Columbia student’s visa cancelled for being with protesters

[Valcazar]

Weren't you arguing last year that it was pragmatic to support genocide?

No.
But you were arguing that everything happening now was good because it would teach Democrats a lesson and make things better for Palestinians and those who support them.

Doesn't it look like it would have been smarter now to stand up for student protests last year when it wasn't life and death?

I was in favor of the student protests, remember?
You're the one who said this was the preferred outcome.

 

[Frankfooter]

No.
But you were arguing that everything happening now was good because it would teach Democrats a lesson and make things better for Palestinians and those who support them.

No.
It was never good. I argued that lots of people have a red line about voting for a party that is aiding genocide, you argued that it was naive and 'pragmatic' to vote for the dems and their support of genocide.

I was in favor of the student protests, remember?
You're the one who said this was the preferred outcome.

No.
I said the preferred outcome was to work to change the party before the election, to support the student protests and to try to change the party before they lost the election over the genocide. I did argue that if the dems couldn't change before that maybe this would be the only way to make them change, but that was not 'good' nor the best choice. I do admit that I underestimated how many fascists and project 2025 people would support trump this time, I had hoped his total incompetence would keep him from screwing over the system.

But I'd say in retrospect that the dems fucked up, both their leaders and the party. Biden ended the idea that the US backed international law and rules based governance. Now they're stuck with trump taking what they made acceptable too far.

 

[Valcazar]

No.
It was never good. I argued that lots of people have a red line about voting for a party that is aiding genocide, you argued that it was naive and 'pragmatic' to vote for the dems and their support of genocide.

Because it would keep Trump out and Trump would be worse.

Oh look.
Trump is worse.

How shocking that the obvious thing that was obvious came to pass.

No.
I said the preferred outcome was to work to change the party before the election, to support the student protests and to try to change the party before they lost the election over the genocide. I did argue that if the dems couldn't change before that maybe this would be the only way to make them change, but that was not 'good' nor the best choice.

You said it would be the way to make them change and that it couldn't get worse under Trump.
Once it was obvious that you weren't going to get the result you wanted from pre-election pressure, you turned to this being long term the better result than the Democrats winning the election.

I do admit that I underestimated how many fascists and project 2025 people would support trump this time, I had hoped his total incompetence would keep him from screwing over the system.

You insisted that it would.
It wasn't even a risk.
It was a "hypothetical" and I was being pro-genocide by warning you of the consequences.

But I'd say in retrospect that the dems fucked up, both their leaders and the party. Biden ended the idea that the US backed international law and rules based governance. Now they're stuck with trump taking what they made acceptable too far.

Ahh, I see you've grown Butlerian in your logic.

 

[Uwauwa]

But I'd say in retrospect that the dems fucked up, both their leaders and the party.

No it’s not just the dems, it’s their supporters too, are fucked up. From the top all the way down.

 

[Frankfooter]

Because it would keep Trump out and Trump would be worse.

Oh look.
Trump is worse.

How shocking that the obvious thing that was obvious came to pass.

trump is the same as Biden, though he did get Netanyahu to declare a ceasefire for a while.
Both aided genocide. Both are letting AIPAC and Netanyahu do what they want.
Both sent US money to Israel instead of for health care or anything for americans.
Both are working to destroy international laws and human rights organizations.

You said it would be the way to make them change and that it couldn't get worse under Trump.
Once it was obvious that you weren't going to get the result you wanted from pre-election pressure, you turned to this being long term the better result than the Democrats winning the election.

You declared it would be 'pragmatic' to vote for Biden's version of genocide to stop trump. But you also know that in a split vote between a hitler and a hitler lite that the hitler will always win because some people will refuse to vote for any form of a hitler.

You insisted that it would.
It wasn't even a risk.
It was a "hypothetical" and I was being pro-genocide by warning you of the consequences.

