Tariffs hitting Leica May 1st

[HairyScandinavian]

There are examples of visas revoked, subsequent detainments and pending deportations for merely writing OpEds in student newspapers.

*claiming

When you dig in there's always something else underlying. We're not going to agree and clearly get our news from different sources so I'll agree to disagree and stop the derailment so nobody has to overeat on popcorn.

 

[Marbles]

 

[Bugger]

 

[Marbles]

View attachment 871708

 

[Poser]

*claiming

When you dig in there's always something else underlying. We're not going to agree and clearly get our news from different sources so I'll agree to disagree and stop the derailment so nobody has to overeat on popcorn.

For the record, I do watch and read quite a bit of far right coverage. I also watch most of the Whitehouse daily pressers.

Anyway, perhaps it was all for nothing:

Apr 25, 2025
The Trump administration is reversing course on its termination of over 1,500 international student visas Friday, according to multiple outlets, making the decision after being slammed with lawsuits that challenged the abrupt cancellations.

 

[TaperPin]

 

[taskswap]

*claiming

When you dig in there's always something else underlying. We're not going to agree and clearly get our news from different sources so I'll agree to disagree and stop the derailment so nobody has to overeat on popcorn.

No, this is factual and has been well documented by numerous sources. This is just one example:

Writing an Op-Ed is Not Grounds for Deportation | ACLU

The U.S. government’s escalating attacks on noncitizens’ right to free speech, including our client Rümeysa Öztürk, should scare us all.

www.aclu.org

There is not "something else underlying." This woman was not (and has not been) charged with a crime, nor has she been linked to any criminal, terrorist, or even anti-semitic acts. Marco Rubio publicly stated "we gave you a visa to come and study and get a degree, not to become a social activist that tears up our university campuses." That is a direct quote from him.

It seems we need to be reminded that the First Amendment states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." What she did was very clearly permitted under that amendment alone, and she is being punished because it government didn't like it.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that "people" means ALL people here, not US citizens. The founders explicitly used the term "citizen" when that's what they mean. "People" means our guests as well, and visa holders are our guests. Remember, visas ARE the primary "here legally" mechanism. Folks love to drop in the "all the folks here legally are fine" claim but that's not true if things like this happen.

Everybody who loves 2FA rights should be absolutely terrified right now, and it puzzles me that more aren't. Supporters who are always claiming they need this right to fend off an oppressive, authoritarian government are bafflingly silent right now in the face of that literal thing happening. The right to due process (for all people) is what stops the government from saying YOU are terrorists, just because they don't like you. If the President and other leaders can ignore the courts and laws of this country and do whatever s/he wants to anyone they dislike, what exactly stops the next Democratic leader from saying "guns bad, just take them all away, here's an executive order to do it"? If they can take away your 1st Amendment rights, what stops them from taking your 2nd?

First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.—Martin Niemöller

 

[HairyScandinavian]

No, this is factual and has been well documented by numerous sources. This is just one example:

Writing an Op-Ed is Not Grounds for Deportation | ACLU

The U.S. government’s escalating attacks on noncitizens’ right to free speech, including our client Rümeysa Öztürk, should scare us all.

www.aclu.org

There is not "something else underlying." This woman was not (and has not been) charged with a crime, nor has she been linked to any criminal, terrorist, or even anti-semitic acts. Marco Rubio publicly stated "we gave you a visa to come and study and get a degree, not to become a social activist that tears up our university campuses." That is a direct quote from him.

It seems we need to be reminded that the First Amendment states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." What she did was very clearly permitted under that amendment alone, and she is being punished because it government didn't like it.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that "people" means ALL people here, not US citizens. The founders explicitly used the term "citizen" when that's what they mean. "People" means our guests as well, and visa holders are our guests. Remember, visas ARE the primary "here legally" mechanism. Folks love to drop in the "all the folks here legally are fine" claim but that's not true if things like this happen.

Everybody who loves 2FA rights should be absolutely terrified right now, and it puzzles me that more aren't. Supporters who are always claiming they need this right to fend off an oppressive, authoritarian government are bafflingly silent right now in the face of that literal thing happening. The right to due process (for all people) is what stops the government from saying YOU are terrorists, just because they don't like you. If the President and other leaders can ignore the courts and laws of this country and do whatever s/he wants to anyone they dislike, what exactly stops the next Democratic leader from saying "guns bad, just take them all away, here's an executive order to do it"? If they can take away your 1st Amendment rights, what stops them from taking your 2nd?

As soon as you cited ACLU your opinion became irrelevant and I stopped reading. LOL

Regardless, let's assume that's 100% true in your case, a few one-offs here and there doesn't mean it's happening on any sort of scale.

 

[HairyScandinavian]

No, this is factual and has been well documented by numerous sources. This is just one example:

Writing an Op-Ed is Not Grounds for Deportation | ACLU

The U.S. government’s escalating attacks on noncitizens’ right to free speech, including our client Rümeysa Öztürk, should scare us all.

www.aclu.org

There is not "something else underlying." This woman was not (and has not been) charged with a crime, nor has she been linked to any criminal, terrorist, or even anti-semitic acts. Marco Rubio publicly stated "we gave you a visa to come and study and get a degree, not to become a social activist that tears up our university campuses." That is a direct quote from him.

