Breaking News

1,716,801 Views | 15426 Replies | Last: 4 hrs ago by movielover
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
tequila4kapp said:

MinotStateBeav said:

sycasey said:

MinotStateBeav said:

Cal88 said:

MinotStateBeav said:

sycasey said:

tequila4kapp said:

A UW fellow and Georgetown PHD candidate have been detained for deportation. Based on what I'm seeing so far they have 'supported' Hezbellah (with words) and associated with Hamas (the PHD candidates' father in law was an advisor to a Hamas leader). Unless there are additional facts indicating something more than thoughts/words/family members...this is a step too far, wrong and un-American.
This fits with the same pattern as the Columbia student who got arrested. The government still has not presented any evidence of actual material support for terrorism from him either . . . again, it's all just speech. This all sets a very, very bad precedent.
Yes, speech is the link. Why do you think green card and visa holders can say anything they want? They cannot. If they would have told the government they were pro-hamas before entering they would have been denied entry. Green card holders are not naturalized citizens. Their entrance into the United States comes with responsibility. We do not want to be importing people into the USA that cause social disruption, that would be catastrophic.

Would you feel the same if the shoe was on the other foot, and permanent residents were getting deported by a Democrat administration for protesting against say, covid mandates, or other activities deemed "socially disruptive" by the administration in office?
American born citizens are not the same as GUESTS to the USA. They literally can not do that.
I don't think you understood the question.
I understand the question, but I'm not falling to appeals of emotion. The law is pretty clear here. If Democrats had a way to deport conservatives they would 100% do it. but they don't.
The first guy led demonstrations that denied Jews access to education, distributed pro-Hamas materials, Jews were threatened at protests. That's not exactly plotting the next 9/11, but fine. Affirmative actions were taken that denied other's rights and advocated for a terrorist hroip. Fine / good, get rid of him.

Not fine/good. There's no evidence thus far that he "led" the protests, only that he served as a negotiator for the student group. The government has openly admitted that they are not charging him with a crime. It would be unprecedented to deport a green card holder for this.
movielover
How long do you want to ignore this user?
EU liberal insanity.

OdontoBear66
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sycasey said:

tequila4kapp said:

A UW fellow and Georgetown PHD candidate have been detained for deportation. Based on what I'm seeing so far they have 'supported' Hezbellah (with words) and associated with Hamas (the PHD candidates' father in law was an advisor to a Hamas leader). Unless there are additional facts indicating something more than thoughts/words/family members...this is a step too far, wrong and un-American.
This fits with the same pattern as the Columbia student who got arrested. The government still has not presented any evidence of actual material support for terrorism from him either . . . again, it's all just speech. This all sets a very, very bad precedent.
Couldn't agree more sycasey...An overreach to be sure...Spell out how what he is being charged with relates to why he is being deported...I disagree strongly with what he has said, not his right to say it...
movielover
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Future Democrat voters?

movielover
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Stop at four margaritas, but VallejoWags loves those five margarita gals!

SFCityBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
tequila4kapp said:

MinotStateBeav said:

sycasey said:

MinotStateBeav said:

Cal88 said:

MinotStateBeav said:

sycasey said:

tequila4kapp said:

A UW fellow and Georgetown PHD candidate have been detained for deportation. Based on what I'm seeing so far they have 'supported' Hezbellah (with words) and associated with Hamas (the PHD candidates' father in law was an advisor to a Hamas leader). Unless there are additional facts indicating something more than thoughts/words/family members...this is a step too far, wrong and un-American.
This fits with the same pattern as the Columbia student who got arrested. The government still has not presented any evidence of actual material support for terrorism from him either . . . again, it's all just speech. This all sets a very, very bad precedent.
Yes, speech is the link. Why do you think green card and visa holders can say anything they want? They cannot. If they would have told the government they were pro-hamas before entering they would have been denied entry. Green card holders are not naturalized citizens. Their entrance into the United States comes with responsibility. We do not want to be importing people into the USA that cause social disruption, that would be catastrophic.

Would you feel the same if the shoe was on the other foot, and permanent residents were getting deported by a Democrat administration for protesting against say, covid mandates, or other activities deemed "socially disruptive" by the administration in office?
American born citizens are not the same as GUESTS to the USA. They literally can not do that.
I don't think you understood the question.
I understand the question, but I'm not falling to appeals of emotion. The law is pretty clear here. If Democrats had a way to deport conservatives they would 100% do it. but they don't.
The first guy led demonstrations that denied Jews access to education, distributed pro-Hamas materials, Jews were threatened at protests. That's not exactly plotting the next 9/11, but fine. Affirmative actions were taken that denied other's rights and advocated for a terrorist hroip. Fine / good, get rid of him.

