A Real Look at Islamists Hiding Behind Pink Pussy Hat Protesters

Protesters support Islamists pretending to be rights activists.

Protesters support Islamists pretending to be rights activists.

Around the world, legitimate protests in recent years were turned into color revolutions. So-called humanitarian groups attach themselves to protests and in many cases changed the agenda and nature of the protest. In Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood took leadership of a leaderless protest in one month and then deposed Hosni Mubarak. They replaced him with a short-lived Brotherhood dictatorship.

In Ukraine, what started as a student protest was co-opted in 3 days and changed into an ultra-nationalist coup with the support of OUNb Ukrainian emigres and the US government.

For the recent Women’s March on DC, groups with real ties to terrorism marched under the banner of human rights moved to gain support from protesters that are only aware of their human rights veneer. They marched with the protest hoping no one would see what their agendas really are. Civil and human rights advocates should consider the following carefully and vet participation in events according to the facts. Civil rights issues are too important not to.

The Woman’s Marchers in Washington DC and around the country became an easy target for this because of the outrage, the number of groups protesting, and the innumerable reasons people were marching. Blending in under a human rights banner with genuine marchers became easy. The march itself went on without many hiccups.

That was where terrorist supporters posing as human rights advocates ingratiated themselves.  In the immediate aftermath of the protest, while the protesters are still motivated and angry, comes the repurposing part.

According to the Hill, “Kucinich said that, in Syria, what began as “a legitimate protest movement” in 2011 was “usurped” by foreign jihadists who have “attempted to take over the government [and] install a Wahabi caliphate in Damascus.” With that in mind, he said. Gabbard’s legislation is wholly necessary.”

This isn’t a critique of the march or the reasons behind it. There aren’t any caveats possible when it comes to civil rights in the US. The battles fought in every generation have cost too much and rights have been paid for in the blood of American heroes. Still, when you read this you can’t walk away without knowing this was planned long in advance of the march. This means the political gains from the protest were co-opted and repurposed as fast as it came time to come out of the gate.

This time the co-option is a tit-for-tat deal. They made themselves and integral part of the lump. This link recommended by CAIR shows this quite clearly. I stood with women and supported your march. Now you stand with me and support my rights. So far, so good. It doesn’t sound like much of a problem, does it? That is until you figure out WHO wanted the help of a few million angry and motivated women protesters and why.

If that seems a little too much to be believable, reconsider the Iraq war. All it took was for the Iraqi diaspora to develop strong ties with like-minded people from “The Project for the New American Century” that wanted regime change in Iraq. Many of the people associated with the PNAC crossed over into the Bush administration. They pushed the invasion together.

“Walt Vanderbush’s essay, “The Iraqi Diaspora and the US Invasion of Iraq” (chapter 9), traces the collaboration between leaders of the Iraqi diaspora and neoconservative Americans, many of them linked to the Iraqi National Congress (INC) and the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), to convince the US government to wage war and bring about “regime change” in Iraq…In marketing the invasion and occupation of Iraq, the diaspora lobby and like-minded government officials were able to frame debates as a choice between invasion or appeasement, thus sidelining alternative perspectives and silencing voices of opposition. The INC claimed credit for placing 108 articles in the news media, including the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the Times (of London), during a nine-month period before the war”.- Diaspora- Government Relations in Forging US Foreign Policies -Josh DeWind and Renata Segura

It wasn’t terror, Osama, or even oil, that the Iraq war was fought for. It was a guy named Ahmed Chalabi who was the only victor of the Iraq war. ”

In the same vein as the Iraq war, Syrian war, Yemen, Ukraine, or the Balkans, the same media blitz used is the same one interested parties are using. First, by help the women’s rights cause and then by attaching themselves to it, giving their own causes legitimacy they would never get because of their sordid connections.

They used their money to build up the same media hype that the Chalabi group did to start the Iraq war.

Although I haven’t spent much time looking into Linda Sarsour, what time I have indicates that contrary to social media wisdom, she doesn’t have ties to terrorism. She doesn’t have many ties to civil rights movements or ethnic representation either. Sources say her goal is to parlay the experience into a Congressional seat in her district. But being the George Soros “march partner” and an organizer of the event might end up working against her. This doesn’t qualify as anti-American.

The first issue going forward from the protests is Muslim refugee immigration. Unlike Sarsour, the representative groups that manned the marches inside the protest not only have ties to terrorists, they have been lobbying for terrorists in Congress for decades. Democratic Rep Tulsi Gabbard didn’t look far enough into why Congress is supporting terrorists.

