PAMELA GELLER’S “CANCEL SARSOUR” PROTEST IN FRONT OF CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AMID POURING RAIN & SARSOUR SUPPORTERS, BLARING HORNS

Brigitte
Gabriel (National Security Expert) joins Dave Rubin to discuss her
views of Linda Sarsour, Sharia Law, how the Quran views women, the
“gullible” women’s movement in America, the hijab and the niqab,
addresses critics who say she’s a racist who hates Muslims, her #ShariaMarch and more.

 

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

The AFDI demo against CUNY’s obscene invitation was a smashing
success, with over a thousand people who came out in a downpour of
pelting rain on East 42nd Street outside CUNY’s headquarters on Thursday
afternoon to oppose the mainstreaming of evil — CUNY’s obscene
invitation to a pro-terror Jew-hater to keynote their commencement
address. It was an amazing event, a turning point, despite Mayor de
Blasio’s nefarious attempts to undermine and destroy the rally.

Background: Linda Sarsour is a leader of the illegal and inhumane 
Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel. Sarsour
has publicly argued that Jews who support Israel can’t be feminists. She
does not recognize Israel or its right to exist, and has made several
tweets indicating she supports armed resistance to Israel. NY State
Assemblyman Dov Hikind considers Sarsour’s views on Israel to be
condoning terrorism, and he, along with a large number of mainstream
Jews, believe Sarsour is strongly anti-Semitic.

“Linda Sarsour’s record of advocating for terrorists
speaks for itself. If she had only called Arabs who hurl rocks at moving
cars ‘the definition of courage,’ that would have been enough,” said
Hikind. “But there’s so much more. Sarsour publicly called for violence
against Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a feminist Muslim author who opposes violence.
She recently shared a stage with and praised Rasmea Yousef Odeh, a
member of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine convicted by
an Israeli court for her role in the murder of two students, Leon
Kanner and Eddie Joffe, in a Jerusalem supermarket bombing.

Mayor De Blasio is a longtime supporter of jihad and Muslim supremacists, and most especially terror-supporter Linda Sarsour. Mayor De Blasio gifted Sarsour’s “organization” with more than $500,000.
She was instrumental in getting de Blasio to partly dismantle the New
York Police Department’s program of spying on the city’s Muslims, and
has worked with officials in City Hall to close public schools for the
observance of Muslim holy days, Eid al-Fitr and Eid al-Adha. From her
base at the Arab American Association of New York, the group whose focus
is the sharia device, “Islamophobia,” Sarsour is working to do the same
on immigration policy, voter registration, mass incarceration,
Islamophobia and the Police Department’s stop-and-frisk tactic.

When Sarsour faked a “hate crime” against herself, New York City
mayor Bill de Blasio tweeted a reminder that the City “will never
condone such glaring acts of bigotry and intolerance.”

In fact, Sarsour’s attacker was Brian Boshell, a mentally
ill homeless man well-known in the Bay Ridge area for public outbursts.
As National Review reported at the time, Boshell, a regular presence in
the neighborhood for more than two decades, had been arrested nearly 60
times before accosting Sarsour, and even Muslim residents of Bay Ridge
expressed skepticism that she didn’t know who he was. (National Review)

De Blasio issued no mea culpa.

And of course, the Mayor’s office has refused to answer whether the de Blasio Administration exerted any pressure on CUNY to invite Sarsour as the keynote speaker.

All that being said, Mayor de Blasio went to extraordinary lengths to
undermine our rally and silence our voices. New York City is no
stranger to protests. Protest is a thriving tradition, and with the
election of President Trump, is a weekly, sometimes daily, exercise for
leftists. So, at this point, the NYPD has it down to a science. Protest
organizers apply for a permit, and if there is to be a counter protest,
their area is set up across the street, or catacorner to the main event.
This is standard operating procedure. During our Ground Zero Mosque
protests, the opposition was penned one block over. Every rally and demo
is set up in this same way. Which is why what happened at our event was
so very extraordinary.

The vicious, vocal and violent protesters were placed right next to
the stage, not three feet away from the stage and our crowd. And they
screamed, blew deafening whistles, and screamed abusive chants tweets
(“Grab that pussy!,” to which I chanted back, “No clit cutting!”). There
was no letup (which is why I am shouting the whole of the rally)  and
at the end of the demo, the leftists attacked our people and were
arrested.

