Image 01 Image 03

National Association of Independent Schools Tries To Silence Reporting By Whistleblower Paul Rossi on CRT Training Sessions

National Association of Independent Schools Tries To Silence Reporting By Whistleblower Paul Rossi on CRT Training Sessions

“I was just locked out of my account twice and received a DCMA strike as a result of a complaint by” NAIS “for sharing a clip from one of their Kindergarten teacher trainings.”

Paul Rossi was a former teacher at the elite Grace Church School in Manhattan, NY, and went public at Bari Weiss’ Substack regarding the destructive “antiracist” teaching and indoctrination at the school, I Refuse to Stand By While My Students Are Indoctrinated.

Paul appeared on a Legal Insurrection Foundation panel on May 30, 2021,

Paul obtained training videos from the National Association of Independent Schools recent People of Color Conference. You can view the schedule here. There was an expansive list of sponsors. Soledad O’Brien was the featured speaker.

NAIS is the central accrediting authority for private schools, sets the tone for Critical Race activities, and is viewed with fear by many people we have communicated with.

Paul began posting some very short clips from the conference on Twitter to demonstrate how horrible this training is — and it truly is terrible.

Paul just tweeted that NAIS is trying to get the clips, which to me clearly are fair use, taken down.

Paul also linked to his original thread, which now shows most of the videos disabled by Twitter.

Many of the tweets were archived, so screenshots pre-takedown were saved though the videos don’t play as of this writing, including:

Rossi has mirrored the videos at GETTR.

Here is the text of one of the takedown notices:


The following material has been removed from your account in response to the DMCA takedown notice copied at the bottom of this email:

If you wish to contest this removal, you may seek retractions from the original reporter, or file a counter notification.

Retractions are not guaranteed, and must be submitted by the original reporter to [email protected]. You can request a retraction by using the reporter’s contact information found in the copy of the original DMCA notice located at the bottom of this email.

If you believe the material has been removed as a result of mistake or misidentification, you may submit a counter-notification of your objection pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 512(g)(3)

Please include the following in your counter-notification:

  1. Your full legal name, complete mailing address (house number, street name, state, country and zip code), telephone number, email address and Twitter username.
  2. Identification of the material that has been removed or to which access has been disabled and the location at which the material appeared before it was removed or access to it was disabled. (Must include specific URLs)
  3. The following statement: “I swear under penalty of perjury that I have a good faith belief that the material was removed or disabled as a result of mistake or misidentification of the material to be removed or disabled”.
  4. A proper jurisdictional consent statement in the form of:

(If your address is in the United States)

“I consent to the jurisdiction of the Federal District Court for the judicial district in which my address is located and I’ll accept service of process from the person who provided notice under 17 U.S.C. 512 (c)(1)(C) or an agent of such person.”


(If your address is outside of the United States)

“I consent to jurisdiction in any judicial district in which Twitter may be found and I’ll accept service of process from the person who provided notice under 17 U.S.C. 512 (c)(1)(C) or an agent of such person.”

Please send your counter-notification to us via webform or as a new email to [email protected].

We will forward a copy of your counter-notification, including the information required in item 1 above, to the complainant and Lumen. BY SENDING US A COUNTER-NOTIFICATION, YOU CONSENT TO THIS DISCLOSURE OF YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION.

Please note that repeat violations of this policy may result in suspension of your account. In order to avoid this, do not post additional material in violation of our Copyright Policy and immediately remove any material from your account for which you are not authorized to post.


Copyright owner:
> National Association of Independent Schools
> Myra McGovern
> National Association of Independent Schools
Job title:
> Vice President of Media

> 1129 20th Street NW, Suite 800
> Washington
> DC
Postal code:
> 20036
Phone (optional):
Fax (optional):

Where is this infringement happening?
> Twitter
Description of original request:
> The clip is taken from a recorded presentation that is accessible only to people who registered for NAIS’s People of Color Conference.

Links to original work:
> [Empty]

Please provide URL(s) to the infringing material (e.g., Tweet URL, Periscope broadcast URL, Fleet ID, etc.):

Reported content:
> Video/Audiovisual Recording
Description of infringement:
> NAIS broadcast this presentation for registered attendees of a conference between November 30 and December 30, 2021. @pauldrossi has violated our intellectual property rights (including our copyright) by posting portions of our presentation without our consent on Twitter. It is our understanding that he intends to post additional copyrighted material in the coming days. We ask that this post be removed, due to this infringement, and the Twitter user @pauldrossi be restrained from posting additional copyrighted material without permission.

512(f) Acknowledgement:
> I understand that under 17 U.S.C. § 512(f), I may be liable for any damages, including costs and attorneys’ fees, if I knowingly materially misrepresent that reported material or activity is infringing.

Good Faith Belief:
> I have good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law.

Authority to Act:
> The information in this notification is accurate, and I state under penalty of perjury that I am authorized to act on behalf of the copyright owner.