During the election campaign, Donald Trump promised to shut down Obama’s Syrian refugee program and make hard vetting or banning refugees from Muslim conflict areas a priority. He also talked about deportations. Part of the women’s march was a show of solidarity. Part of the march was to establish more solidarity and put it on par as an issue.

According to Time Magazine, “The demonstration, in Washington Square Park, was both a rally in support of undocumented immigrants and Muslim refugees and a protest against Trump. It was also a test of whether the fragile coalition of activists who marched all over the country in the Women’s March last weekend could maintain their unity in the long run.

For Robinson, the rally in defense of immigrants and Muslims is just the second of many, many protests she plans to attend throughout the Trump Administration. “I think I will show up to all the rallies and protests I hear about rather than be selective. We can’t afford to be selective,” she says.”

Let’s look at the so-called Muslim groups that want 3 million women’s rights protesters in pink hats to protect them. Let’s see what they actually are. Let’s see what not being selective gets you.

The first and most influential Islamist terror group that Donald Trump put on notice were the Gulenites. The followers of Fetullah Gulen have been responsible for close to 2000 murders, and at least 3 coup attempts in Turkey since 1980.

“Gulen and his organization continually claim to be peaceful. In fact, it’s how they get around in western countries. But are they? Gulen has strong ties to the Turkish Grey Wolves. This Pan-Turkic ultra-nationalist group is responsible for the murder of thousands inside Turkey. They fought in Chechnya, the Balkans, and Afghanistan. The founder of the Grey Wolves, Alparslan Turkes wanted to take Turkey into WWII on the side of Nazi Germany.”

Gulen and his movement are so large and powerful they have their own Congressional Caucus. They are tied directly to and financially support to over 142 members of Congress and the Senate. They have been caught bribing over 200 members of Congress. How many Congressmen represent you again? These terrorists have literally over 200 X the representation.

If you follow out all the links at the Turkic committee site you will see quickly he even developed opposing representation groups that also have their own Congressional representation. Best of all, he’s not even a US citizen!

When Congress was caught taking bribes they couldn’t investigate because there were too few people that HAD NOT taken bribes from Fetullah Gulen to man the committee. Congressmen that were investigated were sitting in front of others that were guilty on a different count.

“You must move in the arteries of the system without anyone noticing your existence until you reach all the power centers … until the conditions are ripe, they [the followers] must continue like this. If they do something prematurely, the world will crush our heads, and Muslims will suffer everywhere, like in the tragedies in Algeria, like in 1982 [in] Syria … like in the yearly disasters and tragedies in Egypt. The time is not yet right. You must wait for the time when you are complete and conditions are ripe until we can shoulder the entire world and carry it … You must wait until such time as you have gotten all the state power until you have brought to your side all the power of the constitutional institutions in Turkey … Until that time, any step taken would be too early—like breaking an egg without waiting the full forty days for it to hatch. It would be like killing the chick inside. The work to be done is [in] confronting the world. Now, I have expressed my feelings and thoughts to you all—in confidence … trusting your loyalty and secrecy. I know that when you leave here—[just] as you discard your empty juice boxes, you must discard the thoughts and the feelings that I expressed here. -Secret Fethullah Gülen Sermon1990 broadcast on Turkish television

Gulen supports ISIS and the Muslim Brotherhood. Fethullah Gulen has a net worth of over $3 Billion and vast media holdings. He has been using them to help develop the next political powerhouse in the US. That’s supposed to be you. By inciting, promoting, providing for the women’s protest and the ones that follow he hopes to take down the Trump administration. He wants you to stand up for his right to be in the USA.

If Gulen succeeds, what will he and his followers get? In 1997 Gulen stated “Turkey […] today encompasses 60 million. Together with the Turks in Central Asia it is 120-130 million. If it manages to break down the Chinese wall and to unite with the Turks there, it will be 300 million.“ That’s a whopping 300 million dedicated Islamist ISIS-inspired terrorists that don’t believe in human rights, never mind women’s rights.

Just before the election when he thought his friend Hillary Clinton would win he said if she won he would never be extradited. Just after the election, Fetullah Gulen was put on notice that his extradition was a priority to Donald Trump.

Is this Islamic terrorist a priority for the women’s movement, civil rights, or progressive reforms? He hopes so.