Yes, you acknowledged the risk of the hitler lite losing to the hitler yet still backed the hitler lite instead of trying to change the party and their choice.
The thing is, I was right and was trying to actively stop it from happening. You just dismissed those warnings and declared a little genocide was ok.

Ahh, I see you've grown Butlerian in your logic.

That's a weak deflection to a question you can't answer.
You used to declare the Wilhoit definition all that was wrong with conservatism, but now you're just on that team.

 

[Valcazar]

trump is the same as Biden

Such a ludicrous statement.

You declared it would be 'pragmatic' to vote for Biden's version of genocide to stop trump.

Your inability to understand voting remains a problem in having a serious conversation with you.
But yes, voting to not make things worth for the Palestinian people was a good thing to vote for.
I know you disagreed.

Yes, you acknowledged the risk of the hitler lite losing to the hitler yet still backed the hitler lite instead of trying to change the party and their choice.
The thing is, I was right and was trying to actively stop it from happening. You just dismissed those warnings and declared a little genocide was ok.

No.
You overestimated the leverage you (generalized you) had and then, instead of working to minimize damage, said that Trump would be better in the long run.

That's a weak deflection to a question you can't answer.
You used to declare the Wilhoit definition all that was wrong with conservatism, but now you're just on that team.

LOL.
Dear god.
You really shouldn't use tools you don't understand.

 

[Frankfooter]

Such a ludicrous statement.

Its not ludicrous at all, on the subject of Israel both Biden and trump have given Netanyahu what they wanted. At most you could argue that trump did force Netanyahu into a ceasefire for a bit, which is way more than Biden ever did.

Your inability to understand voting remains a problem in having a serious conversation with you.
But yes, voting to not make things worth for the Palestinian people was a good thing to vote for.
I know you disagreed.

And yet I was correct about what would happen and you were wrong.
Your inability to understand that your own choice to overlook genocide to vote for Biden means that you are just like MAGA, willing to overlook crimes by your leader in order to gain power.

No.
You overestimated the leverage you (generalized you) had and then, instead of working to minimize damage, said that Trump would be better in the long run.

That's not what I said. l said getting the dems to change would be better long term.

LOL.
Dear god.
You really shouldn't use tools you don't understand.

How are you not fitting Whilhoit's definition of conservatism right now?

 

[Valcazar]

Its not ludicrous at all, on the subject of Israel both Biden and trump have given Netanyahu what they wanted. At most you could argue that trump did force Netanyahu into a ceasefire for a bit, which is way more than Biden ever did.

Wow.

And yet I was correct about what would happen and you were wrong.

Wow.
That's some hard core cognitive dissonance you have going for you.

That's not what I said. l said getting the dems to change would be better long term.

Keep lying to yourself.

 

[Frankfooter]

Wow.

So prove I'm wrong.

Wow.
That's some hard core cognitive dissonance you have going for you.

So prove I was wrong about the election.

Keep lying to yourself.

What is your path forward for the dems now?
Prove to me, with support material, that my claims are wrong.

Its really quite telling that you claim I'm wrong but won't defend your position.

 

[Valcazar]

So prove I'm wrong.

Netanyahu and his government disagree.

So prove I was wrong about the election.

Trump won, things are worse.
Which is what I told you would happen.

What is your path forward for the dems now?
Prove to me, with support material, that my claims are wrong.

How am I supposed to prove your claim that years from now the Dems will be better on Palestine specifically because of this loss?
It's an impossible thing to prove.

Its really quite telling that you claim I'm wrong but won't defend your position.

Frank, why would I bother?
You post HUNDREDS of posts on this subject all the time and have shown your obsession can outlast all but the most passionately obsessed counter arguments.
Reality is an entirely optional component of this process.
Why on earth would I waste my time that way when even the things you ask to prove are impossible to prove or disprove?

It's a fool's errand.

 

[Frankfooter]

Netanyahu and his government disagree.

Netanyahu is wanted for 'extermination' by the ICC.
Yet you are taking his side here.

Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect

During the election you argued that it was pragmatic to overlook Harris and Biden's aid and funding of the genocide in Palestine. Now this is lead to a point where all the GOP and most of the dems are owned by AIPAC and this is leading to the expansion of Wilhoit conservatism in the US. You've got students and immigrants being disappeared, universities under attack and an acceptance that the US is using the law to bind those who are against the genocide. Once its accepted by americans that the law is no longer fair, breaking it becomes acceptable.

Trump won, things are worse.
Which is what I told you would happen.

Harris lost the election over support of the genocide, which is what I told you would happen if the dems didn't listen to the 80% of their base that wanted a ceasefire.
Now the dems are screwed over, they are seen as just as AIPAC and billionaire controlled. They have no moral base and no position to argue from.

trump is letting Netanyahu do what he wants, the exact same as Biden, while paying for it. That is the same.
What's happening now is that trump's tariffs just lost him the support of the oligarchy. Its not quite time for the lettuce watch, but the country will turn against him and the people with the money have already.

How am I supposed to prove your claim that years from now the Dems will be better on Palestine specifically because of this loss?
It's an impossible thing to prove.

I know, you don't care if the dems are better on Palestine. You admit its genocide but don't have any problem with it.
That leaves you sitting in this murky area where your ivory tower self assurance left you blind to backing what a political historian should have understood.
If you back parties that are corrupt and committing evil acts it only makes more evil acts more acceptable.

Frank, why would I bother?
You post HUNDREDS of posts on this subject all the time and have shown your obsession can outlast all but the most passionately obsessed counter arguments.
Reality is an entirely optional component of this process.
Why on earth would I waste my time that way when even the things you ask to prove are impossible to prove or disprove?

It's a fool's errand.

How long is your conversation with larue been going now?
The reason you won't debate this with me is not because you think I'm wrong, its because you don't think you can win.

Here's the thing.
We both know larue is an idiot.
You're not, you know this subject well enough to have known better.

 

[Valcazar]

Netanyahu is wanted for 'extermination' by the ICC.
Yet you are taking his side here.

How is pointing out that Netanyahu doesn't agree with you that Biden gave him everything he wanted "taking his side"?

Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect

Yes, I quote it often.
That you somehow think I have no adopted it simply means you don't seem to understand what the quote means.

During the election you argued that it was pragmatic to overlook Harris and Biden's aid and funding of the genocide in Palestine. Now this is lead to a point where all the GOP and most of the dems are owned by AIPAC and this is leading to the expansion of Wilhoit conservatism in the US. You've got students and immigrants being disappeared, universities under attack and an acceptance that the US is using the law to bind those who are against the genocide. Once its accepted by americans that the law is no longer fair, breaking it becomes acceptable.

I see chains of logic are about as a strong a suit of yours as might be expected.

Harris lost the election over support of the genocide, which is what I told you would happen if the dems didn't listen to the 80% of their base that wanted a ceasefire.

I know you believe this.
You've failed to prove it many times.

Now the dems are screwed over, they are seen as just as AIPAC and billionaire controlled. They have no moral base and no position to argue from.

Solely based on this.
It was literally the only thing anyone voted for or cares about.
You've been very clear that you will believe that until you die.

trump is letting Netanyahu do what he wants, the exact same as Biden, while paying for it. That is the same.

And again, not according to either Trump or Netanyahu.
Or anyone else following the conflict.

What's happening now is that trump's tariffs just lost him the support of the oligarchy. Its not quite time for the lettuce watch, but the country will turn against him and the people with the money have already.

Ahh.
"The oligarchy will save us".
Nice.

I know, you don't care if the dems are better on Palestine. You admit its genocide but don't have any problem with it.

Your wild inability to understand my position has grown more boring each time you insist on it.

That leaves you sitting in this murky area where your ivory tower self assurance left you blind to backing what a political historian should have understood.
If you back parties that are corrupt and committing evil acts it only makes more evil acts more acceptable.

