Tag: race

DNA Evidence Proves “First Black Briton” Was Actually A White Girl

In 2021 the establishment media was electrified by a discovery involving the ancient remains of a woman found over a century ago near a village in East Sussex in Britain.  The reason leftist journalists were so hyped?  A supposedly comprehensive study by “experts” in facial reconstruction had determined that the nearly 2000 year old skeleton belonged to a Sub-Saharan African person.

The remains became known as the “Beachy Head Woman” and images of her reconstructed black face began circulating internationally.  This was proof, somehow, that progressives had always been right to support third world immigration.

The new data arrived conveniently in time to support a far-left campaign to defend the ideas of multiculturalism.  Part of this narrative asserts that Caucasian regions of the world have never actually been Caucasian and that western culture doesn’t really exist.  In fact, white Europeans have no claim to any lands anywhere, they have no home, and African/Asian migrants have “always” freely traveled throughout Europe.

The political left was enthralled, taking to social media and reposting the discovery millions of times over to “own the fascists”.  The BBC even paid to have a plaque constructed on the site where the bones were discovered proudly proclaiming that this is where the first Briton of “African origin” had been found.

School lessons were immediately developed in the UK, teaching students about the multicultural history of Britain.  This was scientific confirmation to back up the avalanche of European entertainment content depicting Sub-Saharan Africans as integral to the history of the continent, roaming the lands as tribesman or enjoying the finery of royal court.   

Leftists argue that their version of history justifies the expansion of open mass immigration, because “things have always been this way” and white people today who want to protect their histories and cultures from erasure are merely ignorant of the past.  

The problem is, Beachy Head Woman is not African or black.  Recently confirmed DNA evidence shows she was white with blonde hair and blue eyes.  She was not a migrant, but born in ancient Britain.

Keep reading

Minneapolis Public Schools SUED by Trump DOJ Over Blatant ANTI-WHITE Discrimination — Teachers of Color Shielded From Layoffs, Black Men Teachers Given Special Privileges

The Department of Justice has launched a major civil rights lawsuit against Minneapolis Public Schools (MPS), accusing the district of engaging in open, systemic discrimination against teachers based on race and sex.

According to the federal complaint filed, the DOJ alleges that Minneapolis Public Schools and its school board adopted a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) that explicitly shielded “teachers of color” from layoffs, while forcing white and non-preferred teachers to be fired, reassigned, or skipped over, regardless of seniority or qualifications.

The same race-based rules apply when teachers are reinstated. Under the contract, teachers of color are rehired first, even if white teachers were laid off earlier and have more experience.

According to the complaint:

“The United States brings this action to stop the Board of Directors of Special School District No. 1, Minneapolis Public Schools (Board), Special School District No. 1, the Minneapolis Public Schools (MPS), and MPS Superintendent Lisa Sayles-Adams (collectively, Defendants) from discriminating against teachers based on their race, color, sex, and national origin in violation of federal law.

Since at least July 1, 2021, Defendants have contracted with a teacher’s union to provide black teachers, teachers of color, and “underrepresented” teachers preferential treatment in employment decisions—such as involuntary reassignments, layoffs, and reinstatements—based on their race, color, sex, and national origin. This preferential treatment is plainly discriminatory and unlawful.”

The lawsuit also highlights a separate and even more explicit discrimination scheme involving an organization called “Black Men Teach.”

Under a special memorandum of agreement embedded in the contract, Black male teachers receive exclusive benefits unavailable to women or non-Black teachers, including:

  • Protection from layoffs and reassignment
  • Priority hiring at certain schools
  • Five additional paid days off per year for training and professional development

Only Black men are eligible for the program, meaning white teachers, Asian teachers, Hispanic teachers, and women of any race are automatically excluded.

Federal lawyers argue this amounts to open race- and sex-based discrimination, flatly prohibited by civil rights law.

“Discrimination is unacceptable in all forms, especially when it comes to hiring decisions,” said Attorney General Pamela Bondi.

“Our public education system in Minnesota and across the country must be a bastion of merit and equal opportunity — not DEI.”

“Employers may not provide more favorable terms and conditions of employment based on an employee’s race and sex,” said Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division.

“The Department of Justice will vigorously pursue employers who deny their employees equal opportunities and benefits by classifying and limiting them based on their race, color, national origin, or sex.”

Keep reading

EEOC chair makes appeal to white men who may have discrimination claims

Andrea Lucas, the chair of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), called on white men to come forward with employment and workplace discrimination complaints. 

