British journalist Sami Hamdi detained by US authorities

[CriticalStinker]

This isn't Biden or Obama's America anymore.

You can't come here, trash-talk America, hate on Jews and think that it'll be okay.

I couldn't go to the UK, say they all suck, call for the death of all muslims without some sort of law involvement.

Between the left and the right, there's going to be a lot we can't say here.

[DBCowboy]

Between the left and the right, there's going to be a lot we can't say here.

If given the opportunity, the left will have me silenced and/or killed.

They have already made that choice.

What choice do I have left?

[putnam6]

It will never end.  We (MAGA) could do nothing, appease the Marxist left with spending, and illegals and when they come back into power, soccer-moms will be called domestic terrorists, veterans will be called (again) domestic terrorists.

The evil left has to be beaten so badly that they won't try this shit again.

The left is literally punch-drunk addle brained right now; some suspect the DNC may crumble, this is when they might become most desperate 

I suspect they aren't dead yet, Obama gathering some new puppets, hearing Gavin's has fallen a bit out of favor, and Kamala's sniffing around at the scraps and a scratch behind the ear. 

[DBCowboy]

The left is literally punch-drunk addle brained right now; some suspect the DNC may crumble, this is when they might become most desperate 

I suspect they aren't dead yet, Obama gathering some new puppets, hearing Gavin's has fallen a bit out of favor, and Kamala's sniffing around at the scraps and a scratch behind the ear. 

[Image: https://media0.giphy.com/media/cyntNbcW2.../giphy.gif]

They were too far to the left, so they lost the 2024 election.

What do they do?

Move FARTHER to the left!

They double-downed on Marxism.

[RazorV66]

They were too far to the left, so they lost the 2024 election.

What do they do?

Move FARTHER to the left!

They double-downed on Marxism.

What I don't get is how the legal Americans that support the Democrats can support how much free shit the Dems want to give illegals.

The Democrats basically piss on legal citizens and shove them out of the way to coddle these illegals. 

At some point you would think Dem supporters would say ENOUGH OF THIS SHIT.

[DBCowboy]

What I don't get is how the legal Americans that support the Democrats can support how much free shit the Dems want to give illegals.

The Democrats basically piss on legal citizens and shove them out of the way to coddle these illegals. 

At some point you would think Dem supporters would say ENOUGH OF THIS SHIT.

They don't think.

They can only obey.

[IdeomotorPrisoner]

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c867gdjl1n1o

Whether or not someone is a citizen, I believe they have freedom of speech. Even described by the founding fathers as part of our God given rights.

While I would disagree with this even if they criticized my own government, the fact we are going against constitutional rights for a foreign government is absurd. I'm struggling to see why both parties are bending the knee to a foreign nation. On all the things to comprimise on constitutional rights, it's for someone else.

To be fair to this guy initially, I know of many Jews that ALSO think 10/7 was a natural consequence of the oppression that is being put on the Palestinians. 

I dont have to agree. But its not limited to Muslims or even close to limited to muslims. Its The United Colors of Israel Divestment.

He has many opinions mirrored by even young American Jews. 

As of 2024 American Jews (millenial or younger) had; a 53% unfavorable view of The Israeli Government, 38% agreed with the statement that "Israel is an apartheid state," and 33% agreed with the statement "Israel is committing genocide against the Palestinians".

They probably wouldnt post or "like" this though...

 ‘How many of you felt it in your hearts when you got the news that it happened? How many of you felt the euphoria? Allah Akbar!’”

My first thought to that is...

"Oh Yes, dragging girls away from a rave into rape tunnels while high on meth is a pure example of how god is great, you fucking ass. You're supposed to stone the devil, not praise it."

But he may be fucked saying that with this supreme court. And that frightens me a little. 
 

While the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects free speech, there are legally recognized exceptions, and praising an act of terrorism can cross the line into criminal activity under specific circumstances. Simply saying you praise an act of terrorism is not illegal, but actions or speech that move beyond abstract praise to direct incitement or providing material support can be prosecuted.

And..

The distinction lies in whether the speech is independent expression or a service provided to the organization itself. 

He showed jubilation, but is an unpopular opinion material support? What is his motivation? Is he doing it specifically to increase militancy and violence, and can they prove that? 

I like to see them prove it beyond his grotesque parallel thought and praise rhetoric.

It seems like a must to not set a precedent of infringing free speech. Like unconstitutional, even for this jackass foreign commentator..

Because if he just said things without direct intention to promote violence we might all be fucked by a "material support through rhetoric" loophole.

[putnam6]

To be fair to this guy initially, I know of many Jews that ALSO think 10/7 was a natural consequence of the oppression that is being put on the Palestinians. 

