Race Distortions: West Point Cheaters

75% Of Cheaters In Latest West Point Scandal Are Athletes; 24 Are Football Players. Anything Else USA TODAY Might Tell Us?

Above, apparently reporting race is important when minorities graduate, but not when they’re caught cheating.

USA Today reports that the latest cheating scandal at West Point involves 73 cadets; 55, or 75 percent, are athletes [West Point cheating scandal involved mostly athletes, including 24 football players on Liberty Bowl team, by Tom Vanden Brook, December 30, 2020].  

Of that 55, 24 are football players.    So 43 percent of the 55 athletes caught cheating, and about a third of the students caught cheating, are football players  

My rough count of the team’s roster shows that about half of the team’s players are identifiably black.   

Question for USA Today’s Brook:

  • How many of the 24 football player are black?
  • How many are white?
  • How many are “other?”
  • And what about the other athletes?
  • What sports do they play, and
  • what is the racial breakdown of those cheaters?  
  • Asking for a friend …
    Print Friendly and PDF

Remember The Pilgrims

Earlier: A Mayflower Descendant Remembers Her Ancestors And The Faith Of Her (And America’s) Fathers

Four hundred years ago, in late December 1620, the Pilgrims who had sailed from England on the Mayflower finally came ashore at what would become Plymouth Plantation. They began building houses and a fort, painfully slowly because of the deep snow and frozen ground. While still on board, they had signed the Mayflower Compact (which has inspired VDARE.com’s 1620 Society).  You’d think such an auspicious anniversary would occasion many celebrations and re-enactments. Not so. 

Of course, it’s partly because of COVID-19 policies.  But even that shouldn’t prevent more media and political celebration, with COVID-19 accomodations. 

One must also suspect the influence of the  relentless Leftist attack on the America’s forbears and its English heritage explains the omission. By forcing us to forget the Pilgrims and their dangerous ocean voyage to settle a new land, Cultural Marxists intend to force us to forget the Historic American Nation. The Pilgrim saga and the story of Plymouth Rock must be retrofitted because of what it was: the establishment of an English Christian colony that was a foundation of the current United States of America. 

The Cultural Marxists portray it as the beginning of a racial genocide, as the reliably Leftist Associated Press just did [400 years on, Mayflower’s legacy includes pride, prejudice, by David Goldman and Alanna Durkin Richer, October 23, 2020]. And on the other, it must be transmogrified into something it wasn’t: the arrival of “refugees” and “illegal immigrants.”

(Right, the cover of the New Yorker from Thanksgiving, 2011.)

How about radical Latino activists?  Consider that 24 years ago, for instance,  Agustin Cebada, of the Brown Berets of Aztlan, offered this boiling bile:

“Go back to the Plymouth Rock, Pilgrims!” he shouted. “Get out! We are the future. You’re old and tired. Go on. We have beaten you; leave like beaten rats.”

[Mexico’s “Reconquista” — We Have Been Warned,American Renaissance, June 1998].

Listen below, and go here for more:

But perhaps that was thought to be too explicit. Some on the Left have settled on rewriting the story of the Pilgrims: They were not settlers, but instead “refugees” and “illegal immigrants,” as I wrote when describing the effort to Hispanicize Thanksgiving.

Of course this is wrong, given that a country must already exist for the refugees or illegal immigrants go to. But recasting the narrative that way enlists the Pilgrims as partners in The Great Replacement being orchestrated by today’s refugees and illegal aliens.

How, the argument goes, can we deport illegal immigrants today? The Pilgrims were illegal too! And they were refugees from religious oppression! How dare we deny Islamic refugees a play in this Melting Pot—this Nation of Immigrants!

Of course, the Pilgrims were neither. They were settlers looking for a place to establish their own sectarian polity, where they got to make the rules.

The Pilgrims  didn’t call themselves Pilgrims, but “Saints”. They were also referred to as “Brownists,” after Separatist Robert Browne (who later returned to the Anglican Church). The term “Pilgrims” only came into use in 1800 [What’s the Difference Between Puritans and Pilgrims? by Dave Roose, History.com, July 31, 2019].