Lucas said Wednesday in a video on the social platform X that white men may have a claim to recover money under federal civil rights laws, and should contact the EEOC as soon as possible. 

The EEOC, established under the Civil Rights Act of 1964, enforces federal antidiscrimination laws in hiring or the workplace, which make it illegal for employers to discriminate against an applicant or employee because of their race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability or genetic information.

“The EEOC is committed to identifying, attacking and eliminating all forms of race and sex discrimination, including against white male applicants and employees,” Lucas added.

Most employers with at least 15 employees and the majority of labor unions and employment agencies are subject to EEOC laws, according to the commission’s website. The laws apply to hiring, firing, promotions, trainings, wages and benefits. 

Lucas, appointed by President Trump in November, had served as acting chair since January. She has been on the commission since 2020, when Trump appointed her during his first term. 

Prior to her time at the EEOC, she worked at the law firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher and clerked for U.S. District Judge James C. Cacheris. Cacheris, who died earlier this year, was appointed to his post in the Eastern District of Virginia by former President Reagan. 

On her LinkedIn page, Lucas promoted a page on the EEOC’s website concerning what people should do if they experience discrimination due to diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) policies. The Trump administration has targeted federal DEI initiatives since the president returned to office in January.

Keep reading

Maryland to consider slavery reparations after Gov. Wes Moore’s veto is overridden

Maryland will create a commission to study potential reparations for slavery after lawmakers voted Tuesday to override a veto by Gov. Wes Moore — currently the nation’s only Black governor — that disappointed many fellow Democrats.

Moore said in his veto letter in May that it was a difficult decision to veto the bill, which was a priority of the Legislative Black Caucus of Maryland. But he wrote there has been enough study of the legacy of slavery, and it was now time to “focus on the work itself” to address it.

But Democrats who control both chambers of the Maryland General Assembly decided the commission was needed to better examine how to do that.

“This topic isn’t easy, but, again, without formal study, reparations risk being dismissed as symbolic or unconstitutional, regardless of moral merit,” said Sen. Charles Sydnor, a Democrat.

After his veto was overridden, Moore said that while he disagrees with the legislature’s decision, “I am eager to move forward in partnership on the work of repair that we all agree is an urgent and pressing need.”

“I believe the time for action is now — and we must continue moving forward with the work of repair immediately,” Moore said in a statement. “That mission is especially vital given the immediate and ongoing effects of this federal administration on our constituents, including communities that have been historically left behind.”

Potential reparations outlined in the bill include official statements of apology, monetary compensation, property tax rebates, social service assistance, as well as licensing and permit fee waivers and reimbursement. Reparations also could include assistance with making a down payment on a home, business incentives, childcare, debt forgiveness and tuition payment waivers for higher education.

Maryland’s Black population is about 30%, the highest percentage of any state outside of the Deep South.

Support for reparations gained momentum in the wake of the murder of George Floyd by a Minneapolis police officer in 2020. However, the issue has been a difficult one, particularly for high-profile Democrats, and comes amid a broader conservative backlash over how race, history and inequality are handled in public institutions.

“At a time of growing attacks on diversity and equity, today’s action reaffirms our shared commitment to truth-telling, accountability, and meaningful progress for Black Marylanders,” the state’s Legislative Black Caucus said in a statement.

Keep reading

NBC News Stirs the ‘Systemic Racism’ Pot With Update on Once-Inaccessible Activities

For years, the Left — aided by the media — have said certain activities are “inaccessible” to Black Americans, and blamed “systemic racism” for the exclusion of specific demographics. Some of those racist things included milk, Sydney Sweeney’s jeans, peanut butter and jelly sandwiches, skiing, cycling, and weight loss.

Now, NBC News is back to stir the racism pot again with an update to that “systemic” and “exclusionary” racism by announcing that people who always had access to these activities are now accessing them.

Here’s more:

Tonya Parker was not looking to add another activity to her life. She traveled the world as a flight attendant and regularly practiced ballet and yoga. She was not searching for new friends, either. After attending Spelman College in Atlanta, she had plenty.

With two grown children who made her proud, Parker’s life was full — or so she thought.

The Covid-19 pandemic led her to a sport she had considered mundane: golf. She was invited to a few golf events and participated. She struggled. But one day, thinking of how tired she was of her friends making fun of her golf game, Parker secretly began taking lessons. Soon enough, her friends noticed improvement. And she noticed her own growing passion for the sport.

