2 hours ago, rasalvaje said:

So much for free speech.

 

 

They still have free speech, that also comes with consequences for their actions. As do ALL actions.
Columbia on the other hand has a responsibility to not encourage terrorist, much less give them a place to spread their disease. Why ? Because they accept federal funding, go ahead and keep doing what your doing but you'll lose all federal funds.

As it should be

1 hour ago, Bkk Brian said:

Since when is barricading themselves in private property, stopping classes and dishing out terrorist propaganda celebrating the massacres on 7th Oct free speech?

Barricading themselves in private property and stopping classes is not free speech. Criticizing IDF terrorists for their continuing attacks on civilians in Gaza and the West Bank and attempts at driving all Palestinians off their land is.

1 minute ago, WDSmart said:

Barricading themselves in private property and stopping classes is not free speech. Criticizing IDF terrorists for their continuing attacks on civilians in Gaza and the West Bank and attempts at driving all Palestinians off their land is.

 

   The problem is the continued harassment of Jewish students on campus and the disruption of students education due to protests .

   Its nothing to do with "free speech" , "free speech " doesn't giver anyone the right to attack Jews or any other minority group 

4 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

Barricading themselves in private property and stopping classes is not free speech. Criticizing IDF terrorists for their continuing attacks on civilians in Gaza and the West Bank and attempts at driving all Palestinians off their land is.

They were promoting the massacres and hostage taking by Hamas. That is not free speech. It is inciting violence.

 

I will ignore your false label of calling the IDF terrorists. 

14 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   The problem is the continued harassment of Jewish students on campus and the disruption of students education due to protests .

   Its nothing to do with "free speech" , "free speech " doesn't giver anyone the right to attack Jews or any other minority group 

You are correct that free speech does not give you the right to attack anyone. It does, however, give you the right to criticize them. 

14 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

They were promoting the massacres and hostage taking by Hamas. That is not free speech. It is inciting violence.

 

I will ignore your false label of calling the IDF terrorists. 

They were justifying Hama's attack on Israel and the taking of hostages. That has already happened. That is free speech. It is not inciting violence. Celebrating the IDF's continuing devastation of Gaza and the attacks on Palestinians in the West Bank is inciting violence. 

Wouldn't you call any military organization accused of war crimes "terrorists"? 

1 hour ago, BangkokReady said:

 

He read the OP, of course, he's simply being disingenuous to try to obfuscate.

Not at all disingenuous.

 

Trump has stated he will withhold all federal funding from, to quote the OP:

 

9 hours ago, Social Media said:

universities that allow what he terms "illegal protests."

This will undoubtedly wind up in the courts.

 

So wondering what Trump’s definition of  ‘illegal protests’ is far from ‘disingenuous’.

 

There are after all already laws in place that address violence, undue obstruction, trespass etc.

 

All of which are enforceable by police and the courts, not by universities.

 

 

 

5 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

You are correct that free speech does not give you the right to attack anyone. It does, however, give you the right to criticize them. 

 

   No ones right to criticise others is being taken away from them, so why bring it up ?

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Not at all disingenuous.

Trump has stated he will withhold all federal funding from, to quote the OP:
This will undoubtedly wind up in the courts.

  

   It wont end up in Court .

The  Unis will stop the disruptors and protestors  and funding will remain and everything will go back to normal .

   This is Donalds way of dealing with issues 

The threat has nothing to do with peaceful protests and only involves protestors that are breaking the law. 

 

Do the anti-Trumpers believe protestors should be permitted to break the law such as damaging property and harassing other students? 

6 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

The threat has nothing to do with peaceful protests and only involves protestors that are breaking the law. 

 

Do the anti-Trumpers believe protestors should be permitted to break the law such as damaging property and harassing other students? 

Well I don’t believe protestors should be allowed to break the law.

 

But I also don’t support the idea of a President declaring ‘protests illegal’.

 

That’s a matter for the law and the courts.

 

10 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

Wouldn't you call any military organization accused of war crimes "terrorists"? 

 

  "Accused"  

Lets not get into the basics of explaining that an accusation isn't a conviction or  proof of anything .

   Lefties these days seem to consider that an accusation is proof of something whilst at the same time going on about how highly educated and intelligent they are and how everyone who disagrees with them is stupid 

14 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

They were justifying Hama's attack on Israel and the taking of hostages. That has already happened. That is free speech. It is not inciting violence. Celebrating the IDF's continuing devastation of Gaza and the attacks on Palestinians in the West Bank is inciting violence. 

Wouldn't you call any military organization accused of war crimes "terrorists"? 

Oh a Hamas apologist. They were committing illegal occupation of a private building in addition they certainly were promoting violence. The very definition of the Oct 7th atrocities. 

9 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Well I don’t believe protestors should be allowed to break the law.

 

But I also don’t support the idea of a President declaring ‘protests illegal’.

 

That’s a matter for the law and the courts.

 

I did not see where the president declared protests illegal. 

 

 

32 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

You are correct that free speech does not give you the right to attack anyone. It does, however, give you the right to criticize them. 

