If you follow or participate in the Women’s March, whose goals are admirable, be aware that you’re getting in bed with some very unsavory characters—the March’s leaders.
Last Sunday, as reported by CNN, Louis Farrakhan, the bigoted and unhinged leader of the National of Islam (the “Black Muslims”) gave a blatantly anti-Semitic speech. Click on the screenshot to see the details:
Minister Louis Farrakhan engaged in a series of anti-Semitic remarks on Sunday.
Farrakhan has led the black nationalist group Nation of Islam since 1977 and is known for hyperbolic hate speech aimed at the Jewish community.
During the speech in Chicago, Farrakhan made several anti-Semitic comments, including, “the powerful Jews are my enemy.”
“White folks are going down. And Satan is going down. And Farrakhan, by God’s grace, has pulled the cover off of that Satanic Jew and I’m here to say your time is up, your world is through,” he later said.
The CNN article contains a lot of tweets from CNN anchor (and liberal) Jake Tapper recounting Farrakhan’s remarks with embedded videos, like this one:
At 2:57:00 he begins approvingly quoting some of the anti-Semitic comments made by Rev. Billy Graham and President Richard Nixon in the Oval Office.https://t.co/WE5ys7It8R
— Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) February 28, 2018
At 3:15, Farrakhan calls Jews 'the mother and father of apartheid, the Jews."https://t.co/WE5ys7It8R
— Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) February 28, 2018
Tapper goes on, but you can see Farrakhan’s anti-Semitic bile at the CNN site.
The Forward adds more:
Farrakhan made multiple inflammatory comments during his three-hour speech. He claimed that “the powerful Jews are my enemy,” that “the Jews have control over agencies of those agencies of government” like the FBI, that Jews are “the mother and father of apartheid,” and that Jews are responsible for “degenerate behavior in Hollywood turning men into women and women into men.”
Farrakhan has been known to make anti-Semitic comments for decades, including calling Adolf Hitler “a very great man” and claiming that Jews were behind the 9/11 terror attacks.
Even the dubious Southern Poverty Law Center, itself too eager to demonize Muslim reformers or apostates like Maajid Nawaz and Ayaan Hirsi Ali, has denounced Farrkhan and the Nation of Islam as producing “deeply racist, anti-Semitic and anti-gay rhetoric”, stating that such behavior “earned the NOI a prominent position in the ranks of organized hate.”
Now, who was at Farrakhan’s speech but Tamika Mallory, one of the four co-chairs of the Women’s March? (They include, as Wikipedia notes: “Linda Sarsour, the executive director of the Arab American Association of New York; Tamika Mallory, a political organizer and former executive director of the National Action Network; Carmen Perez, an executive director of the political action group The Gathering for Justice; and Bob Bland [a woman], a fashion designer who focuses on ethical manufacturing.”) And it turns out that three of these four women—all save Bland—have sucked up to Louis Farrakhan.
CNN reports on Mallory, who has a history of osculating Farrkahan (see also my post here):
Women’s March co-chair Tamika Mallory was in attendance, CNN’s Jake Tapper pointed out on Twitter after she shared an image from the event on Instagram.
Mallory has posted on social media about Farrakhan in the past — on February 21, 2016, she posted an image of him from a stage at the Joe Louis Arena with the caption: “The Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan just stepped to the mic for #SD16DET… I’m super ready for this message! #JUSTICEORELSE #ForTheLoveOfFlint.”
Mallory did not immediately respond to CNN’s request for comment on Sunday’s speech.
