• Why Jihad Watch?
  • About Robert Spencer and Staff Writers
  • FAQ
  • Books
  • Muhammad
  • Islam 101
  • Privacy

Jihad Watch

Exposing the role that Islamic jihad theology and ideology play in the modern global conflicts

Germany: Court rules that satirist who criticizes Islam can be called a “hate preacher”

May 21, 2015 12:07 pm By Robert Spencer

Dieter-Nuhr“Fact: You can do any joke you like about Nazis, the Pope, medicinal ideologies and religions, only Islam stops it.” And the Western intelligentsia stops criticism of Islam. “No Joke: German Satirist Who Sends Up Islam Can be Called A Hate Preacher, Court Rules,” by Donna Rachel Edmunds, Breitbart, May 21, 2015:

A German court has ruled that a comedian and satirist who jokes about Islam can be called a “preacher of hate.”

Dieter Nuhr has made a name for himself in Germany with his satirical take on Islam. Jokes such as “In Islam, a woman is free, but free primarily of having to decide anything,” and “If you did not know that the Qur’an is the word of God, you’d think a man had written it” have provoked a debate in Germany over what constitutes satire and what is blasphemy.

But for Erhat Toka, a Muslim from Osnabrück, the distinction was clear: he branded Nuhr a hate preacher, shared clips of Nuhr’s satirical jibes at Islam on social media, and organised protests outside his shows, the Local has reported.

Nuhr consequently took Toka to court, arguing before the state court in Stuttgart that Toka shouldn’t be allowed to call him a “preacher of hate” in online comments, and appealing for a warning and injunction against Toka.

The court disagreed. A court spokesman has said that the words “hate preacher” were covered by Freedom of Speech rules and rejected the applications.

However, they did uphold a request to place restrictions on an image that Toka had created showing Nuhr’s face superimposed on a stop sign. Toka must desist in using the image or face a fine.

This is not the first time the two men have had a run in over Nuhr’s work. Last October Toka filed a complaint against Nuhr, accusing him of abusing religious communities. In response, Nuhr said that it bothers him “when a Salafist thinks I shouldn’t be able to make jokes about him and his behavior, just because he holds a particular religious belief. I find that ridiculous. I believe that tolerance is necessary, as is satire.”

Following the Charlie Hebdo attack in January, he told the Frantfurter Allgemeine “Fact: You can do any joke you like about Nazis, the Pope, medicinal ideologies and religions, only Islam stops it.”

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • More
  • Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)

Follow me on Facebook

Filed Under: Featured, free speech, Germany Tagged With: Dieter Nuhr


Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Comments

  1. Jan van Eechoud says

    May 21, 2015 at 12:19 pm

    I feel ashamed being a European….. sob…….

    • Marblenecltr says

      May 21, 2015 at 1:53 pm

      The problem is on all continents, 2.1 billion Muslims and 5 billion everybody else. Not all of the 2.1 want conflict, and not all of the 5 will resist scimitar-bearing, gun toting missionaries. The human depopulation community is brimming with endorphins.

      • Gary says

        May 21, 2015 at 4:50 pm

        I feel gravely concerned, (As an American), that what you’re experiencing in Europe is happening before my eye in America.

        • Celtic says

          May 22, 2015 at 5:49 am

          I’m Swiss and I can only mark this day as a sad day for our northern neighbours. The Germans are taking the coward route – probably due to the fact that they have been fed with the story that their ancestors were the most evil people in history – so they are unable to think clearly. They do not realize that speaking against Islam is the new form of speaking against Nazism, they are paralyzed in thinking because Islam comes from another culture and they automatically link justified criticizm of Islam with nazi like racism.

          They would only need to ask the jews what they think of Islam

      • DP111 says

        May 22, 2015 at 9:54 am

        The problem is on all continents, 2.1 billion Muslims and 5 billion everybody else.

        Muslims themselves ragard their number as 1.2 billion. That number is quite likely to be inflate as well, as Muslims seem to think that numbers must make them right.
        .

        • voegelinian says

          May 22, 2015 at 6:08 pm

          You’re a bit behind the times. Muslims now routinely say “There are 1.7 billion Muslims”. They tend to inflate their numbers by total numbers, and by country. Whatever the actual number is, they push it a few decimal points higher.

      • dumbledoresarmy says

        May 23, 2015 at 8:17 am

        Not 2.1 bn Muslims.

        1.5 bn Musilms, at the moment. You’re over-counting the Muslims significantly.

