They also didn't want to hold their nose at work with people that made them wretch. Many of them also seem to really believe that Israel is going to collapse any moment despite this being objectively mad as an opinion.
The Pro-Palestinian movement basically convinced itself that the only way to achieve true justice (TM) for the Palestinians is to completely destroy Israel. Algeria convinced them that this is possible even though Edward Said warned earlier that the Algerian situation does not match the I/P conflict and is a poor comparison. The growth of the De-Colonize whatever movement has not helped. Much of the Pro-Palestinian movement in the West is thoroughly wrapped up in this and is treating the Palestinians as proxies for the Native Americans, Native Hawaiians, and other groups deemed indigenous and by destroying Israel all indigenous people in the world will be avenged.
This is an incredibly stupid strategy that doesn't help the Palestinians at all because Israel exists, is affluent, and has a dedicated patriotic population who sees Israel as the Jewish homeland. Diaspora Jews agree generally with Israeli Jews on this. But the Pro-Palestinian movement would rather shoot itself in the foot so they can graffiti vulgarities against Israel on public property or protest like mad than do something effective.
4 weeks ago
I've mentioned this previously but by formulating the protests around "Anti-Zionism" and "settler-colonialism, the Pro-Palestinian protests did nothing to help the Palestinians and prevented a lot of useful political alliances with Israeli and Diaspora Jews. Netanyahu isn't popular in Israel. There were massive protests against him since his coalition won the last election. He is on trial for massive corruption in Israel. The Israel-Hamas War did nothing to improve Netanyahu's popularity in Israel and his coalition is only held together by him regularly appeasing the most rightest members.
There was big potential to teaming up with anti-Netanyahu forces in Israel including the hostages families and Diaspora Jews. By framing the protests around "anti-Zionism", "settler-colonialism", and the legitimacy of Israel itself, the Pro-Palestinian protest movement made this impossible. They did nothing to help the Palestinians as well.
The first theory doesn't require DHS to prove things. All the Secretary of State has to do is issue a letter on why this person is a foreign policy embarrassment and the IJ will approve it. The second theory is a lot more risky because it puts the burden of proof on DHS. I hope that Khalil's lawyers are consulting with people who know immigration law though.
2025-03-17 13:14:03
Resident immigration lawyer here. The immigration lawyer community believes that DHS is going argue one of these two theories for removal Khalil.
1. There is an obscure provision in the INA that allows the Secretary of State to remove non-citizens who are believed to be foreign policy embarrassments for the United States. This is a very rare but very broad power.
2. They will argue that he made a material misrepresentation in his immigration paperwork by saying no to the questions regarding to material support for terrorism when he clearly supports the terrorist organizations of Hamas and Hezbollah. Material support for terrorism is again given a very broad definition under the law.
The commenter archive features may be temporarily disabled at times.
They also didn't want to hold their nose at work with people that made them wretch. Many of them also seem to really believe that Israel is going to collapse any moment despite this being objectively mad as an opinion.
The Pro-Palestinian movement basically convinced itself that the only way to achieve true justice (TM) for the Palestinians is to completely destroy Israel. Algeria convinced them that this is possible even though Edward Said warned earlier that the Algerian situation does not match the I/P conflict and is a poor comparison. The growth of the De-Colonize whatever movement has not helped. Much of the Pro-Palestinian movement in the West is thoroughly wrapped up in this and is treating the Palestinians as proxies for the Native Americans, Native Hawaiians, and other groups deemed indigenous and by destroying Israel all indigenous people in the world will be avenged.
This is an incredibly stupid strategy that doesn't help the Palestinians at all because Israel exists, is affluent, and has a dedicated patriotic population who sees Israel as the Jewish homeland. Diaspora Jews agree generally with Israeli Jews on this. But the Pro-Palestinian movement would rather shoot itself in the foot so they can graffiti vulgarities against Israel on public property or protest like mad than do something effective.
I've mentioned this previously but by formulating the protests around "Anti-Zionism" and "settler-colonialism, the Pro-Palestinian protests did nothing to help the Palestinians and prevented a lot of useful political alliances with Israeli and Diaspora Jews. Netanyahu isn't popular in Israel. There were massive protests against him since his coalition won the last election. He is on trial for massive corruption in Israel. The Israel-Hamas War did nothing to improve Netanyahu's popularity in Israel and his coalition is only held together by him regularly appeasing the most rightest members.
There was big potential to teaming up with anti-Netanyahu forces in Israel including the hostages families and Diaspora Jews. By framing the protests around "anti-Zionism", "settler-colonialism", and the legitimacy of Israel itself, the Pro-Palestinian protest movement made this impossible. They did nothing to help the Palestinians as well.
The first theory doesn't require DHS to prove things. All the Secretary of State has to do is issue a letter on why this person is a foreign policy embarrassment and the IJ will approve it. The second theory is a lot more risky because it puts the burden of proof on DHS. I hope that Khalil's lawyers are consulting with people who know immigration law though.
Resident immigration lawyer here. The immigration lawyer community believes that DHS is going argue one of these two theories for removal Khalil.
1. There is an obscure provision in the INA that allows the Secretary of State to remove non-citizens who are believed to be foreign policy embarrassments for the United States. This is a very rare but very broad power.
https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/eoir/legacy/2014/07/25/3400.pdf
2. They will argue that he made a material misrepresentation in his immigration paperwork by saying no to the questions regarding to material support for terrorism when he clearly supports the terrorist organizations of Hamas and Hezbollah. Material support for terrorism is again given a very broad definition under the law.