So you've joined Butler in the "if things aren't perfect, we should encourage the most evil as possible since that is what is going to happen anyway" crowd?
Or is this back just to "If everyone only agreed with me, there would be world peace"?
How far are you going to take the stupidity?

But I do agree that your support for Trump and the GOP taking over encouraged more evil.
We agree about you backing their corruption and evil only encouraged more.

How long is your conversation with larue been going now?

Every so often I play with him as a chew toy because it is kind of amusing.
You're not amusing.

The reason you won't debate this with me is not because you think I'm wrong, its because you don't think you can win.

I can't win with Larue either.
You're both very married to narratives that don't need to connect to reality.

 

[Frankfooter]

How is pointing out that Netanyahu doesn't agree with you that Biden gave him everything he wanted "taking his side"?

I said Netanyahu is wanted for extermination by the ICC and you replied that the Netanyahu government disagrees.
You are trying to cast doubt on the charges, that's taking a side.

Yes, I quote it often.
That you somehow think I have no adopted it simply means you don't seem to understand what the quote means.

In context it looks like this.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1908122020837020105

I see chains of logic are about as a strong a suit of yours as might be expected.

Ok, it was late and saying it 'lead to' AIPAC controlled parties is incorrect, they have been bought by AIPAC for quite some time now.

I know you believe this.
You've failed to prove it many times.

I have not failed to prove that 80% of dems wanted a ceasefire.
Nor have you proved I'm wrong that the genocide cost the dems the election.

Solely based on this.
It was literally the only thing anyone voted for or cares about.
You've been very clear that you will believe that until you die.

Straw man. I never argued it was the sole issue, only that it was a major issue for enough people to cost the dems a close election.

And again, not according to either Trump or Netanyahu.
Or anyone else following the conflict.

Back this up with evidence, this assertion doesn't hold water.

Ahh.
"The oligarchy will save us".
Nice.

Save us? Not at all, but they may let trump be turfed.

Your wild inability to understand my position has grown more boring each time you insist on it.

Your position becomes clear as you dance around the issue and refuse to step on certain clear statements.

So you've joined Butler in the "if things aren't perfect, we should encourage the most evil as possible since that is what is going to happen anyway" crowd?
Or is this back just to "If everyone only agreed with me, there would be world peace"?
How far are you going to take the stupidity?

But I do agree that your support for Trump and the GOP taking over encouraged more evil.
We agree about you backing their corruption and evil only encouraged more.

Finally, this is as close to you defending your position as I've seen in a while on this issue. I do find it cute that you want to blame the people who wouldn't vote for genocide instead of blaming the party that wouldn't say no to genocide even though their polls said 80% wanted a ceasefire. You're looking for an excuse for the loss. You know that the Palestine protests were front page news along with the genocide for most of the election year and continuing today. How hard should it have been for the dems to get Biden or Harris to stop paying billions for bombs dropped on Gaza? Why do you refuse to blame them for aiding and funding a genocide?

Every so often I play with him as a chew toy because it is kind of amusing.
You're not amusing.

That's because I can challenge you.

I can't win with Larue either.
You're both very married to narratives that don't need to connect to reality.

So it must have hurt when my warnings about the dems losing were proven correct.
When you face a prediction error you need to adjust your predictions or adjust your model of the world.
This would require adjusting your model of the world, which is nearly impossible for most people.

 

[Valcazar]

I said Netanyahu is wanted for extermination by the ICC and you replied that the Netanyahu government disagrees.
You are trying to cast doubt on the charges, that's taking a side.

No.
You said " Its not ludicrous at all, on the subject of Israel both Biden and trump have given Netanyahu what they wanted. "
Netanyahu and his government disagree.
The court had nothing to do with the exchange.

In context it looks like this.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1908122020837020105

What does this have to do with choosing between Biden and Trump?
This is a larger foreign policy question across the West that won't be addressed by a single Presidential election.

