are people who are here on visas, and who have expressed their hatred of the United States, and whom the Trump administration now wants to deport.  Multiple judges have stayed the deportations, at least until the cases are fully heard.  Ultimately, I don’t think this is a close issue.  The United States is under no obligation to welcome into the country people who hate us.  It is high time that applicants for visas of any type get thoroughly vetted for anti-U.S. views.

Explain the difference.

 I provided some references with all of it outlined.  You must not have Observed them.

 Here's a simple Google result.

https://www.google.com/search?q=expedited+process+vs+expedited+removal&sca_es...