Remember, when White people engage in activities like belly dancing, drum circles, hip-hop dancing, and other activities, that’s “cultural appropriation” and inherently evil.

Keep reading

Biggest Military Funding Bill Still Allows Promoting Soldiers By Race And Sex

Five months ago, in these pages I expressed concern that Congress was missing the opportunity to restore merit to the military personnel system. To accomplish that task I urged Congress to include a meritocracy provision in the 2026 NDAA that does four things: (1) require all military personnel actions to be based exclusively on merit; (2) forbid race and sex-based preferences; (3) provide for reasonable exceptions when mission success requires sex or race be considered; and (4) define key terms so idealogues in the Pentagon cannot manipulate the language to further their diversity agenda.

When the House and Senate passed their versions of the NDAA, it appeared that between the two chambers some progress toward establishing a merit-based personnel system was being made. When the compromise bill resolving the differences between the House and Senate version, S. 1017, was released last week, it was readily apparent that Congress had no intention of requiring merit principles to govern military personnel actions. To make matters worse, the drafters employed smoke and mirrors to put a merit-sounding title on a provision that just reinforces the Biden-era identity preference status quo.

What’s Not in the NDAA

The bill passed by the House had a provision that would have specifically forbidden the use of race or ethnicity in personnel actions except for certain special operations missions. It also required all personnel actions to be based “exclusively on individual merit, fitness, capability, and performance.”

While it did not address sex-based preferences, it did put Congress on the same page as the administration insofar as racial discrimination was concerned.

The initial Senate version, on the other hand, lacked any attempt to restore a meritocracy or to eliminate identity preferences. Had the final version negotiated between the House and the Senate accepted the House provision it would have been a big improvement. Instead, what we got was a provision that, when viewed in context, sends the unmistakable message that race and sex-based preferences are alive and well in the military personnel system.

Gaslighting on Merit

To appreciate the sleight of hand the Congress pulled off, one must look at how its members framed the issue. Section 525 of the final version of the bill is titled “Requirement of equal opportunity, racial neutrality, and exclusive use of merit in military personnel actions.” Sounds pretty good, doesn’t it?

Unfortunately, it is the text of the legislation and not the title that is important. All this section does is add “command selection” to Section 529C of the 2024 NDAA so that the provision now reads, “MERIT REQUIREMENT. — A military accession, promotion, or command selection in the Department of Defense shall be based on individual merit and demonstrated performance.”

Note what this provision does not say. It does not say that personnel actions shall be exclusively based on merit and demonstrated performance. It does not say that racial and sex-based preferences shall not be applied in military personnel actions. It does not define “merit” and “demonstrated performance.” And it does not provide for reasonable and legitimate exceptions, such as assigning women to Female Engagement Teams and blacks to a special operations mission in Africa where the ability to blend in with the local population might be critical to mission success.

You may ask, “Why must Congress be so specific? The language seems straightforward, and a reasonable interpretation would not allow for discrimination or preferences.” When, however, ideologues get to interpret the statute, they will manipulate the language to further their ideological goals.

We know this because of what happened after President Biden signed the 2024 NDAA into law on December 22, 2023. From that point forward “military accession” and “promotion” were to be based on “individual merit and demonstrated performance.” Furthermore, “DOD Instruction 1350.02,” the Department of Defense (now called the Department of War under the Trump administration) policy on Equal Opportunity, required service members to be “evaluated only on individual merit, fitness, capability, and performance.” The statutory language and the department’s instruction would seem to make merit the standard. But things are not always as they seem.

Because neither the federal law nor the department’s policy specifically prohibited race and sex-based preferences and Congress did not define key terms, Pentagon ideologues continued with business as usual. Neither the 2024 NDAA provision nor the Department of War’s policy language contradicted the “diversity is a strategic imperative” mantra of the Biden Pentagon. Despite the language of the 2024 NDAA and the Pentagon policy, the senior leadership in the Pentagon and the Department of Justice argued in federal court that racial preferences were appropriate in granting admission to West Point, Annapolis, and the Air Force Academy. “Diversity is our strength,” they said.

In their interpretation of both the federal statutory law and Biden’s Defense Department policy, considering skin color to achieve diversity was part of the “merit” calculation. “Performance” was weighed not in relation to any objective standard, but relative to the amount of melanin in an applicant’sskin. When Congress fails to define key terms, ideologues can manipulate the language to achieve their goals. Clever lawyering can even convince federal judges to go along with the scam.