Next on the list are the Syrian refugees, according to Ben Rhodes, Obama’s outgoing National Security Advisor “What’s strange is, I met with the Syrian opposition, and often they would argue that we should work with al-Nusra, who we know is Al Qaeda.”

Congress, on the other hand, wants Democrat Tulsi Gabbard and Republican Donald Trump to stop cutting in on their payday. If there is no lobby, no Syrian refugees, and only ISIS, there are no contributions.

And according to Foreign Policy ” And there’s one anti-Assad group that is largely responsible for this dismal state of affairs: Syria’s Muslim Brotherhood. Throughout the Syrian uprising, I have had discussions with opposition figures, activists, and foreign diplomats about how the Brotherhood has built influence within the emerging opposition forces. It has been a dizzying rise for the Islamist movement. Additionally, some Brotherhood-affiliated figures denied they were part of the group and joined the SNC (Syrian National Council) as “independents.” These include Nahas, the London-based director of the Levant Center; Louay Safi, a Syrian-American fellow at Georgetown University and former chairman of the Syrian American Council (SAC); and Najib Ghadbian, a political science professor who also works at the SAC.”

CIA Director John Brennan adds “[ISIS] was, you know, pretty much decimated when US forces were there in Iraq. It had maybe 700-or-so adherents left. And then it grew quite a bit in the last several years, when it split then from al-Qaida in Syria, and set up its own organization.”

Al-Qaida Syria came from Al-Qaida Libya. In Syria, at the beginning, they were called the FSA(Free Syrian Army). These are the people the Syrian American Council want to bring in as refugees. It is still ISIS, IGIL, ISIL, DAESH, whatever.

And IB Times “Islamic State, or Daesh, is not a new phenomenon. It is, like Al Qaeda, an ideological offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood. The leader of Daesh himself was a member of the Muslim Brotherhood. The father of global jihad and Osama bin Laden’s teacher, Abdullah Azzam started his terrorist career within the ranks of the Muslim Brotherhood. Al-Qaeda’s current leader Ayman al-Zawahiri was also a member of the Muslim Brotherhood. The modern ideological root of Islamist terrorism is the Muslim Brotherhood. The battle for world peace starts by defeating the Muslim versions of National Socialism. Europe has a large responsibility to help, but the primary responsibility lies with the Arabs.”

Let’s not forget CAIR (Council on American Islamic Relations) that has been actively tied to terrorist organizations by the FBI. When CAIR chairman Hussam Aylush tweeted “the people want to take down the regime” one day after the elections, he showed CAIR’s position on sedition in the US quite clearly.

“If the Women’s March really cares about inequality for women, they will disavow themselves from CAIR … if these women truly want equality, want to fight oppression, and care about LGBTQ people, they need to disavow CAIR right here, right now,” Scott Presler, #GaysforTrump creator, told The Daily Caller News Foundation.”

From just these groups the women’s march gained over 25 groups, funding, lots of media coverage, and boots on the ground in the range of hundreds of thousands of people.

In a statement from CAIR,“Every American Muslim community should send a delegation to our nation’s capital in support of the Women’s March on Washington,” said Government Affairs Director Robert S. McCaw. “Muslims stand in solidarity with members of every community whose rights have come under attack and status has been marginalized in the recent campaign cycle.”

McCaw said the Women’s March on Washington will send a bold message to the new administration on its first day in office that women’s rights are human rights.

He added that CAIR joins other supporters of the march in pledging not to rest until women have parity and equity at all levels of leadership in society.

CAIR is America’s largest Muslim civil liberties and advocacy organization. Its mission is to enhance the understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, protect civil liberties, empower American Muslims, and build coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding.

Why would a group tied to the Muslim Brotherhood care about women’s rights? The Muslim Brotherhood will work with any group that doesn’t disagree with what they want. They will work with any group that helps them get what they want, until they get it. They are behind al Qaeda, ISIS, and every modern Islamic terrorist group. Their belief system is political, not religious.

It’s time to come to grips with the fact that Islamists are not Muslim. They are fascist murderers. Islamists believe in a hard nationalism and want the protection and support of democracies like the US. It’s not the Muslims, it’s the fascists that hope protesters will protect them. The only way to accomplish that is to masquerade as humanitarians. According to the linked report, they do that really well.

For most people, it’s easier to not know these things. But now you do. Protesting for Islamist refugees, in this case,will bring ISIS to your doorstep.