A Calvinist sect, the Pilgrims were Separatists who had separated from the Church of England because they did not believe it could be purified according to their beliefs.  They wanted to create their own society, governed by their own religious principles, and so, while still  wanting to remain English culturally, they  left their country for Leiden in The Netherlands during the reign of James I.

They began arriving in 1607, the year Jamestown was founded in the New World. Some were textile workers; others taught English to Dutchmen. (Teaching English in a foreign country, by the way, is still a stereotypical Anglo expatriate thing. I taught English in Mexico for years.)

Though the Pilgrims freely practiced their religion in Holland, they left because England’s King James was prodding the Dutch government to crack down on them. And, significantly, they were concerned that their children were assimilating to their host country; i.e. becoming Dutch. They were English, and wanted to remain English.

When the chance came to colonize a new world, they took it. They would still be on English territory, yet they would also be autonomous. Their only financial obligation: repaying the joint stock company that sponsored the colony. In that exchange, beaver pelts were coin of the realm.

Having returned to England to embark on the adventure, the settlers were supposed to sail on two ships, the Speedwell and the Mayflower. The passengers, including some who hadn’t lived in Leiden, packed onto the Mayflower after they determined the Speedwell was leaking and unseaworthy.

It left Plymouth, on the south coast of Devon, on September 16. To today’s Americans with modern comforts, the prospect of crossing the Atlantic on a wooden ship, with all its dangers and discomforts and no GPS or iPhones, would be impossibly daunting. Not so for the Pilgrims. It was a chance for a new life, free from the smothering edicts of the Anglican Church.

They sighted Cape Cod on November 19. The Mayflower attempted to sail south toward the Hudson River, but strong currents and unexpected shoals, and nearly being shipwrecked  convinced the crew to turn back.  They  dropped anchor in Provincetown Harbor at the northern end of the hook-shaped Cape Cod,  on November 21.  This is where they drafted and signed the famous Mayflower Compact.

For the next month, groups of Pilgrims and crew scouted the area in a smaller sailing vessel called  a shallop,  seeking a suitable settlement location.  They eventually decided upon “New Plymouth”, which had been previously named by none other than John Smith, former leader of the Jamestown colony, who had explored that coast (and named it New England) in 1614.  

On December 16, the The Mayflower dropped anchor in New Plymouth Harbor and after 3 days, a specific  settlement site abandoned by the Patuxet Indians was chosen. 

The first formal landing party disembarked on December 21 (O.S. December 11) and two days later, construction began.  This is celebrated in Plymouth on December 22 as “Forefathers’ Day“.

But throughout the winter, most of the Pilgrims remained on the Mayflower, with the bulk of the passengers not disembarking until March 31, 1621.

They Mayflower and crew didn’t leave until April 15. 

The Plymouth Colony  lasted just 72 years. It was absorbed by the Province of Massachusetts Bay, dominated by the later-settled but larger Massachusetts Bay Colony of Puritans.

Nevertheless, Plymouth is the most famous of the English colonies which eventually became the United States of America, partly because of the First Thanksgiving in the Fall of 1621.

Today, it’s estimated that  35 million people are descendants of  51 Plymouth Rock colonists.

The General Society of Mayflower Descendants has 30,000 members and worldwide chapters. Some descendants claim several colonists as ancestors. Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin descended from six.

I present below a partial list of Americans who wouldn’t be here if William Bradford and his stout band hadn’t sailed for Plymouth Rock, from the following six sources:



John Adams, John Quincy Adams, Zachary Taylor, Ulysses S. Grant, James A. Garfield, Calvin Coolidge, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush

Note on Coolidge: In a 1920 tricentennial speech, Coolidge, then governor of Massachusetts and vice president-elect, said he was not a Mayflower descendant. Instead, he said, his ancestors were Massachusetts Bay Puritans [Learn From Pilgrims, Coolidge Admonishes, The New York Herald, November 23, 1920]. However, the General Society of Mayflower Descendants claims Coolidge descended from Plymouth colonists and the website Mayflower Faces documents it.  So Coolidge descended from both groups of Massachusetts colonists.


Frances Perkins, Nelson Rockefeller, Dan Quayle , Howard Dean, U.S. Chief Justice William Rehnquist, and Barbara Bush (née Pierce), Jeb Bush and George P. Bush


Generals George McClellan and Leonard Wood.