The Georgetown guy has a father in law that advised a Hamas leader. We are America. This isn't 1950s McCarthyism - we don't punish people for mere associations and beliefs. Even for green card holders.
What's a hroip?
Cal88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
movielover said:

Stop at four margaritas, but VallejoWags loves those five margarita gals!



Stoney Burke's niece?



lol, Stoney rips into Tedford, must have been towards the end of JT's tenure...
Cal88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
SFCityBear said:

tequila4kapp said:

MinotStateBeav said:

sycasey said:

MinotStateBeav said:

Cal88 said:

MinotStateBeav said:

sycasey said:

tequila4kapp said:

A UW fellow and Georgetown PHD candidate have been detained for deportation. Based on what I'm seeing so far they have 'supported' Hezbellah (with words) and associated with Hamas (the PHD candidates' father in law was an advisor to a Hamas leader). Unless there are additional facts indicating something more than thoughts/words/family members...this is a step too far, wrong and un-American.
This fits with the same pattern as the Columbia student who got arrested. The government still has not presented any evidence of actual material support for terrorism from him either . . . again, it's all just speech. This all sets a very, very bad precedent.
Yes, speech is the link. Why do you think green card and visa holders can say anything they want? They cannot. If they would have told the government they were pro-hamas before entering they would have been denied entry. Green card holders are not naturalized citizens. Their entrance into the United States comes with responsibility. We do not want to be importing people into the USA that cause social disruption, that would be catastrophic.

Would you feel the same if the shoe was on the other foot, and permanent residents were getting deported by a Democrat administration for protesting against say, covid mandates, or other activities deemed "socially disruptive" by the administration in office?
American born citizens are not the same as GUESTS to the USA. They literally can not do that.
I don't think you understood the question.
I understand the question, but I'm not falling to appeals of emotion. The law is pretty clear here. If Democrats had a way to deport conservatives they would 100% do it. but they don't.
The first guy led demonstrations that denied Jews access to education, distributed pro-Hamas materials, Jews were threatened at protests. That's not exactly plotting the next 9/11, but fine. Affirmative actions were taken that denied other's rights and advocated for a terrorist hroip. Fine / good, get rid of him.

The Georgetown guy has a father in law that advised a Hamas leader. We are America. This isn't 1950s McCarthyism - we don't punish people for mere associations and beliefs. Even for green card holders.
What's a hroip?

bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
She is the reincarnation of Holy Hubert.


"God Bless your dirty heart."
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention

“I love Cal deeply. What are the directions to The Portal from Sproul Plaza?”
movielover
How long do you want to ignore this user?
SFCityBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cal88 said:

SFCityBear said:

tequila4kapp said:

MinotStateBeav said:

sycasey said:

MinotStateBeav said:

Cal88 said:

MinotStateBeav said:

sycasey said:

tequila4kapp said:

A UW fellow and Georgetown PHD candidate have been detained for deportation. Based on what I'm seeing so far they have 'supported' Hezbellah (with words) and associated with Hamas (the PHD candidates' father in law was an advisor to a Hamas leader). Unless there are additional facts indicating something more than thoughts/words/family members...this is a step too far, wrong and un-American.
This fits with the same pattern as the Columbia student who got arrested. The government still has not presented any evidence of actual material support for terrorism from him either . . . again, it's all just speech. This all sets a very, very bad precedent.
Yes, speech is the link. Why do you think green card and visa holders can say anything they want? They cannot. If they would have told the government they were pro-hamas before entering they would have been denied entry. Green card holders are not naturalized citizens. Their entrance into the United States comes with responsibility. We do not want to be importing people into the USA that cause social disruption, that would be catastrophic.

Would you feel the same if the shoe was on the other foot, and permanent residents were getting deported by a Democrat administration for protesting against say, covid mandates, or other activities deemed "socially disruptive" by the administration in office?
American born citizens are not the same as GUESTS to the USA. They literally can not do that.
I don't think you understood the question.
I understand the question, but I'm not falling to appeals of emotion. The law is pretty clear here. If Democrats had a way to deport conservatives they would 100% do it. but they don't.
The first guy led demonstrations that denied Jews access to education, distributed pro-Hamas materials, Jews were threatened at protests. That's not exactly plotting the next 9/11, but fine. Affirmative actions were taken that denied other's rights and advocated for a terrorist hroip. Fine / good, get rid of him.