That said, despite de Blasio’s attempt to undermine our rally, it didn’t work. It was huge. And the happy warriors took a stand.

In this photo, you can see how close the two pens were. As a rule,
the opposition is always across the street. Always. I have been holding
protests and going to them for almost twenty years.

The enemedia did not report on this at all. They drummed up the narrative that the event was violent, with the New York Daily News going so far as to say “WILD BRAWL”
in their headline. That’s what de Blasio wanted. He wanted our people
attacked and hurt. And the enemedia eagerly advanced the big lie. De
Blasio must be defeated in the incoming mayoral election. Bo Dietl for
Mayor.

Here is how one attendee described his experience at our rally:

“AFDI: Today’s protest on E. 42nd Street Protesters were given front row standing space to disrupt the speakers,” by Robin Ticker, May 25, 2017:

I wanted to be close to the Podium of this Protest against Linda Sarsour.

Oops. I maybe accidentally went to a Protesters section of the
Protest..or very close by   Next to me were loud protesters yelling Shut
the F— Up and other insults to the Speakers at the Podium behind their
barricade.

I asked the police that they should move the protest to the protest
so that we can hear the speakers. The policeman told me he couldn’t hear
what I was saying.

These protesters who were screaming “Go Home Fascists” and “Shut the
F- Up” had the best standing room of the entire protest.  Everyone else
was further back.

I was told that the Police’s Legal team said that they couldn’t move
the protesters.  Apparently it didn’t matter that they were drowning out
the speakers. Legally they were protected!

Couldn’t they go across the street to where the Neturei Karta were
protesting.  It was very annoying and extremely provocative having them
right up front to the point that they were clearly disrupting and
distracting the ones on the Podium from speaking. For whatever reason,
the loudspeaker was not loud enough to hear the speakers clearly from
where I was standing which was very close to the podium. People way in
the back apparently did hear better. There was too much loud disruptive
and obscene protesting drowning out the speakers from my position. This
was their intention and they succeeded.  Ok I didn’t see them get
actually physically violent but it was very stupid to allow them there.
Verbally they were extremely abusive and physically potentially so.

>Why is it that unrestrained freedom to Protest is legally given
only to those that disrupt those that Protest for Israel?  Pro Sarsour,
anti Israel, anti America, anti AFDI, anti Trump  who are a scary bunch
gets legal protection to stand in close proximity….

I suppose that if the Police would have moved them they would have caused a riot.  Clearly a security threat!.

No other explanation….The anti Sarsour protester were on the street itself. At least part of it.

Why in heaven’s name did the police give these Pro Sarsour space on
the sidewalk in very close proximity to the podium? They also needed a
large police force on the sidewalk to contain them? Couldn’t the Police
tell the protesters of the protest that the sidewalk is only for
pedestrians?

The police were busy rushing the pedestrians who were walking down
the street.  They wanted to make sure that the sidewalk remained
passable, as it was now one third of its normal space.

After all, there was plenty of room across the Street adjacent to Neturei Karta protest.

My conclusion:

They have no problem putting Neturei Karta protesters,  across the
street far away. Neturei Karta are docile and respectful to the police.
They don’t get violent. In fact, when Neturei Karta protesters were
annoyed at a Jewish female wearing an IDF sweatshirt who was in their
face they got the Police to protect them and she was almost
arrested.That clearly shows that the Police can get really tough when
needed especially when this women was holding an Israeli flag and and
wearing an IDF sweatshirt and clearly provoking the Neturei Karta. I
wonder if she was singing. That really would have been a provocation and
could easily cause a confrontation.

PRO Sarsour  foul mouthed whistle blowers (they literally blow loud
whistles to drown out the speaker)  are protected to do so, because
according to the Police’s legal advice they weren’t doing anything wrong
legally. We can’t disrupt their freedom of speech to protest the
protest.

Get this.  The police allowed a bunch of very foul mouthed pro
Sarsour, anti Islamaphobic, anti Trump, and anti America protesters,
 right next to the podium and in very close proximity to  Pamela Geller.
The Police knew fully well that Pamela Geller and her speakers would
talk negatively of Mohammad and Sharia.
This protest could potentially have gotten violent.

But probably the police were afraid. My guess is that they were
intimidated.  Look carefully at the signs of the counter protest.