I have not failed to prove that 80% of dems wanted a ceasefire.
Nor have you proved I'm wrong that the genocide cost the dems the election.

I doubt anyone will be able to prove it in either direction.
Won't stop you from claiming it with absolute certainty, just as it hasn't stopped you in the past.

Straw man. I never argued it was the sole issue, only that it was a major issue for enough people to cost the dems a close election.

Which I never disagreed with.
All major issues are important in a close election.
You, however, did say it was the sole issue.
In fact, you said the fact I would consider other issues at all meant I was a moral monster who thought other lives were more important than Palestinian ones.

Back this up with evidence, this assertion doesn't hold water.

LOL
I thought you listened to the Israeli government to pay attention to what it was doing?

Save us? Not at all, but they may let trump be turfed.

And this would lead to a better Israeli policy from JD Vance?

Your position becomes clear as you dance around the issue and refuse to step on certain clear statements.

LOL.
I don't respond to LaRue's constant repetition of "You refuse to acknowledge the debt bomb and love all government spending and think there is never any waste" and its variants either.

Finally, this is as close to you defending your position as I've seen in a while on this issue. I do find it cute that you want to blame the people who wouldn't vote for genocide instead of blaming the party that wouldn't say no to genocide even though their polls said 80% wanted a ceasefire. You're looking for an excuse for the loss. You know that the Palestine protests were front page news along with the genocide for most of the election year and continuing today. How hard should it have been for the dems to get Biden or Harris to stop paying billions for bombs dropped on Gaza? Why do you refuse to blame them for aiding and funding a genocide?

I do.
I've consistently said it was the wrong policy.
I've also said encouraging people to not vote for them because of it, given the options in the actual election was stupid and counter productive, EVEN if your only voting issue was the Gaza situation.
I was right.

The options were as follows.
On Gaza - Biden Bad / Trump promises to be worse and his previous term shows it isn't an empty promise.

Therefore, if I am a one-issue Gaza voter, I should vote Biden.

On EVERYTHING ELSE - Biden a range of bad-to-ok / Trump consistently worse on all subjects.

Therefore, if I include anything else in my weighting, I should vote Biden.

You -> Biden should lose, Trump can't possibly be worse.

Oh look, reality agreed with me, not you.

That's because I can challenge you.

No.
It's because you are less amusing.
You don't break down in a funny "looping robot" way.

So it must have hurt when my warnings about the dems losing were proven correct.
When you face a prediction error you need to adjust your predictions or adjust your model of the world.
This would require adjusting your model of the world, which is nearly impossible for most people.

You are demonstrating that quite well, I acknowledge.

 

[richaceg]

No.
You said " Its not ludicrous at all, on the subject of Israel both Biden and trump have given Netanyahu what they wanted. "
Netanyahu and his government disagree.
The court had nothing to do with the exchange.



What does this have to do with choosing between Biden and Trump?
This is a larger foreign policy question across the West that won't be addressed by a single Presidential election.



I doubt anyone will be able to prove it in either direction.
Won't stop you from claiming it with absolute certainty, just as it hasn't stopped you in the past.



Which I never disagreed with.
All major issues are important in a close election.
You, however, did say it was the sole issue.
In fact, you said the fact I would consider other issues at all meant I was a moral monster who thought other lives were more important than Palestinian ones.



LOL
I thought you listened to the Israeli government to pay attention to what it was doing?



And this would lead to a better Israeli policy from JD Vance?



LOL.
I don't respond to LaRue's constant repetition of "You refuse to acknowledge the debt bomb and love all government spending and think there is never any waste" and its variants either.



I do.
I've consistently said it was the wrong policy.
I've also said encouraging people to not vote for them because of it, given the options in the actual election was stupid and counter productive, EVEN if your only voting issue was the Gaza situation.
I was right.

The options were as follows.
On Gaza - Biden Bad / Trump promises to be worse and his previous term shows it isn't an empty promise.

