Mahmoud Khalil Refuses to Condemn Hamas, Proving He Should Have
Mahmoud Khalil, the pro-Palestine, Hamas-loving Columbia student and activist who should have been deported months ago, went on CNN and refused to condemn…
Watching Mahmoud Khalil sit on CNN and refuse to condemn Hamas was all the evidence anyone should need. The man who helped lead Columbia’s encampment was asked a yes-or-no question: do you condemn the terrorists who murdered 1,200 people and took families hostage? He said no.
Commentary is separate from the original publisher's reporting.
Mahmoud Khalil, the pro-Palestine, Hamas-loving Columbia student and activist who should have been deported months ago, went on CNN and refused to condemn the terrorist organization that killed 1,200 Israelis and took hundreds more hostage three years ago. Khalil has fought his deportation with the help of activist courts and sympathetic Democrat politicians.
Mahmoud Khalil tells CNN that asking him whether he condemns Hamas is a “silly question.” “This question is only being used to ask Palestinians as a sort of, you know, if you say yes—just say yes or no. It’s black and white.” pic.twitter.com/IEHzOlE7pr
When Kaitlin Collins asked Khalil why he wouldn't condemn Hamas, he said, "Because they are not interested in my views about Hamas. This question is being used as a litmus test... this is basically like, why would you ask me if I condemn Hamas, why don't you ask an American official if they condemn the U.S. government for killing over 80 girls in Iran or any Israeli official for the crimes in Gaza."
"This question is only being used to ask Palestinians as a sort of you know... just say yes or no. It's black and white," he added.
Yes, it is black and white. Hamas is a terrorist organization. If you don't condemn it, you support it. It's that simple. And now we know where Khalil stands.
Yes, Mahmoud, the question is a litmus test, and you’ve failed it.
Of course he failed it. He supports terrorism. His activism at Columbia makes that explicitly clear.
So, in short, he supports Hamas which is why, among other things, he should’ve been deported months ago.
Yeah, because it’s black or white.
There's no nuance here. Hamas is a terrorist organization who — by the way — kills innocent Palestinians by using them as human shields. Khalil can't even condemn that.
Editor’s Note: We voted for mass deportations, not mass amnesty. Help us continue to fight back against those trying to go against the will of the American people.
Original source:
Read at TownhallHow We See It
New Republican Times Editorial Board
Watching Mahmoud Khalil sit on CNN and refuse to condemn Hamas was all the evidence anyone should need. The man who helped lead Columbia’s encampment was asked a yes-or-no question: do you condemn the terrorists who murdered 1,200 people and took families hostage? He said no. He wouldn’t say the words. That isn’t a political opinion. It’s a confession.
The same Democratic politicians who spent years defending open borders now scramble to defend this guy. They call his deportation an assault on free speech. But free speech has never meant the right to cheer on a terrorist organization from a student visa. Refusing to condemn Hamas is not protected speech. It’s a loyalty test, and Khalil failed it. So did every judge who pretends this is about academic freedom rather than who gets to stay in the country.
Here’s what the activists refuse to admit: Khalil isn’t being punished for his ideas. He’s being removed because his presence here is incompatible with public safety. He ran a campaign that celebrated violence, and he won’t disavow it. The courts have become a revolving door for foreign nationals who hate America. The campus crowd chanting for a free Palestine doesn’t have to answer for the bodies Hamas stacked in kibbutzim. Khalil won’t either, if the left gets its way.
Deporting Mahmoud Khalil should have been a routine matter. Instead, we got sanctuary cities, activist judges, and elected officials treating a Hamas sympathizer as a cause célèbre. The Trump administration finally did what the law requires. That’s not extremism. That’s enforcement. The only real question is why it took so long for the rest of the country to see who was standing in the way.
Commentary written with AI assistance by the New Republican Times Editorial Board.