Appreciate the fact based timeline and nuanced reporting here. Mahmoud’s mob has just taken over Trump tower. The overarching issue is about civilization, not free speech.
Why should we import Islamist foreigners who orchestrate riots that put American citizens in danger? Why must we allow them to stay after they openly state support for terrorists and their wish to destroy our civilization? They use our freedoms against us to gain power, then will destroy our freedoms once they are able to. The Middle East, Europe, and the Ivy League are cautionary tales.
That's the crux of it. Mahmoud Khalil is plainly an enemy of America, and we're debating whether to allow him to operate freely within our borders because of procedural concerns.
To the Islamic world, THIS is the weakness that makes the West unworthy of survival.
1A is a ‘Stronger Horse’ than any that rode out of the Bedouin desert. Let all voices be heard, from the lovely to the vile. We uphold the 1A because we are a unique city upon the hill, and not like THEM.
This is different! They may be able to say anything they want-I get it 1A but that's not what they do. This guy is an instigator for those with the same antisemitic views. And, no less, their "1A" is accompanied by disruptive actions including shouting down and confronting Jewish students, disrupting traffic, spraying graffiti on buildings and any surface which can hold paint and the list goes on.
The UK gov has backed its Muslim population and thrown its own citizens in prison because this was always part of the western nation plan. Defile your nation so the citizens become muted and worn. The one world government can't take place without squashing freedom loving people and the best way to do that is by using their own laws to undermine all they hold dear.
Yup. our "freedoms" (rights) are being cynically and effectively used against our civil society, institutions and citizens by non-citizens. At the same time they are providing aid and comfort to many around the world whom are engaging in terrorist acts. Doesn't seem unreasonable to end their free ride and deport them to their home country.
I think too much is made of the citizen/non-citizen distinction. Hearing from all persons is not a weakness in the west @JD_Free. The fact that we don't silence perspectives that various factions would deem harmful is a strength. And, unlike Europe, we would neither constrain criticism of the BDS movement on the basis that it was hostile to Palestinians or Islam. We go from strength to strength.
This is completely independent of our decisions of what aliens to admit to residence and on what basis one so admitted could be deprived of that privilege. The important distinction here is whether Khalil conspired to deprive others of their rights in which case he should be deported; or was simply adamant in his beliefs that Israeli administration of territories and conduct of war with Hamas violate moral principles we should all share so as to have inspired rather than planned or directed the illegitmate actions of the mob that followed, see, e.g. Trump and January 6th. I just do not buy the firey rhetoric critique and there FIRE is right it is only smoke :-). But I don't accept some of FIREs rhetoric that seems to amount to "college kids will be college kids".
Khalil deserves a hearing on that question. The answer does not seem abundantly clear and should be garnered to decide whether his resident alien status should be revoked.
The UK is totally GONE - it's over...they have multiple areas of Sharia Law...the government sides with Muslims and not white indigenous people...the country is rotting - it's gone....a demographer (Morland) said in a recent podcast that last year was the first time the death rate exceeded the birth rate..it's Adios time. It's a god-less country.....
Tucker Carlson, whom I have problems with, nonetheless had an extraordinary interview the other day with Col. Douglas MacGregor. MacGregor said something I've been saying for years, the British need a Cromwell.
Shelley, too many are infected with cognitive dissonance to levels that they’re unable to “see” the connective tissue between UK’s (our mother country!) Online Security Act going after citizens there for Islamophobic wrong-speech, and Trumps ‘Catch & Revoke’ Executive Order that if pushed forward - says it will go after online ‘antisemitism’ by student visa holders and non-citizens.
Khalil (while a dirtbag) is the pretext or ‘icon’ for Trump doing this on broader scale, IMO.
We should all oppose our Federal government having citizens consent to use police powers to go after ‘hate speech, no matter if it’s anti-Islam or anti-Judaic.
Because some day, the Federal government will change ideological hands. And then all the posters here ready to hang and quarter Khalil will be given a mirror to gaze into when it’s their ‘hate speech’ that is criminalized.
Don’t give them the fig leaf of 1A; similar to the sexually confused: I remind them that gender is a grammatical term, not relevant. Only using gender dysphoria because it is a diagnostic term. These people are anti semites, aka Jew haters. They would exterminate Jews and eradicate the state of Israel if they were smarter, stronger, and not so corrupt, but they shouldn’t be given a free pass for stupidity, weakness, and corruption .
I'd want to eradicate anyone genociding the planet, as well. Zionists are the most vile and destructive force on the planet ( not just the Middle East). Sorry that you've been brainwashed, Roger.
This comment makes you the most vile and destructive force on today's comment section. Sorry you've been brainwashed by Hamas and its handy helpers in the media.
What they *do*, and not what they "would" do under some rhetorical hypothetical, is what's relevant in a society of laws, at least one that respects the right of thought. That society ostensibly exists in the US.
Well, on 10/7/23 Hamas did do some things to some people, and these protests can be seen as accessories after the fact, since there is an ongoing kidnapping and hostage situation therefore ongoing crimes. I would argue that KM can be seen as an accessory after the fact and as part of a RICO case.
Defacing property is a crime, even though it’s not prosecuted in the People’s Republic of New York City, except against certain individuals and groups.
Exactly. And that's that's the only kind of thing that should be prosecuted, actual crimes, not protests -- no matter whether they're done for Palestinians, George Floyd, or correcting stolen elections.
There have been no charges of any illegal activity on the part of Khalil. When such charges are brought we can discuss them. But nothing I see is antisemitic. Boycott was fine against South Africa. What’s different here?
In the words of many Jews, some orthodox, some secular, the greatest force for antisemitism in the world today is the Zionist movement. The reaction of nearly every country on earth to Israel’s war crimes demonstrates this amply.
No it is not. And "doing some amount of business with Israel" is a rather sanitized way of describing the US-Israel relationship, given the critical amount of weapons supplied.
shouting down? confronting? Oh my, what are those poor Jewish students supposed to do in the face of ...overt conflict?
I'll tell you, Mimi snowflake - they go to their bribed and controlled U.S. government filled with dual citizens- who enact government thuggery - on a small and large scale - for them DAILY.
Plus, how does this guy claim standing for his actions? Where does he accrue the right to forcibly change the policies of Columbia? Columbia is a learning institution, no a hotbed for radicals. People are paying for their education. They are being restricted . Not right.
To be so, the non-speech aspects that justify the deportation must be made clear, and of course some may still disagree with the justification (for whatever reasons). It's a discretionary action, yes? Per Matt, he has not been charged.
It is my understanding the the head of the DHS has the discretion to allow foreign entry and to deport. This was brought up when Mayorkas let a known foreign criminal stay in the US.
That's my understanding too. But Trump, and his representatives, are acting dangerously wherever they frame the deportation *specifically* on undesirable points-of-view, without a full explanation of the discretionary action, especially vs rights of US citizenry.
I would clarify: absent criminal activity/actions. As I have said elsewhere, the authorities in the People’s Republic of New York State or city do not even try to enforce the law even handedly.
This guy is like Hitler; Hitler never to my knowledge shot or gassed any Jews or gypsies, he just wrote the orders. Or general that orders war crimes be carried out. The actions of the protesters in the protests that he organized were criminal; he’s the head of a criminal conspiracy; does not RICO statutes apply?
Show me the orders this "Hitler" issued and we can talk. Show me the criminal charges laid by the attorney general and we can talk more. What's that, you can't. Then this man is a victim of the Speech Police and needs to be released. I'm a Zionist and I think this arrest is ridiculous.
Shane, as a green card holder, Khalil is a guest, and is subject to administrative removal if he is in any way implicated in the lawless "protest" at Columbia. Not about "free speech."
Ah the stupid have entered the fray!! Riddle me this, Dog Milk: who is this guy’s targets? Is it not Jews? Who were Hitler’s targets? Jews, IIRCC. Hitler wasn’t Fuhrer when he started out; he started out as an ex-corporal in the German army, IIRCC, so the analogy is exactly correct. Godwin’s law can be invoked when an inaccurate or inappropriate analogy to the leader of the 3rd Reich is made.
Actually, Roger - you just expose your ignorance and stupidity with every word you write. There are justifiable targets, and warranted hate. Zionist actions and philosophies are two great examples. They aren't hated ENOUGH - but that time is coming, as people wake up.
Well golly gee Dr. Kimber, two people from different centuries and different parts of the world seem to have one thing in common and presto! They're the same man! If I have bad teeth, does that make me George Washington?
Mahmoud Khalil is an obnoxiously self-righteous college student. There are actually a lot of such students in the US. If you can't see the difference between that and 20th century German Satan, I don't think I can help you.
Oh dear, another ‘Hitler’ comment. Roger, let me break it to you: the Long Twentieth Century is now dead. Or as Tiabbi said this past summer - “Motherf*cker I’m an American. That shit does not work on me” … anymore
Ok, I’ll leave Hitler out, & substitute our friend Carlos. He’s the ringleader who is responsible for stirring up the crowds who are interfering with other students ability to get the full value out of the time they spend & the money their parents spent. That is a tort, even without the damage to university property that has been reported in the media.
I appreciate Matt’s attempt to be even handed & stand up for free speech, coming from his true journalist background, but I disagree, & I do so having participated in the 1960s &70s anti war protests— see my comment elsewhere here.
If you instigate a tribe to violence against others, impeding the students who are on campus to freely move and study, is this acceptable? Assaulting police, breaking windows, tenting on campus grounds. Screaming for the death of jews and Israelis, disrupting and trespassing on private property is beyond freedom of speech. It is hate filled and done with malice. The agitators by proxy are responsible. I think they need to go back to Gaza and round up the ordinary citizens there to protest against their own Hamas genocidal ideology and try and talk common sense that leads to peace. If a neighbor of mine was a Hamas follower and any of the above actions were taken, i would get the law involved. He crossed the line.
While I won't waste my time hunting down some video of "Victor Hansen on YouTube," if you provide a link (or even a specific title I can easily search), I'll gladly watch it.
Sentimental bosh. ( I always wanted to be old enough to say that unpretentiously. ) Associate Justice Robert Jackson: "The Constitution is not a suicide pact."
Douglas MacArthur had freedom of speech, but given his position, it had limits. He transgressed them intentionally because he thought he was untouchable and got his ass fired.
It's been the law since 1952 that the Secretary of State has the right to deport anyone who advocates on behalf of a terrorist cause. This is not a First Amendment matter.
As a US citizen I openly oppose Israel’s actions in Gaza. Should I be deported as an enemy of the state??? If this guy can be tied to acts of terror, or as providing money to Hamas or other terror groups, send him packing or put him in prison. If there’s bar is holding press conferences, and speaking out against Isreal, that’s just insanity. Provide proof this man is what you claim he is. He also has an American wife now, and has a green card, not just a student visa. This man ahould be set free, or the government needs to charge him. BTW, how do you feel about the Jan 6th people that Biden locked up with no due process under saying they were terrorists. This is a slippery slope nobody should want, and can be abused to no end by whomever is in charge.
Big difference, here, buddy Jim. J6 are US citizens; this guy is not. It is why legal immigrants (& even illegal aliens) want & hope to become US citizens. Big deal, an American wife , friends with benefits, easier to get his green card and then his citizenship with which he can’t be deported anymore than any of the anti American Democrats.
He is NOT an American citizen, does not have or deserve the full rights of citizenship, and needs to be deported ASAP.
Roger, your cognitive dissonance is strong here. Try to remove it? The point is we don’t want the Federal government policing speech like this no matter if it’s anti-Islam or anti-Judaic. Both are wrong. You are too 10/7 emotionally invested to see this it seems.
If you say so. I would tend to disagree. He has a legal right to be here, and as far as I can tell broke zero laws, and has been charged with no crime. Not sure I want a thought police board deciding these type of issues, especially when every 4 years the members change.
He is legally privileged to be here, not exactly a right, that privilege can be revoked & I am not sure if that is challengeable. BTW, I am trying to assist my Ghanaian translator to immigrate, so have some experience in this, not expert, though by a long shot.
"He is NOT an American citizen, does not have or deserve the full rights of citizenship, ..."
That may not be how the courts interpret it. In Matt's original piece which ignited the current firestorm: "As [ex-ACLU president Nadine] Strossen points out, though, there are also cases on the books like Bridges v. Wixon, in which Supreme Court Judge Francis Murphy pointed out that while foreigners don’t have the same rights as Americans on the way in, 'once an alien lawfully enters and resides in this country he becomes invested with the rights guaranteed by the Constitution to all people within our borders.' "
All good questions, my guess is he is gainfully employed someplace, and like I said if there is a money trail leading back to terror groups or any crime committed, then throw the book at him. But” because the government said so “ doesn’t cut it in my book.
Who's paying his wife's medical bills? Why does Columbia give him a free place to stay? And the guy is 31 years old, hardly a student just trying to help folks.
If Trump gets away with this, we’ll be next. He said he intends to eliminate the left in this country. I believe he means it.
I must admit it’s been entertaining to watch MAGA heads exploding over this. It’s not funny though. This is straight up fascism. And too many are good with it. Calling those who call out genocide terrorists is despicable and cowardly. Those doing so are seriously confused about the term. They think all Muslims are Jihadists and self-defense is terrorism. The Jihadists are the Muslims the US arms and trains to do regime change as in Libya and Syria.
You have me confused with a leftist, I’m not even close to a leftist. I actually have no use for leftists. I’m for sanity, which means individual freedom, freedom of speech, and blind justice. Something leftists know nothing about.
Leftists are, in fact, all about "individual freedom, freedom of speech, and blind justice" But it's totalitarians who pied-pipered the originally Leftists to abandon core human principles of freedom and fairness -- yes, beginning all the way back with Marx.
How do we know? Because *rank-and-file* Leftists believe in democracy. Totalitarians believe in being part of the *vanguards* running the show, everywhere and all the time; in other words, anything BUT democracy.
This definition of the left must predate me. I’m going to have to look into it further. I’ve been conditioned to equate the left with socialism and communism and the like.
Israel is really bad at genocide. The population in Gaza / Judea/ Samaria has more than quadrupled over last 4-5 decades. But never mind, keep up the Genocide noises for what else is there to talk about after the most horrific slaughter of unarmed people of recent times and the worst sexual violence on women that we all know about from Oct 7th but many choose to forget.
You mean the FALSE propaganda the hasbara-controlled media fed us. There was ZERO credible proof of sexual violence, as even Israeli officials have now admitted.
"Israel is really bad at genocide." -- But it's excellent at ethnic cleansing.
“Zero credible proof” apart from the video recordings created and posted by perpetrators, the eyewitness accounts and the testimony of survivors. You’re right, none of that is credible because it was reported by Jews (and Israeli arabs and Druze, but they don’t exist because apartheid or something), not to be compared to the gazan officials who totally aren’t terrorists.
Actually no, I’m all for a sane immigration process, 2 totally different issues. The man is here legally btw, not illegally. You not liking his views is not a qualifier for legality.
I wrongly assumed; & my argument has nothing to do with being here illegally or as a guest (i.e., having legal status either as immigrant or non-immigrant), he is a guest & just like Zelenskyy, can wear out his welcome.
I have travelled internationally frequently for the last 20 years and I would never have thought to publicly challenge or deride my host country’s customs, culture, politics, or foreign policy.
This guy has been treading on thin ice for some time, & likely gotten away with it because of the previous treasonous administration.
This is a factor for sure. If they end up revoking his green card, I will cry no tears. I can also appreciate where you are coming from. I just am not a big believer in punishing people for words. It is all too vague, what is he allowed to say??? Who decides what words or positions are acceptable??? As of right now, that’s his only crime. Theories are just theories. In the US, even a resident alien is entitled to due process. If found guilty, adios amigo for sure, and don’t let the door hit you where the good lord split you…I’m not interested in granting this much power to a mediocre midwife like Marco Rubio. I’m sure you would think the same if it were Anthony Blinken rescinding your Ghanan friends green card because his thought didn’t line up with the Biden administration.
Roger, check your cognitive dissonance at the door? We are talking about the first amendment to our Constitution. You sir, are ad hominem attacking us on the right who are defending 1A, by painting us as the ‘enemy’ on the left you are accustomed to attacking.
Lawsuit Alpha has a SubStack today that outlines why M
Khalil situation is not free speech but much more than that. Go to that post, & read for yourself. Trump el Al Ave had 4 years in the wilderness being attacked. They know where the bodies are buried & where the trip wires and barbed wire is. They also know that the media always lies as do the leftists.
Matt L: There is the 1952 law empowering the Sec of State to remove noncitizens who support terrorist organizations, Hamas is a terrorist organization by US Government ruling, it is the governing party of The Gaza Strip and there is abundant evidence that Gaza civilians as well as Hamas participated in Oct 7 atrocities & indeed have been active in the ongoing imprisonment of the hostages (not sure if that is relevant to the argument (actually, I think it is, but besides the point)? The ‘protests’ have been shown by documented evidence to include criminal acts &/or law breaking. Either one is grounds for exclusion/expulsion, I don’t think it matters the latter whether the protesters were in support of Hamas, Hezbollah, PLO, Ukraine, Russia, Upper Slabovia, or the KC Chiefs. it’s the relationship to the illegal activities that are determinative,
That is my take on the matter at this point in time. I don’t know how that accords with Matt T’s take in his column & if I am in error in terms of the facts , logic or legalities, I will surrender.
I am having trouble getting my head around the cognitive dissonance, but that may just be my fatigue.
