Linda Sarsour is back in the news. What nasty craziness, or crazy nastiness, is it this time that brings her, just as she intended, to our attention? This time it is for her straight-faced claim that Jesus was not a Jew, but a “brown-skinned Palestinian.” Of course this isn’t her claim alone; it’s a staple of “Palestinian” propaganda. Ilhan Omar retweeted the same claim — “Jesus was a Palestinian” — on April 20, 2019. Palestinian and other Arab propagandists have been saying the same thing for years. This historical revisionism is of a piece with the Muslim rewriting of American history to make it seem that, in Barack Obama’s counterfactual claim, “Muslims have always been part of America’s story.” So we are told, among other things, that Muslims served in the crews of Columbus’s ships, that Columbus reported spotting a mosque — forsooth! — in Cuba, that one-third of the slaves brought to America were Muslim, that Thomas Jefferson owned a Qur’an and became a deep admirer of Islam, that he held the first Iftar Dinner, and so on, and so idiotically forth. More details are here.
Thus, in this helter-skelter get-me-rewrite fashion for so much of settled history, do Arab and Muslim propagandists appropriate part of Jewish history to strengthen the Arab claim to Judea, or as they insist on calling it, following the Romans who used a toponym that would efface the Jewish connection to the land, “Palestine.” Part of this appropriation involves Jesus, who must be claimed as “Palestinian” if the Arabs are ever to overcome the support for Israel of some Christians, especially those Evangelical Christians. This claim by Sarsour, Omar, et al would come as quite a surprise to Mary and Joseph, to John the Baptist, to Martha, Mary, and Lazarus, to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, to Christian theologians, Biblical scholars, and devout Christians of the last 2000 years — and, of course, to Jesus himself. But the claim puts Sarsour back in the news, which she needs to do from time to time to cause a momentary blip of interest, in order to keep the donations flowing. Think of it as an “advertisement for herself.” As for the violence done to history, Linda Sarsour, like her sister-in-arms Ilhan Omar, doesn’t much care: “We don’t need no stinkin’ history.”
As is well known, Linda Sarsour claims to be both a fervent feminist and an ardent Muslim, and sees no contradiction in the two identities, for as she has famously insisted, “oppression of women is absolutely shunned in the Islamic faith.” Sarsour was one of four co-chairs of the 2017 Women’s March. She was also the co-chairwoman of the 2017 Day Without a Woman strike and protest, organized to mark International Women’s Day. Some people have been impressed with all her marching and protesting on behalf, she says, of women. Her marching and protesting, as a “feminist,’” is a way to insinuate herself into the woman’s movement in order to further from within her pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel stance. Those who take her “feminism” at face value fail to realize that Sarsour is a supporter of Sharia law. She supports placing women under the management of men, but also claims that she is fighting for the liberation of women and for their equal rights. For her, that “fighting” is only taking place in the U.S., where women are as well off as anywhere in the world, and not in any Muslim country. Her only expression of dismay at the unequal treatment of women under Islam was about Saudi Arabia’s ban on women driving, a ban which she knew, as did many, would soon be coming to an end. She has stayed away from the much more serious examples of mistreatment of women. She has never discussed Qur’an 4:34, where Muslim men, because they are “superior” in their abilities, are entrusted with the task of managing the affairs of women. Surely this proud Muslim ought to have used the bully pulpit of her Women’s March, or the admiring coverage afterwards, to express her outrage at that claim, and her distress that in that same Qur’anic verse (4:34), Muslim husbands are given the right to “beat” their wives if they even suspect them of disobedience. Don’t her fellow feminists have a right to know why she has remained silent on 4:34? Are they quite sure she is on their side, or might she be using them for her own purposes? Nor has she ever mentioned the inheritance laws in Islam, whereby a daughter receives half the amount of a son. And why has she never criticized in Islam the claim that a woman’s testimony is worth half that of a man, a rule that Muhammad himself explains in the hadith is justified “because of the deficiency in her [woman’s] intelligence.” (Sahih Bukhari 1.6.301, 2.24.501, 3.48.86)
When a female co-worker of Linda Sarsour at the Arab-American Association of New York, Asmi Fathelbab, accused a male coworker of harassment, Sarsour became enraged, not with the male harasser, but with Fathelbab. She told her insultingly that ‘“something like that doesn’t happen to someone who looks like you,” a cruel reference to Fathelbab’s being overweight. Asmi Fathelbab also said in a televised interview that Sarsour had warned her “that I will never work in New York City ever again for as long as she lives” if Fathelbab were to press her claims. Sarsour was suddenly not the feminist stalwart she pretends to be, but a defender of a Muslim male. She was prepared to dismiss or shut up those who might sully the reputation of the faith or of its Believers. In Sarsour’s universe, her pretense of being “feminist” is used to make friends and allies among self-described “progressives” for the sake of Islam, and especially for the “Palestinian” cause.
