In a recent development that could potentially bolster the Trump administration's deportation case against Mahmoud Khalil, the Syrian national has made some controversial remarks.
During a conversation with Ezra Klein, a podcast host for The New York Times, Khalil appeared to downplay the horrifying events of October 7th, instead framing them as a necessary action by Palestinian terrorists.
Rather than expressing remorse or shock at the brutalities witnessed on live streams, Khalil portrayed himself as a victim, citing emotional distress. However, his distress was not rooted in the sight of innocent lives being taken, but in the fact that "we had to reach this moment in Palestinian struggle."
As reported by RedState, the conversation took place on August 5, 2025, at a time when 50 hostages were still held in Gaza. Khalil, who was interning at the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) during the attack, justified the October 7th attacks on Israel as an unavoidable act of desperation.
He argued that the attacks were a cry for attention from the Palestinians, who felt unheard and marginalized in the face of an imminent Saudi-Israel deal.
Khalil's supporters have often argued that he has never explicitly expressed support for Hamas. However, his recent comments seem to contradict this claim. He stated that the October 7th attacks were necessary to prevent Saudi Arabia and Israel from normalizing relations, a statement that could be interpreted as an endorsement of Hamas' actions.
The moral implications of Khalil's remarks are deeply troubling. When asked about his reaction to the horrific images of violence from October 7th, Khalil dismissed them, instead focusing on Hamas' need to "break the equilibrium."
These comments could potentially serve as compelling evidence against Khalil in his deportation case, given that support for terrorism is a disqualifying factor for green card holders.
As the conversation progressed, Khalil's comments became increasingly self-centered. He recalled his experience on October 7th, not from the perspective of the victims, but from his own personal distress. He described his sleepless nights following the attacks, not out of empathy for the victims, but out of concern that "we had to reach this moment in the Palestinian struggle."
Khalil's use of the word "we" is significant, as it suggests a sense of identification with the Palestinian cause. It's worth noting that Khalil was working for the UNRWA at the time, an organization known for its close ties with Hamas and its role in perpetuating anti-Semitic sentiment in Gaza. His support for the October 7th attacks is clear, but his comments hint at a deeper involvement that the Trump administration should investigate further.
Even Klein, known for his left-leaning views and criticism of Benjamin Netanyahu, seemed taken aback by Khalil's statements. He offered Khalil an opportunity to clarify his remarks, but the Syrian national chose to reiterate his stance. He justified the October 7th attacks as a necessary response to the Israeli government's neglect of the Palestinians and their pursuit of a deal with Saudi Arabia.
Khalil's repeated justification of the October 7th attacks and his apparent identification with the Palestinian cause raise serious concerns about his stance on terrorism. It is crucial for the judge presiding over his case to take these comments into account.
The Trump administration should seize upon Khalil's recent admissions as they continue to build their case for his deportation. It was already questionable that his deportation was halted, but his recent comments leave little doubt about his support for Hamas.
It is essential for the security of the United States that individuals who provide support to terrorists are not allowed to hold visas or green cards. The fact that this is even a matter of debate is a testament to the complexity and urgency of the issue at hand.
Login