Double Standards: Boycotts and Discrimination in MassLive
Anti-Israel activists, including Harvard University’s Lara Jirmanus, a clinical instructor, seem to struggle with the concept of “discrimination.” Quoted in a May 14 MassLive article, “Harvard ‘failed to respond’ to 450 discrimination complaints. Staff hand-delivered them again,” Jirmanus complains that Harvard has taken “utterly discriminatory” actions against Arab, Muslim, and Palestinian people, including by “eliminating the[ir] speech.”
How so? The article’s author, Juliet Schulman-Hall, cites as an example: “Harvard School of Public Health cut ties with Birzeit University in the West Bank amid repeated claims that the university was tied to Hamas…”
Consider the irony.
Jirmanus is a known supporter of the anti-Israel academic boycott movement. She is a member of Harvard’s Faculty and Staff for Justice in Palestine, which “endorse[s] the 2005 call issued by Palestinian civil society for Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions” against Israel and declares it is “focused on boycotts of Israeli academic institutions…”
In fact, Jirmanus so fervently supports the anti-Israel boycott movement that she has pledged to boycott even those universities which are insufficiently anti-Israel. In an April 2024 statement, Jirmanus pledged to boycott Columbia University and Barnard College over the arrest of anti-Israel students who occupied and vandalized university property and even held staff members hostage.
Notice the fundamental distinction between Harvard’s decision to cut ties with Birzeit University and the Jirmanus-endorsed anti-Israel academic boycott movement. Birzeit University was individually selected because it is a Hamas stronghold. For example, as CAMERA has previously pointed out, Birzeit University is actively providing material support to the internationally designated terrorist organization.
On the other hand, the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic & Cultural Boycott of Israel targets academic institutions by virtue of their being Israeli, i.e., based entirely on their national identity.
What is more offensive and “utterly discriminatory”: boycotting a specific institution because of its harboring of and material support for a terrorist organization, or boycotting an entire category of institutions on the basis of their national identity?
The obvious answer, it seems, evades Jirmanus.
More from SNAPSHOTS
CNN’s Amanpour Condemns “power grab” By Israel’s Prime Minister and Others
April 1, 2020
We’ve said it often, but it’s worth repeating: Anyone interested in reasonably unbiased information about Israel (at least) should avoid the broadcasts of CNN’s Chief International Correspondent and Anchor, Christiane Amanpour. In characterizing responses to [...]
Seattle Media Oblivious To Imam’s Hateful Indoctrination Condemning Jews
January 7, 2020
The Masjid Ar-Rahmah mosque teaching – that Allah transformed Jews into apes and pigs for disobeying him – delivered by Imam (prayer leader) Mohamad Joban – was posted online by mosque personnel. This December 2019 [...]
AP Distorts: Bethlehem ‘Almost Completely Surrounded’
December 10, 2019
Over two years after improving inaccurate language falsely citing Israel's security "barrier surrounding the biblical city" of Bethlehem, the Associated Press once again misrepresents. AP's Joseph Krauss and Mohammad Daraghmeh wrote yesterday ("Palestinians in Bethlehem [...]
Reuters Errs on Administrative Detention For ‘Anti-Israel Activity’
November 5, 2019
The Ofer Prison, near Ramallah (Photo by Tamar Sternthal) A Reuters article today egregiously misrepresents administrative detention, erroneously asserting that it is mainly applied to "Palestinians suspected of anti-Israeli activities," when in fact the Israeli [...]