Stewart12

Perhaps you should read the OP properly, instead of advising others to do so. It quite clearly says this is a national debate about free speech

Proof? Links? Amazing that you know he's guilty, but Mike Johnson couldn't pin anything on him. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/mike-johnson-cant-say-what-crimes-mahmoud-khalil-committed/ar-AA1AHNs6 Of course, if i'm wrong - i'm wrong. But I haven't seen anything yet

No, but I didn't support Kamala either! Both dreadful candidates in my opinion Yes, it is about free speech, unless the government can provide evidence that he is supporting a terrorist organisation. If the government had done this, I would have supported it. But on the face of it, it looks like Trump is going way overboard and kicking out those who support Palestinian rights - which is not supporting a terrorist entity.

It's not about hating Trump, supporting Israel or Palestinians. It is about free speach and due process. Thankfully, the chap has a lawyer.

No evidence has been shown by a credible source - hence it's deletion my friend. If the guy is a terrorist, then ship him out. But he needs a fair trial, because that is what the law requires.

Reposted with links, as requested. No, I didn’t miss it, I didn’t think it was relevant. It’s like taking "Lawyers for Israel" (a real lobby group in the UK) or AIPAC’s word at face value. Biased sources will give anyone what they want to hear. The same is true for those on the other side - I'm sure you'd be the first to say 'Hamas health ministry are massaging the death figures" because it's a biased source, right? Same is true for your link.. Your legal analysis is also seriously flawed. Here are the facts: Green Card Revocation Requires a Legal Process The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) cannot simply revoke a Green Card without initiating removal (deportation) proceedings in immigration court before an immigration judge (unless the person voluntarily relinquishes their status). https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1229a Unlike non-immigrant visas, which can often be revoked more easily, lawful permanent residency carries strong legal protections under U.S. law. https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/removal-proceedings The government must present specific legal grounds for removal, and the individual has the right to challenge the decision, seek waivers, and appeal. https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/8/1240.8 In removal proceedings, the burden of proof is generally on the government to show that the LPR has committed an offense that warrants deportation, in other words, proof is required. Accusations alone are not enough. Even in cases of suspected terrorism ties, the government typically relies on classified intelligence, which may be challenged in court. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1227 The State Department does not have the authority to revoke a Green Card. It oversees visa issuance but not permanent residency revocation. That falls under DHS and immigration courts. The claim that DHS can revoke an LPR’s status administratively without legal proceedings is misleading. https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/visa-information-resources/visa-vs-status.html A Green Card Holder Can Be Deported For: Committing certain crimes (e.g., aggravated felonies, drug offenses, crimes of moral turpitude). https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1227#a_2 Engaging in terrorism-related activities (which is broadly defined). https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1182#a_3_B Fraud in obtaining the Green Card. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1227#a_1_A Abandoning permanent residency. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1101#a_13_C However, each of these requires evidence, legal review, and due process. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1229a Now, if the government have some evidence of him being a terrorist supporter, then please do reveal it and have him kicked out.

He hasn't actually been accused of ANY crimes at all. In the U.S., we do not punish people based on unproven accusations or political affiliations, due process matters. He is a green card holder, and entitled to those protections. Being pro-Palestinian is not the same as being pro-Hamas. Conflating the two is both intellectually dishonest and prejudicial, as it assumes that all support for Palestinian rights is support for a designated terrorist organization. That kind of misrepresentation has been used historically to silence legitimate political discourse and dismiss the concerns of an entire people. If the standard for 'national security threats' is simply holding a particular political view, then you are advocating for authoritarianism, not democracy. If he does get charged with a crime, or is proven to be a supporter of Hamas, then by all means arrest him, charge him, and deport.

I think it's reasonable, if they stick to 'supporters of Hamas' as they are a proscribed group. However, if they start chucking out all those who disagree with Israeli policies in the region, that goes too far. Criticizing a foreign country shouldn't be punishable in the USA - or anywhere else for that matter!

There are less than 280,000 Jewish people in the UK, yet somehow right wing rags like the Daily Mail, Talk TV, GB News etc seem to find these cases everywhere. 0.02% of the population, yet the media seems fixated on stirring up hate and tension. Quite frankly, I'm fed up of it all. Palestinians have the right to resist - but the way they do it matters. Israelis the right to defend when attacked - but the way they do it matters.

Agreed! I refuse to pay tax in Thailand because I don't get anything from it - no social benefits, security or even permission to stay. However, if they change the rules and simply require a completed and paid tax form for over 400k a year, I'd pay taxes because I'm getting something in return; permission to stay. They are going to have to change something as they can't expect foreigners to have a bank account with 40k+ deposits over 12 months/ 400/800k over 3 months if you literally can't open a bank account.

Thanks, I'll check out those threads now 🙂

Thanks for the reply Jack. I have had a lot of difficulty getting a 12 month extension based on marriage - even though I earn over 3 times the minimum each month, so I'm looking for other options. I'm not interested in using an agent to obtain a non-o - it's expensive and inconvenient. I'm looking at the LTR visa here; https://thaievisa.go.th/visa/ltr-visa It doesn't look like any financials are required for this (Remote workers working for well established overseas companies) - do you know any agents who can help with this - or could I do it by myself? Alternatively, I'll go for the DTV visa. I'm under 50, so retirement is not an option. How much would this cost?

Do you know which visas they can assist with in Sav? I'd love to know if they can actually help with LTR, DTR or NON-O multiple entry...

Yes, I used to go to that office years ago, then they moved the office to the uni in Ubon. The office is about a 20 minute drive past the old office in Phibum. It's been there a for a few years, but it's always empty. Very close to a hospital, on the left hand side.

The one near Phibum, about 30km from Chong Mek