Real Muslims staged one of the biggest peace marches in world history last November. Did you hear about it? You did support it, right? Over 20 million Muslims paraded for peace and against the Syrian refugees that want your help. They call them Daesh, IGIL, FSA, ISIL, ISIS, Syrian Moderates, whatever. The Syrian Moderates responded by killing some of them before, during, and after the peace march. It’s the same group of moderates in both Iraq and Syria.

Supporting the civil rights of Muslims is a good cause. Supporting the civil rights of Islamists is not. CAIR is challenging the Trump administration on the Constitutional level because of the support it got from the women’s protest.

Trump’s policy calls for hard vetting of refugees from regions where there are no government authorities to certify whether or not a potential immigrant is a refugee or ISIS.

To put this in perspective, after being in Donbass for the entire conflict, if I were to go to the US, I would experience hard vetting. That would be on a good day. President Obama issued an executive order in March 2014 making it sanction-able for anyone to question the legitimacy of the new Ukrainian government. This included journalists. At the time, I was the only American journalist in the conflict zone doing so. Obama extra judiciously killed four Americans during his term.  Kind of makes you think about things, doesn’t it?

If an American citizen would have to be interviewed by government agencies after coming out of a conflict zone as a matter of national security, why wouldn’t you vet combatants?

Trump wants to deport illegals with criminal records. But President Obama holds the record for deportation. Obama deported more people than every other president combined, to date. That was close to 2 1/2 million people during his tenure. Where were the protests? Why now? Obviously, there is another agenda.

Women protesting for women’s rights need to protect what they are doing and partner with legitimate civil and human rights protesters. The same goes for every other legitimate civil and human rights groups. There are legitimate Muslim groups that need to be supported, but the above listed are not them.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
  • wunsacon

    George, my laziness overwhelms my willpower to closely read what appears to be an important, well-researched article. I suggest creating an interactive network graph of the individuals about whom you speak. Also, an article this long would benefit from section headers and a TOC at the top.

    Anyone else feel the same way?

    • jo6pac

      Nope

    • George Eliason

      I’ll keep it in mind for the future. Thanks.

    • Joannhharrison

      Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours and have longer with friends & family! !mj257d:
      On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
      !mj257d:
      ➽➽
      ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobsCash257HomeSiteGetPay$97Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★::::::!mj257d:….,……

  • Jean-Luc Picard

    I think ultimately what is happening in America is this – Terminal decline and all sides are absolutely unprepared for the consequences of America’s various Imperial crimes. Confusion overall abounds.

  • ICFubar

    There is a very large game being played behind the scenes and what we see in public as orchestrated protests is a manifestation of that table stakes game. These protests are not the spontaneous reaction of the people to what in reality is Continuity of Agenda. Something else is going on though that extends beyond this Continuity. Can you feel it in the air? This last presidential election was the strangest with the direct sabotage of the Clinton campaign and the faction of the ruling class that was backing her. Who are the Trump backers orchestrating events from behind the curtain and their counterparts backing the duopoly? If there was ever to be a coup it might just come from this new administration and its secretive backers. My take has been to expect more of the same only more so. I tell ya something big is building as factions within the ruling elite battle it out from Wikileaks and within the alphabet agencies to the MSM. If there is to be a de facto coup this new administration might well be the ones pulling it off?

  • gamesjon

    Let me begin by apologizing for this having to be in such a visually unappealing & unhelpful form instead being able to be in an article format like yours. Wow, I almost feel like articles you put on this site under this name were written by different people. I loved your January 3rd & January 10th stories on the Russian Hacking stories. They followed a logical progression through the story/facts, there were great summaries of the information when you provided a link somewhere, etc… But honestly this story nothing like that. There is all sorts of irrelevant stuff in the article, there is nothing close to a logical progression in it, & repeated instances of either no link/source being provided or the summaries of them not being, to me at least, fairly inaccurate representations of the what is at the linked page (this is I guess technically a rather subjective issue in general, but with specifically 1 in particular that I will mention I don’t see how anyone can think the impression of what is at the other end of the link is in anyway fair or close to accurate.) The overall broad criticism would have to be that this article (which when I cut & pasted into Word to do a word count showed it was 3,010 words & 15,078 characters without spaces,) seems to really when boiled down you not liking the fact that CAIR was one of the many groups involved in this Women’s March and issues relating to and/or arising from that fact. If that is wrong I would love to be enlightened on this. I’ve never criticized or done this on any other article I’ve read on here before in the years I’ve been coming to the site, so I promise (for what little that is probably worth,) I am not trying to troll you or to try and just be a dick.