The Georgetown guy has a father in law that advised a Hamas leader. We are America. This isn't 1950s McCarthyism - we don't punish people for mere associations and beliefs. Even for green card holders.
What's a hroip?


"Thanks ever so."

Marilyn M.
MinotStateBeav
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Totally Organic protests are happening in 75% red states to tell those dastardly Senators off!!'

bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cal88 said:




Narrator: "When Virgil Starkwell was released from prison, he made a meager living, selling meagers door to door."
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention

“I love Cal deeply. What are the directions to The Portal from Sproul Plaza?”
movielover
How long do you want to ignore this user?
RIP George Foreman 76.

His comeback was the best, but I never understood naming all his sons George.
bear2034
How long do you want to ignore this user?
MinotStateBeav
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Greenpeace loses lawsuit over Dakota Access Pipeline for $667 million in Mandan, North Dakota (not far from Minot ) (I just copied the first few paragraphs, you can click if you want to read the rest)

Link to story


Greenpeace backed radical protesters who tried to block a North Dakota pipeline. Now the pipeline company has won huge damages in a lawsuit against the iconic NGO. Other nonprofits should take notice.

On Wednesday, a jury in Mandan, North Dakota returned a stunning verdict against Greenpeace for its role in the violent protests and misleading PR campaign that disrupted construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline in 2016. The jury hearing the civil lawsuit found Greenpeace USA and two other Greenpeace entities liable for civil conspiracy, defamation, trespass, and other misdeeds. If the verdict stands, the storied environmental nonprofit will have to pay $667 million in damages to plaintiff Energy Transfer, the pipeline company that built and owns the DAPL.

The decision wasn't entirely unexpected. In fact, Greenpeace had tried (and failed) to get the trial location changed, asserting that a jury in that oil-producing region would be biased in favor of the plaintiff. Nonetheless, the sheer size of the damages awarded will send shock waves through the loose networks of nonprofit groups that support disruptive protests around the nation.

In a City Journal article about the case, I noted similarities between the anti-pipeline protests near North Dakota's Standing Rock Indian Reservation and other mass actions, including Black Lives Matter protests in 2020 and the anti-Israel demonstrations that erupted around the United States after the October 7 attacks. Making an analogy to hybrid warfare, I described these as "hybrid protests," in which masses of peaceful demonstrators are joined by smaller groups of trained agitators who tip the events toward violence. As Park MacDougald has reported, these loose networks of troublemakers are often financially supported "by a vast web of progressive nonprofits, NGOs, foundations, and dark-money groups."

Energy Transfer's suit against Greenpeace represents the first major success in exposing and penalizing the putatively legitimate nonprofits that funnel money and material support to the lawbreakers embedding themselves in these hybrid protests. If the enormous verdict survives the inevitable appeals, it will be a major shot across the bows of progressive organizations that quietly foment political mayhem while maintaining plausible deniability.
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Don't forget to carry your papers, everyone!

tequila4kapp
How long do you want to ignore this user?
MinotStateBeav said:

Totally Organic protests are happening in 75% red states to tell those dastardly Senators off!!'


I assume you mean "totally organic", as Schumer has admitted it's a coordinated effort by the D party and NGOs
tequila4kapp
How long do you want to ignore this user?
bear2034 said:


OMG, D's just never learn. Get rid of these people and find your next Bill Clinton blue dog Democrat. Please.
Cal88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
tequila4kapp said:

bear2034 said:


find your next Clinton blue dog Democrat. Please.

Chelsea?
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
tequila4kapp said:

bear2034 said:


OMG, D's just never learn. Get rid of these people and find your next Bill Clinton blue dog Democrat. Please.

This poll is little more than a name-recognition contest at this early stage. IMO whoever emerges to be the new leader/nominee will probably be someone who isn't near the top of that list right now.
tequila4kapp
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cal88 said:

tequila4kapp said:

bear2034 said:


find your next Clinton blue dog Democrat. Please.

Chelsea?
I am not dialed in enough to name names. Newsom has a chance. He's a governor and he's got time to create a different narrative about his politics. Everyone else on that list is virtually unelectable at the national level.
movielover
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sycasey said:

tequila4kapp said:

bear2034 said:


OMG, D's just never learn. Get rid of these people and find your next Bill Clinton blue dog Democrat. Please.