  2. Richie says

    May 21, 2015 at 12:23 pm

    Give Muslims promote and carry out terrorism, advocate murdering Jews, gays and Christians, as well as advocating rape, pedophilia and slavery, one would think in a sane world Muslims would be considered to be the hate preachers

  3. Cecilia Ellis says

    May 21, 2015 at 12:35 pm

    So much for an endless supply of material that may be used by Dieter Nuhr: “A priest, a rabbi, and an imam walked in to a Kneipe . . . no, make that a priest and a rabbi walked in to a Kneipe . . . or a priest, a rabbi, and an overseas violent extremist (with suicide bomb vest) walked in to a Kneipe . . .”

  4. Marblenecltr says

    May 21, 2015 at 12:35 pm

    Hate speech, Herr Dieter? Was gibst? The court should read at least chapters 8 and 9 of the Koran, and it will have cause to outlaw a religion that preaches hate speech written down and then used to kill unbelievers for 1,400 years. Good luck, you are working for humanity.

  5. pongidae rex says

    May 21, 2015 at 12:42 pm

    ‘Piss Christ’ is Art. Penalty is art galleries full of patrons with money.
    ‘Piss Mohammed’ is Hate Speech. Penalty is murder that media will say is justified.
    The suicide of the West is unstoppable.

    • voegelinian says

      May 22, 2015 at 6:11 pm

      The best cartoon I’ve seen on this particular (and crucial) sub-point was drawn many years ago. It expresses the point with searingly succinct verve:

      http://westernjournalismcom.c.presscdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/hate-crime-koran-art-bible-blasphemy-sad-hill-news.jpg

  6. fido says

    May 21, 2015 at 12:43 pm

    I must say I DO hate islam…the ideology of islam should be hated by all the freedom-loving peoples of the world! Ask yourself who are the “hate preachers”???????

    Islam preaches hate throughout the qur’an. It relegates the status of women to roughly that of sheep, children to something less, promotes jihadi murder of gays, lesbians and, oh, just all “infidels”, denigrates all other religions as inferior and even calls for the killing of all non-muslims except…if the muslims happen to feel charitable on a given day… those who capitulate to islamic superiority and pay the jizya!

    Good God, what other reasons do you need for hating islam?! It’s an ideology as detestable as nazism!!!!!

    • Kepha says

      May 21, 2015 at 8:02 pm

      I hate Islam too–even though some here may doubt it after I stated I understood where Franklin Graham was coming from. However, I haven’t reached the point where I hate all Muslims, and may God deliver me from that evil. My prayer is that the eyes of more and more Muslims will be opened and they will find the actual Christ testified to in the Old and New Testaments.

      To all:

      Lets’ just pray that American courts don’t adopt this German court’s Schweinerei (swinishness). I understand that the triers of Geert Wilders in the Netherlands held that telling the truth is no defense. Pray that our legal profession comes to its senses before it is too late.

  7. nicu says

    May 21, 2015 at 12:43 pm

    Thank god he was not charged .

    One stupid Muslim felt insulted ( AGAIN ) when he said the truth about Koran and Muslims .

    Go for it , Dieter Nuhr !

  8. Michael Copeland says

    May 21, 2015 at 1:02 pm

    “I must have hatred towards everything which is non-Islam.”
    Anjem Choudary, BBC Newsnight, 2006

    “We hate the people of the kufr [non-Muslims]. We hate the kuffar.”
    Usamah Ath Thahabi, Channel 4 Undercover Mosque, 2009.

    For more see:
    http://libertygb.org.uk/v1/index.php/news-libertygb/5968-islam-instructs-hatred-muslims-speak

  9. John Boston says

    May 21, 2015 at 1:06 pm

    Go for it, Herr Nuhr! As for me, here in Boston, USA there are many Muslims and Islamofascist enablers. I am ordering a T-shirt with the words “ISLAMOPHOBIA A Word Used To Silence The Truth”. I will wear it not proudly, but gratefully that I live in a nation where speech is still free.

  10. Tom says

    May 21, 2015 at 1:11 pm

    I guess Jeff Dunham and Achmed the Dead Terrorist should cancel their dates in Berlin. There are obviously enough dummies there already.

  11. Face_The_Truth says

    May 21, 2015 at 1:23 pm

    Germany and France are united in facilitating Islam and Muslims from Turkey and North Africa; so, it’s not unusual for us to see them protecting Islam by banning criticism of Islam whether made for satirical purposes or not.

