Although it received scant media attention, the FBI foiled a plot by members of the pro-Palestinian Turtle Island Liberation Front to bomb Southern California businesses on New Year’s Eve.
Most Americans have probably never heard of the term “Turtle Island,” a name said to be used by some indigenous communities to describe North America. “Turtle Island” proponents view the United States as a nation founded on stolen land and express solidarity with a host of anti-American positions and groups — most notably pro-Palestinian activists who support dismantling “colonizing” and “oppressive” power structures.
These ideas are being promoted by organizations that pressure school administrators to implement anti-American educational material.
TILF’s attempted terror attack shows the natural ends of the group's subversive ideology: hatred, division, and violence. And unfortunately, teachers who view their role as agents of social change are now disseminating these ideas through the country’s K-12 schools in an effort to turn America’s students into child soldiers on the front lines of the country’s culture war.
Curricula such as liberated ethnic studies — a benign-sounding program that encourages students to view the world through an oppressor/oppressed lens and to treat their peers accordingly — is one such vector. Turtle Island is frequently cited in school curricula in the form of land acknowledgements, as well as in school meetings and school board notices on how to “support teachers of color.” The phrase also appears in lesson plans on “the social construction of race” that seek the “inclusion of Black and Latino studies in the public school curriculum.”
In 2021, a whistleblower provided Defending Education with photographs of a classroom at Los Angeles Unified School District’s Alexander Hamilton High School, where posters included “in 2020, make Israel Palestine again and make America Turtle Island again,” "F**k the Police,” and “F**k Amerikka, this is native land.” While those responsible ultimately removed the material under pressure, it is certain that those materials would have remained if not for withering public pressure.
Unsurprisingly, professors promote these ideas in college courses nationwide.
At the University of Minnesota-Twin Cities, students can take a course called “Critical Indigenous Theory,” in which “indigenous” is described as a “comparative, interdisciplinary, and global project that exceeds the material conditions of Turtle Island ...” One of the required readings for that class is “Inter/Nationalism: Decolonizing Native America and Palestine.”
The University of Texas offers at least five courses with explicit land acknowledgements to Turtle Island, while at the University of California, Irvine, a doctoral candidate wrote a 300-page dissertation on the development of liberation schools on Turtle Island.
While examples abound of academics forcing radical ideas on impressionable university students, it is particularly galling for this to take place in the nation’s taxpayer-funded universities.
It is important to recognize that these ideas aren’t occurring organically. They are being promoted by organizations that pressure school administrators to implement anti-American educational material.
Consider the Great Schools Partnership, which provides professional development to K-12 school districts. The GSP’s self-proclaimed goal is “redesigning” public education with anti-American propaganda, including a 2020 blog post that preached about the need to “Decolonize Education” on “Turtle Island” while smearing Christopher Columbus.
There’s also the Zinn Education Project, a so-called history program coordinated by Rethinking Schools and Teaching for Change, which refers to Turtle Island in its abortion advocacy.
One of the most concerning examples of Turtle Island’s negative influence is through its connection to Teach Palestine, an organization corrupting K-12 education with anti-Israel propaganda. Teach Palestine’s sixth-grade lesson plans emphasize the need to “talk about Palestine and Turtle Island in the same breath.”
RELATED: Why are we playing by the rules with people who follow no rules at all?
Through incendiary rhetoric about the perceived injustices indigenous people suffer, Teach Palestine actively encourages students to believe that their country and its history are inherently evil. While the organization doesn’t explicitly endorse violence, its partisan framing, one-sided view of history, and portrayal of Israel and the United States as oppressive colonizers could lead some, like the suspected TILF bombers, to justify violent resistance.
We’re already seeing the effects of this brainwashing destabilizing America.
Anti-Israel protests erupted on college campuses in the wake of the October 7, 2023, massacre in Israel, resulting in Jewish students across the country being violently attacked by their peers. Many of the 18- to 21-year-olds complicit in these riots seemed to genuinely believe they had the moral high ground and that they were “liberating” their campuses from “oppressive” power structures.
Their skewed logic and hatred are the inevitable result of forcing anti-American ideological frameworks on young students, rather than encouraging pupils to think critically for themselves or teaching the basics of history, science, and mathematics — areas where American students are increasingly falling behind.
Without critical thinking and basic education, future leaders and voters become frighteningly easy to pressure into despising their country — and into treating violence as a legitimate answer.
The fact that 2026 nearly started with a Turtle Island-inspired bombing should be a wake-up call for our leaders to address this crisis in the months ahead.