Humphrey Bogart, Orson Welles, Marilyn Monroe, Katharine Hepburn, Joanne Woodward, Clint Eastwood, Dick Van Dyke, Christopher Reeve, Jane Fonda, Sally Field, Meryl Streep, Richard Gere , John Lithgow, Jodie Foster, Christopher Lloyd, Sigourney Weaver, Matt Damon, James Spader, and the Baldwin Brothers: Alec Baldwin , Daniel Baldwin, William Baldwin and Stephen Baldwin .


Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, William Cullen Bryant, Noah Webster, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Phillips Brooks clergyman (wrote O Little Town of Bethlehem), Ambrose Bierce, Ernest Hemingway, Laura Ingalls Wilder, and John Bartlett (Bartlett’s Quotations).


Bing Crosby, Pete Seeger, and Taylor Swift.


George Eastman, founder Eastman Kodak, and Berkshire Hathaway tycoon Warren Buffet.


Lavinia Warren (dwarf performer), Julia Child, Cokie Roberts, Arthur Ochs Sulzberger Jr., Grandma Moses , Amelia Earhart, Alan ShepardBenjamin Spock, Hugh Hefner, and “Mayflower Madam” Sydney Biddle Barrows.


British actor Benedict Cumberbatch and Canadian songstress Avril Lavigne. Marie-Chantal, Crown Princess of Greece is a Mayflower descendant on her American-born father’s side. Jan Masaryk, foreign minister of Czechoslovakia from 1940-1948, was a Mayflower descendant on his American mother’s side.

These are only a few Mayflower descendants.  Maybe you’re one too.  Although I’m not (the Wall family lived in colonial Virginia) I honor them as founders of our nation. 

What the Pilgrims accomplished and left for the world, a new nation and millions of descendants, was no mean feat. And so we must not allow the Pilgrims to be ignored, or worse, turned into villains, or redefined to fit today’s leftist narratives.

To its credit, the U.S. Postal Service has produced a beautiful stamp featuring the Mayflower to honor our Pilgrim heritage. Buy some, and use them proudly.

The Pilgrims must be honored for what they are: Founders of the Historic American Nation.

For more information, try these websites, in addition to those listed above:

American citizen Allan Wall (email him) moved back to the U.S.A. in 2008 after many years residing in Mexico. Allan’s wife is Mexican, and their two sons are bilingual. In 2005, Allan served a tour of duty in Iraq with the Texas Army National Guard. His VDARE.COM articles are archived here; his Mexidata.info articles are archived here; his News With Views columns are archived here; and his website is here.


The Battle Is God’s

Psalm 83

Historical context: 2 Chron 20:14-15

Then in the midst of the assembly the Spirit of the Lord came upon Jahaziel the son of Zechariah, the son of Benaiah, the son of Jeiel, the son of Mattaniah, the Levite of the sons of Asaph; and he said, “Listen, all Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem and King Jehoshaphat: thus says the Lord to you, ‘Do not fear or be dismayed because of this great multitude, for the battle is not yours but God’s.

The following is taken directly from The Treasury of David by Spurgeon.



A Psalm or Song of Asaph. This is the last occasion upon which we shall meet with this eloquent writer. The patriotic poet sings again of wars and dangers imminent, but it is no godless song of a thoughtless nation entering upon war with a light heart. Asaph the seer is well aware of the serious dangers arising from the powerful confederate nations, but his soul in faith stays itself upon Jehovah, while as a poet preacher he excites his countrymen to prayer by means of this sacred lyric.

The Asaph who penned this song was in all probability the person referred to in 2 Chron 20:14, for the internal evidence referring the subject of the Psalm to the times of Jehoshaphat is overwhelming. The division in the camp of the confederate peoples in the wilderness of Tekoa not only broke up their league, but led to a mutual slaughter, which crippled the power of some of the nations for many years after. They thought to destroy Israel and destroyed each other.