I dont have to agree. But its not limited to Muslims or even close to limited to muslims. Its The United Colors of Israel Divestment.

He has many opinions mirrored by even young American Jews. 

As of 2024 American Jews (millenial or younger) had; a 53% unfavorable view of The Israeli Government, 38% agreed with the statement that "Israel is an apartheid state," and 33% agreed with the statement "Israel is committing genocide against the Palestinians".

They probably wouldnt post or "like" this though...

My first thought to that is...

"Oh Yes, dragging girls away from a rave into rape tunnels while high on meth is a pure example of how god is great, you fucking ass. You're supposed to stone the devil, not praise it."

But he may be fucked saying that with this supreme court. And that frightens me a little. 
 

And..

He showed jubilation, but is an unpopular opinion material support? What is his motivation? Is he doing it specifically to increase militancy and violence, and can they prove that? 

I like to see them prove it beyond his grotesque parallel thought and praise rhetoric.

It seems like a must to not set a precedent of infringing free speech. Like unconstitutional, even for this jackass foreign commentator..

Because if he just said things without direct intention to promote violence we might all be fucked by a "material support through rhetoric" loophole.

It's always the worst-case scenario with no factual basis... he isn't an American and is subject to a higher standard for staying in a foreign country, as many foreign countries are with non-citizens...especially journalists

But let's pretend it's a constant Constitutional crisis because OMB is the President King

No, Sami Hamdi is not an American citizen.
He is a British citizen (born and based in the UK, with Tunisian heritage through his family) who was traveling in the US on a visa that was revoked, leading to his detention by ICE and pending deportation. This is confirmed across multiple sources, including reports from CNN, BBC, The New York Times, Hindustan Times, GB News, Daily Mail, and The Times of India, all describing him as a "British journalist" or "UK citizen" in the context of his immigration status. No credible reports indicate US citizenship; instead, his case highlights visa-related enforcement for non-citizens.

[UltraBudgie]

It's always the worst-case scenario with no factual basis... he isn't an American and is subject to a higher standard for staying in a foreign country, as many foreign countries are with non-citizens...especially journalists

But let's pretend it's a constant Constitutional crisis because OMB is the President King

We also ban communists. Here is some AI text for you Mr Putnam:

Generally the U.S. does not automatically bar visas solely for being a member of a communist party, but membership can make someone inadmissible under specific immigration and national-security laws.

Key points:

* Under U.S. immigration law (particularly grounds of inadmissibility related to "totalitarian party membership" and activities), membership in or affiliation with certain organizations (including communist or other totalitarian parties) can render an applicant inadmissible.

* Exceptions and waivers exist. Applicants can sometimes obtain visas if they can show membership was involuntary, limited, or that they are not a security risk; consular officers also exercise discretion.

* Criminal conduct, espionage, terrorism, or advocacy of overthrowing the U.S. government are separately disqualifying and more likely to bar visas.

* Procedures and enforcement evolve; case outcomes depend on individual facts, the specific visa category, and current policy guidance.

[CriticalStinker]

To be fair to this guy initially, I know of many Jews that ALSO think 10/7 was a natural consequence of the oppression that is being put on the Palestinians. 

I dont have to agree. But its not limited to Muslims or even close to limited to muslims. Its The United Colors of Israel Divestment.

He has many opinions mirrored by even young American Jews. 

As of 2024 American Jews (millenial or younger) had; a 53% unfavorable view of The Israeli Government, 38% agreed with the statement that "Israel is an apartheid state," and 33% agreed with the statement "Israel is committing genocide against the Palestinians".

They probably wouldnt post or "like" this though...

My first thought to that is...

"Oh Yes, dragging girls away from a rave into rape tunnels while high on meth is a pure example of how god is great, you fucking ass. You're supposed to stone the devil, not praise it."

But he may be fucked saying that with this supreme court. And that frightens me a little. 
 

And..

He showed jubilation, but is an unpopular opinion material support? What is his motivation? Is he doing it specifically to increase militancy and violence, and can they prove that? 

I like to see them prove it beyond his grotesque parallel thought and praise rhetoric.

It seems like a must to not set a precedent of infringing free speech. Like unconstitutional, even for this jackass foreign commentator..

Because if he just said things without direct intention to promote violence we might all be fucked by a "material support through rhetoric" loophole.

To be honest, I didn’t see the the direct quote from him when the story came out and that changes things for me. 

if we’re just sending him on his way and not charging him with a crime, I’m good with that.

There have been other instances where people got targeted for purely speaking out against Israel which is messed up. But celebrating a terrorist act and speaking to a Muslim community while implying they should too isn’t a good practice for guests.