Is there another angle, given the calls for divestment and then putting her name to an op-ed demanding the university implement the student senate’s resolutions, that she is lobbying for potential federal monies, which plausibly could be tied up in various ways in Tufts investments in Israel to be yanked in order to hurt Israel in its ef…
Is there another angle, given the calls for divestment and then putting her name to an op-ed demanding the university implement the student senate’s resolutions, that she is lobbying for potential federal monies, which plausibly could be tied up in various ways in Tufts investments in Israel to be yanked in order to hurt Israel in its effort to destroy Hamas and retrieve the hostages, including our own? Isn’t that in some sense supporting terrorism and lobbying a material effect of sorts that would benefit Hamas? That seems like an inappropriate contravention of our interest, certainly, even if it doesn’t rise to the level of a crime, it still seems grounds to revoke a VISA given to her solely to study here. As foreign guest here she has no right to demand that, no? But that is effectively what she has signed her name to.
Isn’t there another potential issue that these anti-Israel organizations she’s arguing on behalf of have financial ties to Iran and other terrorist organizations? Even if she is unwittingly being their mouthpiece, she is still in some sense lending support to proxies of hostile actors and grounds for revoking the VISA and deportation.
Ultimately, what is relevant is the nature of both Ozturk's and Khalil's presence here in the United States is that is has been conditional.
Every person in any country on a visa of any kind is there solely on the sufference of that country. Every person in the United States on any sort of visa is here solely on the sufference of the United States. That is an unavoidable fundamental difference between the citizen and the non-citizen.
In the United States, a visa is conditional upon not supporting terrorist groups such as Hamas, or endorsing any of their actions or activities. When those conditions are violated, there should be no surprise that deportation is among the inevitable consequences.
Is there another angle, given the calls for divestment and then putting her name to an op-ed demanding the university implement the student senate’s resolutions, that she is lobbying for potential federal monies, which plausibly could be tied up in various ways in Tufts investments in Israel to be yanked in order to hurt Israel in its effort to destroy Hamas and retrieve the hostages, including our own? Isn’t that in some sense supporting terrorism and lobbying a material effect of sorts that would benefit Hamas? That seems like an inappropriate contravention of our interest, certainly, even if it doesn’t rise to the level of a crime, it still seems grounds to revoke a VISA given to her solely to study here. As foreign guest here she has no right to demand that, no? But that is effectively what she has signed her name to.
Isn’t there another potential issue that these anti-Israel organizations she’s arguing on behalf of have financial ties to Iran and other terrorist organizations? Even if she is unwittingly being their mouthpiece, she is still in some sense lending support to proxies of hostile actors and grounds for revoking the VISA and deportation.
Ultimately, what is relevant is the nature of both Ozturk's and Khalil's presence here in the United States is that is has been conditional.
Every person in any country on a visa of any kind is there solely on the sufference of that country. Every person in the United States on any sort of visa is here solely on the sufference of the United States. That is an unavoidable fundamental difference between the citizen and the non-citizen.
In the United States, a visa is conditional upon not supporting terrorist groups such as Hamas, or endorsing any of their actions or activities. When those conditions are violated, there should be no surprise that deportation is among the inevitable consequences.