When a dictator in a distant, war-torn nation announces a plan to shrink an ethnic group inside his borders, the Western world erupts. Anchors denounce it. Newspapers detail the plight of the targeted people. Sanctions follow. Diplomats whisper about regime change. The moral verdict arrives quickly, and it arrives correctly: ethnic cleansing.
Yet Western leaders now make a parallel declaration in a cleaner suit. Their countries, they insist, have grown “too white.” The white population must fall. The electorate must change. No denunciations follow. No sanctions arrive. Corporate press treats the project as enlightened policy. A global consensus that once claimed to oppose ethnic cleansing now tolerates it — provided the target is white people in Western nations.
If the West still claims to oppose ethnic cleansing, it should start by opposing it at home and refusing the polite lies that protect it.
French writer Renaud Camus gave us the "Great Replacement.” For years, polite society treated the phrase as radioactive. Say it on television and you became a pariah. Post it online and platforms erased you. That taboo held only as long as people could be bullied into denying what they could see.
The concept’s explanatory power proved stronger than the gatekeepers. Major conservative outlets now discuss replacement openly. YouTube will still attach warnings to videos that mention it, yet the subject refuses to disappear because the policy keeps showing up in schools, boardrooms, and border statistics.
A taboo cannot survive daily evidence.
“Diversity” served as a euphemism for replacement long before anyone had heard of Camus. When a corporation, movie studio, or university says it wants to “increase diversity,” it never means it plans to hire more white, straight men because it has too many trans black women on staff.
Diversity, equity, and inclusion never aimed at demographic proportionality. Leadership announced a preference: more non-white members, fewer white members. Declare a goal of reducing any other demographic, and the public would recognize the project as naked discrimination.
Private institutions practicing anti-white discrimination is bad enough. Governments adopting the same objective is a nightmare. Progressive voices in the United States celebrate the declining share of white Americans and brag that demographic change will lock Democrats into permanent power. They frame replacement as destiny, then use policy to accelerate it, then denounce anyone who notices as a “conspiracy theorist.”
Project Veritas recorded a State Department official admitting that replacement migration functions as a political strategy meant to secure electoral victory. That admission matters less than the broader point: Public and private rhetoric have normalized the idea that a party may change the electorate to entrench itself.
Even if ethnic hatred played no role — and it does — the effort to subvert democratic accountability through mass migration amounts to a political coup. A ruling class that imports a friendlier electorate to escape judgment for its failures announces contempt for the people it claims to serve.
Spain offers a clear example. Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez and the Socialist Workers’ Party plan amnesty for 500,000 immigrants. Sánchez could not secure parliamentary support for the scheme, so he bypassed Parliament with an amnesty decree. Spain’s population runs about 49 million. Scaled to American size, that’s roughly 3.5 million people granted legal status by executive fiat. Far-left politician Irene Montero went farther, telling a crowd she hoped for “replacement theory” and meant to use new migrant voters to wipe out her political opponents.
The United Kingdom looks worse. Visitors to London joke that the Englishman has become an endangered species in the cities his ancestors built. Officials now want the countryside next. The Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs has decided rural England feels “too white” and “too middle class.” It has launched programs to “diversify” protected landscapes and village life.
Officials then discovered an awkward detail: Many Muslim migrants dislike dogs, a staple of country living, and avoid living around them. Planners treat dogs, solitude, and preserved land as “white culture,” then hunt for ways to remake rural life so it attracts Pakistanis and Bangladeshis.
Listen to the admission hiding inside that language. The government intends to make the countryside less like a place where white people live so that fewer white people will live there. It plans to change the character of the land, the habits of the residents, and the public culture, all to engineer a demographic outcome. That is social transformation by state design.
RELATED:The left is at war in Minnesota. America is watching football.
Diversity, equity, inclusion, decolonization — the euphemisms multiply, but the goal stays constant. Even the Great Replacement argument, while useful, still softens what the policy does. When a party, an institution, or a government targets a group for reduction, removal, or displacement, the correct term is not “diversification.” It’s ethnic cleansing.
This process does not arise from a neutral demographic ebb. Politicians announce it. Activists demand it. Bureaucrats implement it. Corporate managers enforce it. Then they threaten anyone who objects with professional ruin. Fear keeps the system humming, and euphemism keeps the conscience quiet.
Enough. That taboo deserves to die. When politicians, corporate leaders, and professors declare their intention to replace white populations, they deserve the same disgust any advocate of ethnic cleansing would receive in any other context. If the West still claims to oppose ethnic cleansing, it should start by opposing it at home and refusing the polite lies that protect it.