Therefore, if I am a one-issue Gaza voter, I should vote Biden.

On EVERYTHING ELSE - Biden a range of bad-to-ok / Trump consistently worse on all subjects.

Therefore, if I include anything else in my weighting, I should vote Biden.

You -> Biden should lose, Trump can't possibly be worse.

Oh look, reality agreed with me, not you.



No.
It's because you are less amusing.
You don't break down in a funny "looping robot" way.



You are demonstrating that quite well, I acknowledge.

It's as simple as Franky thinking th world revolves around the Hamas-israel conflict. When something happens in the world...somehow he manages to connect Israel to it...the ultimate world peace can only be achieved when the jews are gone...

 

[Frankfooter]

No.
You said " Its not ludicrous at all, on the subject of Israel both Biden and trump have given Netanyahu what they wanted. "
Netanyahu and his government disagree.
The court had nothing to do with the exchange.

That's your opinion, its biased and wrong.
Biden funded genocide and blocked UN and ICC, trump is funding genocide and bombing Yemen. You can call them different but they are both doing what Netanyahu and AIPAC want, not what americans want.

What does this have to do with choosing between Biden and Trump?
This is a larger foreign policy question across the West that won't be addressed by a single Presidential election.

That was an example of Wilhoit in this particular case.

I doubt anyone will be able to prove it in either direction.
Won't stop you from claiming it with absolute certainty, just as it hasn't stopped you in the past.

And it won't stop you from claiming with absolute certainty I'm wrong. That's the same.
The only difference is I provided polls that backed my argument.

Which I never disagreed with.
All major issues are important in a close election.
You, however, did say it was the sole issue.
In fact, you said the fact I would consider other issues at all meant I was a moral monster who thought other lives were more important than Palestinian ones.

Nope, I said it was the biggest issue that Harris could have easily changed and made a large effect on her support.

LOL
I thought you listened to the Israeli government to pay attention to what it was doing?

deflection

And this would lead to a better Israeli policy from JD Vance?

deflection

LOL.
I don't respond to LaRue's constant repetition of "You refuse to acknowledge the debt bomb and love all government spending and think there is never any waste" and its variants either.

deflectin

I do.
I've consistently said it was the wrong policy.
I've also said encouraging people to not vote for them because of it, given the options in the actual election was stupid and counter productive, EVEN if your only voting issue was the Gaza situation.
I was right.

No, you've never said it was the wrong policy on this board, in fact you made it very clear that you refused to make a clear stance here.

The options were as follows.
On Gaza - Biden Bad / Trump promises to be worse and his previous term shows it isn't an empty promise.

Therefore, if I am a one-issue Gaza voter, I should vote Biden.

On EVERYTHING ELSE - Biden a range of bad-to-ok / Trump consistently worse on all subjects.

Therefore, if I include anything else in my weighting, I should vote Biden.

You -> Biden should lose, Trump can't possibly be worse.

Oh look, reality agreed with me, not you.

Intentional mischaracterization.
I said its a red line to vote for genocide, any moral person that believes in 'never again' can never vote for anyone aiding genocide.
You argued that was naive and it was pragmatic to vote for the lesser amount of genocide and just accept it.

I also said the best plan was to pressure the dems to change before the election, which many groups tried to do.
Harris chose to pay for bombs for killing children rather than win the election.
That was her choice.

No.
It's because you are less amusing.
You don't break down in a funny "looping robot" way.

You want more copy and paste?

You are demonstrating that quite well, I acknowledge.

Yet I was right and you were wrong.
Its your predictive model that needs adjusting.

Ta-Nehesi Coates put it well.

 

[Frankfooter]

It's as simple as Franky thinking th world revolves around the Hamas-israel conflict. When something happens in the world...somehow he manages to connect Israel to it...the ultimate world peace can only be achieved when the jews are gone...

Some people choose to back genocide.
Some choose to stand against it.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1908607336412836261