Last week, with a deadline imposed by the Trump administration looming, Harvard University released the findings of its own internal investigation into anti-Semitism on campus. Elements of the report were utterly damning, but among the most damning realities was the school's simultaneous release of results of another internal probe. You see, exploring the rampant violations of Jewish students' civil rights couldn't be done in isolation at the Ivy League school. As we've seen in other settings, especially as an abhorrent cop-out from leftist politicians, Harvard also commissioned an investigation into 'Islamophobia,' publishing it side-by-side with the anti-Semitism document. This is disgraceful 'bothsidesism,' which insists upon the fiction that these are in any way, shape or form equal or coexisting crises at a place like Harvard.
The 'Islamophobia' charade exists for one reason: To partially mollify the anti-Semites, Islamists and anti-American extremists who made the anti-Semitism investigation necessary. This is pathetic and craven. It offers a further indictment of the structural, deeply-ingrained poison that has spread at this and other similar institutions:
Awful bothsidesism. Harvard commissioning both investigations & releasing them side by side *is itself* evidence of the problem. There are no Islamophobic mobs roaming Harvard, chanting eliminationist slogans against Muslims. Conflating and equating these issues is disgraceful. pic.twitter.com/rmXQlyDV0Z
— Guy Benson (@guypbenson) April 30, 2025
Staring down the barrel of accountability from the Trump administration, with major dollars at risk, Harvard's administration is admitting to and apologizing for the metastasizing anti-Semitism cancer it has tolerated and coddled. But it's also admitting to and apologizing for an epidemic of anti-Muslim discrimination that simply doesn't exist. There are zero scenes like this featuring Muslim students being hounded and assaulted by packs of hostile agitators on campus:
One of the people who accosted a Jewish student and blocked him from walking freely on campus has been identified as Ibrahim Bharmal, the editor of the Harvard Law Review at @Harvard_Law. Many law programs have been taken over by far-left ideologues. pic.twitter.com/lRKh5Yayee
— Andy Ngo (@MrAndyNgo) November 2, 2023
Here is Axios' write-up of the conclusions drawn in each Harvard investigation:
Harvard University's president apologized and vowed to make changes after two internal reports on antisemitism and anti-Arab bias were released Tuesday. The reports come as the Ivy League university is suing the Trump administration for freezing billions in federal funds in a battle that's officially about fighting antisemitism but has also become about governmental regulation of higher education. Task forces composed of faculty and some students released final reports, which were commissioned by the university, on Tuesday — one on campus antisemitism and another on anti-Muslim, Anti-Arab, and Anti-Palestinian bias.
- The first report found antisemitism to be present on campus, through class work and academic programs, in social settings and in hiring faculty.
- The Islamaophobia report found that 92% of surveyed Muslims believe they'd face academic or professional consequences for expressing their political beliefs.
Let's compare and contrast. On one hand, Harvard found pervasive anti-Semitism infecting nearly every component of campus life, from course work and academic programs, to social settings, to univeristy hiring. This is an outrageous confession of censorship and discrimination:
“Harvard has often shut out voices that many liberals disagree with, Harvard President Alan Garber said, and it has allowed antisemitism to go unchecked.” https://t.co/LWvAA9LP0m
— Josh Kraushaar (@JoshKraushaar) May 3, 2025
A few of the examples:
Here’s what we found inside Harvard’s long-awaited antisemitism report. pic.twitter.com/wUk5WpRA5E
— The Free Press (@TheFP) May 1, 2025
So on one side of the ledger, we have all of that. On the other side, Muslims at Harvard believe they might face blowback for their political beliefs. These are not even remotely the same. Also, out of curiosity, what "political beliefs" might cause issues for these Harvard Muslims, if espoused, I wonder? Might they, in some case, possibly have anything to do with calling for the eradication of the Jewish state, supporting deadly Intifada, and celebrating the October 7th slaughter? Inquiring minds would like to know. Meanwhile, let's check in on what's happening at Harvard these days:
Incredible…
— Steve McGuire (@sfmcguire79) May 2, 2025
Harvard Law Review is giving Ibrahim Bharmal, who’s doing community service and an anger management class to avoid a trial for assaulting a Jewish student, a $65,000 public interest fellowship to work for CAIR?!
I don’t even know what to say anymore…@IraStoll pic.twitter.com/IflECJHt0u
The Harvard Law Review has awarded a lucrative fellowship to someone who assaulted a Jewish student, in order for the assailant to work at CAIR -- a pro-terrorism organization whose leader publicly praised Hamas' October 7th massacre:
CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad at AMP Convention: I Was Happy to See the People of Gaza Break the Siege on October 7; They Were Victorious; the People of Gaza Have the Right to Self-Defense - Israel Does Not #Hamas #Gaza #Palestinians @CAIRNational @NihadAwad pic.twitter.com/WDbSRjFJo0
— MEMRI (@MEMRIReports) December 7, 2023
And that's not all:
It appears to be something like official policy at Harvard to ensure the most antisemitic, anti-American students receive the most prestigious awards and fellowships, including Rhodes scholarships.https://t.co/2JkrK8qDhY
— Noah Pollak (@NoahPollak) May 2, 2025
Harvard Law Review really seems to be a fully captured institution within a deeply problematic larger institution. "Progress," you see, requires racial discrimination:
The Trump administration announced on Monday that it was investigating the Harvard Law Review over allegations of race discrimination. Seventy-two hours later, the journal asked prospective editors to disclose their race as part of the application process, writing in an email that it would use this information to select candidates from "diverse … backgrounds." ... Lawyers who reviewed the memo said it provided further evidence of discrimination at the nation’s top law journal and appeared to violate the Supreme Court’s warning, in its decision outlawing affirmative action, that essays may not be used to circumvent the ban on racial preferences...The Department of Education and the Department of Health and Human Services both launched probes of the law review on Monday after the Free Beacon published documents showing that the journal routinely selects editors and articles based on race. The probes, conducted by each agency’s office of civil rights, are also investigating Harvard University itself and its connection to the law review, which claims to be independent from Harvard Law School.
I'll leave you with these reminders, as Trump moves to yank Harvard's tax exempt status:
This paragraph is self-refuting. The Left established the precedent by stripping Bob Jones University of its tax-exempt status. If that's the law, it should be applied equally: Harvard has violated civil rights law in a much more severe manner, so it, too, should lose its status. https://t.co/aUdP95eIv4
— Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️ (@realchrisrufo) April 24, 2025
Asian American applicants faced the starkest discrimination of any racial or ethnic group for decades.
— Carrie Severino (@JCNSeverino) December 19, 2024
But after the Supreme Court struck down the use of racial preferences in admissions, they’re being admitted into Harvard Law School at a higher rate.
This is a win for… pic.twitter.com/BwHSefKwh4
Join the conversation as a VIP Member