> Myra McGovern
> US

This story is just breaking, and will be updated and expanded.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


2smartforlibs | January 9, 2022 at 1:33 pm

If you’re not teaching it why are you stopping anyone from exposing the fact you’re teaching it?

    Nomenclature Games are precisely why education practices and theories always have to be analyzed by their function and intended effects and not the current names. If it functions as CRT that’s what it is, even if that acronym is never used. As covered in the book Credentialed to destroy: How and Why Education Became a Weapon, educators have longed bragged about how to bring Marxist theories and aims into the classroom without ever using the ‘M’ word to avoid detection.

    When Transformational Outcomes Based Education became infamous, its aims and practices were renamed as the more euphonious Portrait of a Graduate.

    Also notice that the enforcer of the mandates are the accreditors–NAIS for privates and Cognia (previously AdvancED) for public==whose work is largely out of the public eye. The above book profiled what Quality Learning was being required by those accreditors and the term no longer meant what any parent or taxpayer would expect.

    Accreditors generally in education as well as learning standards function as what international groups like the OECD or UNESCO push as soft law. Binding, but largely out of the public eye. It’s generally how the most controversial practices get put into place to force consistency throughout geographic regions and different socioeconomic districts.

Because parents aren’t suppose to know what their children are being taught until it’s too late

While the nation is fixated on Chicago’s ed issues, something extremely wicked is brewing in Washington state.

Schools in Wa are funded per student. Well a shit ton of kids were unenrolled over the past two years. Because the actual funding model would cause the schools to implode they are suspending that model.

On Jan 12 the state board of health will decide whether to mandate the jab for students. It’s unclear where that will fall but I suspect they know the demographics of people who will pull their kids and they are the same demographics who will fight CRT.

Since the science doesn’t support the vax mandate for kids at all, methinks this is a chess game for Washington to drive out dissent against CRT and other madness they are going for.

A very large percentage of parents WILL pull their kids out over the mandate and so the ONLY way the schools can’t implode financially is if they redefine the funding model to give them money based on what attendence USED to look like.

I expect by the next legislative session the legislature will start stepping up and start looking for ways to encumber home schooling as well since that is going gang busters here.

For us- we’ll fight through most of the other madness and stay to piss them off and be difficult, but we’re not going to do the jab on our kid as the science doesn’t support it. The coof hit our house over Christmas break and although the wife and daughter were down for a day or two, we’re just fine.

Scott Adams recently coined the phrase “if it’s opaque, it’s fake”, primarily in the context of our election process and the lack of any way to audit results by design. That can apply to anything that is opaque, though. If it wasn’t likely to be considered scandalous, it wouldn’t be so hidden.

It also strikes me that while the media proclaim that Mass Formation Psychosis is not real, and that you can’t hypnotize people to do bad things, that CRT is exactly the right example of such hypnosis.

I have a hard time understanding that when a State has sunshine laws that cover training material how an NDA or other agreement with a a 3rd party trainer overcomes that. This is not a mutually exclusive issue, both can be enforced against the School District.

If the sunshine law compels the public release then they do so and then get hammered by the 3rd party trainer for violating the contract. The School District shouldn’t be allowed to hide behind a contract with a 3rd party to violate State Law.

    healthguyfsu in reply to CommoChief. | January 9, 2022 at 8:37 pm

    It’s a private school accrediting body. I don’t think they are public domain like school districts.

      CommoChief in reply to healthguyfsu. | January 10, 2022 at 10:02 am

      Private v public becomes less clear when there are taxpayer dollars involved. I find it hard to believe that none of the member institutions that send dues or other payment to the National organization accept taxpayer dollars. Maybe you are correct and these guys don’t take any State or Federal funds directly or indirectly but I doubt it.

Is this a true copyright violation? He’s not re-publishing the materials for the purpose of training anyone. His content is the discourse and the audience reactions as much as the speaker.

Steven Brizel | January 10, 2022 at 8:52 am

This is Orwellian suppression of the facts

Parents trying to escape public school indoctrination are pursued into the private sector apparently. Runaway slaves.

The Pedant-General | January 10, 2022 at 12:36 pm

Wait – the good faith statements aren’t even remotely comparable.

The complainant has to assert:
“I have good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law.”

That’s fair enough. The complainant has to declare that they genuinely believe there is a copyright infringement.

But the respondent has to say this:
“I swear under penalty of perjury that I have a good faith belief that the material was removed or disabled as a result of mistake or misidentification of the material to be removed or disabled”.”

The respondent in this case clearly believes NEITHER of these things.
– it’s not been disabled as a result of a mistake – it’s deliberate.
– the material has not been misidentified.

Only unless you class the failure to see that this is fair use as a “mistake” could you sign up to that declaration.

The respondent does not believe that the complainant is acting in good faith – that’s the whole problem…

Of course, there is the “Streisand Effect”