NewDayRocks

Multiple horror stories is the weakest data set you can come up with.

How many tourists do you think come through the US in a single day? What percentage does "multiple" cases make up?

Yes, it is how its always worked that if you go through immigration and you get flagged for something suspicious you get detained for further questioning. Did you expect the immigration officer to let you through if you failed the initial set of questions like "where will you be staying for the duration of your trip? "

Let me throw this back at you for a sec. How exactly do you are the Trump administration organizing this? Did they suddenly hire a bunch of new immigration officers? Among the hiring and spending freeze and stupid Doge stuff, where did these new officers come from? Do the officers now have some detained quota they need to meet each day? Are all TSA secretly MAGA waiting for the chance to deny tourists?

Sometimes the simplest explanation is right in front of you. The girls were too truthful on their form and that for them flagged and detained. You need to account for where you will be while in the US ( or most countries honestly). Otherwise it is assumed you might do something like try to work and stay long term beyond your visa. When their answers didn't add up they got sent home.

If you don't believe this go ahead and try and travel to any country and tell them you don't have a place to stay yet, don't know when you will leave exactly, but you'll just wing it. See if that flies.

This really doesn't seem like something the administration has a hand in.

When you travel internationally and land the first thing that happens is you fill out a slip go through immigration. The slip asks how long you are staying and where your are staying among other things.

Not accounting for your accommodations for the full duration of your trip will get you flagged for more questions. If the immigration officer things you are going to work during your stay they will deny you because it's illegal on a tourist visa.

What the girls should have done was just say they were staying at the hotel for the whole time (although 5 weeks at a hotel is probably also a red flag)

Why is this a shit post? This is like straight out of Silicon Valley.

Much less ok to pretend both are the same

We are not accounting for the percentage of people who read it but are still cool with forfeiting their soul.

And let's be real, it's ok to be emotional and want attention. That's human.

But I'm sure this can be done, and is probably easier to accomplish by not being a nazi, which is the real issue here.

Sure. But there is no way Elon is suggesting that he donated sperm to get her pregnant, but the doctor might have used their own sample instead.

Both applicable in this case

Why would the father be in question if it was through IDF?

This is her objection.

No it's not. That is what the article says, yes. That is not what the source interview (which i pointed you to, twice) says.

She did not mention anything about working with IDF soldiers in the entire interview. Let me repeat that to you for the 1000th time. She just plains never talks about this.

That quote you keep using is not her objection to working with IDF soldiers. It is her complaint that pro-Palestine supporters are being punished for their beliefs, but a professor can work with the IDF for 6 months, and come back to work without any consequences. She is saying the treatment is unequal. Once again, she is not objecting to working with this professor if she had to. She is objecting to the unequal treatment of pro-Palestinian vs pro-Israel supporters.

My claim at the very top of this post is that the title is wrong. Turns out I was right in every possible way. Not only was the title wrong, but so is the article.

I didn't attack the student. I didn't give an opinion on her. I am attacking the author and The Guardian for being misleading.

I'd ask you to reflect and ask yourself, what would it take to change your mind, how much proof you would need before you accept valid criticism of the author...

but we both know won't.

Faced with facts you just go straight to the name calling.

She's not objecting to him working or even hypothetically working with him. She objects to the unequal treatment of pro-Palestine supports vs pro-Israel supporters. It's clear in the interview.

Well thanks for your time. I'm sorry and I hope your life goes better.

By the way, I went ahead and looked up the interview on YouTube. It is on Democracy Now's channel and is from 11 months ago with the title Atlanta Police Violently Arrest Emory Students. Her interview starts at the 8:50 mark.

All she did was point out the hypocrisy of how pro-Palestine student/faculty vs how pro-Israel half were treated.

SHE NEVER ONCE MENTIONS WORKING WITH OR OBJECTING TO WORKING WITH IDF SOLDIERS

Are you finally ready to accept what I have been saying all along? that the title to your article is BS, intentionally deceptive, and clickbait?