Colin Wright Profile picture
Apr 28 • 18 tweets • 5 min read • Read on X
🚨BREAKING: A new report from @ncri_io uncovers a MASSIVE surge in foreign funding to universities under Biden, and a potential pipeline of foreign cash and public funds directly promoting radicalization and terrorism on U.S. campuses. 🧵Image
President Donald Trump has launched an aggressive campaign against the nation’s top universities, accusing them of failing to uphold civil rights, protect women’s sports, defend free speech, and prevent the spread of antisemitism. Image
Now, with the NCRI report's new findings, Trump’s fight has entered a critical new phase: a confrontation over universities’ opaque financial ties that may be compromising their ideological independence and enabling radical, anti-American movements.
In April, Trump signed an EO forcing universities to disclose their foreign funding, including the source, amount, and purpose of any foreign gift exceeding $250,000.

What they found was shocking. Image
From 2021 to 2024 alone (during Joe Biden's term), American universities pulled in $28.96 billion in foreign gifts—more than double the amount received during Trump’s first term ($13.72 billion) and exceeding all foreign money received over the previous 40 years combined(!).Image
Even more alarming, yet perhaps unsurprising, the institutions that received the most foreign funding shared tremendous overlap with those engulfed in antisemitism scandals. Image
A subset of the data shared exclusively with The Free Press showed that: Image
This raises a serious question: Could foreign governments be using donations to quietly push anti-American and antisemitic ideas on campus, hiding behind the language of social justice?

The circumstantial evidence keeps growing. But what we need is hard proof.
That proof just arrived in a new intelligence report titled “Foreign Terror Pipelines in the Academy: The Case Study of SFSU and Dr. Rabab Abdulhadi,” published by NCRI and shared with me.

The discoveries are shocking and disturbing. Image
San Francisco State University (SFSU), a publicly funded institution with about 22,000 students, had long faced accusations of antisemitism. Lawsuits in 2017 had already forced the university into settlements over the treatment of Jewish students. Image
But instead of cleaning things up, SFSU’s Arab and Muslim Ethnicities and Diasporas Studies (AMED) program, run by Dr. Rabab Abdulhadi, got even worse—turning into what NCRI describes as a radicalization pipeline linked to designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs).
Since 2020, AMED used public money to host “open classrooms” and webinars featuring convicted terrorists and affiliates of groups like Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP)—all designated FTOs under U.S. law. Image
Among those platformed were: Image
These were not academic discussions, but events that praised and celebrated individuals whose life work centered on violence against civilians. University-sponsored events normalized their actions and glorified their “resistance” narratives to a captive audience of students. Image
Terrorist operatives were platformed through official university communications channels like SFSU’s Facebook and YouTube accounts. Taxpayer money was literally being used to push terrorist propaganda, all under the misleading cover of academic freedom.
These weren’t lapses of judgement rooted in ignorance. It was a deliberate strategy to use the prestige of a public university to legitimize and promote violent extremist ideologies.

This was not "free speech." It was the weaponization of academia.
Trump’s aggressive approach—particularly his emphasis on transparency and accountability—is not only justified but necessary. Without strong oversight and enforcement, our universities risk becoming fully captured, promoting ideologies that oppose to our values or interests.
Transparency alone won't cut it. Universities that platform terrorists must face consequences—loss of federal funding or nonprofit status, or criminal prosecution under anti-terror statutes.

The time for warnings is over. It’s time for accountability.
realityslaststand.com/p/breaking-for…

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Colin Wright

Colin Wright Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @SwipeWright

Apr 22
🚨As the U.S. enters an era of legal warfare over pediatric “gender-affirming” care, it’s time to shift the terms of debate from outcomes to the foundational premises of the practice.

No amount of reported benefit can salvage a practice rooted in pseudoscience. đź§µ Image
I have served as an expert witness for several court cases on gender-affirming care. These courtroom debates fixate almost entirely on whether the treatments show evidence of benefit.

This is a mistake.
The UK's Cass Review exposed the “remarkably weak” evidence supporting pediatric sex-trait modification.

But while exposing this evidentiary void is welcome, focusing solely on outcomes cedes too much ground to proponents by implying outcomes alone can legitimize the practice.Image
Read 11 tweets
Mar 15
Last week, the American Psychological Association released a statement about Trump's EO on the biology of sex.

In a section titled "What the Science Says," the APA makes several embarrassingly false statements due to their blind commitment to sex pseudoscience.