    Under current U.S. president, any Western deal with the Islamic Republic of Iran will financially benefit both Germany and France immensely.

    In the Islamic Republic of Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan, death penalty is guaranteed for anyone criticizing or satirising Islamic tenets.

    American government will probably follow the longstanding British etiquette of very specially treating the ideology of Islam from all others by restricting the Jihad Watch website.

  12. pdxnag says

    May 21, 2015 at 1:39 pm

    This Toka guy wants to rule over non-Muslims and to silence, permanently, any dissent. Stop treating Islam as a religion and recognize it instead as a political force that will deploy violence as both a means to an end and as an end in the game of total Islamic conquest.

  13. Beagle says

    May 21, 2015 at 1:39 pm

    Unless “hate preacher” has some legal significance I don’t understand, this is not a big deal. The comedian is free to criticize Islam and the Muslim is free to call him names.

    The court did enjoin using his photo to whip up frenzy in the Muslim horde.

    Maybe I don’t get it.

    • Ian H says

      May 21, 2015 at 3:59 pm

      I agree. It seems odd that an organiser of the mohammed picture contest aimed at upholding the right to free speech should criticise a court for refusing to restrict free speech. It isn’t free speech if only speech which you agree with is free – isn’t that how the argument goes? Free speech must mean the right to say obnoxious things – including calling someone a hate preacher.

      • voegelinian says

        May 22, 2015 at 6:18 pm

        Yes; if Muslims weren’t waging a a literal war against us combing violent jihad (in myriad forms, including terrorism, criminality, civil unrest, intimidations & threats to do violence) and stealth jihad (also in myriad forms, including taqiyya, propaganda, lawfare, immigration, baby factory population increase), I’d agree with you that we should consider Muslims as unremarkably in the same category as all other problems.

  14. Angemon says

    May 21, 2015 at 2:06 pm

    I have mixed feelings on this one. On one hand, this is terrible news – it lumps together under the umbrella term of “hate preacher” a comedian who says, for example, “If you did not know that the Qur’an is the word of God, you’d think a man had written it” and Anjem Choudary, who, among many other things, praised the perpetrators of 9/11 and said of Charlie Hebdo’s caricatures of muhammad “in Islam, this carries capital punishment. We saw before with Theo Van Gogh”. I find that particularly disturbing. On the other hand, the butt-hurt muslim who insidiously decided the comedian was a “hate preacher” should be allowed to say so. In a sane world, most people should look at Nuhr’s work and ask “ok, where’s the hate? Where exactly is he preaching hate?” and laugh the muslim out of town. He shouldn’t be allowed to harass Mr. Nuhr as he’s doing, but if he wants to make an ass out of himself by flaunting his ignorance and ill-will, let him do so.

    I don’t know. I think the sanest decision would be the court ruling that, although Mr. Nuhr is by no definition a “hate-preacher”, it’s not up to the court to save Toka from his own stupidity.

    I think that Mr. Nuhr should appeal the decision based on what the very definition of a “hate-preacher” is. Fill the appeal process with quotes from actual hate-preachers – preferably from islamic preachers – juxtaposed with his material and make the court see how labeling him a “hate-preacher” makes a mockery of the term and is damaging to his image since he doesn’t preach hatred of anyone.

    At the very least, I hope Mr. Nuhr can use this to add to his repertoire. Something like “You know, recently a court of law decided I was a hate-preacher. That’s right, a hate-preacher. All because I cracked some jokes at the expenses of someone’s imaginary friend. Oh, well. I’m thinking about changing my name. I was going to go with Adolph, but that would be too stereotypical. I’ve decided with muhammad ibn abdullah instead. I want everyone to know how much of an hate-preacher muhammad is. I want people to go ‘hey, do you know that guy, muhammad?’ ‘I sure do, he’s such a hate-preacher. I don’t think I’ve seen someone preaching hatred like muhammad’. ‘Yeah, what a nasty piece of work muhammad is’. “

  15. Champ says

    May 21, 2015 at 2:08 pm

    …and “If you did not know that the Qur’an is the word of God, you’d think a man had written it”

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    LOL! …great joke, Dieter! 😀

    True, but a “madman” had written the unholy quran.