By adding “command selection” to a statute Department of War has already twisted to allow using racial preferences does not change anything. Furthermore, codifying the language of the DOW policy without defining the terms allows the DOW bureaucrats to supply their own definition.

Keep reading

Plot to kill blacks with HIV exposed

Shocking allegations have surfaced that apartheid-era operatives orchestrated a campaign to spread HIV/Aids among black South Africans to reduce the
population ahead of the country’s first non-racial elections.

The claims, detailed in a new book, Who Really Killed Chris Hani?, point to a deliberate effort to use biological warfare as a tool of oppression.

In a devastating exploration of apartheid’s final, desperate years, retired judge Chris Nicholson’s new book alleges that the racist regime and its allies actively pursued a campaign of biological warfare, seeking to use the emerging HIV/Aids pandemic as a weapon to alter the demographic balance of power.

The book presents a tapestry of evidence, drawing from apartheid-era documents, testimonies from former security operatives, and historical connections to global eugenics movements, to support the harrowing claim that the spread of the virus was not merely neglected but, in some instances, deliberately facilitated.

Nicholson posits that for the apartheid state and its business beneficiaries, faced with the inevitability of non-racial elections, two nightmares loomed: Nuremberg-style trials for crimes against humanity and the economic redistribution promised by the ANC’s Freedom Charter.

“So desperate were the right-wing whites to retain power and wealth that they would consider any solution to avoid these two consequences,” he writes.

The emergence of Aids in the early 1980s presented a macabre opportunity: “Some extremists went as far as looking for ways that the black majority could be reduced, short of a Nazi-style mass extermination strategy.

“The arrival of the deadly Aids virus… gave hope to these white supremacists that nature might achieve their goal for them.”

This notion, Nicholson suggests, was discussed at high levels. He cites former security branch policeman JG Scholte, writing under a pseudonym, who
recalled a conversation with a soldier in 1983.

The soldier allegedly revealed: “South Africa is busy doing research, developing a method of curbing blacks from multiplying. The plan is to make it look natural so the world wouldn’t suspect anything.

“One of the aspects was to make it a sexually transmittable disease because of the blacks’ hyperactive sexual tendency and having multiple sexual partners.”

The book directly implicates the apartheid state’s clandestine chemical and biological warfare programme, Project Coast, and its head, Dr Wouter Basson.

Nicholson quotes academic Robin Jakob’s dissertation, which found that “evidence emerged that the state had tried to develop HIV as a biological weapon”.

Jakob noted that one Project Coast project at the Roodeplaat research laboratories (RRL) “sought to turn HIV into a sterility agent that could be administered to black women, reducing birth rates and opposition to apartheid”.

Another scholar, Jeremy Youde, is cited confirming that “RRL [Roodeplaat research laboratories] spent a great deal of time and money on utilising HIV as this agent”.

Keep reading

Tim Walz Blames White Men For Widespread Fraud in Somali Community

Minnesota Governor and failed Vice Presidential candidate Tim Walz blamed white men for the widespread fraud in the Somali community.

It was recently revealed that Walz and the Democrats allowed a $1 billion heist to take place largely through the Somali community in Minnesota.

The massive scandal happened on Tim Walz’s watch. The GOP-led Oversight Committee is conducting an investigation into the Somali fraud ring.

Some reports suggest the fraud may have exceeded $8 billion.

A reporter asked Walz about the rampant fraud in the Somali community.

“Do you want to hear more from the members – the leaders of the Somali community to say we need to look at ourselves and hold ourselves accountable..” the reporter said.

Walz shifted the blame to white men and said the Somalians are the secondary victims.

“It’s not law abiding citizens. If that were the case, there’s a lot of white men who should be holding a lot of white men accountable for the crimes they have committed,” Walz said.

“I think what you’re seeing here is they’re secondary victims in this…by signing them up and they say well I had no idea I was in this program,” Walz said.

“Each community’s got this in their own midst, but to blame them and say that they should have been responsible for stopping it, I think that’s a pretty hard reach,” he said.

“But no, I think this idea that the Somali community is to blame for this because they didn’t do more. I think that’s how we got into this,” he said.

The Somalians are the victims here.

Keep reading

Conservative Cornell Law Prof Busts Harvard for Scholarship Program That Discriminates Against White Students

Conservative Law Professor William Jacobson of Cornell University is the creator and publisher of the Legal Insurrection blog. As an outshoot of the website, he also runs an organization called the Equal Protection Project which goes after colleges and universities for various forms of discrimination.

