We Don't Need To Welcome In People Who Hate Us
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Yesterday in Boulder, Colorado, a perpetrator sprayed a flammable liquid on a group of mostly elderly Jews protesting the continued holding of hostages in Gaza. Then he threw Molotov cocktails to set several of the demonstrators on fire. The New York Post reports here that 8 were injured, ranging in age from 52 to 88 years old. Police arrested a man named named Mohamed Sabry Soliman, who was caught on video committing the acts. Oh, and also shouting slogans, including “They are killers! How many children you killed?” and “End Zionists.”
It quickly emerged that Soliman was an Egyptian illegally in the country. He had originally entered legally in 2022 on a tourist visa, but then overstayed. In 2023 he was granted a permit to work in the U.S. by the Biden administration. That expired in March 2025, after which he stayed on illegally.
Which raises the question, why was Soliman in the country in the first place, or granted permission to stay and work, or not thrown out when the permission expired? Whatever you might think about the illegal immigration situation, why on earth do we welcome into the country people who hate us? Did anybody vet this guy, even a little?
Add Soliman to a long list of Middle Easterners in the U.S. at the grace of the government who make no secret of their hatred of the U.S. and of Israel. And who are only too happy to lead groups in acts of trespass, vandalism, and violence. To refresh you on some of the names and roles, here is a May 15 piece from Al-Jazeera with a brief list of some of the most prominent:
Mohsen Mahdawi, Rumeysa Ozturk, Mahmoud Khalil and Badar Khan Suri are among the students targeted by US President Donald Trump.
These four are all student leaders of pro-Hamas, anti-Israel, and pro-BDS movements at elite university campuses — Mahdawi and Khalil at Columbia, Ozturk at Tufts, and Suri at Georgetown.
Consider Khalil. Al-Jazeera identifies him as the “lead negotiator” for the group called Columbia University Apartheid Divest. Isn’t “lead negotiator” the same thing as head of the group? Looking around, I can’t find the name of anyone else owning up to being the leader of this group, and it looks to me like calling himself “lead negotiator” is a thinly-veiled way to preserve some kind of argument that he can avoid responsibility for acts of violence and vandalism carried out by the group.
What has CUAD been up to this past year or so? Read articles about the mayhem at Columbia since the October 7, 2023 Hamas massacres, and you find CUAD intimately involved in all of it. For example, there was the statement put out by CUAD on the one-year anniversary of the massacre, as reported in the New York Times of October 9, 2024:
“We support liberation by any means necessary, including armed resistance,” the group, Columbia University Apartheid Divest . . . . The group marked the anniversary of the Oct. 7 attack on Israel by distributing a newspaper with a headline that used Hamas’s name for it: “One Year Since Al-Aqsa Flood, Revolution Until Victory,” it read, over a picture of Hamas fighters breaching the security fence to Israel. And the group posted an essay calling the attack a “moral, military and political victory” and quoting Ismail Haniyeh , the assassinated former political leader of Hamas.
In January 2025, as reported here in the Columbia Spectator , a Columbia building called Kravis Hall, housing the business school, was vandalized by protesters pouring a cement-like substance down multiple toilets all over the building. Somebody just happened to record an anonymous video of the vandalism, which then got posted on the Instagram accounts of CUAD and another group called New York City resists. Text accompanying the Instagram post described the vandalism as some kind of righteous response to actions of the Israeli military in Gaza.
Or, just a few weeks ago, in early May, protesters occupied Columbia’s main library in the middle of exam time. Here is a May 8 report in Time Magazine . Excerpt:
A Substack post that appeared to be from Columbia University Apartheid Divest , a coalition of student groups supporting the Palestinian cause, said the protesters “renamed” the library the “Basel Al-Araj Popular University” after a Palestinian activist and writer who died in 2017. “The flood shows that as long as Columbia funds and profits from imperialist violence, the people will continue to disrupt Columbia’s profits and legitimacy,” the Substack post added, also reiterating calls for the University to divest from companies with business links to Israel.
Time reports that several Columbia public safety officers were injured attempting to restore order.
These are just examples of numerous disruptive and violent activities at Columbia in which CUAD appears to be intimately involved.
According to the Al-Jazeera piece, Mr. Khalil was granted a green card at some point. I can’t imagine why. Now that the Trump administration is seeking to revoke that and deport Mr. Khalil, his attorneys are spinning the situation as an issue of “free speech.”
I disagree. American citizens are completely entitled to express views that are anti-Israel, anti-semitic, and pro-Hamas (short of the First Amendment limit, which is something like immediate incitement to violence). They are entitled to hate the United States, and to say so. But there is no reason that we must be required to invite foreigners and aliens who express such views into the United States.
The individuals listed in the Al-Jazeera article are people who are here on visas, and who have expressed their hatred of the United States, and whom the Trump administration now wants to deport. Multiple judges have stayed the deportations, at least until the cases are fully heard. Ultimately, I don’t think this is a close issue. The United States is under no obligation to welcome into the country people who hate us. It is high time that applicants for visas of any type get thoroughly vetted for anti-U.S. views.