    So one claim made in various forms in at least paragraphs 3, 5, & 15 is that groups who participated in the march had known ties to terrorists and that they were trying to more or less hijack the people who supported the march & get them to supporting other less admirable goals. Now the first attempt that I can see to give any specifics on this claim seems to be in paragraphs 28-29 in the form of an insinuation that itself relies on one of the summaries I mentioned above as problematic.) So paragraph 28 says Fetullah Gulen who thought his friend Hillary Clinton would win saying if she did he would never be extradited. No problem whatsoever with any of this so far. Then saying that after the election he was “put on notice that his extradition was a priority to Donald Trump.” linking to a Newsweek article as your source for this. The Newsweek piece is an Op-Ed written by Michael Flynn in which he talks about the importance of Turkey, how we need to see things from their perspective, & also criticizing Gulen mentioning that the US should not provide him safe haven. Now, I understand how generally statements from a President’s nominee (as this was back in November,) generally can be taken as an indirect message from the President that they for whatever posturing or calculating reason they have they don’t want to say themselves. But
    1) we’ve repeatedly seen very public disagreements between Trump & his nominees on all sorts of issues
    2) I’m not finding anything about this that includes any sort of update, clarification, status, etc.. past the November Op-Ed and articles based on it
    3) Turkey wasn’t one of the 7 countries on Trump’s ban list which is a bit odd if he were really even remotely concerned about trying to ensure this deportation occurred. Seeing as this is a legal decision & not a political one putting Turkey on the list or tailoring to put only Turkish people who meet some requirement that would limit the number of people affected but ensuring Gulen would be included means the opportunity to, if anything, attempt to gain more authority & ability to make decision then he currently has in this. I mean as your article mentioned Gulen is not some poor refugee here, but a very wealthy person with the ability to access, if not already doing so, top of line legal representation to fight this.
    To top the whole thing off his supposed involvement with the March seems to come in paragraph 29 (combined with part of ending of paragraph 26,) with the words, “Is this Islamic terrorist [Gulen] a priority for the women’s movement, civil rights, or progressive reforms? He hopes so.” then in paragraph 26 where you casually drop in claim that he has used his wealth & vast media holdings to “incite, promote, & provide for the Women’s March & the ones that follow he hopes to take down the Trump administration”… No link or source or any specific allegation of this donation or that promotion being given.

    The next supposed connection with terrorists is, I believe, paragraph 30 where you say, “Next on the list are the Syrian refugees….” which I believe is in reference to the refugees being a group the March (as mentioned in paragraph 17,) was rallying in support of. With the rest of paragraph 30 & the following 5 paragraphs talking about Syrian opposition & their indistinguishability from terrorirsts (al-Nusra, Al Qaeda, ISIS, etc…). While I have no issue at all with the points about the Syrian opposition & terrorists how you seem to conflate “Syrian refugee” with “Syrian opposition” is beyond me. You don’t even try some claim that they are infiltrating the refugees to sneak in or some other claim. So since this claim begins by identifying a particular group as what the point is going on to only talk about different groups than the one mentioned it should be rather self-explanatory so….

    Now on to paragraph 36 where what I mentioned as believing to be the real motivation for the article finally enters. Here is where CAIR comes into the picture. You say this organization has been “actively tied to terrorist organizations” which is true and this is one the more subjective parts that I mentioned above and so no huge issue with you saying this, however I think it would have been useful for people if some context was given here. So I know you mention the Muslim Brotherhood in paragraph 43 & while you never actually say they have a connection to one another, instead saying it as “Why would a group tied to the Muslim Brotherhood care about women’s rights?” despite the fact that you have not actually said that CAIR was “tied” to the Muslim Brotherhood, nonetheless it is strongly insinuated in your words I think it would be fair to say. Now, I assume this in relation to the actual terrorist group CAIR has been widely accused as connected to, including by some government officials (though I would note there has not ever been an official government accusation, though I don’t say that in an attempt to say they don’t just thought it worth mentioning,) which is Hamas in Palestine with the Muslim Brotherhood connection entering in because of a 2008 trial of the Holy Land Foundation where a phone book was introduced that revealed a CAIR executive director & CAIR co-founder as belonging to the Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee. “US District Judge Jorge Solis noted in a 2009 ruling that the HLF trial evidence provided “at least a prima facie case as to CAIR’s involvement in a conspiracy to support Hamas.” https://www.algemeiner.com/2017/01/27/cair-ted-cruzs-discriminatory-muslim-brotherhood-bill-not-about-terrorism/ Which so everything is clear as stated in Cornell University Law School’s Wex Legal Dictionary, “Latin for ‘at first sight.’ Prima facie may be used as an adjective meaning ‘sufficient to establish a fact or raise a presumption unless disproved or rebutted;’ e.g., prima facie evidence. It may also be used as an adverb meaning ‘on first appearance but subject to further evidence or information;’ e.g., the agreement is prima facie valid. A prima facie case is the establishment of a legally required rebuttable presumption.” https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/prima_facie Again none of this is to say it isn’t true, in fact I believe it probably is, and while I don’t condone or support any attacks by anyone on innocent people (by attacks on I mean attacks that are known will likely cause, or should cause any reasonable person to know, innocent people will be killed and not the usual rather narrow definition used when this is generally said.) That being said anyone who wants to also say the U.S., Israel, and any number of other countries who regularly initiate armed conflicts in the world are terrorist organizations as well then I will say Hamas & any other Palestinians who take up arms terrorists as well… despite my lengthy criticisms of said countries I do not personally use the label of terrorism except as a way to make a point such as I am here so in keeping with what I just explained I also don’t refer to those Palestinians as terrorist either.

