Ismail, you are surely joking and I have noted that this is the style of leftists who offer no good faith in debate. 

You want me to post a legal brief --I am not a lawyer and this radical woman has been exposed and is not on trial and many of her exploits have been documented--I will not take the time and trouble to document them to you since you are not moved by established facts.  Citations I quote will somehow be questioned and your anger and bias is overwhelming.  If she has legal standing in this country, she is free to remain as a citizen--I do not know that particular fact.  If not, surely, the State Department has her number and she should be quickly deported.

"Citations" and legal briefs concerning how guilty and how much of a radical she is should not be the question on a civil blog.  The question is how can she draw any sympathy and how could the good guy, Daniel Pipes, be smeared by reporting about her firing, radical activities, terror associations and refusal to stand for interviews?

Of course, now you are attempting to smear me as well.  Alas, I would like America to survive--this is my crime and I don't like people who have the gall to take taxpayer funds to tear down this nation.  Why do you support this radical, Ismail?   

The argument put forward by her supporters is that technically she is not a terrorist--the facts demonstrate that she has a whole heck of a lot to be worried about in her activities.  Perhaps you might refrain a little from your name-calling and angry insults to post some support for this person.  Is the only support angry bashing of people who would prefer that we do not enshrine Islamic terror in our school system?

It seems that if you have a point you might want to defend her in terms of how she has been somehow misunderstood since Daniel did such a poor job of doing it--trying to portray good people as filth only lamely attempts to change the topic. I regret to say that Daniel Pipes is not on trial and neither am I.