Mallory, and Perez as well, both have firm connections to Farrakhan, expressing approval for the man and his ideas, as documented in an article in The Algemeiner. This picture, from Perz’s Instagram account, shows their approbation (Perez on left, Mallory on right):
I should add that, as I posted last year, Perez is a big fan of other dubious characters. As NYT writer Bari Weiss noted in a column called “When progressives embrace hate” (and I’ve checked on these statements):
Ms. Mallory, in addition to applauding Assata Shakur [JAC: characterized by Tapper, truthfully, as “a cop-killer fugitive in Cuba”] as a feminist emblem, also admires Fidel Castro, who sheltered Ms. Shakur in Cuba. She put up a flurry of posts when Mr. Castro died last year. “R.I.P. Comandante! Your legacy lives on!” she wrote in one. She does not have similar respect for American police officers. “When you throw a brick in a pile of hogs, the one that hollers is the one you hit,” she posted on Nov. 20.
Ms. Perez also expressed her admiration for a Black Panther convicted of trying to kill six police officers: “Love learning from and sharing space with Baba Sekou Odinga.”
And here’s Linda Sarsour weighing in on a Perez Instagram post, noting that “the brother does not age” and “God bless him”. Indeed!
You might construe this as just a factual assertion, but I think it’s darker than that:
So Perez and Mallory are big supporters of Farrakhan (and terrorist killers) and I suspect Sarsour is, too, given her “God bless him” weigh-in above. As reader BJ—who called the speech, Mallory’s attendance, and some links to my attention—noted: “This would be all over the media if it was about the leaders of a huge right-wing march following Richard Spencer, and since Farrakhan is just as hateful as Spencer, the only difference between the two is that Farrakhan has far more followers and, apparently, influence over respected organizers.”
You’d expect progressives to call out Perez, Mallory, and Sarsour for their association with an unrepentent Jew-hater like Farrakhan, who is the black equivalent of Richard Spencer. But no, some liberals make excuses for it, so eager are they to overlook anti-Semitism in the cause of being woke. Just have a look at this defense of the Women’s March leaders on the feminist site Jezebel (my emphasis):
Of course, neither Sarsour, nor any of the other Women’s March co-founders, is immune to criticism (and Weiss raises a few valid points in her op-ed [JAC: here], particularly around Carmen Perez and Tamika Mallory’s association with Louis Farrakhan, a black activist who has been labeled by the Southern Poverty Law Center as an anti-Semitic and homophobic extremist; neither Perez nor Mallory have responded to our request for comment on the affiliation or Weiss’s piece). But progressives should understand who these criticisms serve, especially when they originate from Islamophobic arguments—and understand that, as a Palestinian-American Muslim woman, Sarsour’s very identity and existence is considered controversial in a country that continues to support policies that discriminate against one of the most oppressed people in the world.
Transation: “It’s okay for Sarsour, Perez, and Mallory to hang around with a rabid anti-Semite, because the critics of that can be fobbed off as simple Islamophobes. Besides, Sarsour is supporting the oppressed feminists, so it’s okay for her and her cronies to express anti-Semitism.”
Like others who endorse the Woman’s March, Jezebel is so enamored at the March’s well-meant aims that they’ll either overlook or defend the viper at the breast of the Women’s March organizers. I am mystified at this. Perez and Mallory associate with a bigoted loon, Sarsour says “god bless him”; and all three are dubious characters, characters who hang around with and praise bigots and killers. Is this the best the Women’s March can do? Can’t they find leaders who aren’t in bed with bigots? And why does the liberal press ignore this? (We already know the answer.)
It’s about power. And identity.
But mostly power.
Glen Davidson
Yes, I do not see how the women’s organization can ever be taken seriously or amount to anything good with these women running things. If there is realistic leadership within this group they will have to remove all three of these people from association. It is a disease that will only kill their movement eventually. How can you speak for women with such radicals among you.
Farrakhan is pure insanity. Even the idiot in the white house will not tweet with him.
I hadn’t heard of Farrakhan for years until last year. I thought we were done with him. Apparently, he still has relevance for some people. I’d hardly say I am shocked.
If Farrakhan were invited to speak at a college, would students demand that his “hate speech” be cancelled?
