Linda’s lies

She’s an Islamist masquerading as a progressive.

This is Linda Sarsour. Her last name means “cockroach” in Arabic (for real). The Left loves her because she is a Palestinian Muslim immigrant woman. She also just happens to be a despicable human being.

I’m not saying that lightly, either. With her, there’s a new scandal almost every day, whether it’s Twitter drama, playing the victim, calling everyone “alt-right trolls,” encouraging jihad, praising actual terrorists… Yet despite all of this our darling Linda organized the Women’s March earlier this year, was asked to give the commencement speech at CUNY, and enjoys endorsement from leftists like Bernie Sanders (of course).

So let’s get into it. What’s so bad about Linda Cockroach?

First of all, she loves sharia, despite claiming to be a feminist. This is the first clue that she’s fake.

In June, protestors held a March Against Sharia in order to criticize Islamization and influence of Islamic law in western countries. Linda retweeted the Atlanta Women’s March who called it a “hate rally,” and she also referred to it as an anti-Muslim rally, which is a total strawman. Not wanting sharia law in America absolutely does not equate to hatred of Muslims.

It’s clear that she supports sharia. Before we go any further, it’s essential to understand why sharia law is so awful.

Wikipedia defines it like this:

Sharia, Sharia law, or Islamic law is the religious law forming part of the Islamic tradition. It is derived from the religious precepts of Islam, particularly the Quran and the Hadith. In Arabic, the term sharīʿah refers to God’s immutable divine law and is contrasted with fiqh, which refers to its human scholarly interpretations.
Traditional theory of Islamic jurisprudence recognizes four sources of sharia: the Quran, sunnah (authentic hadith), qiyas (analogical reasoning), and ijma (juridical consensus).
Its rulings assign actions to one of five categories: mandatory, recommended, neutral, abhorred, and prohibited.

The first and most authoritative source of sharia is the Quran, because Muslims see it as the word of God, literally written by God, existing eternally with him, and sent down to Muhammad for humans to follow and obey. Sunnah, as the second most important, refers to authentic hadith about the life and actions of the prophet Muhammad.

What kind of laws could come from these texts?

  • Muhammad married a 6-year old girl and consummated the relationship when she was 9. Coincidentally, Afghanistan, Iran, Kuwait, Libya, Maldives, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and the UAE are the only countries in the world which do not have a legal age of consent either for sex or for marriage. These are all Muslim-majority countries.
  • The hadith prescribes the death penalty for apostasy from Islam. Coincidentally, 17 countries in the Middle East/North Africa region criminalize apostasy from Islam. 13 countries worldwide prescribe the death penalty. All of them are Muslim-majority countries.
  • The Quran says that women should receive half as much inheritance as men, and their testimony is worth half as much as a man’s in court.
  • The Quran says that Muslims are the best and non-Muslims are the worst. Is it any wonder that Muslim-majority countries are some of most religiously intolerant countries in the world?
  • The Quran says that “men are the protectors and maintainers of women” and they are allowed to hit their wives.
  • The hadith prescribes the death penalty for homosexuality — currently there are 10 states which employ some form of capital punishment for homosexual activity, and they are all Muslim-majority countries.

These are just a few of the many restrictive laws that derive from the Islamic faith. Sharia law permits gross human rights abuses and should have stayed in the 7th century where it belongs. Instead, people like Linda want to resurrect it and perpetuate these horrific crimes — regressivism under a mask of progressivism.

I guess these beliefs aren’t too much of a surprise, though, coming from someone who also promotes jihad!

In a speech given to the convention of the Islamic Society of North America, Linda said that the best form of jihad was, “A word of truth in front of a tyrant ruler or leader,” cited a quote attributed to Muhammad. She went on to say: “I hope that … when we stand up to those who oppress our communities, that Allah accepts from us that as a form of jihad, that we are struggling against tyrants and rulers not only abroad in the Middle East or on the other side of the world, but here in these United States of America, where you have fascists and white supremacists and Islamophobes reigning in the White House.”

Linda maintains that she meant jihad only in the peaceful way and not in the violent way, but there are a few reasons why I think that’s not the whole truth. First of all, the word jihad is an extremely loaded term nowadays and has taken on sociocultural connotations that may differ from the original meaning. Definitions change over time — for example, in the past, “queer” meant strange or odd, when it is now used as an umbrella term for LGBT. To use it today and say “Well, I meant strange,” would be confusing at best. In the case of a word like jihad, a misunderstanding could have the potential for devastating violence.

Secondly, Linda has previously demonstrated sympathetic ties to radicals and terrorists. She is friends with Rasmea Odeh, who was convicted of participation in the planning of a 197o bombing in Jerusalem. Odeh recently lost her US citizenship because she failed to declare her criminal record to the US government — she will soon be deported. That didn’t stop Linda from speaking at an event with her last April, expressing that she felt, “honoured and privileged to be here in this space, and honoured to be on this stage with Rasmea.”

In addition, she has family ties to Hamas — cousins in Israeli jails for working with the terrorist organization who seeks the destruction of Israel. In January, she also met with Salah Sarsour, a former Hamas operative who has also served jail time in Israel. Linda has publicly disavowed Hamas, but she’s also openly expressed her hatred for Zionism. The guiding principle of Zionism is support for the existence of the state of Israel, so either Linda misunderstands and misrepresents Zionism, or she desires Israel’s destruction. She has also stated that Zionism and feminism are incompatible, and she favours a one-state solution, fuelling concerns that she harbours antisemitic sentiments.

