Facebook > Email > More Pinterest Print Twitter Play

A White Supremacist Group Aims To Recruit On College Campuses

The University of Texas at Austin was just the latest papered with fliers from the Texas Vanguard.

By Comments

Photo by Ronald Martinez/Getty Images

Over the weekend, the University of Texas at Austin became the latest Texas university to be hit with fliers by a white nationalist group. The state arm of the American Vanguard, a national organization, is carrying out what it calls “The Texas Offensive,” a seemingly ongoing effort to post the group’s fliers on university campuses across the state. Prior to UT Austin, the American Vanguard claims they have also posted fliers at Texas State University, Rice University, the University of North Texas, the University of Texas at Dallas, Collin College, and Abilene Christian University.

According to posts from the Vanguard Texas Twitter account, the fliers at UT Austin were posted on the night of February 12. Some of the fliers posted on campus asked people to “imagine a Muslim-free America” and called for the reporting of “any and all illegal aliens.” One poster was placed on a statue of Martin Luther King Jr. and read, “Carry the torch of your people” over an image of white men. On Twitter, the group captioned the pictures with “Happy #BlackHistoryMonth.” Many UT Austin students called for action from the school administration on social media. UT’s President Greg Fenves tweeted later that day, “Longhorns stand together,” and that diversity and inclusion are top priorities for the university. The tweet also linked to a statement from J.B. Bird, UT’s Director of Media Relations, which read:

This morning, staff at The University of Texas at Austin discovered signs on the Student Activity Center, College of Liberal Arts and the Sanchez building containing political messages aimed at immigrants, minorities and Muslims. The signs, some of which were affixed with adhesive, are in the process of being removed. The university vigorously supports free speech, but posting signs of any nature on the outside of university buildings is not allowed under campus rules. Additionally, as per policy, only students and student organizations are allowed to post signage in approved spaces on campus. The campus is reserved for the use of students, faculty, staff and their invited guests. Any person coming onto campus damaging or defacing university property is subject to criminal prosecution.

Neither the tweet or the statement directly addresses or condemns the contents of the fliers.

The American Vanguard website warns in bold letters that “AMERICA IS UNDER ATTACK.” The rest of the website, especially the group’s manifesto, makes it clear that they mean white America, specifically, is under attack. On Twitter the organization retweets the former Imperial Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, David Duke, and frequently uses the hashtag #MakeAmericanWhiteAgain. In typical white supremacist fashion, they prefer not be called white supremacists, nevermind that the fact that their posters, tweets, and blog posts call for the establishment of a “white America.” 

The attempt to market themselves as something other than white supremacists isn’t new. But what makes the American Vanguard stand out from other groups is the concentrated effort to recruit on college campus. They are specifically seeking out a young white audience, something that the group notes on its website. And according to an interview the American Vanguard’s anonymous vice commander conducted with the Mercury, the UT Dallas student newspaper, their recruitment efforts are working:

Although American Vanguard keeps the identity of its members anonymous, he said he has received a “few” emails from people interested in the group following the flier campaign.

“A lot of our movement is made up of youth — people who do go to colleges and people that are a bit younger,” he said. “That’s kind of the target demographic.”

American Vanguard has targeted other universities around the country and has individual handles for subchapters in 21 states. The group seems to be reacting to actions from the Trump administration (#MakeAmericaWhiteAgainst mimics his popular rally cry). The appearance of their posters at UT Dallas coincided with an executive order Trump signed barring travel from seven majority-Muslim countries, and the fliers at UT Austin followed increased raids by U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement across the country, including Austin.

“Trump is a representation of white America — whether he likes it or whether he knows it or not,” the group’s vice commander told the Houston Press. “I think what he’s doing is… uh… he’s kind of defending it. Not explicitly, but he’s doing things that are helpful for it.”

Related Content

  • Charlie Primero

    The Left began employing Identity Politics more than 30 years ago.

    It’s hilarious that you now cry when your enemies begin doing the same.

    • St. Anger

      it’s not hilarious but sad that you insist on referring to the loyal opposition as enemies.

      fascist much?

      • Charlie Primero

        Very much.

        • Leigh Williams

          Indeed you are. I saw you earlier today spouting your identity politics nonsense on a WaPo article, I think it was.