It seems we need to be reminded that the First Amendment states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." What she did was very clearly permitted under that amendment alone, and she is being punished because it government didn't like it.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that "people" means ALL people here, not US citizens. The founders explicitly used the term "citizen" when that's what they mean. "People" means our guests as well, and visa holders are our guests. Remember, visas ARE the primary "here legally" mechanism. Folks love to drop in the "all the folks here legally are fine" claim but that's not true if things like this happen.

Everybody who loves 2FA rights should be absolutely terrified right now, and it puzzles me that more aren't. Supporters who are always claiming they need this right to fend off an oppressive, authoritarian government are bafflingly silent right now in the face of that literal thing happening. The right to due process (for all people) is what stops the government from saying YOU are terrorists, just because they don't like you. If the President and other leaders can ignore the courts and laws of this country and do whatever s/he wants to anyone they dislike, what exactly stops the next Democratic leader from saying "guns bad, just take them all away, here's an executive order to do it"? If they can take away your 1st Amendment rights, what stops them from taking your 2nd?

I did however read a bit from your link, which is literally just statements from her representation.

"To be clear, Ms. Öztürk has not been charged with any crime. According to all available evidence, the government is putting Ms. Öztürk through this harrowing experience solely because of the op-ed that she co-wrote with four other students for the college newspaper last spring."

This is simply her representation stating things such as this and these things have a way of finding out months later after the dust settles that there were other underlying things at play.

 

[TaperPin]

If anyone is interested in what’s going on in China, this channel is really interesting. The guy making videos is a venture capital guy working in China and his videos keep being a surprise. It’s very politically neutral. Of course his business involves getting people to invest in the country, so he has that bias, but it’s worthwhile nonetheless.

 

[HairyScandinavian]

If anyone is interested in what’s going on in China, this channel is really interesting. The guy making videos is a venture capital guy working in China and his videos keep being a surprise. It’s very politically neutral. Of course his business involves getting people to invest in the country, so he has that bias, but it’s worthwhile nonetheless.

Thank you for bringing the thread back.

I apologize to everyone for going off track.

 

[Marbles]

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." The 4th

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." The 5th

"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence." The 6th

 

[taskswap]

This is simply her representation stating things such as this and these things have a way of finding out months later after the dust settles that there were other underlying things at play.

It is not her representation. It is her attorneys'. Despite that, the government has not supported its actions in any way. When you say "there were other underlying things at play" would you care to share precisely what you think was at play? Because that's the heart and soul of due process- you can't punish somebody who has not broken a law, and you have to tell them WHAT they did, and what laws they broke. And you have to do it immediately, not "months later."

That's what the 6th amendment covers. This particular detail was so important we have an amendment specifically for it.

The Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was created to ensure fair treatment for individuals accused of crimes and to protect them from potential government abuses. It guarantees specific rights during criminal trials, such as the right to a speedy and public trial, the right to be informed of the charges, and the right to legal counsel. These rights are crucial for a fair trial and to ensure the government's accountability.

So just so we're clear, you're totally OK with the government saying you are a terrorist (not her, YOU), not telling you or anybody else why, deporting you (yes, even though you're an American citizen), not giving you the right to a trial, and telling everyone else who might defend you "he's just a bad guy, we'll tell you why later."

You may not like what I'm saying. But that is in effect what you are signing up for. Do you understand that you are effectively saying it's totally ok for the next President who doesn't like your posts on THIS FORUM to do that to YOU? Because that's what you're saying is OK to happen to somebody else. And you can't claim you're a US citizen rather than an immigrant, because how will you prove that when they say you're lying? Due process is how. But... not for you, because you don't think it's needed. Right?

People who keep saying "relax, the sky isn't falling" are just not looking up.

 

[HairyScandinavian]

Yall are hilarious. It's OK I'll let you have the last word, clearly you don't mind being wrong and that's your right.

 

[realunlucky]

Please remain focused on hunting and shooting topics while enjoying this forum.

If you can't refrain from constant political pot stirring, you will no longer be welcome here.

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

 

[IDVortex]

Considering NF is in Idaho, we have Maven in WY, Leopold. I'm curious if one of these guys will decide to manufact or even push a glass company to come stateside. I'd assume it would be either NF or Leupold would be the ones to convince someone since they also have a higher market share.

 

[jfk69]

Yall are hilarious. It's OK I'll let you have the last word, clearly you don't mind being wrong and that's your right.

No, it’s that you’re failing miserably here. I would suggest following the @realunlucky advice. Let it go.

 

[HairyScandinavian]

No, it’s that you’re failing miserably here. I would suggest following the @realunlucky advice. Let it go.

I tried to back out on the thread derailment three times and yall keep it going. No point in it because nobody's going to change their mind and everybody cherry picks articles and points trying not to be wrong.

 

[HairyScandinavian]

Considering NF is in Idaho, we have Maven in WY, Leopold. I'm curious if one of these guys will decide to manufact or even push a glass company to come stateside. I'd assume it would be either NF or Leupold would be the ones to convince someone since they also have a higher market share.

There's benefit to their other markets as well to move manufacturing over here, making eye glasses or whatever... all their products would avoid tariffs.

 

[jfk69]

I tried to back out on the thread derailment three times and yall keep it going. No point in it because nobody's going to change their mind and everybody cherry picks articles and points trying not to be wrong.

I didn’t “keep it going”, it was my first post in the thread. You acknowledge people “cherry pick”, including you. Yet you kept coming back. Let. It. Go.