An anti-Israel activist’s speech quoting a slain Al Jazeera correspondent stirred tensions at a Manhattan protest that saw thousands of radical leftists call for violence against Jews.
The New York Post reported that on Saturday, Mahmoud Khalil, a 30-year-old anti-Israel activist, addressed roughly 2,000 pro-Palestine demonstrators outside the New York Public Library, invoking an alleged journalist killed in an Israeli airstrike while protesters marched through Manhattan waving Palestinian flags and chanting "globalize the intifada."
Khalil’s seven-minute speech on the library steps referenced Anas al-Sharif, an Al Jazeera correspondent killed the prior week, whom Israel accused of leading a Hamas terrorist cell—a charge both al-Sharif and his employer denied.
His words, draped in liberation rhetoric, conveniently sidestepped the correspondent’s alleged ties to a group responsible for horrific violence. Such selective storytelling fuels skepticism about the protest’s true aims.
The crowd, chanting “Stop Starving Gaza,” carried signs demanding justice and wore symbols tied to Hamas, including a green headband linked to its Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades.
These displays, flaunting imagery of a designated terrorist group, undermine claims of peaceful intent. Critics rightly question whether the march was about humanity or propaganda.
Protesters marched from the library to Columbus Circle, their route clogging Manhattan’s streets with banners and a black flag inscribed with Arabic script. The spectacle, while bold, risks alienating those who see Hamas’ shadow looming over the cause. Glorifying symbols of violence rarely win hearts.
Khalil, a former Columbia University student, is no stranger to controversy, having been detained by ICE in March 2025 for allegedly threatening national security. A Louisiana judge freed him in June, calling the arrest unconstitutional—a ruling that still divides opinions. His release emboldened his activism, but it also sharpened critics’ knives.
In an August 6 New York Times interview, Khalil called Hamas’ October 7, 2023, attack—a massacre that killed 1,200 and abducted 251—a “desperate attempt” to break the Palestinian plight’s cycle.
He refused to label it a mistake, though he admitted targeting civilians was wrong. This verbal tightrope walk exposes his reluctance to fully condemn terrorism, casting a long shadow over his protest speech.
“The time is now, the bridges towards liberation start with us,” Khalil declared at the rally, rallying the crowd with fervor. Yet his words ring hollow when paired with his defense of an attack that slaughtered innocents. Liberation doesn’t justify carnage, no matter how passionately it’s spun.
“Targeting civilians is wrong,” Khalil said in the Times interview, a rare concession that feels like lip service given his broader stance. His refusal to outright denounce Hamas’ actions suggests a moral compass more concerned with optics than principle. Such equivocation only deepens distrust.
Brooklyn Assemblyman Kalman Yeger didn’t mince words, stating, “Naturalized citizenship is an earned privilege of our nation, and he has not earned it.”
Yeger’s call for Khalil’s deportation reflects a growing sentiment that his rhetoric crosses a dangerous line. When elected officials sound the alarm, it’s worth listening.
An unnamed X user vented, “Mahmoud Khalil is not a hero. He’s a f–king shill that so many are romanticizing as some Robin Hood.” The raw frustration captures a broader unease: Khalil’s platform thrives on selective outrage, not truth.
Critics like Rep. Elise Stefanik have joined Yeger in demanding Khalil’s removal, branding him a fraud who exploits free speech to peddle divisive narratives. Their push for action signals a rejection of activism that flirts with justifying terror. It’s a stance that resonates with those tired of double standards.
The “Stop Starving Gaza” march aimed to spotlight humanitarian concerns, but its Hamas imagery muddied the message.
Protests should uplift, not alienate, yet the presence of terrorist symbols risks overshadowing any legitimate grievances. Clarity of purpose matters.
Khalil’s invocation of al-Sharif, a figure tied to Hamas by Israel’s claims, further complicates the rally’s narrative. If the goal was unity, quoting a polarizing figure was a misstep. It’s hard to rally for peace while echoing those accused of violence.