  • azrael777

    Nearly every race in the world has their own homogeneous homelands. It’s only white countries that are expected to be multicultural. Why do white countries have to become non-white? Why is diversity not pushed in other nations?

    • José

      You don’t get around much, do you?

      • azrael777

        You can’t answer the questions, can you?

        • José

          Ok, let me put this very simply. Your first statement is highly doubtful. Your second statement is false. Consequently your two questions are rubbish. So no, I cannot answer them.

          Furthermore, if you are implying that the United States of America is somehow a “white country”, then you are both foolish and offensive. Un-American, too.

          • azrael777

            “Ok, let me put this very simply.”
            If your goal was to appear simple, congratulations on a job well done.

            “Your first statement is highly doubtful.”
            Not only is it true, it’s very easy to verify. You’re demonstrating very low agency by not even trying to figure it out. Africans, arabs, asians, and jews all have their own ethno-states. It can be broken down even further, Koreans, Japanese, Somali’s, etc.

            “Your second statement is false.”
            Wrong, no one is pushing for diversity in those ethno-states. It’s only white countries, Europe, the US etc.

            “Furthermore, if you are implying that the United States of America is somehow a “white country”, then you are both foolish and offensive. Un-American, too.”
            From it’s creation and nearly the first 200 years of it’s existence the US has been 85-90 percent white. That means, simply put, that the country was white. According to the UN the intentional displacement of an ethnic group through forced immigration that leads to that group becoming a minority in it’s own country, is genocide. This is only happening in Europe and the US. White’s are intentionally being targeted for ethnic replacement, the numbers don’t lie.

            You can call me “un-american” if you like but the facts are on my side.

          • José

            “Nearly every race in the world has their (sic) own homogeneous homelands.”
            The whole concept of “race” is awfully wobbly to start with, and yours appears to be especially dubious. How about you define the term first? That will save time and trouble in deciding how best to dispute it. It’s not my job to reconcile your inconsistencies. Good luck.

            There are a number of non-European countries with multiple ethnic groups. There are some European countries with a long and successful history of ethnic diversity by choice, not force. I’m not real sure what you are getting at with this “pushing for diversity”. A more accurate term might be “fighting against intolerance and prejudice”. After all it’s folks like you that bring race, religion, and ethnicity into the discussion. As far as I’m concerned a refugee is a human being, not a color.

            Re: the USA. You must give some serious thought to the distinction between (1) a nation populated predominantly by white people, and (2) a white nation. In theory we are defined by an ideal higher than race or language or religion or social status. If you cannot accept that non-whites and non-Christians can be full citizens, no less than you or any other white person, then you really don’t understand what makes this nation great. I would dearly love for you to have a polite debate with a black, brown, yellow, or red Marine in a dark alley sometime. Try to convince them that they should “go back home”.

            “White’s (sic) are intentionally being targeted for ethnic replacement…”
            Whew, boy. Is that what you read in the Daily Stormer these days?

          • azrael777

            “The whole concept of “race” is awfully wobbly to start with, and yours appears to be especially dubious.”
            I don’t define race, science does. Different people groups evolved under different environmental pressures, this is not a mysterious situation and it’s not about skin color.
            I know this argument though, you’ll just deny race when it comes to whites but not blacks, arabs, asians, etc. DNA is real, race is real. There are biological differences between the races, everything from skull size to bone density. Your fluffy world view will not change science. If people die in a fire, they can identify the race, gender, and age by DNA tests. If you don’t understand the science involved I suggest you study up to avoid that “simple” minded appearance.

            “There are a number of non-European countries with multiple ethnic groups.”
            What’s that got to do with my statement? I stated every race has their own ethno-states and you “doubted” it. I gave examples. Your answer is to imply that “race” might not even exist.

            ” A more accurate term might be “fighting against intolerance and prejudice”.”
            Diversity reduces social cohesion and community trust. This has been the conclusion of many studies. Your platitudes do not change the facts and producing a society that has less trust and cohesion does not produce tolerance. It will actually produce the opposite.

            “…. then you really don’t understand what makes this nation great.”
            White people made great nations and now they will become minorities in many of those nations. The idea that somehow the constitution made this nation great is ridiculous, Liberia has almost the same constitution.