I agree with you on this and I support Israel. This is about free speech and the rule of law. To me, it’s one thing if someone is just on a student Visa and is giving any kind of support to a designated terrorist organization. It’s another thing entirely if they have a green card, and are married to an American citizen. Where is the actual crime? If there is a crime maybe you can revoke the green card. They haven’t shown any evidence of that. This is all very shady and scary. It sure looks to me like they are going too far and they need to get their tails handed to them in court.
Free speech must be absolute. Relying on politicians that stick there finger in the air to see which way the wind is blowing to be the arbiters of truth, or deciders of what is acceptable speech, you are in deep trouble.
Can he be tied to acts of violence and vandalism? Do we only hold those who flew the planes on 9/11 accountable or did we seek to take out the shot callers also?
Nice try. Well nobody did, and the reasons are not quite as black and white as you were taught in our government schools. I guess I’m an antisemite now for possibly defending Hitler?? Maybe I should be deported.
Isn't Kahlil quoted as saying he wanted to "destroy Western civilization" ? - Why on earth would we want to let him stay here - off to Syria he goes!!!
From the Free Press article- ‘Both Left and Right are Wrong About Mahmoud Kahlil’: Kahlil is the spokesperson and negotiator for Columbia University Apartheid Divest which describes itself as “fighting for the total eradication of Western Civilization”. The dude’s a goner. This will not be a ‘free speech’ issue - it will be decided on terrorism and enemy agents.
"who orchestrate riots that put American citizens in danger"
There has been zero evidence provided by the government (or by anyone) to suggest that he did anything illegal. Which is why they haven't actually charged him with any crimes.
"Putting American citizens in danger" is so vague as to be virtually meaningless. It's also the exact same canard that the left has been using for many years now to shut down conservative speech on campuses. ("We can't have Charles Murray on campus because that would jeopardize the safety of our students" - whatever that means.)
If you have any evidence showing that Khalil did something illegal, you should bring it to the attention of ICE and Rubio, because they could surely use it. Until then, you're just calling for the banishment of people whose views you find distasteful.
Claiming Khalil, as a single individual, is responsible for the actions of ANY of the protesters, is like saying Trump was responsible for the actions of anyone in the J6 crowd.
Great comparison! What's the difference. Trump clearly called for peaceful protest. This guy clearly called for taking over the campus. The audio is hard to find but it's out there. Funny how the same "news" sources who told you Trump called for an insurrection, have now scrubbed their early video reporting of the violence 10 months ago on Columbia's campus much less his speeches.
Did you call for charges against Trump but now change your stance?
The other difference is the actual law and how it relates to green card holders vrs citizens.
Have you looked at what's going on in his home country?
I voted for Trump in November. I've supported the J6ers since day one, and have known since 1/6/21 that the whole "insurrection" nonsense was a farce.
As for Khalil, I'd need evidence to believe that he "clearly called for taking over the campus." I won't waste my time searching for hard-to-find video, but I'd gladly watch it if you cited it.
Problem is, that's what Americans had mostly been doing for two decades re the destruction of civil rights, so it's not difficult for some to expect us to roll over once again. I think we're reaching a tipping point, which is what Trump's election and his current blitzkrieg is about. This is a curious twist in the plot, which Matt is absolutely right to be putting under a microscope.
Kirk, federal law since 1952 has given the Secretary of State the right to order the deportation of any foreign national who advocates on behalf of a terrorist cause. This guy did that.
You may dislike the law, but it has been the law for 3/4 of a century, and given the number of civil liberties absolutists in the United States, I find it unlikely it hasn't been challenged in court.
Intimidation disruptions of business activities (to include classes), & property damage is NOT free speech, & just because some of that occurred & was tolerated under the previous criminal regime doesn’t mean that there is a statute of limitations; indeed, there is a new sheriff in town & they & you all better get used to it!
How do you know what information the government possesses? For all we know they have built a pretty good case with receipts, phone records, etc. I'll willing to wait until the hearing before declaring 'this absolutely IS about free speech."
Recall that I said UNLESS the government can show me the criminal charges it laid on him. If it can, fine, legitimate deportation. If it cannot, let him go, it's free speech. Since they have yet to show an ounce of proof, I will assume they have none, because if they did, they would have put it out there already.
Shane, see my post just now above yours. Your logic would say that since no one was or until someone was charged Emmitt Till was not murdered. I really don’t think you want to be on that side of history, but who knows, maybe you do?
Dave, since 1952, federal law has given the Secretary of State the right to order the deportation of any foreign national who advocates on behalf of a terrorist cause.
This guy did that.
Maybe Trump is about doing his duty as Chief Executive to "take care that the laws be faithfully executed." Is that just possible?
For a decade you unrelententingly silly asses have been making ominous and idiotic pronouncements about Trump's True Nature. If he really were a Fascist, you wouldn't have been heard from after 2018 at the latest.
It’s a fine line you are trying to walk, Matt. At some point you have to recognize the terrorists who want to destroy America have learn to abuse and twist the 1A for their own evil motives. Don’t be played.
Stick with it Mr Taibbi. Just facts. I want radical islam, and it’s fuckwit cheerleaders, out of this country. But I want it done legally and transparently. If we go the way of Europe (suppression of speech+unchecked immigration), theres nowhere to run.
Protecting Western Civ is protecting free speech. Western Civ gave you free speech. Western Civ is the only ideology left that truly allows free speech. In fact, some would say the only ideology that has allowed it in thousands of years.
You're against those who are against the guy who used his free speech to urge others to silence the free speech and the right to freely go anywhere in public spaces including the place they paid to go to.
Quite the conundrum but not so much that you simply stand for the one who stands for not only the silencing, but took the freedom to move freely in public spaces including those they paid for.
Civilization is also the freedom to walk the grounds of the school you paid to walk, take the classes you paid to take.
Do you agree that freedom of movement is a protected right under 1A? Do Jews have the right to peacefully assemble in the classrooms they paid to be in?
When movement is prevented, it can ordinarily be prosecuted under numerous traditional and uncontroversial laws against assault, imprisonment, kidnapping, etc. I understand freedom of movement only rarely, tangentially, and if tightly bound can embody freedom of speech. You've yet to show how. So what are the specific violations for this case and how must they reference speech and/or thought to make your case? Otherwise, drop the speech/thought complaint.
I realize, though, like your compatriots here that in reality you're itching to find a way to prosecute your favorite thought "crimes", otherwise the case would matter not a whit -- like the thousands of other violations of freedom of movement that happen every day in America -- do not. So I doubt any argument will persuade you, but sure, continue with the sophistry.
This is not about free speech. Stop trying to deflect from the reality that SecState has the authority to cancel visas and green cards and that non-citizens are not due the same degree of process as citizens.
We don't have to accept enemies as citizens. The First Amendment is not a suicide pact. He can speak freely while he's here. But we don't have to let him stay. The inevitable goodbye just comes a little early for his kind.
(And I'm very curious about the nature of his marriage to an American. Do they actually live together conjugally, or is this a "marriage" like Rep. Ilhan Omar "married" her brother. (I'm giving her the benefit of the doubt that it wasn't actually incest.))
On my best day, I couldn't have expressed myself any better, other than to add we have plenty of home-grown disrupters. No need to issue green cards to any more.
Bollocks, Yuri. You do not "appreciate" the facts and nuance in Matt's timeline.
You pretend to acknowledge it while swiping it aside to foam at the mouth like most of the rest of the commenters in this thread.
This congeries of "land of the free, home of the brave" kibbitzers is made up of cowards and supine supporters of state authority rooted in nothing but anger and resentment.
Small people indeed.
I hope Matt keeps up the good work in the face of clownworlders the way he always has. Even if they pay his wages.
We've all learned how George Soros pays agitators to incite violence - I haven't seen one incident where anything Mahmoud has said was a call to violence. If there is one - someone please share it.
That said - the entire Antifa, BlM, and Democrat party - are constantly calling for violence. Let's round up every one of THOSE members - or is this recently elected government scared to do that ( lack of action by Pam Bondi and Kash Patel would say YES)
2) Israel is the greatest terror state in history. The entire right wing has been fomenting terror in the Middle East - and here - since 1947. They've killed Brits in London, they've killed thousands of Americans. They destroyed Lebanon, Libya, and Syria. Let's round them up - and ship THEM somewhere. They do overt violence (9/11, Las Vegas, US Liberty, Sarin Gas attacks in Syria falsely attributed to Assad), false flags (Pittsburgh, Brooklyn, Uvalde, Baltimore Bridge) and terrorism throughout the U.S - including - the covid bioweapon - that's why Bibi has a syringe encased in glass on his desk.
Then, they have complete control of the media narrative.
Add in @Aipac controlling every politician except two - and we have a recipe for the entire U.S to remain the apparatus that Israel controls.
If we lose free speech, guns are next. And after that? 75 million dead U.S citizens - killed by a controlled U.S. government.
tell me one area I was wrong. I provided a very short list of atrocities -and didn't name all the dual citizen politicians, and all the bribery that AIPAC has used. And all the times Netanyahu got us to do Zionist Israel's bidding in the 5 countries we destroyed ( Iran is next on the list). Shane, you are too stupid to waste time debating ( or too brainwashed).
If Khalil is tied to organizing civil disobediance that set about to deprive others of their rights–passerbys, or more specifically jews or anyone who refused to swear allegiance to BDS–then I have no problem with this detention and deportation.
But if this a case more like January 6th, where the protagonist in the dock may be seen as inspiring such behavior if not its the architect, that is a bridge too far. It is a mealy reliance on the very mechanisms that we have long objected to on elite campuses of chilling speech that creates a "hostile environment" to hoist Khalil solely on his rhetorical petard.
As best I can tell from this apparently non-loaded recitation of events, this is a close call in this case. Admiring the neutrality of presentation, I would nonetheless appreciate hearing whether Matt thinks the former or the latter concept is a play here.
There is also a technical question whether the thought police environment can be applied to aliens in a way it is not to citizens. Aliens get equal protection of the laws but not the privileges and immunities of citizenship. It remains a question in my mind whether the constitution, as the supreme law, is what is meant by "the laws".
Every time I navigate away from this page it disposes of my comment (thanks substack for have such a crappy interface that can't keep track of my comments or where i am in podcasts or really much else, absolutely the only thing going for this site is free speech. guess that is pretty good basis for a site because it makes me put with stuff I ever would elsewhere). I would have liked to check what FIRE actually said about this case on that question, but I'm going to post this and then update or comment again. I'm not opposed to the notion that we are not required to, but should on principle, afford 1st amendment style speech to guests in America.
"Why must we allow them to stay after they openly state support for terrorists and their wish to destroy our civilization?"
The fear of being labeled an Islamophobe. The same woke bs mind virus (Gad Saad) that gets whites to believe they are incurable racists, who should not be able to breathe the same air as a BIPOC individual. On the other hand if all they do is talk they should not be messed with. The flaccid understanding of how to neutralize these evil figures who have a faux exterior of civilization is what is in question.
For some reason, I believe I should remind everybody that Hitler was Austrian. He was an Austrian Citizen during the Beer Hall Putsch and for the term of his imprisonment. He did not become a German Citizen until one year before he was pronounced Chancellor.
In retrospect, deportation rather than imprisonment seems like such a better resolution.
This is incoherent reasoning, Yuri. How can you even raise these questions without taking advantage of the very free speech you claim isn't at issue here? If Khalil actually riots, by all means deport him for that. Otherwise, he's free to "openly state" his support of anyone and anything he chooses, same as you.
I don't agree with his goals, but that's irrelevant. Judging from the evidence of your own post your reasoning is as faulty as his--yet you take for granted your right to share it with us; and those who understand the importance of freedom of speech are fine with that.
That may be an issue for you, for some reason. It has nothing to do with Matt's concerns about free speech and the extent to which governments respect it. Who cares if Khalil is American or not? What free speech advocate has ever argued that only Americans should be free to speak their minds, or that officials are at liberty to censor at will, provided that the voices they suppress aren't those of American citizens? Such an arbitrarily selective approach to fairness wouldn't even be in the interest of Americans themselves, who obviously want and need to hear what the rest of the world has to say.
Mark, since 1952, federal law has given the Secretary of State the right to order the deportation of any foreign national who advocates on behalf of a terrorist cause. This guy has done that. This is not a free speech issue.
You've clearly misunderstood Matt's concerns: I doubt he much cares what happens to Khalil. What he's worried about is the Trump administration going down the same "We've got to control information" road as the Biden-Harris cabal. In the long term, that's the issue that matters.
Where is the history of law-related problems for Khalil prior to taking him into custody? He's been around for awhile. I guess I should put that to the author Greg Collard as well.
Property has been damaged, classes that have been paid for have been disrupted (time, if not money never to be recovered) those are crimes that have occurred at his urging (& similar to crimes that were wrongly attributed to have been encouraged by speech that Trump didn’t make, for which US citizens have been in prison for years).
RICO statutes & incitement come to mind, but @ this point, he is IMHO persona non grata & not a citizen. Out he goes.
It's like this article. I want to see any evidence of crimes committed by the protestors. There are Jewish students mixed in with them. This has been going on for some time. Don't just show up with a DHS charge and say it's all "ghastly".
Read my response regarding my student protest days.
Read HD Thoreau on Civil Disobedience, classic treatise that I wrote an essay on in high school and was one of the underpinnings of MLK’s civil rights movement.
Legitimate non violent protest could be illegal, but it could not be violent, (& not destructive of property, but I can’t assert that for certain). If charged and convicted of illegal acts, one has to incur and suffer the legitimate consequences/punishment. (Something like heaping burning coals on their heads— but not exactly).
Your post seems to completely ignore the harms that the non protesting students, faculty, staff, and community people incur.
Protest has moved far far away from there to galaxies far removed from space and time.
So I can see the university’s position on these modern student ‘protests.’
If Khalil had been honest on his green card application, it would have been denied. Are we declaring that if one lies in order to get approved, approval cannot be revoked?
A reminder from John Adams, our second POTUS: "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."
Free speech isn't the issue here. No sovereign nation can remain sovereign if foreign rabble rousers and agitators are allowed to organize domestic groups against the government of that nation.
Pontificating on a ladder or soap box at Speaker's Corner in Hyde Park is far different from organizing mass protests with the specific intent of the collapse of western civilization.
I agree. I think it FEELS more complicated simply because he was "a student." If just an activist/agitator, it would have been more straight forward. I am ok with deporting people like this guy, but we do get into the weeds some.
This is not the Bush43, Obama, Biden administrations that demanded we do the same thing other western nations have been doing, bringing in foreigners from Jew and Christian hating countries. Syria is now a terrorist country, that was planned under Obama, just took a while because of Trump’s first term when he wiped out ISIS.
Our country is under assault disguised under the first amendment as free speech.
I am so tired of political correct and so glad that this Admin has the proper frame of reference to understand what is and has been happening under those last three Admins.
I do not know all of the details. Is their proof he lied on green card application? Do you know what he lied about? Happy to read up on my own. I am just curious.
I am not a fan of muslim immigration overall. not enough vetting. assimilation does not happen and they seem to really hate other religions...
No, he’s making a claim: That Khalil had to lie in order to get his green card. And JD reinforces that claim with the rhetorical question that follows.
The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench - a long plastic corridor where pimps and thieves run free, and good men die like dogs. Also, there is a negative side.
"Students and non-students broke into Columbia’s Hamilton Hall building four days later and barricaded themselves inside."
You failed to mention the three custodians of Hamilton Hall that were attacked, beaten and held hostage by the "protesters". In a civil society, that's called kidnapping. However, in the jungleland known as New York State, no charges were brought by the radical DA Alvin Bragg, working in concert with the cowardly governor Kathy Hochul.
I made another comment to this effect: there is a gaping logical inconsistency in Matt’s defense of Khalil.
Khalil was not just speaking. He was a SPOKESPERSON. As someone who has had a taste of campus protest planning, let me tell you: there is no way someone becomes a designated spokesperson for a movement-presuming to negotiate on their behalf-without some degree of coordination or control with respect to that movement.
If Khalil had any coordination with or control over the movement conducting clearly illegal actions as you described, outside the bounds of 1A protection, then the deportation is justified.
So then charge those responsible, from what I understand this man took part in none of those protests. Didn’t physically harm anyone. He just spoke at press conferences and stated his groups position on the Israeli genocide that he disagrees with, as do many American citizens. On January 6th the democrats used similar, flimsy wording to try to tie trump to an insurrection, and threw his followers under the prison. Looks like the same thing is coming for anyone that is against the Israeli regime. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
“Osama Bin Laden took part in none of those bombings. Didn’t physically harm anyone. He just made videos and stated his group’s position on anti-Western imperialism that he disagrees with, as do many Muslims”
See how whether Khalil was coordinating with or controlling a group’s illegal activities makes a huge difference in the interpretation of his actions as speech or evidence of contribution to those activities? See my other comment in reply to the original poster.
LOL really? Comparing a protest organizer, with clear peaceful demands, to the leader if an international terror organization is ridiculous. Come on now.
Ok, substitute Bin Laden for any spokesperson for an organization involved in illegal activity (unless you claim that what happened at Columbia was peaceful, in which case you dispute Matt’s factual timeline) and respond to the point being made.
These games are actually fun. Ok, I’ll play. Yes, if osama bin Laden was legally in the US and said things I disagreed with, he should be allowed to stay. Wow, I really said that. Since time travel doesn’t exist, I’ll stick to punishing people for actual crimes, not ones they may or may not commit at some unspecified time.
You’re not addressing the point at all. If someone’s speech is dispositive evidence of their coordination with or control of illegal activities, then it’s no longer about speech but about coordination with or control of illegal activities.
