WHEN ACTIVISM TURNS TO TERRORISM. WE LIVE IN A HOUSE OF WAR*
- lhpgop
- Mar 14
- 6 min read
"Green card status can be revoked — as in cases where someone has obtained that status by fraud, or they commit serious crimes. The government also has broad powers under anti-terrorism laws, including the ability to block entry or remove a non-citizen."
Al Jazeera quote
Dar al-Harb (House of War):
This term refers to territories where non-Muslims hold power and Sharia law (Islamic law) is not in effect. In this context, Muslims living in Dar al-Harb are considered to be in a state of potential conflict or war, and the safety of Muslims is not explicitly guaranteed
Currently, all liberal eyes are on the case of green card carrying terrorist sympathizer and organizer Mahmoud Khalil and his , hopefully, quick departure from the United States for quite a stretch of time.
Khalil is the 15 minute celebrity who has helped to organize a number of anti-semitic "protests" (they used to be called "hate-ins' when the white supremacists did them) as well as his ability to help turn the once vaunted Columbia university into a fomrer shell of itself.
For his reward for service tendered, he is most assuredly getting a poster made for him in Gaza and since he is breaking a number of laws in the USA, an arrest and trip to the ICE deportation center in Louisiana. The only hold up is....an activist judge in New York who is trying to overreach his/her/they position and defy the law of the land, keeping a known terrorist provocateur migrant in the United States.
Now, before your neighbor with the septum piercing tries to tell you different. here are some salient points of the discussion:
Legally, universities that receive U.S. government funding still retain academic freedom and the right to promote a wide range of ideas, including those that may be contrary to government policies. However, there are limitations and consequences depending on the nature of the speech and activities involved.
Key Considerations:
First Amendment Protections
Public universities are bound by the First Amendment, which protects freedom of speech and academic expression. This means that faculty and students can criticize U.S. policies or advocate for controversial positions, even if they contradict government interests.
Private universities, while not directly bound by the First Amendment, generally uphold free speech principles but may impose their own restrictions.
Federal Funding and Compliance
Universities that receive federal funding are required to comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination, including antisemitism if defined under the IHRA framework.
Under the Trump administration's Executive Order 13899, universities failing to address antisemitic incidents risk losing federal funds. A similar stance continues under the Biden administration.
Material Support and National Security
While universities can engage in broad academic debates, they cannot provide material support to terrorist organizations (as per the Patriot Act and 18 U.S. Code § 2339B).
If a university were found to be actively promoting or facilitating activities that support groups designated as terrorist organizations (e.g., Hamas), it could face legal and financial consequences.
Political Pressure and Public Backlash
While universities have the right to promote controversial ideas, they are not immune to political scrutiny. If a school is seen as fostering radical ideologies, it may face pressure from Congress, donors, and the public.
Columbia University, for instance, faced federal funding threats after accusations of failing to address antisemitic incidents linked to pro-Palestinian activism.
Bottom Line:
A federally funded university can legally promote ideas contrary to U.S. government policies, but there are boundaries. If activism crosses into antisemitism, material support for terrorism, or violation of federal law, the institution could face funding cuts, legal actions, and political repercussions.
As was already noted at the top of the article, Khalil has, indeed, checked the boxes for his trip back to Palestine. How? because many people in the US don't know what the First Amendment means nor do they have any understanding of property, property rights or private property to include the forced occupation, seizure and denial of rights to others (in this case the Columbia administrators , Jewish students, faculty and/or anyone trying to access the university buildings to get an education.
The fact that this Judge is holding up the process, temporarily mind you, should show you just how little the protest state thinks about the average citizen.
One would hope that this case will put an end to it, however, if they were to be thorough like the woke Dems, they would also arrest his wife (a willing participant in his activities) and bring charges against her (she is a citizen so she can learn about the court system from the inside). I doubt New York has the minerals to do that to a leftist poster child, but that would be the right thing by law.
Honorable mention: The upcoming false alarm Islamaphobi case in North Carolina
Family wants teen charged with hate crime after attack at a Charlotte high school
CHARLOTTE, NC – Family and activists are demanding hate crime charges after they say a 15-year-old girl was assaulted by another teenage student in a classroom at Ardrey Kell High School on Friday.
A spokesman for the family says the male student physically attacked the girl, called her racial slur and told her to “go back to her country.”
Jibril Hough, activist and advocate for the local Muslim community says the violent altercation between the girl and the boy was motivated by Islamophobia.
“The intent was to attack a young Muslim girl, first, because we’re headscarved, and then telling her to go back to her own country, that clearly shows you he’s after her because she’s Muslim and of Arab descent and that that proves the intent and the force behind it,” Hough said.
Hough says the boy hit the girl multiple times leaving her with broken bones and a black eye. Hough says the girl may have a concussion.
“I honestly feel like if this young man hit her two or three more times, he could have killed her because he is a lot bigger than her. He fought her like she stole something,” Hough said.
The female student was born in America and she is a part of the Islamic community. Hough says this is a hate crime because of the words used in the attack, but it’s not a typical case.
“It’s an African American young man so that makes it even more important to pursue the hate crime to point out the fact that anyone can be Islamophobic, anyone can have these feelings, Black or white,” Hough said.
Hough said since the attack, the girl has been getting a lot of support from her peers. Hough says the attacker is on the football team, and even football players have been offering their words of encouragement.
In a statement to WCCB, a spokeswoman for Charlotte Mecklenburg Schools says they are aware of the incident and they say all policies were followed. The family says the alleged attacker was suspended 10 days and they say the victim is also facing a 10 day suspension."
That is a picture of "activist" Jbril. He is going to have to tread a fine line as his support base seems to be in the Black community in general as well as moonlighting in the Islamic neighborhoods.
He is the one leading the charge to have the Black/ African American boy/football player (surprise! It took 8 articles to get to that fact so they could stoke the anti-white support pyramid). Now one has to go back to the article where the "N" word was supposed to be uttered (sounds like it may have been on both sides) and while it is common to hear that word between two people of colour, it is a big NO NO for others to sue and can bring about a World Star* level of beating to men and women of any age
That would explain the suspensions on both sides. The rush to "hate crime" may not be where Mr Hough wants to go, IF it is found that the islamic girl used the term on the football player.
“It’s an African American young man so that makes it even more important to pursue the hate crime to point out the fact that anyone can be Islamophobic, anyone can have these feelings, Black or white,” Hough said.
This is when DEI storms collide. We will have to stay tuned to see how this second case turns out. I am guessing the only loser will be the School Boards wallet.
I only hope that the Islamic community can find a better "leader" than Mr. Hough or you could see what a full blown race riot looks like. Better call Al Sharpton
Comments