Martha Jackson appeals a summary judgment entered on her claim of retaliation and on discrimination on account of race, sex, age, and religion. The district court entered a lengthy and convincing Memorandum Opinion and Order explaining why Jackson’s suit has no merit. We affirm, essentially for the reasons given by that court.

As the district court explained, plaintiff alleges “fourteen factually [discrete] occasions where she claims her civil rights were violated.” Some of those events, as the district court explained, do not constitute adverse employment actions. *172 One incident — a twelve-day suspension — is an adverse action but, as the district court reasoned, there were legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons.

One incident deserves special mention. Jackson asserts that a lieutenant colonel uttered an extremely offensive and unacceptable racial epithet in reference to her. Although that conduct was reprehensible, Jackson has presented no evidence that the lieutenant colonel in question had authority over the employment decisions that Jackson questions or that the remark was in any way related to those employment actions.

In sum, Jackson has made no showing that any of the myriad actions complained of resulted from discriminatory or retaliatory animus. The district court has shown why summary judgment is amply justified.

AFFIRMED.