Your premise is nonsense. You can't just equate "violent mass murderer" to any "illegal activity". J-walking is illegal. Posession of marijuana is illegal in many states. There's a whole slew of illegal acts that do no harm to anyone else. You're equating speech with violence.
You’re being obtuse. What happened at Columbia was not jaywalking and smoking weed. Nor was it mass murder of course. But it was certainly violent and led to specific harms to other individuals on the campus which are well documented by those who shared multitudes of news stories with you.
Sure - if anyone commits a verifiable war crime or is a leader in an organization that is perpetrating war crimes, they should be held accountable for those crimes.
My position on Khalil or the war in Gaza etc. is entirely conditional on the facts on the ground. I make no prejudgment of guilt or innocence based on the identity or ideology of the person involved. As Solzhenitsyn said, “the line between good and evil runs through the heart of every man.” Israelis and Palestinians, Jews and Muslims, etc are all individuals who should be judged on their individual actions. Unfortunately as with everything these days people (on both sides) toss out rationality and enlightenment individualism in favor of tribalism.
It’s been established that Khalil was a leader of an organization that was responsible for violent and illegal acts on Columbia’s campus (it has been a great struggle to get people in the comments to acknowledge this basic fact, but I have gotten there).
So with that premise established, where’s the false equivalency? Would Khalil need to directly say “I am a leader of a group that committed violent and illegal acts” for this statement to be true? Of course not. Manson might have specifically described the violence his followers committed, but public airing of your group’s crimes is not a necessary condition for a leader to be responsible for them.
Care to elaborate on how comparing two leaders of organizations committing violent and illegal acts is a false equivalency? The operative word is “leader”, the longstanding meaning of which as someone who organizes, plans, and directs others is somehow elided by Khalil’s defenders.
Agree with your point but did this guy have anything to do with those specific acts of violence? I’m vexed because the documents and timeline here showed two different things: Bondi and the original executive order focus on violence and specific acts, whereas Trump and recent DHS are all about punishing expression of viewpoints.
Yes, what was omitted? Can you (rabbitrabbit) provide some of the links you would like Matt to add to the timeline? (and we comment readers can peruse whether or not Matt adds them).
I do want to hear all sides, not a selection aimed in one direction.
So a man that didn’t show up to the protest, should be held accountable for the actions of a few that broke the law. Got it, Trump and anyone that was at the capital on Jan 6,2021 all deserve prison time for the handful that caused property damage or hurt someone, got it.
This is the “politics is only what happens in public” theory. If (and only if) there is evidence that Khalil was involved in covert coordination with or control of illegal activities, then this deportation is justified. If he just happened to show up to speak at a press conference and then go home and mind his business, with no contributions or planning of building occupations etc. then yes, he should be protected.
I would agree 100%..if crimes were committed and can be proven, then deport him or jail him or whatever punishment fits the crime. Words are not crimes. Wrongthink is not a crime.
Oh sorry, it was just smashing up property, attempting to prevent the custodians’ exit to the extent that the custodians had to “fight” their way out (see below). Somehow the very fine distinction between this and “beating” is so fundamental that it makes what happened justifiable? I don’t understand the obsession with splitting these hairs about the violence committed at Columbia unless it’s an attempt to distract attention from the violence by nitpicking.
From the College Fix article:
“protesters…took over Hamilton Hall, smashing windows, breaking through doors, and barricading themselves inside…
…Samuelsen said a few protesters “tried to hold our workers in the building” during the occupation….
“The entire TWU workforce in the building was fearful and rightfully so,” he told Fox News. “They stormed in … but two of the custodians had to fight their way out. They were explicitly told ‘You’re staying here, you’re not going anywhere, this cause is bigger than you.'”
None of those sources show that protestors "beat custodians". The closest description was the NYT article that describes Torres getting into a scuffle with one of the protestors. It was obviously a traumatic experience for them but I see no evidence of them being beaten.
The Israeli government has America by the balls. But this is a consensual relationship, and there’s no excuse for the capitulation to their verbal and political tyranny. I’m afraid that the Israel lobby is winning. At the core of all of it are two factors: The Zionists, (very clearly not all of them Jewish), are without equal in ruthlessness and cunning, and Israel is a nuclear armed state.
Belief doesn’t mean understanding. No Israel no rapture. That’s what our preacher preached. Had to support Israel. So they support all acts by the Israeli government. Want to make sure lots of countries turn against Israel which is part of the end game.
Did you like the Canadian art project, where they drew a penis where the silly palestinian fist is? I think that's creative thinking, don't you agree? As a Hamas enthusiast, I'm sure you found it titilating.
Much handwringing about nothing. Free speech is our core right and should be defended at all costs. Unfortunately for Mahmoud, "our" does not include him.
Green card holders are on probation. We're testing them out to see if they qualify for the club. He failed the test and should now be sent back to Syria where he should feel free to speak out against the government there to his heart's content.
You have to violate the Smith Act (attempting destruction of the govt) and doing something illegal, according to what's in this article. I haven't seen any law violations from him, and he's been there for awhile. The DHS is labeling him as involved in activities "aligned with Hamas".
There is a current deranged notion that "students' right to protest is protected by the 1st Amendment". This is deranged, because students should not go to university to protest. They should to get a degree, hopefully in something useful.
Even more in this case, we do not want a bunch of ungrateful international terrorists coming to the US under false pretenses to protest. They should get the degree, and then leave, immediately. They are not welcome here.
Students' right to protest is protected by 1A. What's "deranged" is to believe it's not.
You do realize a significant number of foreigners who attend college here seek permanent residence on a path to citizenship so they can utilize their degree to become productive members of American society, right?
As a foreign national in the U.S., Khalil is under INS regulations not to espouse support for a U.S.-designated terrorist-group. Nor to encourage others to support such a US-designated terrorist group. He has violated that restriction numerous times.
But Khalil is a leader of CUAD and its primary spokesman. The CUAD response to the anniversary of October 7 massacre by Hamas was THIS: COMMEMORATING AL-AQSA FLOOD | HONORING OUR MARTYRS. (Columbia U, October 7, 2024: large demonstration). Get the picture?
That grotesque and genocidal message is perfectly in tune with the distribution of flyers in support not merely of Hamas but of the October 7 massacre itself (!) that occurred during the forcible takeover of the Barnard building last week where Khalil was again the leader and spokesman. The flyer was entitled "Sometimes History needs a Flood", with an image of Hamas leader Yahyah Sinwar (the architect of October 7), and an AK-47.
To repeat: he is a foreign national. Foreign nationals are subject to the restrictions imposed by the INS, and support of USG-designated terrorist groups is subject to deportation.
I think it still has to go to the courts, but there is a prima facie case that he is in violation of the INS terms.
But look--the Khalil case is a political goldmine for Trump. This guy violated INS rules multiple times in supporting a US government designated terrorist group and in encouraging others to do so. He is a foreign national in the United States who is under INS regulations, which forbid espousing support for a US government-designated terrorist group – – a condition of his being in the United States, a condition which he has violated multiple times. This is not a free-speech issue. He is not a US citizen and is here on sufferance. He violated the conditions of his stay.
Yes, there has to be a legal deportation proceedings of some sort. But Khalil is such a bad actor that this whole thing is a political trap set by Trump. Do not fall into it. This particular case is not a hill to die on.
Right, now Trump has Democrats on record supporting an accused terrorist, something probably 90% of voters disagree with. Why do they always fall for these traps?
You have not listed all this guy's documented positions and statements on overthrowing both the US and Israel and violence. We do not have to put up with that kind of "free speech" from a non-citizen. Research it further.
If the case is about his speech alone, no matter how noxious, he shouldn’t be deported.
However, let’s square a logical inconsistency in Matt’s (and others’) defense of him. He wasn’t just speaking. He was a SPOKESPERSON for an entire movement that was conducting illegal activity who yet somehow wasn’t involved in any of these actions? As someone who got a taste of the behind the scenes of campus protest as an undergraduate, let me tell you: there is no way someone becomes a spokesperson for a protest movement without being intimately involved in the planning and execution of that movement’s actions. That he presumed to speak on their behalf suggests some degree of coordination with them if not control.
This is what we need to have aired to the public to assuage those (like me) who agree with Matt IF it’s a speech issue alone but disagree if it involves coordination and control of illegal protest. Was Khalil involved in any of these illegal activities behind the scenes? Release the evidence.
Exactly. What do his defenders think? Did he just coincidentally show up at opportune moments and exert his 1A rights without knowledge of any of the illegal protester activities? BS.
Exactly. But even if it's about free speech alone, you can argue 1. he doesn't have the same rights as citizens and 2 His speech (and documents positions) are inciting violence and probably did. He went to more than one university to do this, so it wasn't organic. I don't think a non-citizen has the free speech rights to come here and talk about taking down America. Don't think so. But yes.
Sure, but I am trying to argue from the maximalist civil liberties position, to persuade the ardent civil libertarians like Matt (and myself) that there is the possibility this is justified if we see evidence of behind the scenes coordination or control of illegal actions at Columbia.
What I take away from several of your comments here is that "there is a possibility that [the deportation] is justified", rather than "we commenters know enough to decide whether his deportation is justified or not". I appreciate that distinction.
I would prefer that the evidence for and against be presented in a functional court proceedings, in which the case against him is not based on prohibited speech, but criminal collusion or a related charge. If convicted after due process, deport. If not, then even if we strongly disagree with what he says (and I do), the first amendment should apply (the SCOTUS says it applies to legal permanent residents as well as citizens).
I'm somewhat dismayed by people who believe he should be summarily deported based on fragments of selectively presented assertion, without a full hearing of both sides. I see more and more progressives wanting to punish people "just because we all know they are evil", without due process or respect for free speech. I don't want to see both sides doing it.
This is from The Blaze and includes links to back up his assertions which I checked:
15 smoking guns that show Mahmoud Khalil is a terror threat
Ryan Mauro
March 13, 2025
support us
Columbia University’s radical protest leaders, including Khalil, aren’t just anti-Israel — they want America to fall and are taking steps to make it happen.
Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats are demanding the release of Columbia University student and pro-Hamas protester Mahmoud Khalil. While House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) is accusing the Trump administration of “authoritarianism,” the Democrats are about to be embarrassed.
Khalil is a leader of Columbia University Apartheid Divest, one of more than 150 pro-terrorism groups I identified in my comprehensive study for the Capital Research Center, “Marching Toward Violence: The Domestic Anti-Israeli Protest Movement.”
The real question is whether decision-makers recognize their options and have the resolve to act.
I recently wrote a follow-up series identifying about 250 “pro-Palestinian” groups allied with this group that have expressed genocidal desires to see the U.S. destroyed and replaced by an indigenous Native American “Turtle Island,” just as they desire to see Israel destroyed and replaced by a Palestinian state.
Sign up for the Blaze newsletter
By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, and agree to receive content that may sometimes include advertisements. You may opt out at any time.
The following smoking guns about the national security risk posed by Khalil and his group should serve as a microcosm of the broader threat — not just as a vindication of a single decision by the Trump administration.
1. Khalil’s group seeks to incite and carry out terrorism on U.S. soil, including copying the October 7 atrocities.
His organization instructed “comrades” to “look to the tactics” of “the Palestinian resistance for inspired action against oppressive institutions” and to “rise” like a “flood.”
The term “flood” — which anyone in the pro-Hamas seditionist ecosystem would recognize — is a reference to the Oct. 7 attacks that Hamas and other terrorist groups refer to as “Operation Al-Aqsa Flood.”
CUAD also declared its intention to “grow” the number of terrorist attacks in the West like Casey Goonan’s multiple acts of arson in California targeting UC Berkeley.
2. Khalil’s CUAD praised the Oct. 7 attacks and Islamist-backed violent uprisings in Bangladesh as parts of the “global intifada” against “American imperialism.”
3. CUAD said “we” must “genuinely threaten the state” so much that “we” are “killed, jailed, tortured, disappeared, and targeted” in America.
The group continued: “If we want to achieve liberation in America, we must be prepared to make these same sacrifices,” as was the case during the overthrow of the Bangladeshi government.
4. Khalil’s group called for attacking the military and police “en masse” and “dismantling state infrastructure.”
CUAD glorified the Oct. 7 Hamas terrorists and Bangladeshi militants for “escalating the global battle for liberation. By directly confronting military and police en masse, by not merely ‘engaging’ but battling fascist agitators, by dismantling state infrastructure, they are moving the global resistance into a new phase of struggle.”
It frighteningly ended the paragraph in bold writing that reads, “Those of us in the Western world have the obligation to meet them there.”
5. Khalil’s group describes itself as part of a violent anti-American “insurgency” that must target the criminal justice system “until the empire crumbles.”
It specifically called on insurgents in the United States to follow the methods of Bangladeshi “actionists” who took over a prison, released the prisoners, and burned the building down.
6. Khalil’s group seeks the “eradication of Western civilization.”
Specifically, CUAD posted: “We are Westerners fighting for the total eradication of Western civilization,” “the imperialist world order,” and “we reject every genocidal, eugenicist regime that seeks to undermine the personhood of the colonized.”
7. Khalil’s group asks violent extremists abroad for help in organizing uprisings.
8. His group asked for help from “militants in the Global South” in achieving its goal of eradicating Western civilization and fighting “the fascism ingrained in the American consciousness.”
A separate statement said, “We send love and wait to learn more from our comrades” who overthrew the Bangladeshi government, ending with “Long live the Global Intifada.”
9. Khalil’s group threatened to “shut down” Columbia University unless it eliminated the police presence on campus and severed all ties to the NYPD.
10. Khalil’s group really likes to see things set on fire.
CUAD said “the only way to respond to state repression” is to “learn from our comrades in Bangladesh” who “set fire to the state broadcasting network’s headquarters” and starting with “setting fire to the prison, government offices, and state vehicles.”
It also repeatedly professed its affection for Casey Goonan’s multiple acts of arson in California. Khalil’s group endorsed an attempted firebombing of a federal building in Oakland, the firebombing of a UC Berkeley cop car, the torching of a campus building, the looting of a campus supply building, and the setting of a fire at a construction site in the middle of the campus.
11. Khalil’s group had terrorists teach Columbia students.
CUAD held a virtual event where actual terrorists propagandized to students in March 2024. Two leaders of Samidoun (Palestinian Prisoner Support Network), an obvious front for the Marxist-Leninist Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine terrorist group that participated in the October 7 attacks alongside Hamas, were booked as speakers.
Khaled Barakat, a senior PFLP official, explained to the students that hijackings are “one of the most important tactics that the Palestinian resistance have engaged in.” Of course, the Oct. 7 attacks were depicted as inspiring.
The U.S. and Canadian governments designated Samidoun as a terrorist entity that is a “sham” charity for PFLP. It is a landmark decision that opens the door to possible action against a wide array of pro-terrorism groups linked to Samidoun and PFLP.
12. Columbia protesters were told to riot by a Chinese Communist Party entity, and they complied merely hours later.
In late April 2024, over 100 Columbia University protesters visited the headquarters of the People’s Forum, which is a front for the Chinese Communist Party, where they were told to go riot on campus grounds. The protesters, which would have included CUAD as the umbrella coalition bringing all the allied student groups together, then rioted a few hours later.
13. Khalil’s group’s stated goal is to “topple all institutions that benefit from colonial, racial capitalism” and “dismantle” the state.
14. Khalil’s group boasts about vandalism of campus property.
15. A large part of Khalil’s coalition declared itself a literal part of Hamas.
According to its website, Khalil’s organization is a large coalition of 116 groups. The Columbia University chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine is almost certainly the biggest group in the coalition.
Although SJP’s open celebration of the Oct. 7 attacks did get noticed, almost no one noticed that SJP framed its fight against Israel as part of a broader war against the U.S. to liberate “Turtle Island” and that SJP declared itself to be a literal part of Hamas.
After explaining that it is fully supportive of the “resistance movement” that perpetrated the Oct. 7 massacres, tortures, kidnappings, sexual assaults, and animal abuses in Israel, SJP announced, “We, as Palestinian students in exile, are PART of this movement, not in solidarity with this movement.”
SJP also signed an April 18, 2024, statement by the Committee of Anti-Imperialists in Solidarity with Iran that endorsed Iran’s direct attacks on Israel and expressed wholehearted support for the Iranian government and its “Axis of Resistance” proxies including Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis, cheerfully predicting they would defeat the United States, Israel, and their allies. It also sided with Russia over Ukraine and NATO.
Other groups in CUAD’s coalition that expressed support for the October 7 attacks or other acts of terrorism include chapters of Democratic Socialists of America, Sunrise, National Lawyers Guild, and Jewish Voice for Peace.
LOL "Columbia University Apartheid Divest is one of 150 pro-terrorism groups".
That's because they're pro-Palestinian. All these people think Palestine is terrorist because they're as racist as Israel wants them to be. You know both Biden and Trump have been staunchly pro-Israel? That's because AIPAC owns them. They own the United States.
You are talking about US citizens. These people do NOT have the same rights to come here and organize against our country. You seem to have a loose grasp of our constitution.
Where in the First Amendment does it say that it only applies to citizens, and not The People? The Constitution is a restriction of the federal government, and it doesn't matter whether The People are citizens or not.
And since we're copypasting now:
Donald Trump's free speech plans are going extremely well...
for those who support genocide...
Laura and Normal Island News
President Trump’s free speech plans are going so well that he has kidnapped a man from his home in front of his heavily-pregnant wife. ICE agents disappeared Mahmoud Khalil so effectively, even his lawyers couldn’t find him, all because he expressed the wrong opinions. The man’s terrifying message was “please stop exterminating my people”.