            “I would dearly love for you to have a polite debate with a black, brown, yellow, or red Marine in a dark alley sometime.”
            It always comes back to violence with you people. You keep pushing that narrative and it’ll become real and you won’t like the results.

            “Is that what you read in the Daily Stormer these days?”
            Again, you have no ability to formulate an argument. Like most leftists you attempt to muddy the waters with snark and buzzwords.

          • Leigh Williams

            No, we deny the concept of “race” across the board. It is not particularly useful in biological terms, and it’s actively pernicious in social terms.

            It is unsurprising that population groups that were once isolated tend to share physical characteristics. But if you think that, say, Americans of some African descent can reliably be identified as what you probably call “negroes” from their bones, you need to turn off “Bones” and pick up a modern physical anthropology textbook.

            There is a name for people like you, but it’s momentarily escaping me. I encountered your ilk in the days I routinely visited science blogs.

            Ah, well, I can’t remember it. It was a misleading euphemism of the alt-right sort. I called it “pseudoscientific racism”, which removed the euphemism.

            People like you prove that intelligence is no bar to an evil heart.

          • azrael777

            Typical virtue signaling leftists. No argument, just insults. That’s why you lose.

            “It is unsurprising that population groups that were once isolated tend to share physical characteristics.”

            Only physical characteristics right? Different evolutionary pressures could never result in East Asians generally testing higher than Europeans in math? Those same pressures could never result in anything having to do with intelligence or aggressive behavior , right? How many levels of science denial are you on right now?

          • jackalope23

            White people are a larger percentage of the population in the U.S. than jews are in Israel. Besides that Israel is incredibly ethnically and racially diverse within the jewish population. There is plenty of activism around how to promote and maintain a multi cultural society. The Bahai and Druze are also centered in the country and are free to practice their faith.

            There are very few ethnically and racially homogeneous countries in the world. So few they are the exception rather than the rule. Egypt, both Koreas, Japan, and Cambodia are the prominent ones. Each is a several thousand year old culture who’s borders closely mirror it’s historical boundaries. “White” ain’t a culture.

            The wealthy mideast countries import so much South Asian labor that they represent a very large chunk of the population. And yes they are under tons of pressure to improve the treatment of these folks.

            Finally if America was supposed to be a white country someone should go back in time and tell the early colonists who seemed to have brought a large number of non-white people with them and not by their choice. All this bs is just a cover for people too lazy to solve their own problems by hard work and education.

          • azrael777

            “White people are a larger percentage of the population in the U.S. than jews are in Israel.”
            Lie, easily debunked. The number is 74.8% according to Israel Central Bureau of Statistics. When someone starts out their comment with a lie, I don’t bother to read the rest it’ll most likely just be more lies.

          • José

            “Diversity reduces social cohesion and community trust. This has been the conclusion of many studies.” Is that supposed to slam the door shut on any rebuttal? Of course there can be tensions and costs associated with mixing cultures, regardless of whether we are talking about ethnicity, religion, socioeconomic backgrounds, gender, etc. It would be foolish to pretend otherwise. Conversely, there can be enormous value to a community by broadening its knowledge and experience by bringing in people with different backgrounds and ideas. I see this in business, schools, and churches. Inbreeding can weaken and enfeeble a population, not just biologically but also intellectually.

            But back to your preoccupation with race, whatever that may mean. What exactly is it that favors the light skinned favored people over all others? Is there something that intrinsically makes Dylann Roof a better American than, say, a Frederick Douglass or Colin Powell? It just doesn’t make sense to use arbitrary physical characteristics as a criterion for judging and sorting people. You might as well enforce segregation of people based on the color of their eyes or whether their navels are innies or outies.

          • azrael777

            Your rebuttal? You never made one, I was just pointing out your mistake on tolerance.

            I never claimed light skinned people were any better or worse than anyone else. Why would you jump straight to that? You’ve been trained to believe that white people don’t deserve their own homeland and that anyone who says they do is a supremacist. It’s intellectually dishonest and disgusting.

            Different races have different characteristics. I could site study after study about criminality, aggression, hormone levels, intellectual differences , etc. (hint: white people never finish “first” in those comparisons, usually around the middle of the pack) It wouldn’t matter to you though, because anyone who claims white people have the same rights as every other people group is a supremacist.

          • José

            It’s “cite”, not “site”. As in “We should cite you for violation of the rules of the English language.”

