Student Exposes Instructor’s Anti White Comments

As first reported by Campus Reform, “Audio recorded by a student at Weber State University reveals what the student says is evidence of his debate professor’s ‘anti-White’ attitudes.”

If this wasn’t hateful and irrational enough, the instructor also asserted that science and the concept of space were “White Fantasies.”

In addition, this “educator” argued that those concepts were “fake”.

The instructor also endorsed a plan to “launch all White people into outer space,” echoing radical anti White and anti-Jewish hater Louis Farrakhan.

“Our argument will be that space is not real,” says the instructor, who the student identifies in a separate video as Ryan Wash, while guiding students through a debate topic meant to address the validity of the US working with other countries for space exploration. ”

A student at Weber, Michael Moreno, recorded his experiences with this instructor, who served as his debate coach.

The student made a video chronicling all these experiences with this anti-White teacher, as well as other hateful anti-White experiences.

Among the “gems” these instructors were caught teaching were “Whiteness then works, and then appropriates science and technology to say, ‘this is true while this is not true because it’s not verifiable,’” said Wash, going on to say that this is a “hyperfocus on the experiential” for those who do not “capitulate with whiteness.”

Moreno then raised the topic of Black astronauts who have been to space. Wash dismissed the example and pressed Moreno to prove that any black people have been to space, suggesting “we cannot know for sure if any have.”

Moreno posits that “the instructor may claim to have been simply engaging in a debate exercise, but argues that only using one’s own experience as evidence is fundamentally flawed and therefore not a legitimate debate exercise, not to mention assuming that the assertion that space is real has something to do with ‘whiteness.’”

In another segment of the video, Moreno argues that people who have gone through something as an experience are proof that something exists. The instructor, however, responds by calling that assertion ‘colonialism.’

The instructor also argued, “Whiteness as a structure definitely rules the world, that’s our uniqueness argument.”

Keep reading

Whites Protected by Employment Discrimination Laws

Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon told Newsmax on Wednesday that Minneapolis Public Schools will learn they cannot discriminate against white people.

The Department of Justice’s civil rights division, which Dhillon leads, is suing Minneapolis Public Schools, accusing them of imposing race-, sex-, and national origin-based preferences in hiring, layoffs, reassignments, and reinstatements in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.

Dhillon noted on “Carl Higbie FRONTLINE,” that it has always been against the law to discriminate based on skin color, even against white people.

“The Department of Justice was never run before by an administration that cared about protecting the rights of all Americans,” Dhillon said.

“And yes, white Americans and men are protected by our employment discrimination laws.”

The complaint filed by DOJ says that since July 2021, the district has enforced collective bargaining provisions that intentionally favor “underrepresented” teachers — defined as Black, Indigenous, and other people of color — over white and Asian teachers.

According to the lawsuit, the 2021-2023 and 2023-2025 collective bargaining agreements required Minneapolis administrators to override standard seniority rules during layoffs and involuntary reassignments when a teacher was deemed “underrepresented.”

In those cases, district officials were instructed to skip the protected teacher and instead excess or reassign a “nonunderrepresented” teacher with more seniority.

“When we see egregious examples like paint-by-numbers and color-by-numbers, hiring in Chicago and Minneapolis, we open investigations,” Dhillon said.

“When we gather the evidence; we file lawsuits,” she added.

“This is a very clear case of not only disparate impact run amok but the types of affirmative action we are not having anymore in this country.”

“Disparate impact, DEI, that’s all over from the federal government’s perspective,” Dhillon concluded.

Keep reading

Judge rules against UCLA prof suspended after refusing lenient grading for black students

A judge has issued a tentative decision against a professor who sued UCLA after he was suspended in the wake of the George Floyd-Black Lives Matter riots after refusing a request to grade black students leniently.

Superior Court Judge H. Jay Ford’s recent ruling against UCLA accounting lecturer Gordon Klein sides with UCLA on all three causes of action: breach of contract, false light, and negligent interference with prospective earnings. 

Klein’s legal team has filed an appeal, and Judge Ford is scheduled to consider that request, or enter a decision finalizing his tentative ruling, at a hearing scheduled for Jan. 9. 

If the judge does not amend his tentative ruling, Klein will receive nothing in a case in which he sought a $13 million dollar award, alleging the university and a former UCLA business school dean destroyed his lucrative expert witness practice when it publicly suspended him. 

“It’s a bloodbath against Klein. It rewards him nothing,” said documentarian Rob Montz in a documentary on the controversy he published last week first reporting on Ford’s Dec. 1 ruling titled “When a Professor Took His Cancellation to Trial.”

“No punitive damages, no compensatory damages,” Montz said. “Gordon doesn’t get a dollar.”

Klein, who has now taught at UCLA for about 45 years, argued in his lawsuit he averaged about $1 million annually as an expert witness in many high-profile corporate cases. 

But he argued his suspension meant he would have to disclose that administrative punishment, hurting his credibility with jurors and effectively making him undesirable as an expert witness. 

Ford, in his 30-page ruling, agrees UCLA had the contractual right to place Klein on administrative leave while it investigated the massive controversy surrounding Klein’s email to a student rejecting his request to grade black students leniently and the viral uproar it created. 

“UCLA had the right to determine what public response was necessary to address and mitigate the immediate [and] extraordinary public outrage toward both Klein and UCLA arising from the public disclosure of Klein’s email,” Ford wrote.

Keep reading

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 milkSydney Sweeney’s jeanspeanut butter and jelly sandwichesskiingcycling, 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