[CatoRenasci]

I think that the scumbag's statements are within the reasonable limits of academic freedom: if academic freedom doesn't protect the ridiculously unpopular, it's meaningless.

That said, I also think it's perfectly proper for alumni, potential students and the state legislature not to be willing to fund this nonsense. Students should transfer, alumni refuse to give and the state legislature should zero out the budget and shut the place down. Start a new university on that campus in which Sami baby doesn't have a job.

[Publius6961]

I think that the scumbag's statements are within the reasonable limits of academic freedom: if academic freedom doesn't protect the ridiculously unpopular, it's meaningless.

There is something troubling about this statement even if on its face it appears "reasonable".

It may be that we have been anethecized to accept political correctness to the point of culturally shooting ourselves in the foot.

Or it may be that he has been secretely aiding the FBI, but the ineffectiveness of it argues against it.

Or it may be that we have drifted into the "Constitution is a suicide pact" territory

In any case the "solution" proposed should never be necessary. There comes a point when collective common sense needs to be at the forefront of the solution for a real and serious threat.
Although his effectiveness as a terrorist shill may be ended (what a bizarre exercise of academic freedom!), something does not feel right.

[Notforprophet]

I have to disagree, Cato. I mean, if this guy were teaching Middle-East history, or some other topic where the concept of jihad were a part of the curriculum, then maybe he'd be within his 'academic freedom'. But the scumbag is a computer science professor, so why should his radical speech on an entirely different topic be protected by academic freedom?