As an aside: Nation of Islam is in cahoots with Scientology. Difficult to figure out what’s in it for either party…http://www.beliefnet.com/faiths/home-page-news-and-views/is-farrakhan-merging-islam-and-scientology.aspx
Yes, that is an incredibly strange pairing.
Or is it? They have spaceships and general craziness in common.
BJ is wrong about one thing. He said;”the only difference between the two is that Farrakhan has far more followers and, apparently, influence over respected organizers.”
There is one principle difference that accounts for the ways they are treated; Farrakhan is black and Spencer is white.
That’s why Farrakhan is not hauled over the coals for his racist shite but Spencer is. They are the same in almost every other way.
That’s more likely to get him into trouble with intersectional feminists than antisemitism. Antisemitism is fine with intersectionalists because they see Jews as white; Farrakhan sees all whites as Jews so both agree that whites and Jews are just different terms for the same thing.
But ‘turning men into women and women into men’ is denegrating intersectional feminism’s own ‘chosen race’. I’d like someone to ask Sarsour whether she endorses Farakkhan’s mockery of transgenderism.
True, intersectional feminism supports transgender people, at least on paper.
But whereas gender feminists deny the science behind transgender identity, intersectional feminists don’t base their support on the science, either.
Also, in my experience, most intersectional feminists are on the Regressive Left, and support multiculturalism over universal human rights.
I remember once pointing out to a *very* vocal intersectional feminist that Pope Francis has said some nasty things about transgender people — and, as you might imagine, the intersectional feminist went into full denial mode. The same person, you won’t be surprised to learn, thinks the hijab is a symbol of feminism.
Why did I have to learn about this on WEIT! The true scandal about these so-called feminists is that most of the Left has turned a blind eye to the bigotry. Then you would think that the justification (the critics are “Islamophobe”) would completely discredit them and their followers, but aparently not. The progressive movement has to be rebuilt from scratch, from the bottom up, start from the beginning. This was the last straw for me. It is hard to believe what I am reading.
Rep. Keith Ellison, deputy chair of the DNC and highly touted rising star of the Democratic party, also had a decade-long role defending the Nation of Islam and several other antisemites, facts that came out in the process of his consideration for the DNC. Apparently, it didn’t make a difference. He repeatedly defended Farrakhan, as well. He is still considered one of the leading Democrat prospects.
Ellison story from CNN: https://www.cnn.com/2016/12/01/politics/kfile-keith-ellison-nation-of-islam/index.html
Can you imagine what the media response would be if similar information surfaced about a Republican and Spencer? Let’s not forget Jeremy Corbyn, who, it was known long before he was elected to Labor’s leadership, stood on stage proudly with Hamas leaders and called them his “friends.” The difference between Spencer and leaders of Hamas is that Spencer hasn’t actively taken part in organizing and funding terrorist attacks, nor making exhortations to committing genocide against an entire people. But Corbyn is leading Labor anyway.
Then there’s the photo that recently surfaced of President Obama with Farrakhan from 2006. I don’t think Obama is an antisemite like the others mentioned here, but it’s still worrying because it further demonstrates the serious issue of antisemitism being tolerated among the left and the Democratic party.
Obama photo story: https://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/photo-of-obama-louis-farrakhan-to-be-released
In trying to find the photo, the only links I found talking about it are the above blog, Jewish news websites, and foxnews.com. The wider media is as disinterested in all of this as everything else we’ve discussed here.
http://www.jpost.com/Diaspora/Why-did-Barack-Obama-meet-with-Louis-Farrakhan-in-2005-540510
You will find the photo of Hussein Obama and Farrakan here.
It’s Barack Hussein Obama. Don’t bother explaining yourself.
“Hussein Obama”
Come on, man.
The only presentation of LF I watched an extended portion of was his diatribe against the movie “The Color Purple” re its unflattering depiction of black men and promotion of homosexuality.