            If you can cite (or site, whatever) any reputable study showing a biological basis for criminal behavior based on race (whatever that is), have at it. But don’t bother if all you can do is regurgitate data that reports a correlation between crime and socioeconomic factors, especially those brought about a history of institutional segregation and prejudicial treatment.

            I’m all for judging people by the content of their character. Apparently you’re obsessed with the color of their skin. You didn’t answer my earlier question so I’ll ask again, a little differently. Why do you think that Dylann Roof deserves to be automatically accepted as a better American than a black person who was born and raised here, who served this nation, who has a family and a home and a job, who pays taxes and obeys the laws and votes and goes to church? Yeah, I have a problem with that little line of thinking.

          • azrael777

            I find that most anti-whites resort to strawman arguments. “muh Dylan Roof” and “muh skin color”. You’re the only one talking about those things.

          • José

            And yet the question remains. You’re judging individuals by their biological ancestry, not their individual qualities. Explain why that is acceptable, given the examples of its awful inconsistencies.

          • azrael777

            Another strawman, congratulations. Stop assigning me a point of view then attacking it. It’s boring.

          • José

            1. You assert that white people, as a group, are more intelligent and less criminal than others. Set aside for the moment whether this observation is actually supported by the data and whether it is explained by biology rather than by social factors. Clearly there is a great deal of individual variation. There are many non-whites who are good, hardworking, smart, well-adjusted American citizens. There are many whites who are liars, cheats, crooks, idiots, etc. So by what criteria is it a good idea to characterize an entire set of people based on artifacts that are so often wrong? Why is it not preferable to judge individuals based on their individual merits?

            2. You apply the term “white country” to our nation because, historically, it has been populated by descendants of Western European immigrants. What is the significance of this fact, aside from being an interesting bit of trivia? Do you understand it as according certain privileges which are not documented in the Constitution or law? If not, then what? You also note that in the past we restricted immigration to avoid diluting our social uniformity. Would you not agree, then, that if our country is “white” then by the same token it is also non-Irish, non-Italian, non-German, and non-Catholic?

            3. Black people have lived here since colonial times. Free blacks fought in the Revolutionary War to establish this nation. Along the border region of Texas there are many citizens of Hispanic descent whose families have lived here for years. Their ancestors didn’t move to the US, but instead the US moved to include them. Where do these people fit in the white America that you see? Should they be forced to forsake the home where they have lived for generations, or to be relegated to a second class status, while more recent immigrants get accepted solely because of their ethnicity? Simply put, what do you insist that they give up?

            There. This is carefully enough worded that it should not offend. I humbly request the favor of your full response. If I erred in representing your POV please feel free to correct but do NOT use that as an excuse to avoid the question altogether. As always I have avoided calling anyone a supremacist, or expressed any hatred for people based on their biology. Please do likewise. Thank you!

          • José

            You made a good decision to cut and run. It’s not exactly brave, of course, but the alternative of sticking around and accounting for yourself is impossible. You have the perfect opportunity to school me and others on the merits of your doctrine but it ain’t gonna happen because no one could construct any convincing defense of that white homeland, racial purity nonsense.

            The United States of America is a great nation because its values and ideals transcend petty prejudices and irrational fears. There is no place for white nationalism here. You and President Bannon need to find a new home.

          • azrael777

            Cut and run? You’re whole argument was reduced to insults and straw men. I just don’t care about getting the last word. Any one with an objective opinion would see that you really don’t have an argument besides mischaracterizing mine.

          • José

            Three questions laid out very neatly and clearly. Three questions that directly address what you’ve been trying to say. Three questions that would shed light on the subject and open it up for analysis and understanding. Three questions that give you the opportunity to show us just how wrong we are.

            Three questions ignored by you.

            So don’t let me mischaracterize you! Characterize yourself! Stand up for what you believe and explain yourself thoroughly. Or just sit back and complain. Either way, we’re listening. And what you’re saying right now, it’s not helping you a bit.

          • azrael777

            Yeah , 3 questions.
            1. How come you stated these things you never actually stated?
            2. How come you don’t believe in this abstract political philosophy that never existed.
            3. How come you want this thing you never actually said or implied you wanted?