Mahmoud Khalil is a Palestinian Hamas-loving terrorist who is guilty of speaking while being brown. Among his monstrous crimes was distributing leaflets at Columbia University. This is clearly unforgivable. If your people are being slaughtered by the empire, the only acceptable thing to do is politely shut the fuck up.
Legality was the justification for the abduction of Khalil, but technically, there is no legal basis for deportation because the legal US resident has committed no crime. Clearly, it’s the law that’s wrong, so we don’t give a fuck about legality now.
Sensibly, Khalil’s lawyer wasn’t allowed to speak to her client because he hasn’t been charged with a crime. Therefore, due process does not apply to him. Same goes for his supporters, meaning any international students who express support for Khalil will be abducted by ICE. Only Zionists are allowed to study in the United States of Israel.
Khalil can’t stay in the USI because he is a radical Hamas-loving terrorist, just don’t mention he had security clearance in the UK, and worked in the British embassy in Syria where his former colleagues speak extremely highly of him.
The White House refused to comment on the whereabouts of its hostage, but explained “free speech without limitations” has its limitations. For example, it does not extend to opposition to genocide.
We were initially told Khalil had attended an “illegal protest”, but when it turned out protests aren’t illegal because of the woke first amendment, the White House explained Khalil had undermined US foreign policy. Obviously, no self-respecting government would tolerate brown people disagreeing with its decisions. Undermining US foreign policy is one of those unofficial laws that can and will get you killed.
If Khalil was in a foreign land, the empire would blow up his entire neighbourhood, which explains why Trump wants to send him to Syria. Either Al Qaida will do his dirty work, or Al Qaida’s boss, Israel, will. Either way, Khalil must pay the ultimate price for pleading for mercy for his people.
I guess we’ll never know why Khalil is so hateful. He spent his childhood in a Palestinian refugee camp in Syria, presumably because Israel blew up his family home. Trump wanted to send him back to Palestine, but sadly, Israel won’t let Palestinians go back to Palestine. It kind’a undermines the “go back to where you came from” argument, doesn’t it?
Khalil is not allowed to return home because his family history in Palestine goes back as far as his grandparents could trace it, and this makes colonisers jealous. Only those of European ancestry are allowed onto Palestinian land these days in accordance with the Bible.
Disturbingly, anti-Semitic protests have erupted in support of Khalil, including one held by Jewish students. It’s unclear whether Trump will deport those Jewish students to Syria because Israel certainly doesn’t want them. All we know is anyone who opposes genocide must be cleansed from the empire to ensure all subjects have the same opinions x
I would link you to articles showing Supreme Court precedent for limiting speech rights for aliens, but your comment "arrested for speaking while brown" kinda indicates you're not willing to consider in good faith.
Actually, legally, there IS a distinction. We afford students and others here some of our rights, but it is NOT a law. We do NOT have to allow noncitizens free speech to come here and advocate taking down our country. Look it up. And why would you want that?
Which is precisely why Matt has solicited readers to contribute their own primary sources. You criticize Matt for not listing "this guy's documented positions and statements on overthrowing both the US and Israel and violence." So (as I originally asked), why don't you provide them to Matt to include?
I provided links. Included in Blaze article. "Primary" sources is what, mainstream media? I'm not going to cut and paste all the sources they listed. You can click on them or cut and paste them in yourself. Get real.
Hogwash. I HAD "primary" sources embedded in that article. The Blaze had them in there and I checked them. I don't intend to put them in again when you can look at them if you want to. So I assume you mean "mainstream primary."
Right? This seems like one of those issues where there is a divergence between correct action when considering the particulars versus the principles. And the impassioned debates here are ok and don’t need to make the opposing Racket readers mortal enemies. Good people disagree all the time.
The more I read about this character the more I despise everything about him. He seems like a deranged maniac from abroad who has come here to damage Americans and our social cohesion. He should never have been given a visa or residence. He’s a net negative for our country. Every cell in my body says deport his ass. That’s the particulars.
The principles are free speech is tolerated even from those whose ideas we hate. It’s the Skokie Klan march reimagined for the 21st century. And the important distinction with his immigration status seems like a technicality that can be seized upon to dismiss the important free speech principle. I honestly don’t know what is the ethically right move and how the particulars versus the principles argument gets resolved.
I’m glad Matt has the guts to advocate for his free speech principles even when it provokes a backlash and undoubtedly will cost him some paid subscribers, even if I’m not sure he has parsed the principles versus particulars matter correctly.
For what it is worth, while I agree that both the neo-Nazis in Skokie and the Hamas Lite protestors have the right to vent their nasty viewpoints, there is a major difference. The Columbia protests were violent and included a multitude of illegal acts while the Nazis won their case and then declined to march. Obviously no march, no illegalities.
And yet, if Khalil was not inciting or participating in the violence, can we hold him accountable for it (--even if we suspect that he felt the violence was justified and was satisfied by it)?
That's a real question. My initial thought is that we should hold immigrants to a very high standard, simply because western civilization is more fragile than we usually realize, and there are cultural differences among nations that must be accounted for. We would clearly not want to ensure that people who hate our country are nevertheless welcome to move here because "all humans are welcome to move here."
But, I'm not seeing solid evidence that Khalil "hates our country," even if some of his crap enrages me. I can GUESS that he hates us, or suspect it, and certainly wonder about it; but I definitely don't know it, and I'd still need to see sources that show that he was clearly involved in whatever protest activities got out of hand before forming a real opinion.
I think I have posted about this but probably broken into too many pieces to be clear so I will try to compile it in one place
If it is just "speech", he could stay but that term is more than a little vague. In my opinion, handing out a flyer that says "I do not believe Hamas should be designated as a terrorist group, please help me to persuade people to write to their representatives to get this changed" is protected, citizen or not. If the flyer says, "I agree with the objectives of Hamas as exhibited through word and deed, please help me carry out their important work.", you have crossed over into actively supporting a terrorist group and there should be consequences.
There are certainly room for gray areas in between that we could debate for days. However, the beauty of a representative democracy is that we have selected people to have that debate for us. In the case of people who are guests in this country, the laws have made it clear that there is a lower bar for imposing consequences on them than on citizens. Moreover, as there will certainly be gray areas that cannot be anticipated when writing laws and regulations, the Secretary of State will have discretion on these matters.
I still consider it a possibility that when the dust has settled, Khalil may still be able to reside here. However, based on the strong indication that he took actions that were illegal (perhaps not directly but by planning and facilitating) and that his documented speech seems to fall (at least) into that gray area where Rubio will make the decision, I consider it far more likely that he will be deported and within the letter and spirit of the law.
There is an interesting article (I believe cited elsewhere in this thread) with a title something like "15 Reasons Khalil Mahmoud Should be Deported". Personally, I disagree with somewhere around half and am iffy on several more but it provides a pretty good outline of the issues at hand.
I'll be looking for your "strong indication" on illegal activity in the primary source updates of this timeline. (I think it's going to be updated as new info comes in?) Thanks for your thoughts--
If If If-- Lets wait and see. There are several videos out there that could be construed as incitement-- but I do not know what the US govt definition of that is in regard to immigration issues. So I will wait.
This reminds me of when Alex Jones was banned from Twitter in 2018. They always start with someone who is easy to dislike, but once they start, they don't stop. The Patriot Act wasn't supposed to apply to American citizens, until suddenly we had the indefinite detention provision of the NDAA. Does anyone really believe that the need to shut down student protests is so great that the government needs sweeping new powers?
You don't have all the information yet, right? Who knows if the government has receipts, phone records, informants, or whatever. Trump has gotten all the Democrats on record as supporting him. Genius.
Yes. A lot of people see defending freedom of speech as just doing an unearned favor to the accused (Khalil). But it's more about protecting the concept, as it will be applied to others including ourselves in the future. That is, we defend even free speech which we detest, and expect similar protections for our own speech. Put another way, it's not just speaking (or expression), it's also about what we are free to hear (even from an external source). So banning US citizens from listening to Polish or Chinese or Paraquan sources which the government doesn't like would be bad, even tho those sources are not US citizens or permament residents.
Some in the comments here are saying that there are crimes which Khalil has committed, which are the real issue, not how he has used free speech. That case needs to be made more fully, in a context where both sides get to present evidence (like a court proceeding).
I will reiterate a comment on a previous post made about this Islamofascist in our midst. He does not have Constitutional rights. His rights are based on federal law. See Dershowitz: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbD6OhbtaZg
Khalil immigrated to the US 3 years ago. He got married his first year and the last 2 years he spent yelling how evil the US and Israel are, with a special fixation on his hatred of jews. He has been protected by Columbia University whose leadership shares his bigotry. When he is detained/arrested, 19 lawyers represent him in court.
A few questions - why immigrate to a country you hate? How did someone who appears to be expressing his bigotry on his own suddenly get legal representation from 19 lawyers? Who is paying these 19 lawyers?
How did he fill out his form? This needs to be added to the timeline. Rubio has said that both when he filled out his student visa and again with his green card, he did not put that he was a Hamas supporter. If he had, he would not have been admitted. This is the crux of the issue for the Hamas supporters. You have to declare this on your form. If he declared it on his form, then he has legal standing, but if he did not, he purjured himself, this they should be in their right to revoke his green card status as he purjured himself on the form.
Thank you for doing this Matt and Greg, there are many complexities around this particular case and it's helpful to have all the relevant information available in one place.
He doesn't have to be a 'threat to national security' - he just has to be an undesirable visitor, which he is, if a single US citizen was harassed or made to suffer hardship or even inconvenience going about their business, because they are Jewish.
I've worked and lived in many foreign countries, and in exactly none of them, does a visa holder enjoy the right to be obnoxious. We have always been told to act like a guest, to be treated like a guest. I think the evidence is fairly clear that Mahmoud has been thinking he has a right to be obnoxious, and for a long time he was getting away with it. But as they say, past performance is no guarantee of future success.
The benefits of being a US Citizen: These are things for which we should be eternally grateful, and be willing to defend. My wife is an immigrant, and she frequently mentions these benefits, and her feelings of gratitude for living here. They should not be squandered by bestowing them indiscriminately, and our citizenship should not be liquidated, compromised, or diluted by politicians looking to buy friends. This is not a Free Speech issue.
I agree - not a free speech issue. It is an issue of abuse of hospitality. We do not wish to become the doormat of the world in which foreign terrorists and cretins come here, abuse our hospitality, and tell the world lies about our policies.
He came in 2022. Seriously --- he has been here how many months? In that time in America he has earned a degree (in what) at Columbia, ground zero for his type of movement.
His self-serving quotes only prove that he is well-qualified to be the spokesperson for the jihad. He embraces what he wants to about our system ("they don't have evidence to suspend") as it suits his purposes. But he has no interest in America itself.
He dresses in the style of the West, but is seen backed up by unknown individuals who could swap places standing behind the coffins of the Israeli mother and her two children.
He is not here to assimilate. He is here to facilitate.
Who is funding his life here? Is it normal to get a green card so quickly? Who makes THAT decision? What do you have to present to get a student visa? What evidence did Columbia "not have" to change its decision?
Go ahead and peel back this onion. There will be plenty to learn.
Appreciate the fact based timeline and nuanced reporting here. Mahmoud’s mob has just taken over Trump tower. The overarching issue is about civilization, not free speech.
Why should we import Islamist foreigners who orchestrate riots that put American citizens in danger? Why must we allow them to stay after they openly state support for terrorists and their wish to destroy our civilization? They use our freedoms against us to gain power, then will destroy our freedoms once they are able to. The Middle East, Europe, and the Ivy League are cautionary tales.
That's the crux of it. Mahmoud Khalil is plainly an enemy of America, and we're debating whether to allow him to operate freely within our borders because of procedural concerns.
To the Islamic world, THIS is the weakness that makes the West unworthy of survival.
1A is a ‘Stronger Horse’ than any that rode out of the Bedouin desert. Let all voices be heard, from the lovely to the vile. We uphold the 1A because we are a unique city upon the hill, and not like THEM.
This is different! They may be able to say anything they want-I get it 1A but that's not what they do. This guy is an instigator for those with the same antisemitic views. And, no less, their "1A" is accompanied by disruptive actions including shouting down and confronting Jewish students, disrupting traffic, spraying graffiti on buildings and any surface which can hold paint and the list goes on.
The UK gov has backed its Muslim population and thrown its own citizens in prison because this was always part of the western nation plan. Defile your nation so the citizens become muted and worn. The one world government can't take place without squashing freedom loving people and the best way to do that is by using their own laws to undermine all they hold dear.
Yup. our "freedoms" (rights) are being cynically and effectively used against our civil society, institutions and citizens by non-citizens. At the same time they are providing aid and comfort to many around the world whom are engaging in terrorist acts. Doesn't seem unreasonable to end their free ride and deport them to their home country.
I think too much is made of the citizen/non-citizen distinction. Hearing from all persons is not a weakness in the west @JD_Free. The fact that we don't silence perspectives that various factions would deem harmful is a strength. And, unlike Europe, we would neither constrain criticism of the BDS movement on the basis that it was hostile to Palestinians or Islam. We go from strength to strength.
This is completely independent of our decisions of what aliens to admit to residence and on what basis one so admitted could be deprived of that privilege. The important distinction here is whether Khalil conspired to deprive others of their rights in which case he should be deported; or was simply adamant in his beliefs that Israeli administration of territories and conduct of war with Hamas violate moral principles we should all share so as to have inspired rather than planned or directed the illegitmate actions of the mob that followed, see, e.g. Trump and January 6th. I just do not buy the firey rhetoric critique and there FIRE is right it is only smoke :-). But I don't accept some of FIREs rhetoric that seems to amount to "college kids will be college kids".
Khalil deserves a hearing on that question. The answer does not seem abundantly clear and should be garnered to decide whether his resident alien status should be revoked.
The UK is totally GONE - it's over...they have multiple areas of Sharia Law...the government sides with Muslims and not white indigenous people...the country is rotting - it's gone....a demographer (Morland) said in a recent podcast that last year was the first time the death rate exceeded the birth rate..it's Adios time. It's a god-less country.....
Tucker Carlson, whom I have problems with, nonetheless had an extraordinary interview the other day with Col. Douglas MacGregor. MacGregor said something I've been saying for years, the British need a Cromwell.
Shelley, too many are infected with cognitive dissonance to levels that they’re unable to “see” the connective tissue between UK’s (our mother country!) Online Security Act going after citizens there for Islamophobic wrong-speech, and Trumps ‘Catch & Revoke’ Executive Order that if pushed forward - says it will go after online ‘antisemitism’ by student visa holders and non-citizens.
Khalil (while a dirtbag) is the pretext or ‘icon’ for Trump doing this on broader scale, IMO.
We should all oppose our Federal government having citizens consent to use police powers to go after ‘hate speech, no matter if it’s anti-Islam or anti-Judaic.
Because some day, the Federal government will change ideological hands. And then all the posters here ready to hang and quarter Khalil will be given a mirror to gaze into when it’s their ‘hate speech’ that is criminalized.
Don’t give them the fig leaf of 1A; similar to the sexually confused: I remind them that gender is a grammatical term, not relevant. Only using gender dysphoria because it is a diagnostic term. These people are anti semites, aka Jew haters. They would exterminate Jews and eradicate the state of Israel if they were smarter, stronger, and not so corrupt, but they shouldn’t be given a free pass for stupidity, weakness, and corruption .
I'd want to eradicate anyone genociding the planet, as well. Zionists are the most vile and destructive force on the planet ( not just the Middle East). Sorry that you've been brainwashed, Roger.
This comment makes you the most vile and destructive force on today's comment section. Sorry you've been brainwashed by Hamas and its handy helpers in the media.
Back at you Carlos.
I disagree w/ you Carlos. But I’m very happy 1A allows you to say your bit without impunity.
Fuck off
I'm not a Zionist, and Muslims want me dead...
Agree, Carlos
They would also eradicate the United States, and murder all her Christians. This war has been going on for almost 1,500 years.
Forced conversion mostly, but yes, a healthy dose of murder . Also NOT just Christians, dude.
What they *do*, and not what they "would" do under some rhetorical hypothetical, is what's relevant in a society of laws, at least one that respects the right of thought. That society ostensibly exists in the US.
Well, on 10/7/23 Hamas did do some things to some people, and these protests can be seen as accessories after the fact, since there is an ongoing kidnapping and hostage situation therefore ongoing crimes. I would argue that KM can be seen as an accessory after the fact and as part of a RICO case.
"shouting down and confronting Jewish students, disrupting traffic, spraying graffiti"
These are the claimed crimes, yes? Not the content of the speech.
Defacing property is a crime, even though it’s not prosecuted in the People’s Republic of New York City, except against certain individuals and groups.
Exactly. And that's that's the only kind of thing that should be prosecuted, actual crimes, not protests -- no matter whether they're done for Palestinians, George Floyd, or correcting stolen elections.
This is exactly what I'm trying to figure out. The timeline didn't list any specific "crimes," and the manifesto was boilerplate progressive speech.
Right. Matt says he hasn't be charged with anything (congruent with not listing any).
Please…one…just a single example of his antisemitism. Just one. I will read it openly and consider it honestly.
Violently protesting because Columbia does some amount of business with Israel is a big example of antisemitism.
Is the "violent protesting" indicated somewhere in Matt's timeline? If you have a source that details this better, could you post it?
There have been no charges of any illegal activity on the part of Khalil. When such charges are brought we can discuss them. But nothing I see is antisemitic. Boycott was fine against South Africa. What’s different here?