Now he didn’t target the book by Alice Walker, and ignored the movie was initiated by Quincy Jones, but focused on the director being Steven Spielberg who is, of course, Jewish. (Spielberg was picked by Quincy Jones to direct the film.) This confirmed (according to LF) that the film was part of a Jewish plot to corrupt the African-American community.
Most of the malfeasances of the FBI took place during the reign of J. Edgar Hoover who was no friend of Jews.
But I waste my breath.
Farrakhan and Walker are bedfellows, nestling under the blanket of anti-Semitism.
Walker was married to a Jew for many years. Her daughter Rebecca has a memoir called “Black, White, and Jewish”.
Yes, I’m aware of her marriage. Just being married to a Jew doesn’t mean that one isn’t anti-Semitic. However, she may well not have been ant-Semitic then. She sure is now. Are you aware of the appalling things she’s said and written in recent years about Jews, as individuals (such as her husband) and as a group? Not your run-of-the mill anti-Semitism, not by a long shot. I’ve noted in other posts on WEIT that she’s proudly pledged her allegiance to David Icke and his fantastically obscene Rothschild Jew reptilian alien anti-Semitism. I can point to chapter and verse. Sad, but this is a fact.
Thank you. Did not know of this.
I’m sorry to be the bearer of such bad news. I found it hard to believe at first, but I did a lot of research and there is no doubt about her position. I was aware of her support of BDS, and her increasingly anti-Semitic statements; but for the life of me, I can’t fathom how she came to swallow hook, line and sinker the abominable and truly insane doctrines propagated by David Icke. When I learned about this (by reading her own blog entries, ca. 2013 and later — straight from the horse’s mouth), I was profoundly shocked and disillusioned. Here’s an excerpt from her Wiki that encapsulates these matters: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice_Walker#Criticism_of_political_views_and_actions.
As for the “personal being the political,” the Wiki also quotes a remark she made about her marriage to Mel Leventhal: “In March 2009, Walker [and other women from Code Pink] traveled to Gaza in response to the Gaza War Their purpose was to deliver aid, to meet with NGOs and residents, and to persuade Israel and Egypt to open their borders with Gaza. She wrote about her meeting with an elderly Palestinian woman who, upon accepting a gift from Walker, said: “May God protect you from the Jews.” Walker responded, “It’s too late, I already married one,” referring to her former husband, a civil rights lawyer; they had divorced in 1976.”
Though she’s received a barrage of criticism about her anti-Semitism, she’s never given any indication that she’s reconsidered, much less recanted anything; she’s only doubled down, and though she’s now become quite coy about trumpeting her allegiance to Icke on her blog, she’s still a devoted follower, and periodically recommends that her readers watch his videos. Sleuthing around I found this photo of her with Icke https://twitter.com/davidicke/status/780821818970034176 taken in late 2016. She also admires Alex Jones and once appeared on his show, though it was an amusing debacle; they were both talking at cross purposes — he wanted to rag on feminists and assumed she was fed up with them, she wanted Rothschild reptilians and ended up going off on him for criticizing Steinem, et al.
Lets hope womens’ issues don’t get lost in all this grandstanding, religious bigoted bling minister (couldn’t watch that for to long) cop killing advocates.
Who, by the way, do they call if they were burgled or assaulted?
It just seems all so… obsequious, you’d slip over in it and do yourself an injury.
Shouldn’t that be either “Imam” LF, or “Sheikh” LF?
What gets me is the three hour speech. Who could sit through that?
Reblogged this on Roni Sez and commented:
My Cassandra Complex: Women’s March Edition
Thanks for highlighting this – unbelievable hypocrisy by so-called ‘progressives’. These people claim to be fighting ‘oppression’ while simultaneously posting grinning photos of themselves with a man who thinks Jews are the spawn of Satan, it’s like living in an episode of South Park.
Just written a blog on this as well, check it out if you’re interested!
https://themaxklinger.wordpress.com/2018/03/12/farrakhan-feminism-and-the-fuhrer/