An appeal to God in a general manner fills

Psalms 83:1-4

O God, do not remain quiet; Do not be silent and, O God, do not be still. For behold, Your enemies make an uproar, And those who hate You have exalted themselves. They make shrewd plans against Your people, And conspire together against Your treasured ones. They have said, “Come, and let us wipe them out as a nation, That the name of Israel be remembered no more.”

And then the psalmist enters into details of the league

Psalms 83:5-8

For they have conspired together with one mind; Against You they make a covenant: The tents of Edom and the Ishmaelites, Moab and the Hagrites; Gebal and Ammon and Amalek, Philistia with the inhabitants of Tyre; Assyria also has joined with them; They have become a help to the children of Lot. Selah.

This leads to an earnest entreaty for the overthrow of the enemy with an expression of desire that God’s glory may be promoted thereby.

Psalms 83:9-15

Deal with them as with Midian, As with Sisera and Jabin at the torrent of Kishon, Who were destroyed at En-dor, Who became as dung for the ground. Make their nobles like Oreb and Zeeb And all their princes like Zebah and Zalmunna, Who said, “Let us possess for ourselves The pastures of God.” O my God, make them like the whirling dust, Like chaff before the wind. Like fire that burns the forest And like a flame that sets the mountains on fire, So pursue them with Your tempest And terrify them with Your storm.

Banks Destroying Freedom

Did Jesus teach that we cannot serve both God and unrighteous mammon? Does that mean that money is second only to God in the list of things that influence us the most?

If these things are true, doesn’t it stand to reason that the misuse of or control of or exploitation of money might be the single most sought after target by any enemy of our wellbeing? And doesn’t that mean we ought to make it one of our priorities to see that these things never happen?

Virus Variant in Colorado

No Travel History in 1st Reported US Case of Virus Variant | CBN News

  • A new variant of the coronavirus that may be more contagious has been found in a Colorado man who had not been traveling, triggering a host of questions about how the first reported U.S. case of the new version showed up in the Rocky Mountain state.
  • Colorado officials were expected to provide more details at a news conference Wednesday about how the man in his 20s from a mostly rural area of rolling plains at the edge of the Denver metro area came down with the variant.
  • For the moment, the variant is likely still rare in the U.S., but the lack of travel history in the first case means it is spreading, probably seeded by travelers from Britain in November or December
  • Scientists in the United Kingdom believe the variant is more contagious than previously identified ones — though they have found no evidence that it is more lethal or causes more severe illness.
  • New versions of the coronavirus have been seen almost since the virus was first detected in China nearly a year ago. It is common for viruses to undergo minor changes as they reproduce and move through a population.
  • But if the virus has significant mutations, one concern is that current vaccines might no longer offer the same protections. Although that’s a possibility to watch for over time with the coronavirus, experts say they don’t believe it will be the case with the latest variant.


by David Sims

THERE’S A LOT of media hoopla just now over a new strain of coronavirus that is more infectious than the original that causes covid-19. They speak, now, of a coming covid-21 pandemic, a new worldwide health emergency that will require more and longer lockdowns everywhere outside China, which will further degrade the national economies of every country except China, which is the biggest reason why the covid diseases exist in the first place: making China the supreme world economic superpower, to which all other countries must bow and pay money.

Paid-off traitors on board with this agenda can be found in every Western nation. Joe “Beijing” Biden is one of them.

But the infectiousness of a disease isn’t the matter of chief concern. Much more important is the severity of its symptoms, or how likely an infected person is to die or to be crippled from having it. Epidemics have snuffed themselves out in the past when a more infectious strain of the original pathogen appeared by mutation — more infectious, yes, but which caused very few, or didn’t cause any, symptoms — but which did cause the infected people to develop antibodies that protected them from the more dangerous original disease. The West African ebola epidemic ended this way. Everyone got immunized by the more rapidly spreading virus that had much less severe symptoms, and in the end no vaccine was necessary.

If there were a rapidly spreading form of coronavirus that didn’t produce any symptoms in anybody, and therefore didn’t kill anybody, then we should welcome it and encourage it to spread. Then the world would be naturally immunized against covid and the whole pandemic problem would be solved. No vaccines necessary.