In the words of many Jews, some orthodox, some secular, the greatest force for antisemitism in the world today is the Zionist movement. The reaction of nearly every country on earth to Israel’s war crimes demonstrates this amply.
No it is not. And "doing some amount of business with Israel" is a rather sanitized way of describing the US-Israel relationship, given the critical amount of weapons supplied.
NO it's Zionism. Many Arabs are Semites. Most Zionists are NOT.
fact is, no right-minded citizen of the U.S. is anti-semitic ENOUGH.
You're too stupid to listen
shouting down? confronting? Oh my, what are those poor Jewish students supposed to do in the face of ...overt conflict?
I'll tell you, Mimi snowflake - they go to their bribed and controlled U.S. government filled with dual citizens- who enact government thuggery - on a small and large scale - for them DAILY.
You just outed yourself as a Jew hater.
Right on cue....if you say anything at all against the state of israel, you must hate jews!!! Grow up.
joooooooooos! Right, los?
Not just antisemitic views. Such things are protected by 1A.
Taking advantage of being here in America to wage jihad. On America.
You can hate America, but we don't have to tuck you into bed. Expel these vile people.
Please explain exactly, using SPECIFIC examples, how Khalil "waged jihad on America."
Plus, how does this guy claim standing for his actions? Where does he accrue the right to forcibly change the policies of Columbia? Columbia is a learning institution, no a hotbed for radicals. People are paying for their education. They are being restricted . Not right.
Did you even read Matt's piece? It's all in there.
This is not, repeat is not, a "free speech" Issue.
To be so, the non-speech aspects that justify the deportation must be made clear, and of course some may still disagree with the justification (for whatever reasons). It's a discretionary action, yes? Per Matt, he has not been charged.
It is my understanding the the head of the DHS has the discretion to allow foreign entry and to deport. This was brought up when Mayorkas let a known foreign criminal stay in the US.
That's my understanding too. But Trump, and his representatives, are acting dangerously wherever they frame the deportation *specifically* on undesirable points-of-view, without a full explanation of the discretionary action, especially vs rights of US citizenry.
Absent criminal charges, this is ONLY a free speech issue.
I would clarify: absent criminal activity/actions. As I have said elsewhere, the authorities in the People’s Republic of New York State or city do not even try to enforce the law even handedly.
Actually, it is, until you can provide compelling evidence that he is inciting violence.
Did he advocate on behalf of Hamas? If he did, federal law since 1952 gives the Secretary of State the right to order his deportation.
We only need one picture of Khalil illegally occupying a building, or harassing a student, etc, and he's gone. No charges needed!
He's a guest in our country. He should act accordingly.
Repeat: it is dimwit
How convenient for you, though, that you're free to make this judgment of yours known to the world, yes?
Just because you say you're protesting doesn't mean you can do whatever you want under the banner of protesting.
This guy is like Hitler; Hitler never to my knowledge shot or gassed any Jews or gypsies, he just wrote the orders. Or general that orders war crimes be carried out. The actions of the protesters in the protests that he organized were criminal; he’s the head of a criminal conspiracy; does not RICO statutes apply?
Show me the orders this "Hitler" issued and we can talk. Show me the criminal charges laid by the attorney general and we can talk more. What's that, you can't. Then this man is a victim of the Speech Police and needs to be released. I'm a Zionist and I think this arrest is ridiculous.
Shane, as a green card holder, Khalil is a guest, and is subject to administrative removal if he is in any way implicated in the lawless "protest" at Columbia. Not about "free speech."
Aaaaand Godwin's law has entered the chat.
Ah the stupid have entered the fray!! Riddle me this, Dog Milk: who is this guy’s targets? Is it not Jews? Who were Hitler’s targets? Jews, IIRCC. Hitler wasn’t Fuhrer when he started out; he started out as an ex-corporal in the German army, IIRCC, so the analogy is exactly correct. Godwin’s law can be invoked when an inaccurate or inappropriate analogy to the leader of the 3rd Reich is made.
YOU LOSE, Sucker.
Actually, Roger - you just expose your ignorance and stupidity with every word you write. There are justifiable targets, and warranted hate. Zionist actions and philosophies are two great examples. They aren't hated ENOUGH - but that time is coming, as people wake up.
Well golly gee Dr. Kimber, two people from different centuries and different parts of the world seem to have one thing in common and presto! They're the same man! If I have bad teeth, does that make me George Washington?
Mahmoud Khalil is an obnoxiously self-righteous college student. There are actually a lot of such students in the US. If you can't see the difference between that and 20th century German Satan, I don't think I can help you.
Oh dear, another ‘Hitler’ comment. Roger, let me break it to you: the Long Twentieth Century is now dead. Or as Tiabbi said this past summer - “Motherf*cker I’m an American. That shit does not work on me” … anymore
Ok, I’ll leave Hitler out, & substitute our friend Carlos. He’s the ringleader who is responsible for stirring up the crowds who are interfering with other students ability to get the full value out of the time they spend & the money their parents spent. That is a tort, even without the damage to university property that has been reported in the media.
I appreciate Matt’s attempt to be even handed & stand up for free speech, coming from his true journalist background, but I disagree, & I do so having participated in the 1960s &70s anti war protests— see my comment elsewhere here.
Yeah just like Hitler! That's why he's supporting jews and kicking out Nazi sympathizers. You are dumber than dirt.
???
If you instigate a tribe to violence against others, impeding the students who are on campus to freely move and study, is this acceptable? Assaulting police, breaking windows, tenting on campus grounds. Screaming for the death of jews and Israelis, disrupting and trespassing on private property is beyond freedom of speech. It is hate filled and done with malice. The agitators by proxy are responsible. I think they need to go back to Gaza and round up the ordinary citizens there to protest against their own Hamas genocidal ideology and try and talk common sense that leads to peace. If a neighbor of mine was a Hamas follower and any of the above actions were taken, i would get the law involved. He crossed the line.
"instigate a tribe to violence against others" -- Evidence?
"impeding the students who are on campus to freely move and study" -- Evidence?
"Assaulting police, breaking windows" -- Evidence?
"Screaming for the death of jews and Israelis" -- Evidence?
"they need to go back to Gaza" -- Khalil is from Syria
"Hamas follower" -- Evidence?
Victor Hansen on YouTube has a view on this situation you might check out. Maybe you out to look at what Columbia’s sister college has to say too.
While I won't waste my time hunting down some video of "Victor Hansen on YouTube," if you provide a link (or even a specific title I can easily search), I'll gladly watch it.
Sentimental bosh. ( I always wanted to be old enough to say that unpretentiously. ) Associate Justice Robert Jackson: "The Constitution is not a suicide pact."
Douglas MacArthur had freedom of speech, but given his position, it had limits. He transgressed them intentionally because he thought he was untouchable and got his ass fired.
It's been the law since 1952 that the Secretary of State has the right to deport anyone who advocates on behalf of a terrorist cause. This is not a First Amendment matter.
"advocates on behalf of a terrorist cause" -- Still waiting for the evidence that's what Khalil was doing.
Deluded fool.
As a US citizen I openly oppose Israel’s actions in Gaza. Should I be deported as an enemy of the state??? If this guy can be tied to acts of terror, or as providing money to Hamas or other terror groups, send him packing or put him in prison. If there’s bar is holding press conferences, and speaking out against Isreal, that’s just insanity. Provide proof this man is what you claim he is. He also has an American wife now, and has a green card, not just a student visa. This man ahould be set free, or the government needs to charge him. BTW, how do you feel about the Jan 6th people that Biden locked up with no due process under saying they were terrorists. This is a slippery slope nobody should want, and can be abused to no end by whomever is in charge.
Big difference, here, buddy Jim. J6 are US citizens; this guy is not. It is why legal immigrants (& even illegal aliens) want & hope to become US citizens. Big deal, an American wife , friends with benefits, easier to get his green card and then his citizenship with which he can’t be deported anymore than any of the anti American Democrats.
He is NOT an American citizen, does not have or deserve the full rights of citizenship, and needs to be deported ASAP.
Free speech isn't just for U.S. citizens.
And especially anyone who hates Jews, right, Carlos?
Roger, your cognitive dissonance is strong here. Try to remove it? The point is we don’t want the Federal government policing speech like this no matter if it’s anti-Islam or anti-Judaic. Both are wrong. You are too 10/7 emotionally invested to see this it seems.
I suspect he uses that name in honor of the terrorist, Carlos the Jackal.
Carlos had thought himself so clevah!
If you say so. I would tend to disagree. He has a legal right to be here, and as far as I can tell broke zero laws, and has been charged with no crime. Not sure I want a thought police board deciding these type of issues, especially when every 4 years the members change.
He is legally privileged to be here, not exactly a right, that privilege can be revoked & I am not sure if that is challengeable. BTW, I am trying to assist my Ghanaian translator to immigrate, so have some experience in this, not expert, though by a long shot.
See my other comments to others.
"He is NOT an American citizen, does not have or deserve the full rights of citizenship, ..."
That may not be how the courts interpret it. In Matt's original piece which ignited the current firestorm: "As [ex-ACLU president Nadine] Strossen points out, though, there are also cases on the books like Bridges v. Wixon, in which Supreme Court Judge Francis Murphy pointed out that while foreigners don’t have the same rights as Americans on the way in, 'once an alien lawfully enters and resides in this country he becomes invested with the rights guaranteed by the Constitution to all people within our borders.' "
"... and needs to be deported ASAP."
And that's an opinion.
Burger King
who pays his rent? who pays him to do anything. ? how does he live day to day?
All good questions, my guess is he is gainfully employed someplace, and like I said if there is a money trail leading back to terror groups or any crime committed, then throw the book at him. But” because the government said so “ doesn’t cut it in my book.
Who's paying his wife's medical bills? Why does Columbia give him a free place to stay? And the guy is 31 years old, hardly a student just trying to help folks.
All good questions you can easily go research.
If Trump gets away with this, we’ll be next. He said he intends to eliminate the left in this country. I believe he means it.
I must admit it’s been entertaining to watch MAGA heads exploding over this. It’s not funny though. This is straight up fascism. And too many are good with it. Calling those who call out genocide terrorists is despicable and cowardly. Those doing so are seriously confused about the term. They think all Muslims are Jihadists and self-defense is terrorism. The Jihadists are the Muslims the US arms and trains to do regime change as in Libya and Syria.
You have me confused with a leftist, I’m not even close to a leftist. I actually have no use for leftists. I’m for sanity, which means individual freedom, freedom of speech, and blind justice. Something leftists know nothing about.
Leftists are, in fact, all about "individual freedom, freedom of speech, and blind justice" But it's totalitarians who pied-pipered the originally Leftists to abandon core human principles of freedom and fairness -- yes, beginning all the way back with Marx.
How do we know? Because *rank-and-file* Leftists believe in democracy. Totalitarians believe in being part of the *vanguards* running the show, everywhere and all the time; in other words, anything BUT democracy.
This definition of the left must predate me. I’m going to have to look into it further. I’ve been conditioned to equate the left with socialism and communism and the like.
jim, I’m also not a leftist. I’m a 3x Trump voter. But I agree with you 100%. This issue transcends party politics.
Israel is really bad at genocide. The population in Gaza / Judea/ Samaria has more than quadrupled over last 4-5 decades. But never mind, keep up the Genocide noises for what else is there to talk about after the most horrific slaughter of unarmed people of recent times and the worst sexual violence on women that we all know about from Oct 7th but many choose to forget.
You mean the FALSE propaganda the hasbara-controlled media fed us. There was ZERO credible proof of sexual violence, as even Israeli officials have now admitted.
"Israel is really bad at genocide." -- But it's excellent at ethnic cleansing.
“Zero credible proof” apart from the video recordings created and posted by perpetrators, the eyewitness accounts and the testimony of survivors. You’re right, none of that is credible because it was reported by Jews (and Israeli arabs and Druze, but they don’t exist because apartheid or something), not to be compared to the gazan officials who totally aren’t terrorists.
Lady, your comparing Israelis with genocidalists is what is despicable.
But then you're one of these dolts who thinks Trump is a Fascist.
Please share your opinion on the Jan 6, 2021 incident.
And Iraq, Afghanistan, Nicaragua, Honduras, etc, etc.
You are probably one of those people who think that illegal aliens should be allowed to vote.
Actually no, I’m all for a sane immigration process, 2 totally different issues. The man is here legally btw, not illegally. You not liking his views is not a qualifier for legality.
I wrongly assumed; & my argument has nothing to do with being here illegally or as a guest (i.e., having legal status either as immigrant or non-immigrant), he is a guest & just like Zelenskyy, can wear out his welcome.
I have travelled internationally frequently for the last 20 years and I would never have thought to publicly challenge or deride my host country’s customs, culture, politics, or foreign policy.
This guy has been treading on thin ice for some time, & likely gotten away with it because of the previous treasonous administration.
This is a factor for sure. If they end up revoking his green card, I will cry no tears. I can also appreciate where you are coming from. I just am not a big believer in punishing people for words. It is all too vague, what is he allowed to say??? Who decides what words or positions are acceptable??? As of right now, that’s his only crime. Theories are just theories. In the US, even a resident alien is entitled to due process. If found guilty, adios amigo for sure, and don’t let the door hit you where the good lord split you…I’m not interested in granting this much power to a mediocre midwife like Marco Rubio. I’m sure you would think the same if it were Anthony Blinken rescinding your Ghanan friends green card because his thought didn’t line up with the Biden administration.
Roger, check your cognitive dissonance at the door? We are talking about the first amendment to our Constitution. You sir, are ad hominem attacking us on the right who are defending 1A, by painting us as the ‘enemy’ on the left you are accustomed to attacking.
Mark L
Lawsuit Alpha has a SubStack today that outlines why M
Khalil situation is not free speech but much more than that. Go to that post, & read for yourself. Trump el Al Ave had 4 years in the wilderness being attacked. They know where the bodies are buried & where the trip wires and barbed wire is. They also know that the media always lies as do the leftists.
Matt L: There is the 1952 law empowering the Sec of State to remove noncitizens who support terrorist organizations, Hamas is a terrorist organization by US Government ruling, it is the governing party of The Gaza Strip and there is abundant evidence that Gaza civilians as well as Hamas participated in Oct 7 atrocities & indeed have been active in the ongoing imprisonment of the hostages (not sure if that is relevant to the argument (actually, I think it is, but besides the point)? The ‘protests’ have been shown by documented evidence to include criminal acts &/or law breaking. Either one is grounds for exclusion/expulsion, I don’t think it matters the latter whether the protesters were in support of Hamas, Hezbollah, PLO, Ukraine, Russia, Upper Slabovia, or the KC Chiefs. it’s the relationship to the illegal activities that are determinative,
That is my take on the matter at this point in time. I don’t know how that accords with Matt T’s take in his column & if I am in error in terms of the facts , logic or legalities, I will surrender.
I am having trouble getting my head around the cognitive dissonance, but that may just be my fatigue.
I agree with you on this and I support Israel. This is about free speech and the rule of law. To me, it’s one thing if someone is just on a student Visa and is giving any kind of support to a designated terrorist organization. It’s another thing entirely if they have a green card, and are married to an American citizen. Where is the actual crime? If there is a crime maybe you can revoke the green card. They haven’t shown any evidence of that. This is all very shady and scary. It sure looks to me like they are going too far and they need to get their tails handed to them in court.
Free speech must be absolute. Relying on politicians that stick there finger in the air to see which way the wind is blowing to be the arbiters of truth, or deciders of what is acceptable speech, you are in deep trouble.
but destruction of property is a crime.
What property was destroyed?
Self-deport!
Can he be tied to acts of violence and vandalism? Do we only hold those who flew the planes on 9/11 accountable or did we seek to take out the shot callers also?
Right, because that's an equal comparison.
Should someone have put an end to the German ex-corporal before he got power?
Nice try. Well nobody did, and the reasons are not quite as black and white as you were taught in our government schools. I guess I’m an antisemite now for possibly defending Hitler?? Maybe I should be deported.
Isn't Kahlil quoted as saying he wanted to "destroy Western civilization" ? - Why on earth would we want to let him stay here - off to Syria he goes!!!
Let's see the greater context around that cherry-picked (and dubious) quote.
From the Free Press article- ‘Both Left and Right are Wrong About Mahmoud Kahlil’: Kahlil is the spokesperson and negotiator for Columbia University Apartheid Divest which describes itself as “fighting for the total eradication of Western Civilization”. The dude’s a goner. This will not be a ‘free speech’ issue - it will be decided on terrorism and enemy agents.
“Somehow Samuel Huntington has returned.”
Say it.
"who orchestrate riots that put American citizens in danger"
There has been zero evidence provided by the government (or by anyone) to suggest that he did anything illegal. Which is why they haven't actually charged him with any crimes.
"Putting American citizens in danger" is so vague as to be virtually meaningless. It's also the exact same canard that the left has been using for many years now to shut down conservative speech on campuses. ("We can't have Charles Murray on campus because that would jeopardize the safety of our students" - whatever that means.)
If you have any evidence showing that Khalil did something illegal, you should bring it to the attention of ICE and Rubio, because they could surely use it. Until then, you're just calling for the banishment of people whose views you find distasteful.
Very well said, LW. That Khalil is a misguided jerk does not mean we get to pack him off into detention.
Amen!
Claiming Khalil, as a single individual, is responsible for the actions of ANY of the protesters, is like saying Trump was responsible for the actions of anyone in the J6 crowd.