Signs at the counter protest of the anti Sarsour protest
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B86sGl9yfinjdV9qUXdJTXk3SUk/view?usp=sharing

Google peoplespower.net and you get http://peoplespowerassemblies.org/. Check out their website.  Also Google http://www.workers.org/

The signs read
“Smash Fascism and White Supremacy  PeoplesPowerAssemblies Peoplespower.net”
“Smash Racism and Islamaphobia”
workers.org
They also chanted “From the River to the Sea Palestine Will be Free”….
“No KKK no Fascist USA”
etc.

Now it make sense. The Police didn’t want to be accused of being
Islamaphobic and in so doing engage in Police Terror according to this
crowd of protesters.  Police were intimidated to openly say that  this
group of seasoned police protesters actually might be a physical threat
to Pamela Geller  and her team.

Surely, the incident at the AFDI Mohammad cartoon contest and recent
terror attacks across the globe in Manchester etc.  should have been
sufficient reason to place them across the street.

Policed didn’t even need any excuses as they commonly put protesters
like Neturei Karta  across the street far away and keep the sidewalks
free for pedestrians.

Another question to the Police Legal team is Isn’t disrupting Freedom of Speech to Protest also illegal?

Thank G-d this time there was no Physical confrontation. We wouldn’t
want a repeat of  the violent confrontation in DC when Police tried to
separate protesters and anti protesters..

Do you really want to wait for a physical confrontation to prove our point?.

Sadly, Linda Sarsour, an anti Semite, anti women and anti women’s
rights, pro Sharia and a Liar gets to speak at CUNY Commencement with
probably lots of protection for her freedom of speech and Pamela Geller
and Noni Darwish etc have no physical protection to speak of nor the
freedom and protection to protest without serious disruption all because
the other side are bullies and are legally protected!

And another person’s account:

I think there was something more sinister going on. I was
one of the first people there. In fact, I offered to help set up. If
anyone remembers, I was the guy with the short sleeve purple polo/golf
shirt with my law firm name and had a backpack. I only got to talk with
David Wood and Marie for few mins and Gavin (I think Pam may know who I
am and David and Marie know Scott from Boston, Gavin has my card). When
the radicals first showed up, you could see that this vile degenerate
loser, Heather Morris, was their leader. She was talking with two others
who asking if her group was with CPUSA, she responded that they were
affiliated( all radical group’s r affiliated whether they know it or
not)If you looked out from the stage, I was at the very front row,at the
farthest left. Nearly right in front of a speaker that was covered from
the rain.I was right against the front rail and left side rail with the
ululating ninnies in my right ear. Originally, the Marxists were
directed down the street toward the back. I observed Morris talking on a
cell phone along with another man. Soon thereafter, some other men
arrived, including a short, fat bald guy, there was some discussion with
a policeman in charge and the Marxist were moved up to where they were
originally, directly next to me. I saw 2 of the Marxist men huddle with
Morris and they were all giggly and smiles, including the short, fat,
bald guy, who quickly wiped his grin off his face when he saw me
glowering at him intently. I stared at them nearly the whole time. They
were vulgar to everyone, especially Heather Morris, swearing at everyone
who passed by, thrusting out her middle finger in peoples faces, trying
to grab peoples American flags and signs. There was a short policeman,
with red hair that was next to me the whole time. He was a nice guy and
clearly disgusted by there antics. I asked him why the Marxists were
allowed back at the front, blocking and harassing foot traffic, he said
he didn’t know but someone higher up changed the cops, who were there,
original call. I was the one who first made the immediate request to the
officers to have them moved back, to clear pedestrian traffic, not
disrupt speakers,and more practical in keeping the peace and safety of
all. As it was the obvious, logical thing to do, the police did just
that. I believe these Marxists have a direct line into someone at
“Red-Bill’s”office or Red Bill himself.The cops there did not seem
happy.I read Morris lies about her arrest, if she was any whiter, she’d
be translucent. And Nobody that I saw, with our group had any sticks,
all our flags, both USA and Israel, had no sticks…I helped hold up both
flags.The only people carrying sticks were the hyenas with there Soros
made signs. I didn’t know anyone from our group that I was standing
with, but there was a brotherhood/sisterhood, a real bond we quickly
formed with each other. Lots of hugs and high-five’s. We also looked out
after each other because Ms. morris, et al, were clearly trying to
provoke and we would calm our fellow patriots down when it seemed like
it was getting heated. Nobody tried to calm the radicals down. Morris
had to be warned a few times as she assaulted and technically battered
several people walking past who were not even paying attention to her.
It may be a good idea in the future, if we can get 2 of our good people
who will volunteer to just video the antifa/Marxists the whole time. It
really was a great event, kudos to Pam, amazing given the lousy weather.