Tags
Who is online
147 visitors
That this even needs to be said shows how batshit crazy our immigration system is.
Oh come on Sean, “we’re not going to have anyone around to wipe our asses without more immigration”.
How about starting the ball rolling with Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar? I guess Noam Chomsky and Bernie Sanders are birthright citizens so nothing much can be done about them.
Of course, a biden appointed judge has now stopped the deportation of the boulder terrorist's family despite their lying to gain admission to the country under false pretenses and the fact that spouses and children of someone who has committed a terrorist act within 5 years are not allowed in the country.
the concept of detaining/deporting family accomplices of domestic terrorists should come in handy in a few years ...
Lol. So corrupt.
Susanna Dvortsin, who petitioned the court to stay the deportation of the firebomber's wife and children--called the "Next Friend"--was barred from the practice of law owing to misconduct in an immigration matter in South Dakota in 2019.
So, none of that sounds like he hates America or Americans. I think it’s fair to say he hates Israel. That’s not surprising. A lot of people in the Middle East do.
The available evidence indicates he likes America. He chose to seek a visa, work here, and have a family here. When he should have gone back to his country, he stayed here. Nothing was preventing him from leaving, at least on our end.
It is possible to be pro-America but anti-Israel.
none of that sounds like he hates America or Americans. I
He threw Molotov cocktails at Americans. And it’s sort of crucial to the idea of America that most of us support that you don’t try and murder people going for a walk because of some foreign blood feud.
i know it’s something that will be unpopular with democrats, but i think we shouldn’t import people who want to kill Americans. It’s just one of those crazy old fashioned beliefs i have.
Because they were American? So, does everyone who ever commits violence in this country hate America?
What evidence do you have that that’s some kind of hot take? I have never heard anyone endorse importing people who want to kill Americans. Do you have a link or a quote or something supporting that assertion? A poll?
Let me save you some time. I recognize that you’re engaging in emotional, political rhetoric. Try being reasonable for a second. Obviously, no one wants what you wrote.
It should also be obvious that people are vetted before being let into this country. That is no guarantee that a visitor won’t do something terrible one day.
This comment is to all the previous comments above.
For goodness' sake.
This had nada to do with Americans.
This had nada to do with Israel.
These people were protesting the taking of people by a terrorist organization.
These people only crime to this man was being Jewish.
This crime was an excuse to kill Jews. Just say it.
Perrie, the terrorist tried to kill Americans in America. It's the duty of the government to protect Americans from foreign terrorists who want to kill them, whether it's because of their religion, their hair color or any other trait. It's simply an insane policy to let people in, and let remain, people who want to kill Americans because of their religion.
Sean,
I know as a fact, that one of those people there was not American, so it wasn't because they were Americans. It as because he thought he knew they were Jews. When we can't define why a crime happened, then there is something truly bad in this world.
There is no bigotry test for letting people into this country. People who come over come with all their biases. How do you test for that?
And yes, this man was here illegally. There are plenty others who are American and hate just as much... different people, for different reasons. Hate is hate, and when we can't actually call it out for what it is, that is when we can sweep it under the rug.
Which would seem prima-facie evidence that he's a lunatic and not thinking clearly.
Immigration is so broken we need to halt all immigration and get rid of all illegals
Statistically, immigrants to the United States are less likely to commit crimes than native born citizens.
and we have enough problems of our own so why add anymore problems?
Get rid of problems we can and do not add anymore problems
Even if that's true, and it depends on your source, how does that justify adding more crime?
You don’t know that we are. Less people doesn’t necessarily mean less total crime.
Of course we are. If we didn't add the terrorist in Boulder, that crime would not have occurred. Unless you believe illegal migrants commit zero crimes (a level of immigrant fetisization I don't think even the most rabid open border advocate would even claim) adding millions of people results in added crime.
This guy came to this country on a work visa. How is that “adding more crime?”
If crime automatically increased with population, there would be no value in tracking crime statistics on a “per capita” basis.
No. He came into the country on a tourist visa and then illegally overstayed it. Rather than deporting him then (and stopping a future terrorist attack) the Biden admin then rewarded him for lying with a work visa.
He burned 12 people with homemade Molotov cocktails. By all means, explain how that isn't a crime.
That has nothing to do with my point other than demonstrating what a red herring the "immigrants to the United States are less likely to commit crimes than native born citizens" canard is.
Again, unless you believe illegal migrants are magical beings who commit no crimes, they irrefutably add to the amount of crime in the US.
Kindly F off with the straw men. I don’t need to explain something I didn’t say.
I'm just trying to produce a rational basis for your nonsensical point.
By all means, explain how burning 12 peaceful people didn't add to the amount of crime that has occurred.
I'm not sure I've seen many statistically verified canards. I'm curious how that actually works.
Again, I did say anything like that. I can’t explain your fantasies.
Except those studies are not, in fact, statistically verified.
You literally said "How is that “adding more crime?” when discussing an alien who lit 12 people on fire. The only way that makes sense is to believe burning people isn't a crime.
Ok, well that’s a lie. This is like three comments in a row that you have tried to lie about something I said. I think we’re done.