It would be helpful if some intrepid journalist were to ask Linda Sarsour the questions she has never been asked, about how her “feminism” and her devotion to “Islam” manage to coexist in her understanding, but that she ought at long last to answer. After all, in 2017 TIME magazine had already crowned her as one of the “100 most influential” people in the world — an astounding and absurd claim (she is, no doubt, one of the “100 most influential Arab-Americans”) — and she needs to explain what might charitably be called an “internal contradiction.”
Here are a handful — eight — questions that Linda Sarsour might profitably be asked:
1. As both a feminist and as a Muslim, Linda Sarsour, what do you think of the right of Muslim husbands to practice polygyny — one husband, many wives? Do you think that this practice devalues a woman’s worth?
2. Qur’an 4:34 gives Muslim husbands the right to “beat” their wives if they suspect them of being disobedient. Do you think that verse should be abrogated?
3. According to the Shari’a, a woman’s testimony in court is worth half that of a man. The reason for this, according to Muhammad, in several hadiths (Sahih Bukhari 1.6.301; 2.24.501; 3:48:86} is “because of the deficiency in her intelligence.” Could you tell us, Ms. Sarsour, what you think of that justification for men to manage women’s affairs from the Prophet Muhammad himself?
4. Muhammad consummated his marriage to Aisha — that is, had sexual intercourse with her — when she was nine years old and he was 54. Muslims regard Muhammad as the “Perfect Man” and the “Model of Conduct.” Many Muslims as a consequence find nothing wrong with older men marrying young girls — even as young as nine. The Ayatollah Khomeini married his wife when she was ten years old. He was determined to lower the marriageable age of girls to nine. What do you think of Muhammad’s treatment of Aisha? And what should be the minimum age for Muslim girls to marry?
5. In Islamic law, Ms. Sarsour, a woman who accuses a man of rape has to produce four male witnesses. Doesn’t such a requirement make it almost impossible, in Muslim countries, to convict a man of rape? Should this requirement be done away with?
6. You have been quoted as saying that Muhammad was “the original feminist.” Could you tell us what you meant by that, keeping in mind his comment about the “deficiency in woman’s intelligence”? Some Muslims have claimed that Muhammad had encouraged his first wife Khadija to engage in business — but isn’t it true that when he married Khadija she was already a successful businesswoman and needed no encouragement?
7. In the Qur’an, men are told they can treat their wives as their “tilth,” and sexually use them whenever and in whatever way they wish. The wives may not object. And recently the fatwa-issuing authority of the Palestine Authority, Dar al-Ifta, issued the following fatwa about a Muslim husband’s right to have sex on demand:
“A woman must ask permission from her husband to fast, because the husband has the right to enjoy his wife [sexually] at any time, and it is obligatory [for his wife] to fulfill his right immediately.
This was published in the Official PA daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, May 15, 2019.
Do you agree with this fatwa, Ms. Sarsour? Or do you think that a woman has a right to say “No” to her husband?
8. You can be seen on YouTube here at 1:17, claiming that “oppression of women is absolutely shunned in the Islamic faith.” How do you reconcile this with the practice of polygyny, or the right of Muslim husbands to demand sex at any time and in any way, from their wives, or the right of husbands to “beat” their wives if they suspect them of disobedience?
That’s all the questions for now, Linda Sarsour. Thank you for your attempts at answering, But there will be other occasions, other questions, other questioners, other colossal doubts.
Peggy says
Great job, Linda ! Show the christian pedophiles that it is not OK to have intercourse with toddlers in the name of religion.
Keep fighting christianity, but also islam. All religions are the same and the root of all trouble on earth.
mortimer says
Peggy, you are very wrong. Objectively, all religions are different. Here’s how Islam is different.
Danish University Researcher Tina Magaard claimed Islam is the most warlike religion.
Danish researcher Tina Magaard, Ph.D. concluded that Islam is the most warlike religion. After three years analyzing the original texts of ten different religions, Tina Magaard concluded that the Islamic texts stand out by encouraging terror and fighting “to a far larger degree than the original texts of other religions. The texts in Islam distinguish themselves from the texts of other religions by encouraging violence and aggression against people with other religious beliefs to a larger degree.”