________________________________________________________

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

Linda Sarsour is a pro-Sharia anti-Semite; that means the New York Times loves her.

Comments interspersed below.

“A Muslim-American Activist’s Speech Raises Ire Even Before It’s Delivered,” by Eli Rosenberg, New York Times, May 26, 2017:

Linda Sarsour, one of the most prominent Muslim-American
activists in New York, says the messages have been arriving by the hour
recently.

“Your time is coming.”

“A good Arab is a dead Arab.”

“You’re getting two bullets in your head.”

She “says” she has been receiving threats. This is news as far as the
New York Times is concerned, although “journalist” Eli Rosenberg
apparently doesn’t make any attempt to verify her claim. Meanwhile,
Pamela Geller is the target of a fatwa from the Islamic State (ISIS).
The Times, when it speaks about her, never leads with that information.
Apparently, some death threats are just fine with the New York Times, if
their targets are the Times’ ideological enemies.

Ms. Sarsour, one of the lead organizers of the Women’s
March on Washington, has tackled issues like immigration policy, mass
incarceration, stop-and-frisk and the New York Police Department’s
spying operation on Muslims — all of which have largely inured her to
hate-tinged criticism.

Note that everything the Times list shows her to be working actively
to impede and obstruct counterterror efforts. The New York City of
Sarsour’s dreams is supine and defenseless before the advancing jihad.

But it is the commencement address she is to deliver next
week to about 100 students at the City University of New York School of
Public Health that she says has drawn the most hostility and ire she
has ever experienced.

“Linda Sarsour is a Sharia-loving, terrorist-embracing, Jew-hating,
ticking time bomb of progressive horror,” the conservative media
personality Milo Yiannopoulos said at a rally on Thursday outside CUNY’s
main office, as protesters held signs with images associated with the
often racist and anti-Semitic language used by what is known as the
alt-right, a far-right, white nationalist movement.

Note that the Times makes no attempt to determine whether or not Milo’s charges are true (they are).
It just quickly changes the subject to signs “with images associated
with the often racist and anti-Semitic language used by what is known as
the alt-right.” Associated by whom? Why, by the New York Times, of
course. This paragraph is tantamount to saying, “Milo made some charges
against Sarsour, but protesters were holding signs bearing images that
we have previously smeared as racist.”

The controversy over Ms. Sarsour’s appearance is the
latest dispute in a heated national dialogue over free speech on
university campuses.

But in this instance, the roles have been reversed. Other protests
have largely pitted left-wing students against conservative speakers
like Mr. Yiannopoulos, Ann Coulter, Gavin McInnes and Charles Murray.
This time, conservatives are leading the charge against Ms. Sarsour.

This is false. The controversy is not over her appearance at CUNY. We
who are routinely barred from speaking on college campuses, or shouted
down by fascists when we do, would never dream of saying she should not
allowed to speak. In fact, I would be happy to go to CUNY at my own
expense to debate her. The controversy is over whether she should be
celebrated and lionized, given the honor of delivering the commencement
address, in light of her numerous hateful, anti-Semitic, and pro-Sharia
statements.

Her critics are a strange mix, including right-leaning
Jews and Zionists, commentators like Pamela Geller, and some members of
the alt-right.

They accuse her of sympathizing with terrorists, supporting Sharia
law and anti-Semitism for statements she has made about politics in the
Middle East.

And with good reason, although the Times never presents this evidence or bothers to debunk it.

The CUNY chancellor, James B. Milliken, has defended the
appearance on the basis of free speech, and a group of CUNY professors,
some prominent progressives and liberal Jewish groups have spoken in her
support.

Free speech? Funny how universities seldom remember that principle when a conservative speaker comes around.

Fred Smith Jr., a constitutional scholar and assistant
professor at the University of California, Berkeley School of Law, said
the controversy was a reminder of the bipartisan nature of the outcry
over free-speech issues.