As I mentioned earlier, one of the main purposes served by the coronavirus scare-mongering is to make China stronger by making its rival countries economically weaker. But another major purpose is creating a captive consumer base for vaccines peddled by Big Pharma. We must number as our enemies two different groups: predatory Communists and predatory capitalists, both of which are treating the bulk of the world’s population as their prey.

* * *

Source: Author

The Mystery of the Beast

Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and spoke with me, saying, “Come here, I will show you the judgment of the great harlot who sits on many waters, 2 with whom the kings of the earth committed acts of immorality, and those who dwell on the earth were made drunk with the wine of her immorality.” 3 And he carried me away in the Spirit into a wilderness; and I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast, full of blasphemous names, having seven heads and ten horns. 4 The woman was clothed in purple and scarlet, and adorned with gold and precious stones and pearls, having in her hand a gold cup full of abominations and of the unclean things of her immorality, 5 and on her forehead a name was written, a mystery, “BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND OF THE ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.” 6 And I saw the woman drunk with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the witnesses of Jesus. When I saw her, I wondered greatly. 7 And the angel said to me, “Why do you wonder? I will tell you the mystery of the woman and of the beast that carries her, which has the seven heads and the ten horns. Rev 17:1-7
Rev 17:8-13

Keeping the end in mind helps to understand what societies drift (accelerate) toward.

2020: Accelerating Towards the European Superstate, by Guillaume Durocher – The Unz Review

  • Without Britain and Germany, the camp opposed to more EU spending was reduced to the “Frugal Four” that are Austria, Denmark, the Netherlands, and Sweden, a coalition of smaller nations who lack the clout to block the ambitions of the Franco-German directorate. British withdrawal has deprived the EU of its second-biggest net financial contributor (some €10 billion annually) and of one of its biggest and most dynamic economics, but ultimately the Union has gained in cohesion.
  • Since the Second World War, the pace of European integration has always been set by the Franco-German engine. This remains the case, even as France has become the decidedly weaker partner.
  • The EU’s response to the coronavirus crisis, while uneven, has been decidedly more proactive and ambitious than during the financial-economic crisis that started in 2007.
  • The new EU borrowing-stimulus plan is particularly significant for the following reasons:
    1. The precedent having been set, European heads of state and government will likely be increasingly tempted in the future to find agreeable compromises through yet more apparently painless EU borrowing.
    2. The EU borrowing will have to be repaid, creating pressure to establish new European taxes (referred officially in Eurocratese as “own resources,” a cold term intentionally designed to confuse European citizens, such is the price of consensus). The European Commission notably proposes a carbon tariff on imports, a tax on tech giants, and a financial transactions tax.
    3. Like the United States of America, albeit on a much smaller scale, Europe’s Union conditions states’ access to its funds, thus the EU now will have increased means to bribe national governments to accept its norms.
  • Indeed, the European Parliament has demanded a “rule of law” mechanism to punish Hungary and Poland for their national-populist governments. The mood is suggested by Brussels’ recent decision to deprive several Polish cities of funds because of their creation of “anti-LGBT-ideology zones” (essentially declarations in favor of traditional marriage and pledges to not fund NGOs promoting homosexuality or transgenderism).
  • Up to now, depriving a whole nation of EU funds could only occur with the unanimous support of all 26 other national governments.
  • Now, a supermajority of national governments representing 65% of the population and 55% of states may move to deprive a country of EU funding.
  • What’s more, the deprivation can only occur with a concurrent ruling of the European Court of Justice (ECJ). Admittedly, the ECJ, like other Western courts, has been known for plenty of legal creativity over the years. Nonetheless, given that the ECJ is made up of 27 equal independent judges, one from each member state including 11 central-eastern Europeans, this makes it less likely national-populist governments will be punished for ideological reasons as against legitimate accounting ones.
  • All these developments give some indication of the character of the emerging European Superstate, which creeps along imperceptibly year after year, though ultimately forms something substantial: as of today, a sovereign and influential market regulator and an effective trade bloc (as the British have learned), able to bring into its orbit much of its near abroad (notably in central-eastern Europe).
  • As times goes on, the north-west European core of the EU looks likely to increasingly have the means to impose its norms on the southern and eastern periphery. Patriots in central-eastern Europe had better hope Western Europe takes an identitarian turn or they may have to choose between their wallets and their values.