Jacobson recently appeared on Real America’s Voice with Amanda Head to talk about one of the EPP’s latest projects. They exposed a Harvard scholarship program that was using language that made it clear that they were discriminating against white students.

This sort of thing is far more prevalent in higher education than most Americans even realize.

Transcript via Legal Insurrection:

Head (00:49):

You know, we as a society typically applaud rebranding. Madonna reinvented herself at least a half a dozen times, and everybody was a congratulating her. But when you rebrand your anti-whiteness, your racism, it’s definitely not something to be applauded. And it still is just racism, isn’t it?

WAJ (01:07):

Yes. And sometimes they say the quiet part out loud. And that’s what we found with the Harvard Union Scholars Program.

It’s a scholarship, an internship program that’s quite lucrative for students, a summer program that nets them over $10,000 that they run with AFSCME, the Municipal Workers Union. And it’s a joint program between Harvard and the Union. And they talk about historically marginalized communities. But that’s something of a defined term. We all know what that means. That means non-whites.

And they actually admitted it on the website because in a very prominent place, they said, this is for students of color. They said the quiet part out loud, they said the euphemism of historically marginalized communities, they said out loud what we all know it really means.

And of course, after we filed a complaint with the Department of Justice and asked for an investigation, and after the New York Post ran an article about our complaint, what did they do? They changed the language again, but it’s a little too late because they’ve been discriminating, it’s right on their website.

We caught them, and changing it after the fact doesn’t really change anything.

[unrelated discussion removed]

Solomon (02:17):

So I want to go back to where we started this great conversation, and that is with the Harvard case and the new complaint that your great group has filed. It could have some more significant repercussions than even the issue at hand. Obviously, Harvard sued the Trump administration saying, Trump has no right to punish our university, take funding from us, because we’re just a good ally here. But if it’s shown in this case that they’ve just gone back and done discrimination again, could that strengthen the Trump administration’s hand that Harvard should be penalized the way it has been?

WAJ (02:45):

Well, it could.

Certainly the Department of Justice we hope will take our complaints seriously. It’s thoroughly documented.

The fact that they changed the language after the New York Post ran an article about it and after our complaint to me is a sign of consciousness of guilt. If they thought they were good, they wouldn’t have to change the language.

And what they’re doing is they’re changing the language to hide what they’ve been doing. But it’s too late because it’s all documented. It’s screenshotted, it’s archived. We do all those sort of things before we file a complaint so they can’t go back and change the record.

And I think the Department of Justice needs to seriously consider whether this blatant act, this open act of discrimination, is something that will factor into any deal they may strike with Harvard. Maybe they will take a tougher line or maybe they will prosecute this case. So I think it has potentially huge implications.

Keep reading

Segregation, quotas and gender ideology: Minnesota’s schools are going backward

We expect it in California and New York, but Minnesota has become one of the most aggressive states in reshaping education. Defending Education has documented the statewide leftward shift, and it is a civil-rights crisis.

In October, Defending Ed filed a civil rights complaint with the U.S. Department of Education over Minneapolis Public Schools’ racially segregated classes, which appeared to be available only to black students, in violation of Title VI and the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

We settled this question in 1954. In Brown v. Board of Education, the Supreme Court made it clear that segregating students by race in public schools is unconstitutional.

In that same Minnesota district, students in a required Ethnic Studies class conduct a “structural analysis of racism and colonialism,” viewing everything through a race-based, anti-capitalist and Marxist lens.

The course cites Critical Race Theory, promotes the ideas of Karl Marx and peddles the notion that capitalism and Western culture are to blame for slavery, genocide, colonialism and white supremacy. Teachers then ask students to “challenge the ‘white savior’ narrative” and complete a Youth Led Participatory Action Research project that pushes them into activism.

In 2023, lawmakers required that by 2026 every high school add an ethnic studies course that can count toward graduation along with history, geography, economics and civics.

Ethnic studies is touted as a curriculum to promote tolerance and cultural understanding, but we’ve documented how it is a trojan horse for activism in the classroom, framing society as divided between oppressors and the oppressed.

Minnesota is also fighting the Trump administration’s “Gender Ideology” and “Sports Ban” orders as unlawful rewrites of Title IX. At the same time, under the banner of a group called Gender Justice, school board candidates published a joint initiative supporting “the full inclusion of transgender and nonbinary students in school athletics,” which they claim Title IX protects.

Keep reading