Anti-Zionist harvest: Women’s March edition

Reclassifying Jews into the oppressor category continues apace in increasingly mainstream leftist circles:

as the women were opening up about their backgrounds and personal investments in creating a resistance movement to Trump, Perez and Mallory allegedly first asserted that Jewish people bore a special collective responsibility as exploiters of black and brown people—and even, according to a close secondhand source, claimed that Jews were proven to have been leaders of the American slave trade.

Questions also began to emerge about the ideological values upon which the movement was being built. On Jan. 12, the Women’s March made public their Unity Principles, which asserted: “We must create a society in which women, in particular women—in particular Black women, Native women, poor women, immigrant women, Muslim women, and queer and trans women—are free and able to care for and nurture their families, however they are formed, in safe and healthy environments free from structural impediments.” Numerous observers noted the absence of “Jewish” from the list of signifiers, and began questioning whether it signaled something about whether and how warmly American Jews—the vast majority of whom vote and identify as Democrats—would be welcomed in a changing left.

I noticed the energy in the room changed. I suddenly realized that Tamika and Carmen were facing Vanessa [Wruble], who was sitting on a couch, and berating her—but it wasn’t about her being white. It was about her being Jewish. ‘Your people this, your people that.’ I was raised in the South and the language that was used is language that I’m very used to hearing in rural South Carolina. Just instead of against black people, against Jewish people. They even said to her ‘your people hold all the wealth.’ You could hear a pin drop. It was awful.”

Reached by Tablet, Wruble declined to comment on the incident. Multiple other sources confirm that soon after, Wruble was no longer affiliated with the Women’s March Inc.—as the nascent group was starting to be known.

When Tablet asked Morganfield whether she believes the co-chairs are anti-Semitic, she offered a terse answer: “There are no Jewish women on the board. They refused to put any on. Most of the Jewish people resigned and left. They refused to even put anti-Semitism in the unity principles.”

Do you honestly believe this happened all on its own? And this is why a decade ago crypto-Jews tried to convince me that feminists would never care about anti-Zionism and were therefore not worth liasing with. Of course I did not listen to them. Now we know who was correct:

This entry was posted in Aryan Sanctuary. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Anti-Zionist harvest: Women’s March edition

  1. Robert Young says:

    I’m sure the women’s march movement will openly complain that the allegations against Harvey Weinstein are being used by the alt right, and then compare Weinstein’s situation to Muslims subjected to Islamophobia, much like how an admin of this site did.

    I’m also sure Malcolm X’s daughter (the one that tried to assassinate Louis Farrakhan) and Bill Cosby’s rape victims would love to know why Linda Sarsour and others have connections with Louis Farrakhan.

    I’m also sure this site has no problem with Linda Sarsour enabling sexual harassment herself.

  2. Philistine says:

    @Robert Young

    I keep wondering why the admins continue to let you comment. Every single thing you say is slimy and filthy. Are you seriously saying that an administrator of this site compared Harvey Weinstein, a jew accused and arrested for sexual abuse, to victims of islamophobia?
    And just look at the progression here. “I will imagine that these people you’re praising have this or that opinion. I will also IMAGINE that such and such people, completely unrelated to this post, would hate that such and such woman is connected to such and such man, who are also both completely unrelated to this post. Oh, by the way, I have also IMAGINED that you have this opinion I made up about this unrelated woman. This is my critique against you.”

    Seriously, why is this snake allowed to spit its poison? I feel like vomiting every time I read its words.

  3. Lucius Rhine says:


    He is allowed to speak for the very reason I love the value of Free Speech.

    Free speech allows idiots (like Robert Young, who contacted me claiming he would commit to activism. Of course at my first request that he work, did not reply) to be vilified in society, worse than any prison sentence. This applies only when the society itself holds up values of freedom and empathy.

    @Robert Young

    You wonder why Sarsour would be in connection with one of the most influential members of the Nation of Islam.

    The Daughter of Malcolm X being the Daughter of Malcolm X means next to nothing without context. This would be like saying there would be some significance in the Daughter of Rockwell becoming some sort of painter—good for her, I suppose! But Farrakhan does not speak for all “black” people, just like Cosby does not speak for all “black people,” just like Cosby’s rape victims do not speak for all rape victims.

    Your arguments are incoherent, and…


    I advise you all to not engage with Robert Young.

    Clearly not of sound mind, he will only confuse you. And due to your good hearted nature, in trying to give this poor man the benefit of the doubt, you may think “perhaps his argument has a point, and perhaps I am reading his words incorrectly.” I assure you, you read them quite correct. They simply do not make sense. If do you attempt to make sense of the spittle laden gibberish, you will soon realize you will never get that time back. I warned you.

  4. Robert Young says:


    Have fun explaining why AS would even bother to comment on Harvey Weinstein’s allegations in a way that could directly benefit Weinstein, and why he would even compare the allegations against him to the promotion of Islamophobia.

    Also, Philistine, why aren’t you an admin?

    I oppose the women’s march for promoting rape. You have no problem with the women’s march promoting rapists (like Bill Cosby) and killers (like Louis Farrakhan). This site can’t even be consistent with its own position on Malcolm X when it endorses one of the persons that got him killed.

  5. Robert Young says:

    @anyone who cares

    LR, AS threatened to remove your swastika for a comment you didn’t even make, and then compared him to Charles Manson. Honestly, this site is pretty insane.

    Philistine, has life being a former white supremacist doing? Why should anyone even trust you?

    Also, I highly doubt Malcolm X’s daughter would appreciate this site even giving the slightest approval to Louis Farrakhan (which has happened before on this site), whom she tried to kill herself.

    Also, Tamika D. Mallory (a leader in the women’s march movement) herself has shown ‘mixed-feelings’ towards the many rape victims that have come out against Cosby, and she deserves ostracism for that alone. So, the allegations against Cosby, and the enabling he’s received, is actually relevant to this site.

  6. ItIsWhatItIs says:

    Off topic, but worth a read. I found this after googling the sentence, “Why does the CIA love anti-Communist leftists?”.

  7. ItIsWhatItIs says:

    ….Lest we forget that the CIA has been accused many times by useful idiots of the Judeo-Anglo western variety of being aligned with the “nazis” during WWII….

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>