“What is striking is not in itself that one can find murderous passages in the Islamic texts, as such passages can also be found in other religions. But it is striking how much space these passages take up in the Islamic texts, and how much they focus on an us-and-them logic in which infidels and apostates are characterized as dirty, rotten, criminal, hypocritical and dangerous. It is also striking how much these texts demand that the reader fight the infidels, both with words and with the sword. In many passages, Muhammad plays a central role as one who encourages the use of violence, whether it comes to stonings, beheadings, acts of war or execution of critics and poets.”
gravenimage says
I believe Peggy was being sarcastic, Mortimer.
Ashok Kumar Braroo says
Western world is not understanding the fact that water of jihad onslaught is already neckdeep. Together with Muslim population bomb is changing demography of western world. It is just 40 years from now that western women will wear hijab and men keep filthy beards. Then these left liberals will also no be spared.
Jayell says
I have been told, rightly or wrongly, that ‘Palestine’ was a name given to that geographical area of the world by the Romans, because there were no territorially established kingdoms and the human populations was mainly nomadic. If that was correct, then there was never an established country of ‘Palestine’ and therefore no Palestinian citizens. So Sarsour’s point would be completely inaccurate. But then, do people like Sarsour ever bother themselves with small matters of factual accuracy if it doesn’t suit their purpose?
mortimer says
Sarsour’s claim about Jesus is wrong, as you observed. One of the highest compliments in the New Testament is that so-and-so is a ‘TRUE ISRAELITE’ … a patriotic and godly Israeli. The New Testament frequently mentions Israel, Israelite, and Jerusalem, but doesn’t mention ‘Palestine’ a single time.
The New Testament refers to Jesus as ‘Shepherd of my people Israel’ (Matt.2.6), to the home of Mary and Joseph as ‘the land of Israel’ (Matt.2.20), to the miracles of Jesus ‘in Israel’ (Matt.9.33), to the ministry of Christ ‘to the lost sheep of the house of Israel’ (Matt.10.6), to Jesus as ‘King of Israel’ (Luke 22.30, Mk 15.32, John 1.49), to Jesus as ‘the hope of Israel’ (Acts 28.20).
Jesus saw himself ethnically as a patriotic Israelite and saw himself in religion as a pious, observant Jew.
Sarsour has no doubt COMPLETELY AVOIDED READING the New Testament. She is a lazy mannequin who reads the script they hand her every day.
James Lincoln says
mortimer says,
“Sarsour has no doubt COMPLETELY AVOIDED READING the New Testament.”
I’m sure that that’s possible.
It’s also possible that she is practicing taqiyya…
gravenimage says
Jayell wrote:
I have been told, rightly or wrongly, that ‘Palestine’ was a name given to that geographical area of the world by the Romans, because there were no territorially established kingdoms and the human populations was mainly nomadic…
…………………………
You are half right, Jayell. The Romans did indeed name the region ‘Palestine’, but not because there were no settled populations there. Jerusalem was already a large city in the first century AD, and there had been Jewish populations there for centuries. The Roman historian Tacitus estimated the population of Jerusalem at 600,000–a major city even by modern standards.
The Romans were tired of the Jews constantly revolting against Roman rule, and so renamed Roman Judea (which acknowledged that the region was majority-Jewish and dated to the Roman conquest in 63 BC) as Roman Philistia (Palestine). in the early second century AD. Renaming the region for one of the Jews historic enemies–the Philistines–was an attempt to suppress Jewish connection to the land.
Hugh Fitzgerald says
“Palestina” first occurs in Herodotus in the 5th century B.C. It then appeared in the writings of other Greeks, but the accepted toponym remained “Judea.” In 135 A.D., after crushing the Bar Kochba revolt, the Romans renamed Roman Judea as “Syria Palestina” or “Palestine.” Most scholars believe this was done to efface the Jewish connection to the land. In the same way, Jerusalem became, under the Romans, “Aelia capitoline.”
There never was a “Palestine” in Arab or Muslim history until the 20th century, when the Arabs simply appropriated the term as a way to stake their claim to the land to which the place name referred. And we all know that after the Six-Day War the local Arabs were transmogrified into the “Palestinian people” who had been living in Palestine since time immemorial. Sleight-of-word works wonders.
gravenimage says
Spot on, Mr. Fitzgerald.
observer says
Here we are Linda-saugage
I’m told you need attention…
So here’s a nice warm pat on your broad feminist shoulders for you…
I’m so relieved you’ve got a handle on FGM (female genital mutilation), driving bans against women and young islamic women who have their throats cut because their poor, feeble families are so easily ‘shamed’ by them.
What a cult you belong to dearie.
It must keep you very busy lying your way through its ongoing machinations.
I hope your blindfold never falls off because you’d find the Light somewhat blinding.