In the comic books, Galactus devours worlds without discrimination. In real life, that role belongs to the Democratic Party.
You can see it play out in Minneapolis right now. Colorado offers its own case study. That’s where Rich Guggenheim is under attack inside the Colorado Department of Agriculture because he thought being a plant health programs manager meant focusing on — stay with me — plants, not pronouns.
Most people choose comfort. They tell themselves they agree with freedom, but they live like they don’t. They fear conflict more than they fear losing the country.
Last November, Guggenheim logged into a virtual meeting with roughly a dozen department heads. One agenda item covered a grant report tied to pest surveys, “inclusive leadership,” and employee participation in a program called “Colorado for All.”
Because when I think about protecting America’s food supply from pests, my first concern always involves the state’s ideological diversity metrics.
Guggenheim wanted to keep plants healthy. He didn’t have patience for the ritual. He typed a short comment into the group chat: “DEI on steroids.”
That was enough to trigger a full-blown response from Plant Industry Division Director Wondirad Gebru. Gebru paused the meeting and labeled the comment “inappropriate” in front of colleagues. Gebru told Guggenheim to mute his microphone.
Guggenheim did something better. He turned on his camera and accused Gebru, on the record, of viewpoint discrimination.
See, that’s how it’s done, folks. No excuses. Just a jawbone of an ass wielded without apology. Take stupid out to the woodshed and bludgeon it.
“They are trying to frame me as disruptive,” Guggenheim said. “But how can they do that when the topic is actually on the agenda?”
Next, Guggenheim told Gebru via private chat that he would file a formal whistleblower disclosure with U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi at the U.S. Department of Justice. The letter he sent that same day alleged First Amendment violations through viewpoint discrimination and compelled speech, retaliation, and disregard for President Donald Trump’s executive order directing federal agencies to stop promoting, requiring, or funding diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives that impose ideological preferencing.
He filed additional complaints with the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division and the Office of Special Counsel whistleblower channel; an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission inquiry; a Colorado Civil Rights Division/State Personnel Board consolidated appeal; and a state whistleblower complaint.
A month later, Guggenheim received notice of a workplace investigation. The notice offered no specifics about the allegations, the complainant, or the policy at issue. The state hired an outside group to conduct the investigation.
That process is under way as Guggenheim pursues a federal lawsuit against a state whose political class has built a reputation for using institutions as weapons.
Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold tried to keep Trump off the presidential primary ballot before investigators examined her office’s election-security failures. Last year, lawmakers also advanced a regime of pronoun policing and gender ideology that reaches into schools and families and invites the state to play commissar.
RELATED: The taboo conservatives refuse to confront
Colorado’s leadership class doesn’t merely govern. It disciplines.
“Destruction of Western civilization is what queer theory is all about,” Guggenheim said.
Guggenheim is 46. He doesn’t sound demoralized. He sounds ready. He believes Colorado has boxed itself in legally, which left him with a choice: comply, stay quiet, and keep his head down — or put the issue on the record and force a confrontation.
Most people choose comfort. They tell themselves they agree with freedom, but they live like they don’t. They fear conflict more than they fear losing the country.
Guggenheim’s refusal to be emotionally bullied by the pronoun police should shame the rest of us. He didn’t beg for approval. He didn’t bargain. He didn’t self-censor to keep the peace. He documented the coercion and escalated through the proper channels.
One detail makes the story even harder for the usual activists to process: Guggenheim is openly gay.
He still drew the line. He still confronted ideological coercion in the workplace. He still chose risk over submission.
That’s the right standard. What’s your excuse?
With AP teachers increasingly focused on race, gender, and social movements, the CLT is attempting to end the partisan paradigm.
A federal appellate court handed President Trump a major victory on Friday by shutting down a lower court blockade on his efforts to eliminate racist DEI programs in federal contracting. In its unanimous decision, a three-judge panel for the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals vacated a preliminary injunction issued by Maryland District Judge Adam Abelson […]
The number of Fortune 500 companies willing to publicly disclose their diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) practices has dropped 65 percent in the last year, according to the Human Rights Campaign (HRC). The HRC, likely the most powerful gay and “transgender” lobby in the country, typically keeps track of which companies are doing its political […]
For Trump, the problem at the NSF is the problem in the entire government. Do the agencies carry out the president's directives?
Real truth and actual intelligence will never be 'artificial.'
thefederalist.com
www.theblaze.com