            Have some integrity, your questions are framed and intellectually dishonest. I’ve already explained my positions and you ignore the explanations and assign me ones that you can comfortably argue against. If you refuse to acknowledge my statements , as I’ve stated them, at this point further explanation is only pointless but redundant. You’ll just purposely ignore my words and attack what you want my words to be.

          • kikz2

            The whole concept of biological “race” is awfully wobbly to start with, and yours appears to be especially dubious. oh, reallly? care to offer some back up on that ‘wobbly’ opine?

            anthropology, forensics, and medical sciences are apparently unknown to you ,or you conveniently for the sake of your argument omit through disingenuousness.

          • José

            Race is more of a social construct and less of a biological rule. There is more genetic variation within a so-called biological race than between races. It’s not a particularly useful term in science.

            http://www.americananthro.org/ConnectWithAAA/Content.aspx?ItemNumber=2583
            http://physanth.org/about/position-statements/biological-aspects-race/

            Living creatures inherit physical characteristics from their biological ancestors. Genetically isolated groups can develop physical features that distinguish them other groups. No question. But that’s a truism REGARDLESS of the concept of race. Put them in a line up and you could probably identify the Irish from the Italian from the Russian from the Swede, yet they are all members of the same so-called race. So tell me again what race means to you, in precise scientific terms, and be sure to explain exactly how it differs from genetic variations that occur within a race.

            When our thin skinned friend azrael throws around the term “race” and then cites African as a single race and Jewish as another, he deserves to be challenged. More importantly when he raises such a fuss about it and wants to use it to control people’s behavior then he danged sure owes us an explanation of what he means and why it matters. Why. Does. It. Matter?

            Same thing with this foolish talk about racially “homogeneous homelands”. What is he getting to here? Maybe he wants the majority of American citizens to move back to Western Europe? Sounds kinda dumb to me but OK, you go first.

          • kikz2

            ‘Race is more of a social construct and less of a biological rule.’

            if biological differentiation were not physically present to observe/quantify/qualify no degree of taxonomic sub-classification would have been forthcoming.

            “The name is not important.
            What is important is to acknowledge the existence of differentiation and its significance for the reconstruction of human history.”

            Jan Klein and Naoyuki Takahata, Where Do We Come From? The Molecular Evidence for Human Descent(New York: Springer,2002), 390. For the study referred to see Barbujani and Sokal, “Zones of Sharp Genetic Change in Europe Are Also Linguistic Boundaries,”
            Proc. Nati.Acad. Sci.87 (March 1990): 1816–19:

            http://encyclopedia.jrank.org/articles/pages/6243/Forensic-Anthropology-and-Race.html

            http://europepmc.org/abstract/med/15813536

          • José

            Funny. The first article refers to “ancestry (race)”. Yes, even in scholarly journals you will see them use common layman terms that are technically imprecise. I mean, would you say that meteorologists deny the Copernican model because someone said “sunrise”? The second article refers to “social race”. You can almost hear the shrugging of shoulders. If you intended to set forth a clear and complete definition of “race”, please try again.

            So let me repeat two things from my earlier post:
            1. “Living things inherit physical characteristics from their biological ancestors.” This is the gist of what you actually say, and I emphatically agree. However that is hardly a scientific endorsement of the concept of race. Unless you are talking about the human race, of course.
            2. “Why does it matter?” According the other guy this question is absolutely critical and yet the two of y’all can’t be bothered to answer. Well, except for some rubbish about ethnic purity and that kind of thing. We had a good long fight over that 70-80 years ago. It was ugly. Time to move on.

          • azrael777

            “Why does it matter?”

            White people have a right to exist. White people have a right to exist in white countries, just like every other people group in the world.

          • José

            Good Lord. White people have a right to exist. And the USA is not a “white country”. If you don’t like the US Constitution (especially amendments 13, 14, 15) then you might want to find a different homeland. We left you behind 150 years ago. It’s time to move on or move away.

          • azrael777

            I understand that you are anti white, no need to project your bigotry upon me. I don’t expect to have a “pure” white homeland but I think it’s reasonable to not want my people to be rendered to minority status in a country our forefathers built. You can say that the US was never a white country, but it’s population was overwhelmingly white, governed by laws written by whites, and restricted immigration to places and people that would not change the ethnic make up of the population.

            If that’s not a white country, by your standards, then there’s nothing that would qualify.

