Meet the terrorist behind the next women’s march

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

And I've never seen you write a thread nor drop even a whisper against 'militant' White Nationalists. So I guess you and Odeh are even huh?

What a horrible slap in the face that was.



Desperate and frustrated.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

you know it's funny when left leaning people start getting a spanking on the violence that some of their groups tout.
they always want to pull out the "'militant' White Nationalists." card.

Lol... associating the next women's march with terrorism... Be afraid. Be very afraid.

a reply to: xuenchen

Oh good lord, don't be a snowflake. I get hit with worse all the time on ATS.

a reply to: xuenchen

She is trying to lash out by attempting to shift the blame.

a reply to: Kali74

Are we discussing white nationalists? I thought we were talking about a convicted bomber who killed 2 students.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Am I now the subject of your thread?

a reply to: hounddoghowlie

Actually I was using them as an example. When militant White Nationalists hold rallies or march they don't engage in violence. They are aggressively demonstrating their belief that America is for white people.

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Am I now the subject of your thread?

I am calling you out when you tried to make a false and defamatory claim about me in this thread. That is not the same as making you the subject of the thread...

The New York Post is owned by Newscorp (Rupert Murdoch).

It's pro-Trump, pro-Republican fake news just like Fox News, the Wall Street Journal, etc.

Next?

a reply to: Kali74

Are these white nationalists bombers convicted of murdering 2 students like our new community organizer with a shiny new manifesto?

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

And as I said in a post on the last page... "Have you? Cool.".

Defamatory? lol

a reply to: Gryphon66

LOL, so the manifesto these organizers made, and the plethora of information that corroborates the main article of the op is false news?... How about posting evidence these women have not done any of these things mentioned in the op?

a reply to: Kali74

aw please you were trying to deflect, you know it, i know it, the op knows it, everyone that reads this thread will know it.
why make up a bs post and use a word that was not really part of the topic, but one you decided to bring into the discussion.

your deflection is obvious.

Have any of you read what was linked as the "manifesto"?

Perhaps you can point to anything in that newspaper article in the Guardian (hint, the word manifesto is not used anywhere within it, although, hey it does echo with Communist Manifesto ... doesn't it?

(At least you guys have finally gotten to folks who are actual self-defined "leftists" for a change. Good job.)

So, what problems do you have with what was actually said, rather than the very lose truth that's being spun around this newspaper article?

Its not illegal to be communist or socialist or feminist. They aren't encouraging violence.

Material is being dredged up from 46 years ago that has zero relationship to the present, etc. etc.

So what's the problem? A bunch of older ladies marching is scaring you guys this bad???

a reply to: seasonal

Has any American white nationalist been tortured in order to elicit a confession? Why would you accept a confession under those circumstances as the truth?

I haven't looked at the facts of her case, I wouldn't trust the evidence provided by Israel even if I had access to it. I don't know if she bombed anyone, I never heard of her until this thread. As of right now she has freedom of speech, she used it to participate in an op-ed about a day of women's marches across the world... something she didn't help organize but chose to opine how she hopes the direction of a growing movement will be.

If I'm healthy enough to march on that day, I will do so as a woman, a feminist that opposes Trumps agenda, not a militant anything. If other women decide to participate as militants that is their choice, as long as they don't break the law... more power to them. If anyone decides to get violent, it has nothing to do with me or anything I stand for.

a reply to: hounddoghowlie

I'm combative, not deflective... you should know me at least that well.

a reply to: Kali74

I believe that most everyone knows that "militant" in this context means "in your face, confrontational, non-apologetic."

If they really want to dredge up what folks were doing 40-50 years ago, perhaps we should mention those public officials who were hiding from military service behind college exemptions.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

So communists are marching an planning protests.

Not surprising since their Hillary lost. They are angry that the US isn't turning globalist/socialist/communist.

They can't stop what their bosses have already started at
the end of WW2: they're just trying to make it another
class struggle. It's the women versus the men (where have
I heard that before, Gloria?) YEah, Pumpkinhead fox. YOU.

Insert: blowing up a school bus, and showing the camera
shrapnel from your trying to stop it doesn't make you all
of a sudden photogenic. It makes you "wow.. I'd like to
get to know her more than Spanky McFarland."
How ya doin' Bernardine? Care for another filet?

I refuse to fight progress.. but they'll have to show me
some that benefits everyone. I'm 65 and haven't seen
it yet. Violence for a political result IS TERRORISM.

a reply to: Gryphon66

They don't like it when you don't take the poison pill.