THREAD đź§µ Image
STATEMENT 1: "Sex is a biological characteristic determined by chromosome and reproductive anatomy."

This statement is reflective of profound ignorance regarding the distinction between how sex is developmentally DETERMINED and how it's DEFINED.

It's true that in humans sex is "determined by chromosomes," but that just means genes on certain chromosomes guide embryos down developmental pathways that will result in either a male or female. So, on its face, this statement seems all right.

But the fact that they included "reproductive anatomy" in how sex is determined reveals their muddled thinking. The development of certain reproductive anatomy that has the function to produce either sperm or ova is how sex is DEFINED, not how it's DETERMINED.
STATEMENT 2: "The assertion that only two sexes exist is not scientifically accurate."

Because sex is universally defined in terms of the type of gamete an individual has the biological function to produce, and there are only two types of gamete (sperm and ova), there are and can only be two sexes.

For there to be more than 2 sexes would require a distinct third gamete that a person can have the biological function to produce.
Read 6 tweets
Mar 14
🚨NEW: Proponents of "gender-affirming care" assert that "trans" people have an opposite-sex brain, a belief shaped by a pervasive pseudoscientific narrative flooding culture, courts, and clinics.

Here, @NeuroSGS, @buttonslives, and I address this fatally flawed "research." đź§µImage
The “brain sex” myth isn’t just an academic debate, it’s a diagnosis from doctors pushing people toward medical transition.

Take Yarden Silveira. The belief that he had a “female brain” caused him to pursue transition, and complications likely caused him to take his own life. Image
Civil rights lawyers, activists, and researchers pursue this “brain sex” angle to ground “gender identity” in biology. This is a legal play, because U.S. law protects “innate” characteristics, giving this claim serious weight. Image
Image
Read 13 tweets
Mar 12
So I usually just quote the most ideological and insane sections of the woke papers I share here, but the abstract of this new paper is so unhinged that I'll let it speak for itself in full.

Queers, lesbians, cyborgs, robot dogs, trans-dog intimacies... it's got it all! 🤡 Image
Link to paper ⬇️
tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.108…
It appears this person's total pay is almost $74K per year. Image
Read 4 tweets
Feb 27
🚨The NCAA's "transgender" policy is a TROJAN HORSE!

While the new policy might appear reasonable at a glance, a closer look reveals a massive loophole that actually streamlines the process of allowing males to compete in women’s sports. 🧵...Image
First, the policy is steeped in gender ideology and deliberately avoids referencing objective biology. It defines “woman” as a “gender identity” rather than as an “adult human female”—the language of Trump's EO. Further, it defines “gender identity” circularly as “an individual’s own internal sense of their gender.”Image
Second, though the policy states that “a student-athlete assigned male at birth may not compete on a women’s team,” and that eligibility will be determined based on the sex “marked on [the athlete’s] birth records,” this standard is easily manipulated. Image
Image
Read 9 tweets
Feb 23
They're doubling-down on sex pseudoscience. This won't end well for them.

This article attempts to critique the new definitions of sex announced by the @HHSGov, yet the new HHS statement completely anticipated their critiques and makes them entirely irrelevant.

Thread đź§µ... Image
Sex is all about gametes, or "reproductive cells." Other traits—which emerge during puberty—are considered "secondary sex characteristics" because they are a downstream effect of sex, not sex itself.

The "expert" cited here, Sam Sharpe, is a Ph.D. candidate at Kansas State University, and self-describes as “a trans and intersex person” who has “been involved in trans and intersex activism since 2016.” Sharpe has previously called for a “more inclusive understanding of sex diversity” and believes Lia Thomas (the male swimmer who won an NCAA Division I title in the women’s category) is being discriminated against for “failing to conform to expectations of cisnormative white femininity.”

Sharpe says that “biological sex is complex, variable, not fully understood, and definitely not a binary,” and has blamed the binary view of sex on “capitalism.”

Sharpe is an activist first, and a biologist second.Image
The article claims that the new definition of sex "leaves out people who carry genetic variants and don't make any reproductive cells, or gametes."

This is 100% FALSE.

The new HHS statement (right) explicitly explains that "having the biological function to produce eggs or sperm does not require that eggs or sperm are ever produced" and covers cases where "males and females may not or may no longer produce eggs or sperm due to factors such as age, congenital disorders or other developmental conditions, injury, or medical conditions that cause infertility."

They're choosing to ignore the substance of the document.Image
Image
Read 7 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(