But free speech does not give you the right to criticize them anywhere. 

7 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

I did not see where the president declared protests illegal. 

 

 

From the OP:

“Donald Trump has escalated his stance against pro-Palestinian demonstrations on college campuses, threatening to withdraw federal funding from universities that allow what he terms "illegal protests."”

4 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

From the OP:

“Donald Trump has escalated his stance against pro-Palestinian demonstrations on college campuses, threatening to withdraw federal funding from universities that allow what he terms "illegal protests."”

 

   Trump didn't makes laws that declare the protests to be illegal , he just pointed out that the protests weren't legal .

   There's a huge difference between making something illegal and simply stating that they were illegal 

25 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

  "Accused"  

Lets not get into the basics of explaining that an accusation isn't a conviction or  proof of anything .

   Lefties these days seem to consider that an accusation is proof of something whilst at the same time going on about how highly educated and intelligent they are and how everyone who disagrees with them is stupid 

"Accused" does not guarantee a conviction, but calling someone something does not make that true, either.

No, I don't consider everyone who disagrees with me stupid, but I often consider them misinformed. And, on occasion, I, too, have been misinformed. 

31 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Oh a Hamas apologist. They were committing illegal occupation of a private building in addition they certainly were promoting violence. The very definition of the Oct 7th atrocities. 

We've had this discussion many times, so I don't think I'll convince you of it now, but I will again state that October 7 did not just happen for no reason. This deadly conflict between the Israelis and the Palestinians has been going on for at least 70 years, and you could even say 3,000 years. I support the Palestinians, and you support the Israelis. I know that won't change.  

2 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

"Accused" does not guarantee a conviction, but calling someone something does not make that true, either.

No, I don't consider everyone who disagrees with me stupid, but I often consider them misinformed. And, on occasion, I, too, have been misinformed. 

 

   Hamas have committed acts of terrorism , multiple acts of terrorism and that is undeniable .

   You seem to ignore the facts and then label Israel as being terrorists because of some accusation 

20 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

But free speech does not give you the right to criticize them anywhere. 

Yes, it does, unless you are doing more than criticizing them.  

11 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

From the OP:

“Donald Trump has escalated his stance against pro-Palestinian demonstrations on college campuses, threatening to withdraw federal funding from universities that allow what he terms "illegal protests."”

As I said, I did not see where the president declared protests illegal. 

 

He's threatening to withdraw federal funding from universities that allow illegal protests.

 

Is there a not difference between illegal protests and legal protests? 

 

A legal protest would be carrying signs and whatnot. An illegal protest would be people damaging property and harassing people. 

3 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

We've had this discussion many times, so I don't think I'll convince you of it now, but I will again state that October 7 did not just happen for no reason. This deadly conflict between the Israelis and the Palestinians has been going on for at least 70 years, and you could even say 3,000 years

 

   You couldn't say that , because Palestinians were not around 3000 years ago , there were barely around 300 years ago 

Oh well, at least President Dufus hasn't (yet) sent in the National Guard with live ammo to shoot the kids like your pal Reagan did when he was Governor of California in 1969.

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/02/video-ronald-reagans-press-conference-after-bloody-thursday/284045/ 

15 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

We've had this discussion many times, so I don't think I'll convince you of it now, but I will again state that October 7 did not just happen for no reason. This deadly conflict between the Israelis and the Palestinians has been going on for at least 70 years, and you could even say 3,000 years. I support the Palestinians, and you support the Israelis. I know that won't change.  

Wrong topic

30 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   Trump didn't makes laws that declare the protests to be illegal , he just pointed out that the protests weren't legal .

   There's a huge difference between making something illegal and simply stating that they were illegal 

Again, that’s a matter for the courts.

 

It is not matter for Presidential edict.

 

 

23 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

As I said, I did not see where the president declared protests

 

He's threatening to withdraw federal funding from universities that allow illegal protests.

 

Is there a not difference between illegal protests and legal protests? 

 

A legal protest would be carrying signs and whatnot. An illegal protest would be people damaging property and harassing people. 

“He's threatening to withdraw federal funding from universities that allow illegal protests.”

 

From the OP:

 

Donald Trump has escalated his stance against pro-Palestinian demonstrations on college campuses, threatening to withdraw federal funding from universities that allow what he terms "illegal protests."”

16 minutes ago, ronnie50 said:

Oh well, at least President Dufus hasn't (yet) sent in the National Guard with live ammo to shoot the kids like your pal Reagan did when he was Governor of California in 1969.

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/02/video-ronald-reagans-press-conference-after-bloody-thursday/284045/ 

Yet.

5 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

“He's threatening to withdraw federal funding from universities that allow illegal protests.”

 

From the OP:

 

Donald Trump has escalated his stance against pro-Palestinian demonstrations on college campuses, threatening to withdraw federal funding from universities that allow what he terms "illegal protests."”

So, Trump said "illegal protests" and the OP added (in typical leftist fashion) "what he terms".

 

Yeah, I got that part. 

6 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Yet.

But Jared will be whispering in his ear, I bet.