Great comparison! What's the difference. Trump clearly called for peaceful protest. This guy clearly called for taking over the campus. The audio is hard to find but it's out there. Funny how the same "news" sources who told you Trump called for an insurrection, have now scrubbed their early video reporting of the violence 10 months ago on Columbia's campus much less his speeches.
Did you call for charges against Trump but now change your stance?
The other difference is the actual law and how it relates to green card holders vrs citizens.
Have you looked at what's going on in his home country?
I voted for Trump in November. I've supported the J6ers since day one, and have known since 1/6/21 that the whole "insurrection" nonsense was a farce.
As for Khalil, I'd need evidence to believe that he "clearly called for taking over the campus." I won't waste my time searching for hard-to-find video, but I'd gladly watch it if you cited it.
"The overarching issue is about civilization, not free speech."
The overarching issue *of* civilization IS free speech -- not someone's or some group's conception of the best society.
This is not--repeat is not--about "free speech."
Just keep repeating that. We'll all come around eventually I'm sure.
Problem is, that's what Americans had mostly been doing for two decades re the destruction of civil rights, so it's not difficult for some to expect us to roll over once again. I think we're reaching a tipping point, which is what Trump's election and his current blitzkrieg is about. This is a curious twist in the plot, which Matt is absolutely right to be putting under a microscope.
Agreed. As a Matt fan, I am hoping he won't get fooled again. The enemy of my enemy is not always my friend.
Kirk, federal law since 1952 has given the Secretary of State the right to order the deportation of any foreign national who advocates on behalf of a terrorist cause. This guy did that.
You may dislike the law, but it has been the law for 3/4 of a century, and given the number of civil liberties absolutists in the United States, I find it unlikely it hasn't been challenged in court.
You should have read the article to the end. The Smith Act has it’s limitations as will be demonstrated.
Intimidation disruptions of business activities (to include classes), & property damage is NOT free speech, & just because some of that occurred & was tolerated under the previous criminal regime doesn’t mean that there is a statute of limitations; indeed, there is a new sheriff in town & they & you all better get used to it!
I do hope so. Keep thinking and reading if you can.
Unless you can show me the criminal charges laid on him--which you can't because there aren't any--this absolutely IS about free speech.
How do you know what information the government possesses? For all we know they have built a pretty good case with receipts, phone records, etc. I'll willing to wait until the hearing before declaring 'this absolutely IS about free speech."
Recall that I said UNLESS the government can show me the criminal charges it laid on him. If it can, fine, legitimate deportation. If it cannot, let him go, it's free speech. Since they have yet to show an ounce of proof, I will assume they have none, because if they did, they would have put it out there already.
If they did they would have charged him.
Better do your homework.
Shane, see my post just now above yours. Your logic would say that since no one was or until someone was charged Emmitt Till was not murdered. I really don’t think you want to be on that side of history, but who knows, maybe you do?
At least this should dispel any notions of what Trump’s about. See if Walter tells us what a great guy he is tomorrow.
Dave, since 1952, federal law has given the Secretary of State the right to order the deportation of any foreign national who advocates on behalf of a terrorist cause.
This guy did that.
Maybe Trump is about doing his duty as Chief Executive to "take care that the laws be faithfully executed." Is that just possible?
For a decade you unrelententingly silly asses have been making ominous and idiotic pronouncements about Trump's True Nature. If he really were a Fascist, you wouldn't have been heard from after 2018 at the latest.
It’s a fine line you are trying to walk, Matt. At some point you have to recognize the terrorists who want to destroy America have learn to abuse and twist the 1A for their own evil motives. Don’t be played.
Stick with it Mr Taibbi. Just facts. I want radical islam, and it’s fuckwit cheerleaders, out of this country. But I want it done legally and transparently. If we go the way of Europe (suppression of speech+unchecked immigration), theres nowhere to run.
Says you.
Protecting Western Civ is protecting free speech. Western Civ gave you free speech. Western Civ is the only ideology left that truly allows free speech. In fact, some would say the only ideology that has allowed it in thousands of years.
You're against those who are against the guy who used his free speech to urge others to silence the free speech and the right to freely go anywhere in public spaces including the place they paid to go to.
Quite the conundrum but not so much that you simply stand for the one who stands for not only the silencing, but took the freedom to move freely in public spaces including those they paid for.
No, I'm pro-free speech. I'm saying civilization = freedom of expression.
Civilization is also the freedom to walk the grounds of the school you paid to walk, take the classes you paid to take.
Do you agree that freedom of movement is a protected right under 1A? Do Jews have the right to peacefully assemble in the classrooms they paid to be in?
When movement is prevented, it can ordinarily be prosecuted under numerous traditional and uncontroversial laws against assault, imprisonment, kidnapping, etc. I understand freedom of movement only rarely, tangentially, and if tightly bound can embody freedom of speech. You've yet to show how. So what are the specific violations for this case and how must they reference speech and/or thought to make your case? Otherwise, drop the speech/thought complaint.
I realize, though, like your compatriots here that in reality you're itching to find a way to prosecute your favorite thought "crimes", otherwise the case would matter not a whit -- like the thousands of other violations of freedom of movement that happen every day in America -- do not. So I doubt any argument will persuade you, but sure, continue with the sophistry.
This is not about free speech. Stop trying to deflect from the reality that SecState has the authority to cancel visas and green cards and that non-citizens are not due the same degree of process as citizens.
Thanks for the compliment, Yuri. And I just updated with the Trump Tower news.
We don't have to accept enemies as citizens. The First Amendment is not a suicide pact. He can speak freely while he's here. But we don't have to let him stay. The inevitable goodbye just comes a little early for his kind.
(And I'm very curious about the nature of his marriage to an American. Do they actually live together conjugally, or is this a "marriage" like Rep. Ilhan Omar "married" her brother. (I'm giving her the benefit of the doubt that it wasn't actually incest.))
They are married. She seems full blown radical herself which is why the lawyer spoke for her.
Is there strong evidence showing he "orchestrated riots?" That would be a compelling argument against him, but I don't know that it exists.
When people are afraid of freedom, we become afraid of the very tenants that make us free (like free speech).
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/3/9/mahmoud-khalil-student-leader-of-columbia-protests-arrested
Johnny-O asked for STRONG evidence. That article only says Khalil was a mediator between the protesters and Columbia administrators.
On my best day, I couldn't have expressed myself any better, other than to add we have plenty of home-grown disrupters. No need to issue green cards to any more.
Bollocks, Yuri. You do not "appreciate" the facts and nuance in Matt's timeline.
You pretend to acknowledge it while swiping it aside to foam at the mouth like most of the rest of the commenters in this thread.
This congeries of "land of the free, home of the brave" kibbitzers is made up of cowards and supine supporters of state authority rooted in nothing but anger and resentment.
Small people indeed.
I hope Matt keeps up the good work in the face of clownworlders the way he always has. Even if they pay his wages.
1) Protests do not = riots.
We've all learned how George Soros pays agitators to incite violence - I haven't seen one incident where anything Mahmoud has said was a call to violence. If there is one - someone please share it.
That said - the entire Antifa, BlM, and Democrat party - are constantly calling for violence. Let's round up every one of THOSE members - or is this recently elected government scared to do that ( lack of action by Pam Bondi and Kash Patel would say YES)
2) Israel is the greatest terror state in history. The entire right wing has been fomenting terror in the Middle East - and here - since 1947. They've killed Brits in London, they've killed thousands of Americans. They destroyed Lebanon, Libya, and Syria. Let's round them up - and ship THEM somewhere. They do overt violence (9/11, Las Vegas, US Liberty, Sarin Gas attacks in Syria falsely attributed to Assad), false flags (Pittsburgh, Brooklyn, Uvalde, Baltimore Bridge) and terrorism throughout the U.S - including - the covid bioweapon - that's why Bibi has a syringe encased in glass on his desk.
Then, they have complete control of the media narrative.
Add in @Aipac controlling every politician except two - and we have a recipe for the entire U.S to remain the apparatus that Israel controls.
If we lose free speech, guns are next. And after that? 75 million dead U.S citizens - killed by a controlled U.S. government.
You assert a number of things that are only certain in your mind.
You need to get back on your antipsychotic.
"Israel is the greatest terror state in history."
"terrorism throughout the U.S - including - the covid bioweapon - that's why Bibi has a syringe encased in glass on his desk."
"They have complete control of the media narrative."
"we have a recipe for the entire U.S to remain the apparatus that Israel controls."
Back away from the meth, Jew-hater, it's turned your brain into Swiss cheese.
tell me one area I was wrong. I provided a very short list of atrocities -and didn't name all the dual citizen politicians, and all the bribery that AIPAC has used. And all the times Netanyahu got us to do Zionist Israel's bidding in the 5 countries we destroyed ( Iran is next on the list). Shane, you are too stupid to waste time debating ( or too brainwashed).
Same could be said about you.
Take your ritalin.
100%
If Khalil is tied to organizing civil disobediance that set about to deprive others of their rights–passerbys, or more specifically jews or anyone who refused to swear allegiance to BDS–then I have no problem with this detention and deportation.
But if this a case more like January 6th, where the protagonist in the dock may be seen as inspiring such behavior if not its the architect, that is a bridge too far. It is a mealy reliance on the very mechanisms that we have long objected to on elite campuses of chilling speech that creates a "hostile environment" to hoist Khalil solely on his rhetorical petard.
As best I can tell from this apparently non-loaded recitation of events, this is a close call in this case. Admiring the neutrality of presentation, I would nonetheless appreciate hearing whether Matt thinks the former or the latter concept is a play here.
There is also a technical question whether the thought police environment can be applied to aliens in a way it is not to citizens. Aliens get equal protection of the laws but not the privileges and immunities of citizenship. It remains a question in my mind whether the constitution, as the supreme law, is what is meant by "the laws".
Every time I navigate away from this page it disposes of my comment (thanks substack for have such a crappy interface that can't keep track of my comments or where i am in podcasts or really much else, absolutely the only thing going for this site is free speech. guess that is pretty good basis for a site because it makes me put with stuff I ever would elsewhere). I would have liked to check what FIRE actually said about this case on that question, but I'm going to post this and then update or comment again. I'm not opposed to the notion that we are not required to, but should on principle, afford 1st amendment style speech to guests in America.
What's also being missed is that every right has restrictions. In a "freer" society, these restrictions cycle over time.
"Why must we allow them to stay after they openly state support for terrorists and their wish to destroy our civilization?"
The fear of being labeled an Islamophobe. The same woke bs mind virus (Gad Saad) that gets whites to believe they are incurable racists, who should not be able to breathe the same air as a BIPOC individual. On the other hand if all they do is talk they should not be messed with. The flaccid understanding of how to neutralize these evil figures who have a faux exterior of civilization is what is in question.
For some reason, I believe I should remind everybody that Hitler was Austrian. He was an Austrian Citizen during the Beer Hall Putsch and for the term of his imprisonment. He did not become a German Citizen until one year before he was pronounced Chancellor.
In retrospect, deportation rather than imprisonment seems like such a better resolution.
This is incoherent reasoning, Yuri. How can you even raise these questions without taking advantage of the very free speech you claim isn't at issue here? If Khalil actually riots, by all means deport him for that. Otherwise, he's free to "openly state" his support of anyone and anything he chooses, same as you.
I don't agree with his goals, but that's irrelevant. Judging from the evidence of your own post your reasoning is as faulty as his--yet you take for granted your right to share it with us; and those who understand the importance of freedom of speech are fine with that.
The issue is that Khalil is a recent immigrant (he came to america in 2023, I believe)
That's the foundation of the problem.
He got a greencard last year presumably because he married someone.
You either think that makes him an American or you don't.
That's the crux of the issue.
That may be an issue for you, for some reason. It has nothing to do with Matt's concerns about free speech and the extent to which governments respect it. Who cares if Khalil is American or not? What free speech advocate has ever argued that only Americans should be free to speak their minds, or that officials are at liberty to censor at will, provided that the voices they suppress aren't those of American citizens? Such an arbitrarily selective approach to fairness wouldn't even be in the interest of Americans themselves, who obviously want and need to hear what the rest of the world has to say.
Mark, since 1952, federal law has given the Secretary of State the right to order the deportation of any foreign national who advocates on behalf of a terrorist cause. This guy has done that. This is not a free speech issue.
I'm extremely disappointed in Taibbi on this one.
You've clearly misunderstood Matt's concerns: I doubt he much cares what happens to Khalil. What he's worried about is the Trump administration going down the same "We've got to control information" road as the Biden-Harris cabal. In the long term, that's the issue that matters.
That's stupid. There's thousands of students protesting (and millions of dollars of damage being done) and no one has been arrested because of speech.
I agree.
Where is the history of law-related problems for Khalil prior to taking him into custody? He's been around for awhile. I guess I should put that to the author Greg Collard as well.
Property has been damaged, classes that have been paid for have been disrupted (time, if not money never to be recovered) those are crimes that have occurred at his urging (& similar to crimes that were wrongly attributed to have been encouraged by speech that Trump didn’t make, for which US citizens have been in prison for years).
RICO statutes & incitement come to mind, but @ this point, he is IMHO persona non grata & not a citizen. Out he goes.
It's like this article. I want to see any evidence of crimes committed by the protestors. There are Jewish students mixed in with them. This has been going on for some time. Don't just show up with a DHS charge and say it's all "ghastly".
Ghastly is not a word that I did or would use. I would be pissed if I was paying $70,000 a year for an education that my child did not get in full.
The real threat I have seen is removing students for being protestors, and yes, that's how horrible that is.
Read my response regarding my student protest days.
Read HD Thoreau on Civil Disobedience, classic treatise that I wrote an essay on in high school and was one of the underpinnings of MLK’s civil rights movement.
Legitimate non violent protest could be illegal, but it could not be violent, (& not destructive of property, but I can’t assert that for certain). If charged and convicted of illegal acts, one has to incur and suffer the legitimate consequences/punishment. (Something like heaping burning coals on their heads— but not exactly).
Your post seems to completely ignore the harms that the non protesting students, faculty, staff, and community people incur.
Protest has moved far far away from there to galaxies far removed from space and time.
So I can see the university’s position on these modern student ‘protests.’
Well
If Khalil had been honest on his green card application, it would have been denied. Are we declaring that if one lies in order to get approved, approval cannot be revoked?
A reminder from John Adams, our second POTUS: "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."
Exactly. Non-citizens do not have equal free speech rights and he shouldn't even be here.
Free speech isn't the issue here. No sovereign nation can remain sovereign if foreign rabble rousers and agitators are allowed to organize domestic groups against the government of that nation.
Pontificating on a ladder or soap box at Speaker's Corner in Hyde Park is far different from organizing mass protests with the specific intent of the collapse of western civilization.
I agree. I think it FEELS more complicated simply because he was "a student." If just an activist/agitator, it would have been more straight forward. I am ok with deporting people like this guy, but we do get into the weeds some.
This is not the Bush43, Obama, Biden administrations that demanded we do the same thing other western nations have been doing, bringing in foreigners from Jew and Christian hating countries. Syria is now a terrorist country, that was planned under Obama, just took a while because of Trump’s first term when he wiped out ISIS.
Our country is under assault disguised under the first amendment as free speech.
I am so tired of political correct and so glad that this Admin has the proper frame of reference to understand what is and has been happening under those last three Admins.
I do not know all of the details. Is their proof he lied on green card application? Do you know what he lied about? Happy to read up on my own. I am just curious.
I am not a fan of muslim immigration overall. not enough vetting. assimilation does not happen and they seem to really hate other religions...
There is no proof, they’re just regurgitating propaganda
Here's where he's interning at.
https://icct.nl/publication/unrwa-countering-financing-terrorism-and-swing-back-post-911-hard-security-reflexes
Yes, JD should submit the documentation for Matt's collection.
JD says "IF". He hypothesizing which is clear in his post.
No, he’s making a claim: That Khalil had to lie in order to get his green card. And JD reinforces that claim with the rhetorical question that follows.
The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench - a long plastic corridor where pimps and thieves run free, and good men die like dogs. Also, there is a negative side.
lol
I should quote Hunter Thompson more often. Nobody says it better.
Do you know what Khalil lied about, or was untruthful about, on his green card application?
The fact that I cannot find any information on that doesn't mean it's not true, obviously, or that the information isn't out there.
There is an admissibility section to the green card review that asks you questions about whether or not you're a person like Khalil.
Specifically:
Terrorist Activities – INA 212(a)(3)(B)
Adverse Foreign Policy Impact – INA 212(a)(3)(C)
It is safe to assume he lied, because these sections are specifically intended to keep people like him out of the US.
To be clear - The US has designated HAMAS as a terrorist organization.
So if you are in the US and advocating for HAMAS, you are advocating for a terrorist organization.
There are questions on the application that ask you if you will do that.
So if you are here, and you do that, then you have lied on your application.
Where is the evidence that he advocated for Hamas?
He gave out pro Hamas fliers
Show me the flyers.
Your gossip is not evidence
When we accept assertions without evidence, we are only cheating ourselves.
I doubt he lied. He came here in 2022. He immediately interned for UNRWA. You do the math.
Your timeline glosses over a very important fact.
"Students and non-students broke into Columbia’s Hamilton Hall building four days later and barricaded themselves inside."
You failed to mention the three custodians of Hamilton Hall that were attacked, beaten and held hostage by the "protesters". In a civil society, that's called kidnapping. However, in the jungleland known as New York State, no charges were brought by the radical DA Alvin Bragg, working in concert with the cowardly governor Kathy Hochul.
I made another comment to this effect: there is a gaping logical inconsistency in Matt’s defense of Khalil.