This poll is little more than a name-recognition contest at this early stage. IMO whoever emerges to be the new leader/nominee will probably be someone who isn't near the top of that list right now.


Which is a big deal in politics.

Kamala has the experience, she needs time to put her team together, she is a proud POC, a woman, three oppressed groups rolled into one... I'm for her.

Kamala 2028!
Eastern Oregon Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sycasey said:

tequila4kapp said:

bear2034 said:


OMG, D's just never learn. Get rid of these people and find your next Bill Clinton blue dog Democrat. Please.

This poll is little more than a name-recognition contest at this early stage. IMO whoever emerges to be the new leader/nominee will probably be someone who isn't near the top of that list right now.
Yeah, I haven't researched it, but I expect Trump had microscopic poll numbers in 2013.
Big C
How long do you want to ignore this user?
movielover said:

RIP George Foreman 76.

His comeback was the best, but I never understood naming all his sons George.

Paging concordtom. Paging concordtom:

I found this on the "Breaking News" thread instead of the "Obituaries" thread, which you created just for this purpose.


(Rather than thinking of myself as a snitch, I am helping concordtom to keep this forum organized. You're welcome.)
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Eastern Oregon Bear said:

sycasey said:

tequila4kapp said:

bear2034 said:


OMG, D's just never learn. Get rid of these people and find your next Bill Clinton blue dog Democrat. Please.

This poll is little more than a name-recognition contest at this early stage. IMO whoever emerges to be the new leader/nominee will probably be someone who isn't near the top of that list right now.
Yeah, I haven't researched it, but I expect Trump had microscopic poll numbers in 2013.

Likewise Barack Obama in 2005. You don't know who might emerge when there's an open primary.
bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Big C said:

movielover said:

RIP George Foreman 76.

His comeback was the best, but I never understood naming all his sons George.

Paging concordtom. Paging concordtom:

I found this on the "Breaking News" thread instead of the "Obituaries" thread, which you created just for this purpose.


(Rather than thinking of myself as a snitch, I am helping concordtom to keep this forum organized. You're welcome.)

I get so many media alerts that I can usually post an obit within a few minutes after it is announced….and I am very afraid of concordtom.

https://bearinsider.com/forums/6/topics/100433/replies/2479240
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention

“I love Cal deeply. What are the directions to The Portal from Sproul Plaza?”
movielover
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Doesn't sound pleasant.

movielover
How long do you want to ignore this user?
This would be huge.

bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Trump has mediocre loyalist legal minds advising him. He is going to cost the federal government millions of dollars in damages awarded because of his unlawful conduct.

He has the additional problem of having few, if any, competent prosecutors in the DOJ. His crew of incompetent demagogue loyalist prosecutors are already f@ucking up during law and motion proceedings. They have never tried substantive cases in their careers.

On the SCOTUS, he can only rely 100% on the corruption of Alito, Thomas and Gorsuch to back his unlawful conduct.

That being the case, Trump has to go full dictator to exact revenge on his enemies. He has replaced the generals with loyalists. He can and will pull it off, and his base will fully embrace it. The gateway to dictatorship would be anti Vietnam War level national protests where he declares Martial Law.

Trump certainly can't count on his enemies paying extortion money like this one did:

Law firm Paul Weiss makes deal with Trump to escape executive order


https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/03/21/paul-weiss-law-firm-trump-executive-order/82589374007/
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention

“I love Cal deeply. What are the directions to The Portal from Sproul Plaza?”
movielover
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Why are Democrats so eager to give child molesters light sentences?

bear2034
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sycasey said:

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

sycasey said:

tequila4kapp said:

bear2034 said:


OMG, D's just never learn. Get rid of these people and find your next Bill Clinton blue dog Democrat. Please.

This poll is little more than a name-recognition contest at this early stage. IMO whoever emerges to be the new leader/nominee will probably be someone who isn't near the top of that list right now.
Yeah, I haven't researched it, but I expect Trump had microscopic poll numbers in 2013.

Likewise Barack Obama in 2005. You don't know who might emerge when there's an open primary.

AOC.
bear2034
How long do you want to ignore this user?
movielover said:

Why are Democrats so eager to give child molesters light sentences?
And why are they so eager to read to children dressed in women's clothes and makeup?
Big C
How long do you want to ignore this user?

Don't knock it until you've tried it!
Big C
How long do you want to ignore this user?

KIDDING! (^)
First Page Last Page
Page 393 of 441
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.