[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.

[CatoRenasci]

No, as long as the scumbag doesn't actually violate the law, academic freedom protects his right to say offensive things, if he does violate the law, then prosecute him (and throw the book at him, I say) for the violations of law, not his grossly offensive and misguided opinions. If Mahometan scumbags want to preach hatred of the US fine, but let them cross the line into advocacy of action or treason, and then I say lock 'em up and throw away the key. The opinion you think so bad it should be prohibited today, could be your opinion in someone else's view tomorrow.