Khalil was not just speaking. He was a SPOKESPERSON. As someone who has had a taste of campus protest planning, let me tell you: there is no way someone becomes a designated spokesperson for a movement-presuming to negotiate on their behalf-without some degree of coordination or control with respect to that movement.
If Khalil had any coordination with or control over the movement conducting clearly illegal actions as you described, outside the bounds of 1A protection, then the deportation is justified.
Did he lie on his Visa application?
He was a SPOKESPERSON, which is a leadership position.
He graduated in December and is still in University Housing. Has he applied for employment anywhere? Is he employed?
Who is paying for his lawyers?
Who financed Tentifada?
Were there paid protesters involved and who financed them?
Not one single charge has been made against any of these protesters, while 5,000 federal agents were assigned to the J6 attendees. Why?
Answers to those questions would fill out the story.
wonderful questions
GREAT questions!!🏆
So then charge those responsible, from what I understand this man took part in none of those protests. Didn’t physically harm anyone. He just spoke at press conferences and stated his groups position on the Israeli genocide that he disagrees with, as do many American citizens. On January 6th the democrats used similar, flimsy wording to try to tie trump to an insurrection, and threw his followers under the prison. Looks like the same thing is coming for anyone that is against the Israeli regime. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
“Osama Bin Laden took part in none of those bombings. Didn’t physically harm anyone. He just made videos and stated his group’s position on anti-Western imperialism that he disagrees with, as do many Muslims”
See how whether Khalil was coordinating with or controlling a group’s illegal activities makes a huge difference in the interpretation of his actions as speech or evidence of contribution to those activities? See my other comment in reply to the original poster.
LOL really? Comparing a protest organizer, with clear peaceful demands, to the leader if an international terror organization is ridiculous. Come on now.
Ok, substitute Bin Laden for any spokesperson for an organization involved in illegal activity (unless you claim that what happened at Columbia was peaceful, in which case you dispute Matt’s factual timeline) and respond to the point being made.
These games are actually fun. Ok, I’ll play. Yes, if osama bin Laden was legally in the US and said things I disagreed with, he should be allowed to stay. Wow, I really said that. Since time travel doesn’t exist, I’ll stick to punishing people for actual crimes, not ones they may or may not commit at some unspecified time.
You’re not addressing the point at all. If someone’s speech is dispositive evidence of their coordination with or control of illegal activities, then it’s no longer about speech but about coordination with or control of illegal activities.
Your premise is nonsense. You can't just equate "violent mass murderer" to any "illegal activity". J-walking is illegal. Posession of marijuana is illegal in many states. There's a whole slew of illegal acts that do no harm to anyone else. You're equating speech with violence.
You’re being obtuse. What happened at Columbia was not jaywalking and smoking weed. Nor was it mass murder of course. But it was certainly violent and led to specific harms to other individuals on the campus which are well documented by those who shared multitudes of news stories with you.
Now do it with Jews and Israeli war criminals
Sure - if anyone commits a verifiable war crime or is a leader in an organization that is perpetrating war crimes, they should be held accountable for those crimes.
My position on Khalil or the war in Gaza etc. is entirely conditional on the facts on the ground. I make no prejudgment of guilt or innocence based on the identity or ideology of the person involved. As Solzhenitsyn said, “the line between good and evil runs through the heart of every man.” Israelis and Palestinians, Jews and Muslims, etc are all individuals who should be judged on their individual actions. Unfortunately as with everything these days people (on both sides) toss out rationality and enlightenment individualism in favor of tribalism.
Charles Manson would have agreed with that logic
False equivalency. Manson directly told his followers to commit murder.
It’s been established that Khalil was a leader of an organization that was responsible for violent and illegal acts on Columbia’s campus (it has been a great struggle to get people in the comments to acknowledge this basic fact, but I have gotten there).
So with that premise established, where’s the false equivalency? Would Khalil need to directly say “I am a leader of a group that committed violent and illegal acts” for this statement to be true? Of course not. Manson might have specifically described the violence his followers committed, but public airing of your group’s crimes is not a necessary condition for a leader to be responsible for them.
None of that refutes my comment.
Care to elaborate on how comparing two leaders of organizations committing violent and illegal acts is a false equivalency? The operative word is “leader”, the longstanding meaning of which as someone who organizes, plans, and directs others is somehow elided by Khalil’s defenders.
Agree with your point but did this guy have anything to do with those specific acts of violence? I’m vexed because the documents and timeline here showed two different things: Bondi and the original executive order focus on violence and specific acts, whereas Trump and recent DHS are all about punishing expression of viewpoints.
Source where Trump said this was about punishing expression of viewpoints?
His refrain is that they are bad people and don’t like America.
Unless the man who was arrested is proven to have had a part in that then it’s irrelevant
I agree, it seems Matt left out the timeline from the other side...Matt do you planon providing this as well?
What other side?
Yes, what was omitted? Can you (rabbitrabbit) provide some of the links you would like Matt to add to the timeline? (and we comment readers can peruse whether or not Matt adds them).
I do want to hear all sides, not a selection aimed in one direction.
Great point-- time lines are great if they include everything.
I've seen this claim about beating the custodians several times now. Can you point me to a source for that claim?
From the custodians’ own union representative, in case source credibility is an issue: https://www.thecollegefix.com/custodians-union-to-sue-columbia-says-didnt-protect-staff-from-bratty-privileged-protesters/
So a man that didn’t show up to the protest, should be held accountable for the actions of a few that broke the law. Got it, Trump and anyone that was at the capital on Jan 6,2021 all deserve prison time for the handful that caused property damage or hurt someone, got it.
This is the “politics is only what happens in public” theory. If (and only if) there is evidence that Khalil was involved in covert coordination with or control of illegal activities, then this deportation is justified. If he just happened to show up to speak at a press conference and then go home and mind his business, with no contributions or planning of building occupations etc. then yes, he should be protected.
I would agree 100%..if crimes were committed and can be proven, then deport him or jail him or whatever punishment fits the crime. Words are not crimes. Wrongthink is not a crime.
Where in that article does it say they were beaten?
Oh sorry, it was just smashing up property, attempting to prevent the custodians’ exit to the extent that the custodians had to “fight” their way out (see below). Somehow the very fine distinction between this and “beating” is so fundamental that it makes what happened justifiable? I don’t understand the obsession with splitting these hairs about the violence committed at Columbia unless it’s an attempt to distract attention from the violence by nitpicking.
From the College Fix article:
“protesters…took over Hamilton Hall, smashing windows, breaking through doors, and barricading themselves inside…
…Samuelsen said a few protesters “tried to hold our workers in the building” during the occupation….
“The entire TWU workforce in the building was fearful and rightfully so,” he told Fox News. “They stormed in … but two of the custodians had to fight their way out. They were explicitly told ‘You’re staying here, you’re not going anywhere, this cause is bigger than you.'”
I see no claim that they "beat custodians."
https://www.nydailynews.com/2025/03/03/barnard-college-student-expelled-columbia-hamilton-hall-takeover-gaza/
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/08/nyregion/columbia-hamilton-hall-protests.html
https://www.thefp.com/p/columbia-custodian-invasion-traumatized
https://www.foxnews.com/media/custodians-attacked-anti-israel-agitators-taking-columbia-court-epic-failure
https://www.thefp.com/p/charges-dropped-columbia-hamilton-hall-protest
https://gothamist.com/news/lock-all-windows-a-designated-smoking-room-inside-columbia-protesters-maps-and-plans
https://www.foxnews.com/us/columbia-university-custodians-union-plans-sue-school-anti-israel-protests-slams-bratty-occupiers
None of those sources show that protestors "beat custodians". The closest description was the NYT article that describes Torres getting into a scuffle with one of the protestors. It was obviously a traumatic experience for them but I see no evidence of them being beaten.
The Israeli government has America by the balls. But this is a consensual relationship, and there’s no excuse for the capitulation to their verbal and political tyranny. I’m afraid that the Israel lobby is winning. At the core of all of it are two factors: The Zionists, (very clearly not all of them Jewish), are without equal in ruthlessness and cunning, and Israel is a nuclear armed state.
Does the USA want a Zionist/Evangelical Society?
Think!
In America alone there are more fundamentalist Christians who identify as Zionists than there are Jews in the world.
I grew up in that world in Alabama. Only knew of one Jewish family but sure knew lots of evangelicals supporting Israel to bring about the 2nd coming.
No Evangelical who actually understands premillennialism has ever believed that "supporting Israel" would bring about The Second Coming.
Belief doesn’t mean understanding. No Israel no rapture. That’s what our preacher preached. Had to support Israel. So they support all acts by the Israeli government. Want to make sure lots of countries turn against Israel which is part of the end game.
Did you like the Canadian art project, where they drew a penis where the silly palestinian fist is? I think that's creative thinking, don't you agree? As a Hamas enthusiast, I'm sure you found it titilating.
@ Sera:
👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎
Did you want swiss or cheddar on your sandwich? Encampment leaders forgot to ask if you're lactose intolerant.
Much handwringing about nothing. Free speech is our core right and should be defended at all costs. Unfortunately for Mahmoud, "our" does not include him.
Green card holders are on probation. We're testing them out to see if they qualify for the club. He failed the test and should now be sent back to Syria where he should feel free to speak out against the government there to his heart's content.
He was not vetted properly, if at all, when let in.
Evidence?
Check out my other comments.
I'm not going to hunt down all your comments. But I'll gladly read whatever evidence you provide here.
You have to violate the Smith Act (attempting destruction of the govt) and doing something illegal, according to what's in this article. I haven't seen any law violations from him, and he's been there for awhile. The DHS is labeling him as involved in activities "aligned with Hamas".
Green card holders are permanent residents, and thus share the same constitutional protections as citizens.
How exactly did Khalil "fail the test"?
There is a current deranged notion that "students' right to protest is protected by the 1st Amendment". This is deranged, because students should not go to university to protest. They should to get a degree, hopefully in something useful.
Even more in this case, we do not want a bunch of ungrateful international terrorists coming to the US under false pretenses to protest. They should get the degree, and then leave, immediately. They are not welcome here.
I found a good number of kids attend college to party a lot.
Students' right to protest is protected by 1A. What's "deranged" is to believe it's not.
You do realize a significant number of foreigners who attend college here seek permanent residence on a path to citizenship so they can utilize their degree to become productive members of American society, right?
👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎
Such coherent arguments!! You must be a progressive.
As a foreign national in the U.S., Khalil is under INS regulations not to espouse support for a U.S.-designated terrorist-group. Nor to encourage others to support such a US-designated terrorist group. He has violated that restriction numerous times.
But Khalil is a leader of CUAD and its primary spokesman. The CUAD response to the anniversary of October 7 massacre by Hamas was THIS: COMMEMORATING AL-AQSA FLOOD | HONORING OUR MARTYRS. (Columbia U, October 7, 2024: large demonstration). Get the picture?
That grotesque and genocidal message is perfectly in tune with the distribution of flyers in support not merely of Hamas but of the October 7 massacre itself (!) that occurred during the forcible takeover of the Barnard building last week where Khalil was again the leader and spokesman. The flyer was entitled "Sometimes History needs a Flood", with an image of Hamas leader Yahyah Sinwar (the architect of October 7), and an AK-47.
To repeat: he is a foreign national. Foreign nationals are subject to the restrictions imposed by the INS, and support of USG-designated terrorist groups is subject to deportation.
I think it still has to go to the courts, but there is a prima facie case that he is in violation of the INS terms.
But look--the Khalil case is a political goldmine for Trump. This guy violated INS rules multiple times in supporting a US government designated terrorist group and in encouraging others to do so. He is a foreign national in the United States who is under INS regulations, which forbid espousing support for a US government-designated terrorist group – – a condition of his being in the United States, a condition which he has violated multiple times. This is not a free-speech issue. He is not a US citizen and is here on sufferance. He violated the conditions of his stay.
Yes, there has to be a legal deportation proceedings of some sort. But Khalil is such a bad actor that this whole thing is a political trap set by Trump. Do not fall into it. This particular case is not a hill to die on.
Right, now Trump has Democrats on record supporting an accused terrorist, something probably 90% of voters disagree with. Why do they always fall for these traps?
Pro-Palestine Protesters Storm Trump Tower
https://www.theepochtimes.com/epochtv/pro-palestine-protesters-storm-trump-tower-secretary-of-state-rubio-talks-with-canadas-foreign-minister-5824946
They are not pro-Palestine; they are pro-Hamas. They call themselves Jewish Voice for Peace. They're not either one.
Your opinion.
Jewish Voice for Peace is just one of 250 funded groups. 150 can be found in a report here: https://capitalresearch.org/app/uploads/Marching-Toward-Violence-1.pdf
You have not listed all this guy's documented positions and statements on overthrowing both the US and Israel and violence. We do not have to put up with that kind of "free speech" from a non-citizen. Research it further.
If the case is about his speech alone, no matter how noxious, he shouldn’t be deported.
However, let’s square a logical inconsistency in Matt’s (and others’) defense of him. He wasn’t just speaking. He was a SPOKESPERSON for an entire movement that was conducting illegal activity who yet somehow wasn’t involved in any of these actions? As someone who got a taste of the behind the scenes of campus protest as an undergraduate, let me tell you: there is no way someone becomes a spokesperson for a protest movement without being intimately involved in the planning and execution of that movement’s actions. That he presumed to speak on their behalf suggests some degree of coordination with them if not control.
This is what we need to have aired to the public to assuage those (like me) who agree with Matt IF it’s a speech issue alone but disagree if it involves coordination and control of illegal protest. Was Khalil involved in any of these illegal activities behind the scenes? Release the evidence.
Exactly. What do his defenders think? Did he just coincidentally show up at opportune moments and exert his 1A rights without knowledge of any of the illegal protester activities? BS.
Exactly. But even if it's about free speech alone, you can argue 1. he doesn't have the same rights as citizens and 2 His speech (and documents positions) are inciting violence and probably did. He went to more than one university to do this, so it wasn't organic. I don't think a non-citizen has the free speech rights to come here and talk about taking down America. Don't think so. But yes.
Sure, but I am trying to argue from the maximalist civil liberties position, to persuade the ardent civil libertarians like Matt (and myself) that there is the possibility this is justified if we see evidence of behind the scenes coordination or control of illegal actions at Columbia.
What I take away from several of your comments here is that "there is a possibility that [the deportation] is justified", rather than "we commenters know enough to decide whether his deportation is justified or not". I appreciate that distinction.
I would prefer that the evidence for and against be presented in a functional court proceedings, in which the case against him is not based on prohibited speech, but criminal collusion or a related charge. If convicted after due process, deport. If not, then even if we strongly disagree with what he says (and I do), the first amendment should apply (the SCOTUS says it applies to legal permanent residents as well as citizens).
I'm somewhat dismayed by people who believe he should be summarily deported based on fragments of selectively presented assertion, without a full hearing of both sides. I see more and more progressives wanting to punish people "just because we all know they are evil", without due process or respect for free speech. I don't want to see both sides doing it.
Yes, I get it because I consider myself a civil liberties free speech person. But this isn't right, either.
YOU research it further and send the documents for posting.
This is from The Blaze and includes links to back up his assertions which I checked:
15 smoking guns that show Mahmoud Khalil is a terror threat
Ryan Mauro
March 13, 2025
support us
Columbia University’s radical protest leaders, including Khalil, aren’t just anti-Israel — they want America to fall and are taking steps to make it happen.
Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats are demanding the release of Columbia University student and pro-Hamas protester Mahmoud Khalil. While House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) is accusing the Trump administration of “authoritarianism,” the Democrats are about to be embarrassed.
Khalil is a leader of Columbia University Apartheid Divest, one of more than 150 pro-terrorism groups I identified in my comprehensive study for the Capital Research Center, “Marching Toward Violence: The Domestic Anti-Israeli Protest Movement.”
The real question is whether decision-makers recognize their options and have the resolve to act.
I recently wrote a follow-up series identifying about 250 “pro-Palestinian” groups allied with this group that have expressed genocidal desires to see the U.S. destroyed and replaced by an indigenous Native American “Turtle Island,” just as they desire to see Israel destroyed and replaced by a Palestinian state.
Sign up for the Blaze newsletter
By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, and agree to receive content that may sometimes include advertisements. You may opt out at any time.
The following smoking guns about the national security risk posed by Khalil and his group should serve as a microcosm of the broader threat — not just as a vindication of a single decision by the Trump administration.
1. Khalil’s group seeks to incite and carry out terrorism on U.S. soil, including copying the October 7 atrocities.
His organization instructed “comrades” to “look to the tactics” of “the Palestinian resistance for inspired action against oppressive institutions” and to “rise” like a “flood.”
The term “flood” — which anyone in the pro-Hamas seditionist ecosystem would recognize — is a reference to the Oct. 7 attacks that Hamas and other terrorist groups refer to as “Operation Al-Aqsa Flood.”
CUAD also declared its intention to “grow” the number of terrorist attacks in the West like Casey Goonan’s multiple acts of arson in California targeting UC Berkeley.
2. Khalil’s CUAD praised the Oct. 7 attacks and Islamist-backed violent uprisings in Bangladesh as parts of the “global intifada” against “American imperialism.”
3. CUAD said “we” must “genuinely threaten the state” so much that “we” are “killed, jailed, tortured, disappeared, and targeted” in America.
The group continued: “If we want to achieve liberation in America, we must be prepared to make these same sacrifices,” as was the case during the overthrow of the Bangladeshi government.
