Over at The Gatestone Institute, Khadija Khan has a compelling article on this Ueber-Hypocrite and islamic U-Boat:
"Why do women who believe in equal rights for women, pick as their spokesperson someone who one minute boasts of her supposed dissent as "patriotism," while the next minute advocating chopping off other womens' genitals? It is like choosing a hangman to campaign against the death penalty, or the head of ISIS to campaign for same sex marriages.
The principles of "dissent," of which they claim to be so proud, and to have borrowed from religious sources, are actually the modern world's liberal values and human rights -- just those rights values they seem to be trying to destroy.
From the other side of their mouths, however, they are trying to impose Islamic sharia law on the West. Unfortunately, sharia is openly antagonistic to Western values and human rights.
How can cults that believe in dominating others call themselves progressive, when their entire message runs counter to the spirit of tolerance and social coexistence?
The champions of sharia have always said they wish to establish a "righteous" form of government, made by divine law, and presumably to that end, they implant their set of rules -- such as allowing no debate or criticism on their beliefs, or such as segregating sexes -- to destroy modern democracies.
It must be so convenient, while marching on Washington DC, to advocate that other women -- far away -- be genitally mutilated, married off in childhood, and domestically beaten and violated -- and all the while, in the safe confines of Washington, to stay silent on issues of truly massive abuse: floggings; acid burnings; chopping off limbs or heads, or burning, drowning or burying people alive.
These women in hijabs marching on Washington DC do not have to live in this "Utopia." They are comfortably living in the "infidel West', protected from such barbarity.
The values they are enjoying here are the values of the enlightened world and have nothing to do with the culture they are trying to impose on others.
The culture that is allowing women such as Linda Sarsour to shout into microphones is not even necessarily the culture these women believe in; it is often just the culture they are using to promote totalitarian ideas such as anti-Semitism, religious intolerance and the imposition of theocratic beliefs through infiltration or force.
The culture to which Sarsour says she aspires, allows mutilating women but does not allow women to speak in a loud tone, let alone speaking through microphones. Hence, she owes her current privileges to her American identity."
And in a tweet dated May 13, 2015, Linda Sarsour stated: "You'll know when you're living under Sharia Law if suddenly all your loans & credit cards become interest free. Sound nice, doesn't it?"
"... Then she wrote on an April 29, 2014 tweet: "@RobertWildiris I don't drink alcohol, don't eat pork, I follow Islamic way of living. That's all Sharia law is."
It would be nice if the only requirements of sharia were avoiding alcohol or pork were; there happens, however, to be an ocean of dos and don'ts that fall into the category of "I follow Islamic way of living."
The ocean Sarsour never bothered to mention, but that the world witnesses every day, exists from the Saudi palaces to the caves of Afghanistan and Raqqa.
The culture that Sarsour desires to impose on the world -- along with promises to waive interest on loans -- does not allow women to interact with unrelated men, drive cars, ride bicycles, attend sports events, leave the house without permission, or wear makeup and clothes that reveal their body parts, let alone address a crowd.
Women would also need four male witnesses to prove a rape, or risk being stoned to death for "adultery."
Does Sarsour really think that people have gone so mad that they will give up all of their civil liberties and freedom that their ancestors earned through the centuries, merely for interest free loans?
The hypocrisy is that her bold lifestyle in the US portrays that deep down, she herself loathes the suppressing conditions that she likes promoting for the poor women of the Muslim world who actually have to live with them."
As a final note on this despicable Sarsour character, read this article by Candice Malcolm at The Toronto Sun: "THE NEW FEMINIST LEFT ARE REGRESSIVE HYPOCRITES."
"... When the film Honor Diaries was released, Sarsour tried to suppress the film and delegitimize those involved with it. The film exposes violence against women in Middle Eastern societies, and tells the story of victims of this cultural violence.
Sarsour worked to discredit those involved the film, notably targeting activist Ayaan Hirsi Ali – herself was a victim of abuse and FGM. She said in a now-deleted 2011 tweet concerning Hirsi Ali and another women involved with the film "I wish I could take their vaginas away - they don't deserve to be women."
This is the new feminism; no longer a movement about equality. It is a movement about extremist politics. And Linda Sarsour is the face of it.
When Sarsour was exposed for her regressive comments that promote a culture of hate against women, the radical left came to her defence.
Bernie Sanders, Susan Sarandon, Mark Ruffalo and Naomi Klein all tweeted in support of Sarsour, as did organizations including Amnesty International, Black Lives Matter and the Southern Poverty Law Center.
The irony and hypocrisy of the new feminist left knows no bounds."
You bet it doesn't. Multiculti assholes going ballistic over a man who, admittedly, used locker room talk over women's private parts 15 years ago march arm in arm with monsters advocating mutilating these very same private parts.
That's today's left.