Meet the terrorist behind the next women’s march

originally posted by: Kali74

Maybe you should buy a dictionary then. Militant can mean violent or not.

... Ok, I'll bite... Let' see the so peaceful meaning of "militant"...

Definition of militant

1
: engaged in warfare or combat : fighting

2
: aggressively active (as in a cause) : combative
...

www.merriam-webster.com...

It connotes such fuzzy feelings.

militant


adjective
1.
vigorously active and aggressive, especially in support of a cause:
militant reformers.
2.
engaged in warfare; fighting.
noun
3.
a militant person.
4.
a person engaged in warfare or combat.

www.dictionary.com...

Kind of makes you want to sit by a fire and sing Kumbaya with your peaceful friends doesn't it?

Sniff, sniff...after such warm and fuzzy feelings it makes me want to hug... Need a hug?

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

To a liberal, that is the wrong dictionary.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Your title is kind of ironic, as is your conclusion...

Take a look at the first paragraph -

The massive women’s marches of 21 January may mark the beginning of a new wave of militant feminist struggle.

...not a call for one, but suggesting that it might be.

But what exactly will be its focus? In our view, it is not enough to oppose Trump and his aggressively misogynistic, homophobic, transphobic and racist policies. We also need to target the ongoing neoliberal attack on social provision and labor rights

...and they continue with

Lean-in feminism and other variants of corporate feminism have failed the overwhelming majority of us...

In other words, they're trying to stop the neo-Liberals from taking over the movement. And they're calling for peaceful marches. Violence would actually be counter-productive.

a reply to: seasonal

Look her up on wikipedia.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

vigorously active and aggressive, especially in support of a cause

Is that is how you define violent?

a reply to: Kali74

Does aggressive mean bombing and killing 2 students like she did, and spent 10 years in prison for?

If this women said she was doing anything militant I would listen.

a reply to: seasonal

If it does to you, you might want to seek help.

a reply to: Kali74

Given her history I would use extreme caution to have her hand in any demonstration especially when she uses inflammatory phrases in her manifesto.

Maybe she should spend some time in other countries that actually have very repressive laws and rules for women. She is wasting her time.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Rasmea Yousef Odeh terrorist past not that relevant for her part in this women's march. She is still a woman after all, and somehow still an American.

However, it is curious that she is the associate director of the Arab American Action Network!

Why would you want an arab terrorist as a director of a network that is supposed to "strengthen the Arab immigrant and Arab American communities"? To me that seems counterproductive in a post 9/11 world where Western distrust of islam runs wild.

That is just, yeah, counterproductive.

a reply to: seasonal

How do you propose anyone goes about stopping her from participating in am op-ed? She is free on bail at the moment and protected by the Constitution.

AND...

Do you actually believe that people shouldn't attend marches and rallies or support causes if 'undesirable' speak about it? Because I'm pretty sure Trump supporters screamed and hollered every time anyone tried to define Trump as supporting White Nationalism based on them showing up at his rallies.

a reply to: Byrd

Ironic how you ignore the histories of these women, plenty of documentation is provided in the op, but let's look at the few things you decided to focus on.

First, you completely ignore the fact that they do call it a "new wave of militant feminist struggle

Second, you are ignoring not only the history of these women organizers, but you are ignoring what they have written about which is in part covered in the op. I gave links an excerpts for crying out loud, and you want to claim that "they mean something completely different' to what these organizers have been calling for?...

originally posted by: Byrd

...and they continue with

Lean-in feminism and other variants of corporate feminism have failed the overwhelming majority of us...

In other words, they're trying to stop the neo-Liberals from taking over the movement. And they're calling for peaceful marches. Violence would actually be counter-productive.

So, you did not stop for a second to actually look at what else these organizers have written... In other words it appears that it hasn't crossed your mind that they are referring to change in feminism movement to be more militant as well as "anti-capitalist, being pro-socialist"?...

You are also ignoring that just like they are doing it now "militant socialism/socialist revolutionaries" have used in the past "labor reform" "feminism" and other forms of "social justice" to demand for "anti-capitalist reforms" as in socialist reforms.

If you notice in their "manifesto" they do call for:

...
Together, they herald a new international feminist movement with an expanded agenda: at once anti-racist, anti-imperialist, anti-heterosexist and anti-neoliberal.
...

www.theguardian.com...

Not to mention that they claim to talk for "99% of women" yet there are millions of women in the U.S. alone who do not want to be part of this socialist militant movement of "99% women", and yet again that's not to mention how many women around the globe suffer under the "socialist reforms" implemented in countries like China, North Korea, Cuba, etc. The type of "changes" these organizers are actually calling for.

As for being anti-globalists?... Are you, or they even aware of who has been behind these "left-wing organizations/movements"?... They are the biggest "pro-globalists and rich people in the world"...

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

They aren't organizers.

Gee, she's still in the USA starting political marches.

Imagine that.

So is that chinese PLA Col. that runs the UMT.

I wonder what Seema Rao would think about this "woman's march".



en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: Kali74

Well how about a article distancing the march from her, or is that to much for these community orgs to manage?

a reply to: burgerbuddy

I'm sure that was a set up, maybe photo shopped she is as pure as the driven snow.

a reply to: seasonal

Why? Where are the articles denouncing White Nationalism? You don't need to denounce something you aren't involved with.

a reply to: Kali74

Start a thread about the other issue if you wish, lets talk about this one.

a reply to: seasonal

Deflect more.

a reply to: DupontDeux

She is not an American anymore. She is referred as a "former United States citizen" because she lied in her citizenship application about her past, her citizenship was revoked. Similar to how a Mexican woman was similarly "idolized" by the left claiming she was a victim, when in fact she stole 2 social security numbers, and used false identifications to apply for resident status. BTW, her past is very relevant when she is calling for a militant feminist movement...

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Your premise er sorry... the premise that you were fed, is absurd. I had to look up Rasmea Odeh, apparently she's being deported because she lied about her record when applying for residency. She was released in a prisoner exchange program because her confession was elicited through torture. She could be innocent.

Militant doesn't mean violent and there's no call for violence in the Guardian op-ed.

Quit your fear mongering and anti-feminism baiting.

Militant doesn't mean violent? "engaged in warfare" isn't violent in your world? If you can "excuse" these three then you can "excuse" anything. Look at their records. They can be directly tied to violent deaths as a means of "political protest"---and these are your leaders?

The authoritarian left screams and goes into paroxysms of hysteria when the KKK holds a rally. Same when a gay Jewish guy speaks out against their ideology and even dares to make fun of them. They stood on their heads when some right-winger associated with a white supremacy group endorsed Trump. To the best of my knowledge no KKK members or white supremacy group leaders have been convicted of murder or conspiracy to murder in many, many years. Never heard of the gay guy supporting violence either and yet the authoritarian-progressive left want to shut all these people down while they follow violent felons to combat their "fears."

You folks who have been identifying with these progressives better take a good hard look at what is attempting to lead you. Violence isn't the answer to your problems.