            What I can’t understand is why you hate whites so much? If any group of people on earth were facing the same reality, people like you would rush to that people’s defense.

          • José

            The United States of America has declared, very clearly, that citizenship is not constrained by ethnicity of one’s ancestors nor the color of one’s skin nor one’s religious convictions. So, yeah, that sort of precludes this “white country” stuff. It’s the difference between a description and a definition. You can describe the USA as having a population whose ancestry was and is primarily Western European. Someday that description will no longer be true, yet the United States will still continue to be the nation that was founded 240 years ago and has grown and evolved since, assuming that no one undermines its defining laws and its core principles of freedom and equality. Our nation isn’t defined by any historic whiteness any more than by its original historic borders (which excluded Texas, I might add).

            Friend, stop with the “anti-white” and “hate whites” garbage. As one who identifies as white, with no shame or hesitation, I really can’t figure out how you can even accidentally understand that. No more foolish yammering. If you want to argue with something that I actually said, please proceed. I make no claims to being perfect and will humbly try to correct, clarify, or apologize if needed. However don’t expect that you can make up stuff and attribute it to me and not get called out for such childishness. Be a man, son.

          • azrael777

            “Fighting bigotry and prejudice is pretty much the opposite of racial hatred”
            How come people only fight whites when fighting “bigotry” and “racial hatred”? Anti-racist is just a code word for anti-white.

            “However don’t expect that you can make up stuff and attribute it to me and not get called out for such childishness”
            You derail the conversation with dishonest accusations, lies, and straw man arguments and then have the nerve to act offended when your white hate is called out? Talk about “be a man”, you don’t qualify as a person much less a man. You’re merely a brainwashed sheep who’s more concerned with appearance than reality.

          • Donna Ross

            How about OUR genocide of the indigenous people? Our “ally”, “Israel’s” genocide of the indigenous people of Palestine, ongoing as we speak, aided and abetted by US to the tune of 10 million dollars per day?

    • Charlie Primero

      White People = Evil, thus less White People = Good.

      Visit http://mtv.com for more on this.

    • RamblinLonghorn

      America wasn’t white until the white man showed up and removed the indiginous population. Even then, they brought in races as slaves and workers, thereby giving up any sort of idea of America ever being an “ethnically homogenous” nation state. And to make this claim in regards to Texas, a land that has been stolen and sold many times in the last few centuries, is particularly ridiculous.

      • azrael777

        See, at least you admit your reasoning for being anti-white, I can somewhat respect that. However, every civilization practiced slavery and every inch of populated land has been fought over. If you apply the “stolen land” to one people, you must apply it universally. Good luck unraveling all of history to figure out who’s owed what and who belongs where.

    • Donna Ross

      Not really….Most countries, with the exception of Japan, are racially/ethnically diverse.

  • not your bro

    LOL, UT Austin? Talk about not knowing your audience. Probably would have had better luck at A&M.

    • oblate spheroid

      UT has many more good ol’ country boys and A&M has many more hippies than the perceptions of the schools would have you believe.

      • not your bro

        I went to one of the schools and had many friends at the other, so my opinion is based on more than just perceptions.

        • oblate spheroid

          As did I. Just pointing out the traditional perceptions of “UT = liberal hippies” and “A&M = conservative country folk” is completely outdated. There is a much larger audience for white supremacists at UT than one might think, and A&M’s audience might be smaller than one might think. Ask Richard Spencer.

          • not your bro

            I was also talking about from an available pool of white students (presumably the only ones who would/be allowed to join an organization such as this) – Texas is 45% white, while A&M is around 60% – so you’ve got a much larger pool of potential recruits.

          • oblate spheroid

            The number of white students is a point that somehow flew right over my head. Thanks for (politely) highlighting it.

  • Headley Jones

    Actually, I heard UT President Fenves on KUT with a strong condemnation of the posters. Good words:
    http://utnews.tumblr.com/post/157200879578/president-fenves-condemns-posters-at-ut-austin

    • Joeytjones

      Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours & have longer with friends and family! !di11c:
      On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
      !di11c:
      ➽➽
      ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialCashJobs301ShopInfoGetPaid$97/Hour ★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫::::::!di11c:….,……

  • mike5586

    “and that diversity and inclusion are top priorities for the university.”

    But not education, since those things are mutually exclusive.