“There are a few people who have been very effective in branding the
left at shutting down free speech, but the moment they are confronted
with leftist speech they don’t like, they are equally outraged and
poised to suppress that speech,” he said. “I don’t think that’s the
answer for either side. The more you try to suppress speech, the more
the ideas of the suppressed speaker become salient to more people. It
makes the person more well known and attracts more people to those
ideas.”

Once again, this is off the point, and an apparently deliberate
obfuscation. The controversy is not over whether or not she can speak.
It is over whether or not she should be the commencement speaker.

The debate about Ms. Sarsour’s speech began last month
with Dov Hikind, a conservative Democratic state assemblyman who
represents a largely Orthodox community in Brooklyn. Mr. Hikind said Ms.
Sarsour should not have been chosen, pointing to her recent appearance
in Chicago with Rasmea Odeh, who was convicted in Israel of playing a
role in the bombing of a supermarket that killed two civilians in 1969.

Mr. Hikind also pointed to a picture Ms. Sarsour once posted on
Twitter of a Palestinian boy standing across from police officers with
rocks in his hands. Ms. Sarsour wrote that the photo was “The definition
of courage.”

Mr. Hikind said in a phone interview, “You can’t support a terrorist
and then be the commencement speaker at a university that my taxes help
pay for.”

Indeed. And there is no doubt that her speech will be a pep rally of
anti-Israel, anti-American agitprop, with heavy helpings of
self-righteousness and self-pity.

….Brad Lander, a Democratic city councilman from
Brooklyn, described the accusations against Ms. Sarsour as
“preposterous,” and pointed to her help in raising money to repair two
Jewish cemeteries that were vandalized in St. Louis and Pennsylvania in
February.

“She’s been in my synagogue,” he said. “She and my rabbi are friends.
There’s no doubt that part of what this is is backlash against the idea
of having a Palestinian-American as a visible leader and inheritor of
the civil rights movement.”

He added, “One terrible feature of the Trump regime is that it threatens to tribalize all of us.”

The fact that she repaired these cemeteries does not negate her pro-Sharia or viciously anti-Israel statements. She even declared recently
that feminists could not support Israel. Lander is taking an incident
that was an obvious bid to wrongfoot her opponents as a reversal of her
entire stance regarding Israel. It wasn’t.

At the protest, even Mr. Yiannopoulos briefly
acknowledged Ms. Sarsour’s right to speak, before making a racially
tinged joke about her getting paid in goats. He was more restrained in
an emailed response to a question.

“Unlike some of the other speakers, I don’t want Sarsour canceled,”
he wrote. “I want as many people as possible to hear her odious
thoughts. That doesn’t mean I can’t explain why she is dangerous and
wrong.”

Once again: the problem is that she is the commencement speaker. She
should be canceled as the commencement speaker. And brought back to
debate with Pamela Geller or some other defender of freedom.

Ms. Sarsour said she had nothing to apologize about for her views.

She said there were questions about the integrity of Ms. Odeh’s
conviction many decades ago. The photo of the Palestinian boy was taken
during a week when about 200 Palestinians had been killed, she said. And
she said she had never planned to speak about Israel in the
commencement address.

We’ll see about that. In any case, note how the Times gives Sarsour
space to rebut the charges, and never bothers to check on her claims
about Odeh’s conviction or the photo. The Times never offers this
service to those who aren’t Leftists.

Ms. Sarsour said she believed she became a target for
far-right conservatives in the days after the Women’s March, which she
said was evidence of a larger “Islamophobia industry.”

The claim that there is a well-heeled “Islamophobia industry”
churning out hateful material against Muslims is a staple of Leftist
propaganda. Ironically, the organizations such as the Center for
American Progress and others that have produced lavishly printed
“Islamophobia” reports have budgets exponentially larger
than those of the organizations they defame as “Islamophobic.” If there
is any “industry” here, it is that of the truly well-heeled effort to
defame and destroy those who oppose jihad terror and Sharia oppression.

She has hired two private bodyguards to accompany her to
public events. She says she regrets that she has not been able to shield
her three children, all teenagers, from the vitriol and threats she has
received online. Still, she said, she does not plan to be silent.

“I’m Muslim, I’m Palestinian, I’m a woman in a hijab,” she said. “I’m everything they stand against.”

She added, “I have a bigger mission here.”

In reality, she is a foe of counter terror efforts, a supporter of the
jihad against Israel, and a woman who normalizes and legitimizes the
Sharia oppression of women. Indeed, everything we stand against.