    Ok this last issue I take with the piece is in regards to the complaint about summaries & the 1 I was referring to as how I don’t see how any person could consider this a fair or accurate summary of the link provided. This is about paragraph 8 where you talk about the specific way in which the Women’s March was being co-opted and what you say is a “tit-for-tat-deal”. Then say, “They made themselves and integral part of the lump. This link recommended by CAIR shows this quite clearly. I stood with women and supported your march. Now you stand with me and support my rights. So far, so good. It doesn’t sound like much of a problem, does it? That is until you figure out WHO wanted the help of a few million angry and motivated women protesters and why.” Now you don’t really do anything like mentioning any of organizations (absolutely none of the groups you talk about in the article appear in any 1 of the 73 different organizations listed on the page you linked to.) The page itself is an article, which is obviously targeted to people with a left-leaning political viewpoint, talking about how they can “turn the Philly protest marches into action” going on to list 18 different sections of issues 1) ‘alternative facts’ ; 2) a ban on refugees or Muslim immigration ; 3) attempts to defund sanctuary cities ; 4) capitalism ; 5) gender inequality ; 6) income and economic inequality ; 7) lack of action on climate change ; 8) police brutality ; 9) racial inequality ; 10) Russian meddling in the election ; 11) the border wall ; 12) the DAPL and Keystone XL ; 13) the education system ; 14) the repeal of the ACA and other healthcare issues ; 15) the rise of fascism ; 16) the threatening of reproductive rights ; 17) the whole damn thing ; 18) threatening of LGBT rights for the record and includes in each section local organizations involved in those issues “where to donate your time and money” or “organizations and communities to join” to work on that issue & the contact information for their senators & congressmen. I will gladly provide the list of the 73 organizations throughout the lists if asked for, but would not think it appropriate in consideration to the space the list would be adding on to this already extensive comment. But I will say that in addition to none of the groups in the article being on it that fully 21 of the 73 organizations begin their name with either Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Philly, or PA. If you count the ones that contain those same words anywhere in the name instead of just the first word it goes up to 47 out of the 73.

    I guess the only other claim/accusation made related to the Women’s March is a rather minor one that seems perfectly normal in our system and I have no problem so I don’t even care to really see if it is or isn’t true & would generally take it as a given in most situations like it. This is of course in regards to paragraph 14 about Linda Sarsour (who I’m guessing was part of the of the protest activities though I don’t see her mentioned before this even though I would usually think with wording like “Although I haven’t spent much time looking into Linda Sarsour…” this would be a continuation of information regarding someone rather than the introduction to them. Who you say you have not found to have any ties to terrorism, nor even civil rights movements or ethnic representations either for that matter. Going on to say “sources say her goal is to parlay the experience into a Congressional seat in her district.” as well as for some reason referring to George Soros being a “march partner” linking to a source talking about George Soros having apparently given money to 56 of the organizations that were involved in the Women’s March (though since I still don’t know who Linda Sarsour is other than my assumption she was in some way to some degree involved in the Women’s March so I don’t know if this summary is fair or not because like I said I would just give this whole claim a pass and accept it as most likely true for any similar situation so I wouldn’t discriminate & do differently for this one.)