Image 01 Image 03

Harvard Tells Students it’s a Potential Violation of School Policy to Call Someone A ‘Terrorist Sympathizer’

Harvard Tells Students it’s a Potential Violation of School Policy to Call Someone A ‘Terrorist Sympathizer’

“according to a mandatory training for all Harvard students”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gICYjW1hF0

Harvard is so lost. They wouldn’t even have to deal with this if they had just told Hamas sympathizers to knock it off after October 7th.

The Washington Free Beacon reports:

Harvard Tells Students Calling Someone A ‘Terrorist Sympathizer’ Can Violate School Policy

Harvard University, where 33 student groups signed a statement blaming Israel for Hamas’s Oct. 7 attacks, now says that calling someone a “terrorist sympathizer” can violate the school’s anti-discrimination policies, according to a mandatory training for all Harvard students obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.

“Accusing an individual of being a terrorist or terrorist sympathizer, supporting genocide, or urging them to self harm based solely on their race, ethnicity, religion, or other protected characteristic” may violate school policies, a slide from the training says.

Other parts of the training suggest students can be sanctioned for mocking a wide range of religious institutions, including the Mormon Church, and for “denying the ancestral history of another person or group.” Actions including teasing, mocking, and ridiculing are described as “verbal abuse.”

Conducted by Harvard’s anti-discrimination office, the training also discusses anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism and appears to be a response to the Trump administration’s campaign against the school. But legal experts say the guidance goes far beyond what the law requires and has the potential to chill all kinds of protected speech, including criticism of the protesters who made Harvard exhibit A for campus radicalism run amok.

“Because each provision essentially vests unfettered discretion in the enforcing officials, they can—and, predictably, will—exercise that discretion in accordance with their own subjective values,” said Nadine Strossen, a former head of the American Civil Liberties Union. “And that will in turn lead certain members of the campus community—defined in terms of both identity and ideas—disproportionately to engage in self-censorship.”

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

” . . . calling someone a “terrorist sympathizer” can violate the school’s anti-discrimination policies . . . ” sounds just like something a terrorist sympathizer would say.

Didn’t somebody get in trouble there for calling someone a “water buffalo”?

The headline is misleading.

“Accusing an individual of being a terrorist or terrorist sympathizer, supporting genocide, or urging them to self harm based solely on their race, ethnicity, religion, or other protected characteristic” may violate school policies

As it should. It is wrong to accuse anyone of sympathy for terrorists without any evidence at all, just because the person is a Moslem, or an Arab. There are plenty of Arabs, Moslems, and even Moslem Arabs, who do not support terrorism. It’s the same as accusing someone of supporting Democrats just because they’re black.

    destroycommunism in reply to Milhouse. | September 7, 2025 at 10:16 am

    There are plenty of Arabs, Moslems, and even Moslem Arabs, who do not support terrorism. It’s the same as accusing someone of supporting Democrats just because they’re black.

    yeah,, but its the other 96+% we are worried about

      That may be, but it is still wrong to accuse someone of a wrong simply because of his race. And Harvard is right not to allow that. In fact it’s required by Title 6 not to allow it. If you want to call someone a terrorist sympathizer, or a Democrat, you must first have some shred of evidence.

        DrNo76 in reply to Milhouse. | September 8, 2025 at 9:48 am

        If DestroyCommunism is correct (or reasonably so) in his stats, that’s the ‘shred of evidence’ you seem incapable of understanding. The dichotomy of ‘quality vs. quantity’ often misses the point that sometimes quantity has its own quality.

    The Laird of Hilltucky in reply to Milhouse. | September 7, 2025 at 4:23 pm

    Harvard should not receive any government money when it violates the free speech rights of students.

      It is not violating anything, at least not with this rule. On the contrary, Title 6 requires it to have and enforce rules like this. That’s the whole point of the Trump administration’s lawsuit against Harvard for not doing so. So it’s good to hear that it’s finally bringing itself into compliance with the law.

“students can be sanctioned for … denying the ancestral history of another person or group.”
I bet Lizzie’s staff had a hand in writing that part.

destroycommunism | September 7, 2025 at 10:14 am

harvard *acting* like they are trying to support the jewish students is laughable

they want to get this supposed “help” struck down so they can ,,as time passes,, openly revert back to the good old days days of allowing the pogrom against the actual hardworking jewish students , to continue