But finally, and most disturbing of all, is her relationship with her mentor, Siraj Wahhaj. In the speech where she called for jihad, she also singled out the imam as her “favourite person in the room.” She described him as a mentor, a motivator, and an encourager in her life. But yet again, she’s closely involved with a very shady character. This is unconfirmed, but Siraj Wahhaj may have been an unindicted co-conspirator involved in the 1993 World Trade Centre bombings.

What we do know for sure is that he has openly preached hatred and violence in his sermons. After the Rodney King riots in L.A., he advocated armed jihad in America. In another talk, he said, “In time, this so-called democracy will crumble, and there will be nothing, and the only thing that will remain will be Islam.” He is also quoted as saying, “Islam is better than democracy. Allah will cause his deen [Islam as a complete way of life], Islam, to prevail over every kind of system, and you know what? It will happen.” Siraj Wahhaj is a full supporter of sharia: “If Allah says 100 strikes, 100 strikes it is. If Allah says cut off their hand, you cut off their hand. If Allah says stone them to death, through the Prophet Muhammad, then you stone them to death, because it’s the obedience of Allah and his messenger — nothing personal.”

For a more in-depth explanation of Linda’s relationship to Siraj Wahhaj, I recommend this video:

In any case, the fact that Linda even associates herself with this man is already concerning, but when she calls him her “mentor” and “favourite person” it’s downright horrifying. This is a man who said he would cut off his own daughter’s hand if she stole. This is a terrorist sympathizer who called the FBI and the CIA “the real terrorists” for trying to eradicate Islamic extremism. This is an open supporter of a global Islamic caliphate.

But wait. There’s more.

Linda’s a thief, too. In June, she ran a gofundme campaign for Rahma Warsame, who was allegedly a victim of an anti-Muslim hate crime. The campaign raised over $100,000. Only the problem is, after investigation the police found no evidence whatsoever that a hate crime had been committed. Surprise, surprise, it turns out a crazy Muslim woman was actually the one who started it by threatening a Hispanic woman with a taser in her apartment complex — Rahma Warsame then tried to help her Muslim friend and the whole thing turned into a brawl with the Hispanic woman and her boyfriend. Not exactly a hate crime! And I’m extremely skeptical of what Linda is going to do with the $100,000 that she got by lying and swindling.

Even more recently, Linda Sarsour made headlines yet again by soliciting donations for Hurricane Harvey victims. But after a bit of research, it became clear that the organization she linked to in her tweet was really just a political action committee, and had nothing to do with relief efforts in Texas. She even admitted to this herself in a response on Twitter, saying it isn’t her PAC (but it still is a PAC).

And here we see a classic example of Linda responding to criticism.

For the record, Jake Tapper is a journalist with CNN. He’s most definitely not alt-right — he’s not even on the right wing at all. He was simply criticizing Linda’s views, and her disgusting comment towards Ayaan Hirsi Ali.

Let it be known that Ayaan is a victim of female genital mutilation — someone already DID take her vagina away (they cut out her clitoris according to Islamic tradition).

Linda is even so fragile that she’s actually threatened to sue her critics!

Poor delicate baby Linda. She’s always perfect and has never done anything wrong in her whole life. There’s absolutely no reason why anyone should hate her or disagree with her, because her views are impeccable. Anyone who criticizes her must be a racist white supremacist alt-right Islamophobic bigoted troll and deserves to pay for their sins!

You gonna make me pay for writing this, Linda?

In Linda’s own words:

Since the Women’s March on Washington, which I had the privilege of co-chairing with inspirational women from across the country, my family and I have received countless threats of physical violence. These ugly threats come from people who also spout anti-Muslim, xenophobic and white-supremacist beliefs. Their sole agenda is to silence and discredit me because I am an effective leader for progress, a Palestinian American and Brooklyn-born Muslim woman. In short, I am their worst nightmare.

Oh, sure, I’m shaking in my shoes because this insane woman is so incredibly good at employing ad hominem attacks! How can I ever argue against her? I guess I’ll actually have to do research and provide evidence to support my claims! The horror!

This post has gone on so long simply because of the vast amount of scandalous information relating to Linda Sarsour and her activism, but this is about all I can stomach. She claims to be a feminist while advocating for the subjugation of women under sharia law. She claims to support gay rights while advocating for a legal system which would have them executed. She claims to fight for the rights of minorities including Jews, yet she would deny them the right to self-determination. She claims to be a progressive yet wants to take society back to the 7th century. In short, she is not a “Brooklyn homegirl in a hijab,” she is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. A hypocrite to the core.

I don’t dislike Linda because of her skin colour, her religion, or her ethnicity. I couldn’t care less about superficial things like that. I can’t stand her because not only are her views utterly repulsive to me and actively harmful to millions of people in the world at this moment, but she also cleverly conceals her true agenda in order to make friends and influence people on the left. Make no mistake; she is dangerous, her activism is divisive, and her agenda is destructive.

Linda Cockroach, if you’re reading this, all I have to say is: I dare you to refute my points without calling me a racist, a white supremacist, an alt-right troll, or an Islamophobe.

I dare you.