4. Khalil’s group called for attacking the military and police “en masse” and “dismantling state infrastructure.”
CUAD glorified the Oct. 7 Hamas terrorists and Bangladeshi militants for “escalating the global battle for liberation. By directly confronting military and police en masse, by not merely ‘engaging’ but battling fascist agitators, by dismantling state infrastructure, they are moving the global resistance into a new phase of struggle.”
It frighteningly ended the paragraph in bold writing that reads, “Those of us in the Western world have the obligation to meet them there.”
5. Khalil’s group describes itself as part of a violent anti-American “insurgency” that must target the criminal justice system “until the empire crumbles.”
It specifically called on insurgents in the United States to follow the methods of Bangladeshi “actionists” who took over a prison, released the prisoners, and burned the building down.
6. Khalil’s group seeks the “eradication of Western civilization.”
Specifically, CUAD posted: “We are Westerners fighting for the total eradication of Western civilization,” “the imperialist world order,” and “we reject every genocidal, eugenicist regime that seeks to undermine the personhood of the colonized.”
7. Khalil’s group asks violent extremists abroad for help in organizing uprisings.
8. His group asked for help from “militants in the Global South” in achieving its goal of eradicating Western civilization and fighting “the fascism ingrained in the American consciousness.”
A separate statement said, “We send love and wait to learn more from our comrades” who overthrew the Bangladeshi government, ending with “Long live the Global Intifada.”
9. Khalil’s group threatened to “shut down” Columbia University unless it eliminated the police presence on campus and severed all ties to the NYPD.
10. Khalil’s group really likes to see things set on fire.
CUAD said “the only way to respond to state repression” is to “learn from our comrades in Bangladesh” who “set fire to the state broadcasting network’s headquarters” and starting with “setting fire to the prison, government offices, and state vehicles.”
It also repeatedly professed its affection for Casey Goonan’s multiple acts of arson in California. Khalil’s group endorsed an attempted firebombing of a federal building in Oakland, the firebombing of a UC Berkeley cop car, the torching of a campus building, the looting of a campus supply building, and the setting of a fire at a construction site in the middle of the campus.
11. Khalil’s group had terrorists teach Columbia students.
CUAD held a virtual event where actual terrorists propagandized to students in March 2024. Two leaders of Samidoun (Palestinian Prisoner Support Network), an obvious front for the Marxist-Leninist Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine terrorist group that participated in the October 7 attacks alongside Hamas, were booked as speakers.
Khaled Barakat, a senior PFLP official, explained to the students that hijackings are “one of the most important tactics that the Palestinian resistance have engaged in.” Of course, the Oct. 7 attacks were depicted as inspiring.
The U.S. and Canadian governments designated Samidoun as a terrorist entity that is a “sham” charity for PFLP. It is a landmark decision that opens the door to possible action against a wide array of pro-terrorism groups linked to Samidoun and PFLP.
12. Columbia protesters were told to riot by a Chinese Communist Party entity, and they complied merely hours later.
In late April 2024, over 100 Columbia University protesters visited the headquarters of the People’s Forum, which is a front for the Chinese Communist Party, where they were told to go riot on campus grounds. The protesters, which would have included CUAD as the umbrella coalition bringing all the allied student groups together, then rioted a few hours later.
13. Khalil’s group’s stated goal is to “topple all institutions that benefit from colonial, racial capitalism” and “dismantle” the state.
14. Khalil’s group boasts about vandalism of campus property.
15. A large part of Khalil’s coalition declared itself a literal part of Hamas.
According to its website, Khalil’s organization is a large coalition of 116 groups. The Columbia University chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine is almost certainly the biggest group in the coalition.
Although SJP’s open celebration of the Oct. 7 attacks did get noticed, almost no one noticed that SJP framed its fight against Israel as part of a broader war against the U.S. to liberate “Turtle Island” and that SJP declared itself to be a literal part of Hamas.
After explaining that it is fully supportive of the “resistance movement” that perpetrated the Oct. 7 massacres, tortures, kidnappings, sexual assaults, and animal abuses in Israel, SJP announced, “We, as Palestinian students in exile, are PART of this movement, not in solidarity with this movement.”
SJP also signed an April 18, 2024, statement by the Committee of Anti-Imperialists in Solidarity with Iran that endorsed Iran’s direct attacks on Israel and expressed wholehearted support for the Iranian government and its “Axis of Resistance” proxies including Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis, cheerfully predicting they would defeat the United States, Israel, and their allies. It also sided with Russia over Ukraine and NATO.
Other groups in CUAD’s coalition that expressed support for the October 7 attacks or other acts of terrorism include chapters of Democratic Socialists of America, Sunrise, National Lawyers Guild, and Jewish Voice for Peace.
What’s next?
LOL "Columbia University Apartheid Divest is one of 150 pro-terrorism groups".
That's because they're pro-Palestinian. All these people think Palestine is terrorist because they're as racist as Israel wants them to be. You know both Biden and Trump have been staunchly pro-Israel? That's because AIPAC owns them. They own the United States.
😂
Mr. Mauro seems to have a loose grasp on the concept of incitement. Still, nice try.
You are talking about US citizens. These people do NOT have the same rights to come here and organize against our country. You seem to have a loose grasp of our constitution.
Where in the First Amendment does it say that it only applies to citizens, and not The People? The Constitution is a restriction of the federal government, and it doesn't matter whether The People are citizens or not.
And since we're copypasting now:
Donald Trump's free speech plans are going extremely well...
for those who support genocide...
Laura and Normal Island News
President Trump’s free speech plans are going so well that he has kidnapped a man from his home in front of his heavily-pregnant wife. ICE agents disappeared Mahmoud Khalil so effectively, even his lawyers couldn’t find him, all because he expressed the wrong opinions. The man’s terrifying message was “please stop exterminating my people”.
Mahmoud Khalil is a Palestinian Hamas-loving terrorist who is guilty of speaking while being brown. Among his monstrous crimes was distributing leaflets at Columbia University. This is clearly unforgivable. If your people are being slaughtered by the empire, the only acceptable thing to do is politely shut the fuck up.
Legality was the justification for the abduction of Khalil, but technically, there is no legal basis for deportation because the legal US resident has committed no crime. Clearly, it’s the law that’s wrong, so we don’t give a fuck about legality now.
Sensibly, Khalil’s lawyer wasn’t allowed to speak to her client because he hasn’t been charged with a crime. Therefore, due process does not apply to him. Same goes for his supporters, meaning any international students who express support for Khalil will be abducted by ICE. Only Zionists are allowed to study in the United States of Israel.
Khalil can’t stay in the USI because he is a radical Hamas-loving terrorist, just don’t mention he had security clearance in the UK, and worked in the British embassy in Syria where his former colleagues speak extremely highly of him.
The White House refused to comment on the whereabouts of its hostage, but explained “free speech without limitations” has its limitations. For example, it does not extend to opposition to genocide.
We were initially told Khalil had attended an “illegal protest”, but when it turned out protests aren’t illegal because of the woke first amendment, the White House explained Khalil had undermined US foreign policy. Obviously, no self-respecting government would tolerate brown people disagreeing with its decisions. Undermining US foreign policy is one of those unofficial laws that can and will get you killed.
If Khalil was in a foreign land, the empire would blow up his entire neighbourhood, which explains why Trump wants to send him to Syria. Either Al Qaida will do his dirty work, or Al Qaida’s boss, Israel, will. Either way, Khalil must pay the ultimate price for pleading for mercy for his people.
I guess we’ll never know why Khalil is so hateful. He spent his childhood in a Palestinian refugee camp in Syria, presumably because Israel blew up his family home. Trump wanted to send him back to Palestine, but sadly, Israel won’t let Palestinians go back to Palestine. It kind’a undermines the “go back to where you came from” argument, doesn’t it?
Khalil is not allowed to return home because his family history in Palestine goes back as far as his grandparents could trace it, and this makes colonisers jealous. Only those of European ancestry are allowed onto Palestinian land these days in accordance with the Bible.
Disturbingly, anti-Semitic protests have erupted in support of Khalil, including one held by Jewish students. It’s unclear whether Trump will deport those Jewish students to Syria because Israel certainly doesn’t want them. All we know is anyone who opposes genocide must be cleansed from the empire to ensure all subjects have the same opinions x
I would link you to articles showing Supreme Court precedent for limiting speech rights for aliens, but your comment "arrested for speaking while brown" kinda indicates you're not willing to consider in good faith.
Actually, legally, there IS a distinction. We afford students and others here some of our rights, but it is NOT a law. We do NOT have to allow noncitizens free speech to come here and advocate taking down our country. Look it up. And why would you want that?
Oh my God!! Facts!!! Somebody get the antivenin!!!
I remember Matt soliciting input from readers who have more PRIMARY sources to contribute to the timeline. Do you?
You are kidding right? I checked these links. We are here reading Matt precisely because "PRIMARY" sources omit half of the facts. Please.
Which is precisely why Matt has solicited readers to contribute their own primary sources. You criticize Matt for not listing "this guy's documented positions and statements on overthrowing both the US and Israel and violence." So (as I originally asked), why don't you provide them to Matt to include?
I provided links. Included in Blaze article. "Primary" sources is what, mainstream media? I'm not going to cut and paste all the sources they listed. You can click on them or cut and paste them in yourself. Get real.
Ah, you don't know what primary sources are. That explains a lot. Here you go: https://library.shu.edu/primarysources
Hogwash. I HAD "primary" sources embedded in that article. The Blaze had them in there and I checked them. I don't intend to put them in again when you can look at them if you want to. So I assume you mean "mainstream primary."
I am not sympathetic to Khalil at all, but I would like to see a better case made for what exactly he in particular stands accused of doing.
Right? This seems like one of those issues where there is a divergence between correct action when considering the particulars versus the principles. And the impassioned debates here are ok and don’t need to make the opposing Racket readers mortal enemies. Good people disagree all the time.
The more I read about this character the more I despise everything about him. He seems like a deranged maniac from abroad who has come here to damage Americans and our social cohesion. He should never have been given a visa or residence. He’s a net negative for our country. Every cell in my body says deport his ass. That’s the particulars.
The principles are free speech is tolerated even from those whose ideas we hate. It’s the Skokie Klan march reimagined for the 21st century. And the important distinction with his immigration status seems like a technicality that can be seized upon to dismiss the important free speech principle. I honestly don’t know what is the ethically right move and how the particulars versus the principles argument gets resolved.
I’m glad Matt has the guts to advocate for his free speech principles even when it provokes a backlash and undoubtedly will cost him some paid subscribers, even if I’m not sure he has parsed the principles versus particulars matter correctly.
For what it is worth, while I agree that both the neo-Nazis in Skokie and the Hamas Lite protestors have the right to vent their nasty viewpoints, there is a major difference. The Columbia protests were violent and included a multitude of illegal acts while the Nazis won their case and then declined to march. Obviously no march, no illegalities.
And yet, if Khalil was not inciting or participating in the violence, can we hold him accountable for it (--even if we suspect that he felt the violence was justified and was satisfied by it)?
That's a real question. My initial thought is that we should hold immigrants to a very high standard, simply because western civilization is more fragile than we usually realize, and there are cultural differences among nations that must be accounted for. We would clearly not want to ensure that people who hate our country are nevertheless welcome to move here because "all humans are welcome to move here."
But, I'm not seeing solid evidence that Khalil "hates our country," even if some of his crap enrages me. I can GUESS that he hates us, or suspect it, and certainly wonder about it; but I definitely don't know it, and I'd still need to see sources that show that he was clearly involved in whatever protest activities got out of hand before forming a real opinion.
I think I have posted about this but probably broken into too many pieces to be clear so I will try to compile it in one place
If it is just "speech", he could stay but that term is more than a little vague. In my opinion, handing out a flyer that says "I do not believe Hamas should be designated as a terrorist group, please help me to persuade people to write to their representatives to get this changed" is protected, citizen or not. If the flyer says, "I agree with the objectives of Hamas as exhibited through word and deed, please help me carry out their important work.", you have crossed over into actively supporting a terrorist group and there should be consequences.
There are certainly room for gray areas in between that we could debate for days. However, the beauty of a representative democracy is that we have selected people to have that debate for us. In the case of people who are guests in this country, the laws have made it clear that there is a lower bar for imposing consequences on them than on citizens. Moreover, as there will certainly be gray areas that cannot be anticipated when writing laws and regulations, the Secretary of State will have discretion on these matters.
I still consider it a possibility that when the dust has settled, Khalil may still be able to reside here. However, based on the strong indication that he took actions that were illegal (perhaps not directly but by planning and facilitating) and that his documented speech seems to fall (at least) into that gray area where Rubio will make the decision, I consider it far more likely that he will be deported and within the letter and spirit of the law.
There is an interesting article (I believe cited elsewhere in this thread) with a title something like "15 Reasons Khalil Mahmoud Should be Deported". Personally, I disagree with somewhere around half and am iffy on several more but it provides a pretty good outline of the issues at hand.
I'll be looking for your "strong indication" on illegal activity in the primary source updates of this timeline. (I think it's going to be updated as new info comes in?) Thanks for your thoughts--
If If If-- Lets wait and see. There are several videos out there that could be construed as incitement-- but I do not know what the US govt definition of that is in regard to immigration issues. So I will wait.
Agreed about the If's and the waiting!
This reminds me of when Alex Jones was banned from Twitter in 2018. They always start with someone who is easy to dislike, but once they start, they don't stop. The Patriot Act wasn't supposed to apply to American citizens, until suddenly we had the indefinite detention provision of the NDAA. Does anyone really believe that the need to shut down student protests is so great that the government needs sweeping new powers?
You don't have all the information yet, right? Who knows if the government has receipts, phone records, informants, or whatever. Trump has gotten all the Democrats on record as supporting him. Genius.
Yes. A lot of people see defending freedom of speech as just doing an unearned favor to the accused (Khalil). But it's more about protecting the concept, as it will be applied to others including ourselves in the future. That is, we defend even free speech which we detest, and expect similar protections for our own speech. Put another way, it's not just speaking (or expression), it's also about what we are free to hear (even from an external source). So banning US citizens from listening to Polish or Chinese or Paraquan sources which the government doesn't like would be bad, even tho those sources are not US citizens or permament residents.
Some in the comments here are saying that there are crimes which Khalil has committed, which are the real issue, not how he has used free speech. That case needs to be made more fully, in a context where both sides get to present evidence (like a court proceeding).
See my comment with links.
I will reiterate a comment on a previous post made about this Islamofascist in our midst. He does not have Constitutional rights. His rights are based on federal law. See Dershowitz: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbD6OhbtaZg
Khalil immigrated to the US 3 years ago. He got married his first year and the last 2 years he spent yelling how evil the US and Israel are, with a special fixation on his hatred of jews. He has been protected by Columbia University whose leadership shares his bigotry. When he is detained/arrested, 19 lawyers represent him in court.
A few questions - why immigrate to a country you hate? How did someone who appears to be expressing his bigotry on his own suddenly get legal representation from 19 lawyers? Who is paying these 19 lawyers?
https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/forms/i-485.pdf
Part 9 Security and Related 43f
How did he fill out his form? This needs to be added to the timeline. Rubio has said that both when he filled out his student visa and again with his green card, he did not put that he was a Hamas supporter. If he had, he would not have been admitted. This is the crux of the issue for the Hamas supporters. You have to declare this on your form. If he declared it on his form, then he has legal standing, but if he did not, he purjured himself, this they should be in their right to revoke his green card status as he purjured himself on the form.
Thank you for doing this Matt and Greg, there are many complexities around this particular case and it's helpful to have all the relevant information available in one place.
Just FYI, a bunch of filings in the case were made late Wednesday and Thursday. I've added them to the timeline.
Thanks for the great reporting.
He doesn't have to be a 'threat to national security' - he just has to be an undesirable visitor, which he is, if a single US citizen was harassed or made to suffer hardship or even inconvenience going about their business, because they are Jewish.
I've worked and lived in many foreign countries, and in exactly none of them, does a visa holder enjoy the right to be obnoxious. We have always been told to act like a guest, to be treated like a guest. I think the evidence is fairly clear that Mahmoud has been thinking he has a right to be obnoxious, and for a long time he was getting away with it. But as they say, past performance is no guarantee of future success.
The benefits of being a US Citizen: These are things for which we should be eternally grateful, and be willing to defend. My wife is an immigrant, and she frequently mentions these benefits, and her feelings of gratitude for living here. They should not be squandered by bestowing them indiscriminately, and our citizenship should not be liquidated, compromised, or diluted by politicians looking to buy friends. This is not a Free Speech issue.
I agree - not a free speech issue. It is an issue of abuse of hospitality. We do not wish to become the doormat of the world in which foreign terrorists and cretins come here, abuse our hospitality, and tell the world lies about our policies.
He came in 2022. Seriously --- he has been here how many months? In that time in America he has earned a degree (in what) at Columbia, ground zero for his type of movement.
His self-serving quotes only prove that he is well-qualified to be the spokesperson for the jihad. He embraces what he wants to about our system ("they don't have evidence to suspend") as it suits his purposes. But he has no interest in America itself.
He dresses in the style of the West, but is seen backed up by unknown individuals who could swap places standing behind the coffins of the Israeli mother and her two children.
He is not here to assimilate. He is here to facilitate.
Who is funding his life here? Is it normal to get a green card so quickly? Who makes THAT decision? What do you have to present to get a student visa? What evidence did Columbia "not have" to change its decision?
Go ahead and peel back this onion. There will be plenty to learn.
Maybe it’s a chicken or the egg situation with Columbia University- was he there because it’s ground zero or is it ground zero because he was there?