I’m sure you’ll enjoy your encounter with Jesus when the time comes.
He’s all about Truth you know…
All the best with that…
Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY) says
By coincidence, here are further remarks about Israelite-Palestinian precedence:
http://www.unz.com/isteve/and-so-it-begins-3/
Bible quiz: Who led the Israelites through the Semipermeable Membrane?
Answer: Os-Moses.
I’m not a Dead Head; I’m a Palestrinian.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0yd5EE0hAB8
Angemon says
Somehow, this seems relevant:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJFjtcAN3S4
gravenimage says
Thanks for posting that, Angemon. Sye Ten Atheist’s Anti-Jihad animations are hilarious!
Jack Cade says
Ms Cockroach’s face screams for a nikab! Jesus was called “Rabbi” and spoke in a synagogue. Ms Cockroach is either ignorant or a liar. Since Muslims are commanded by Allah, AKA Satan, to lie, I’m going to say that she is a liar. I know this is offensive to barbaric sensibilities but it is the truth.
RichardL says
I don’t think she is lying; I think she believes it. The moon goddess allah had an illiterate, pedophile, slave-owning crossdresser dictate it to someone. How can one not believe it?
Dennis says
This article reflects the perverse Arab/Mentality that is forever trying to justify the false claim that Islam is first a religion and that it promotes peace, both of which are not true. The writings and conduct of their belief system speaks volumes about their expectation to dominate all non-Muslims. Whether or not Jesus might have actually been a man of Arab look is really not relevant, though I doubt that would have been the case based on all the proof to the contrary. What Sarsour should be trying to explain is the adverse conduct of the so-called Prophet. Their prophet was a deeply narcissistic human, who expected all others to revere him, going so far as to kill those Jews who refused to do so. That, I understand is factual, and when you ascribe to him the writings which affect the Islamic belief system involving the status of women, one must be a fool to not recognize that this self-centered prophet was very much a madman, a military tyrant and a womanizer to the nth degree, but never a prophet to any degree.
PRCS says
“2. Qur’an 4:34 gives Muslim husbands the right to “beat” their wives if they suspect them of being disobedient. Do you think that verse should be abrogated?”
A fine tick question!
As she (most likely) knows Qur’an can only be abrogated by Muhammad’s special friend, get her to disagree with ‘Allah’.
That should result in some fancy verbal tap dancing.
Walter Sieruk says
First , that above picture of Linda Sarsour pointing her right index finger in the air has the symbolic, signing , meaning that she in not really giving her allegiance to the USA but she is giving to total and complete allegiance to Allah ,the god of Islam .Which she believes is the one only god Thus her signing wit one index finger of her right hand.
Second, That about warning is wise about not being deceived by the smile Sarsour put on. With her scheming Islamic agenda. So much so that her smile is a reminder of the song written and played on the radio in the early 1970’s. Some of the lyrics to that song are “Don’t let them fool you …enmity you can see in smiling faces, smiling faces tell lies .”
Barb says
IF JESUS is a Palestinian then there is no reason for Islam to insult and kill Jews and Christians!
IF Jesus is Palestinian then Islam cannot claim Jews and Christians descended from Apes and Pigs!
Muslim’s claim they are descended from Ishmael – Isaac and Ishmael had the same father – Abraham!
Following the logic of “descended from Apes and Pigs” – Abraham wasn’t an Ape or a Pig neither was Sarah neither was Hagar??!!
IF Jews were descended from Apes and Pigs – Muslim’s are too they have the same common Ancestor – Abraham!
gravenimage says
Muslims believe that Jews and Christians deliberately “corrupted” the Torah and Gospels, and lied about Jesus and the prophets not being Muslim. This is what Islam teaches.
gravenimage says
Some Questions for Linda Sarsour
………………….
Muslims *hate* the fact that Jesus was a Jew, and try to hide it all the time.
Owen Morgan says
So Ilhan Omar tweeted that Jesus was a Palestinian on the 20th of April: the Austrian bloke’s birthday. Coincidence, do we think?
David Conell says
So my question would be “Why then do you deny him?”
Walter Sieruk says
About the god of Islam , Allah and those who believe in the pagan god .
When Linda Sarsour is holding up her one index finger in the air, this stands for her belief that Allah is the one true god. Likewise the those violent and murdering jihadists of ISIS, in many photographs , also hold their index finger in the air which stands for their belief that Allah is the one true god.
This is very revealing. For this shows that ,at heart, Sarsour is really no better than that Muslim members of ISIS.
CRUSADER says
Sinister SourSister
Tony46 says
Her holy book doesn’t agree with her.
Surah 5:116