    • Islam_Is_Islam says

      May 21, 2015 at 7:58 pm

      Speaking of “mad man”, this story just came to my attention about a French Mayor being shut in a mental hospital for tweets and facebook posts calling for a ban of Muslims from France. See more here: http://gatesofvienna.net/2015/05/an-asylum-called-france/ or here http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/europe/item/20895-was-politician-forced-into-mental-institution-for-islamophobia

  16. William Lucas Harvey Jr. says

    May 21, 2015 at 2:27 pm

    However, Islam’s Muslims can Preach “Hate”, “Death to the Infiidel”, Defame and Degrade ANY Belief or Religion that is NOT Islam, with expected Allah, Muhammed, and Qur’an given “Impunity”, while THEMSELVES DEMANDING the World Wide Imposition of “Blasphemy Laws”, with Criminal Penalties, if ANYONE “Criticises” THEM.

  17. swampbubbles says

    May 21, 2015 at 2:50 pm

    It is human nature to hate being downgraded from equal to inferior [aka defacto sharia law].

    It is abnormal to “expect to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements.” [narcissistic personality disorder, pp. 9-10]

    http://www.psi.uba.ar/academica/carrerasdegrado/psicologia/sitios_catedras/practicas_profesionales/820_clinica_tr_personalidad_psicosis/material/dsm.pdf

    • swampbubbles says

      May 21, 2015 at 2:55 pm

      Islam is a mental disorder. No two snowflakes are alike — why should every human being have to be alike?!?!? I don’t understand how Islamics don’t see themselves as messed up!!!!!

  18. Tom Cherian Mullammootil says

    May 21, 2015 at 3:18 pm

    I would be totally ok if the case was thrown out on the basis of FREE SPEECH.

    What is more hateful than RESPECT Muhammad the SLAVE OWNER as a PERFECT MAN aka PROPHET?

  19. epistemology says

    May 21, 2015 at 4:14 pm

    I definitely recommend the judge to learn German. This is the definition of hate preacher according to the DUDEN, the German dictionary: somebody who as a preacher incites people to hatred and violence.

    Dieter Nuhr is no preacher, he’s a comedian and he never incited anybody to hatred and violence.

    His jokes are really innocuous, but they hit the nail. That’s what muzzies dislike most. Hey Mr. Judge welcome to the PC club, to the cultural relativists sucking up to Islam.

    As for mastering the German language I’m sorry Mr. Judge but there is plenty of room for improvement.

  20. Mark says

    May 21, 2015 at 4:17 pm

    I actually think the court got it right. It wasn’t saying that the comedian was a hate preacher, just that calling him one was a valid exercise of free speech. If all the muzzies did was call peiplr hate preachers o wouldn’t have a problem with them.

  21. isabel steffens says

    May 21, 2015 at 4:36 pm

    Have the Germans gone nuts?

    • Kepha says

      May 21, 2015 at 8:10 pm

      Have the Germans gone nuts? Haven’t you heard Gilbert and Sullivan’s line about “All prosy dull society sinners who blabber and bleat and bore/ Are sent to hear sermons by mystical Germans who preach from nine till four!” (from The Mikado). I think the country has had something wrong with it for a while–every extremist ideology in the West and the higher criticism of the Bible finds its roots somewhere in Germany (although there are too many willing hearers over here in Amercia).

  22. CogitoErgoSum says

    May 21, 2015 at 6:05 pm

    Would I be considered a hate preacher if I said that Muhammad was a preacher of hate? Well…..he was and I do say it. Muhammad was a preacher of hate. Just read the Quran. It’s filled with hate. (Glad I’m free to say that.)

  23. More Ham Ed says

    May 21, 2015 at 7:50 pm

    I’m pretty sure the unholy ko ‘ran teaches one-way “tolerance” and teaches followers how to pretend to be a victim while being hateful, while verbally calling everyone else “hateful” while 1.6 billion profess to read said book. Not a small problem, not a “tiny” “minority.”

    • Islam_Is_Islam says

      May 21, 2015 at 8:35 pm

      Unfortunately 1.6 billion merely recite it rather than actually read it. Some who do finally read it, reject it.

      See more here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d4Q8bImiPCM

  24. dumbledoresarmy says

    May 21, 2015 at 9:02 pm

    Dieter Nuhr: write him down among the list of candidates for Anti-Dhimmi of the Year, International (arts/ media subdivision).

    He should at least get an Honorable Mention.

    I hope he perseveres and refuses to be silenced.

    And he isn’t the only sign of resistance to Islamisation. There was that lady, Heidi Mund, back in November 2013, who rocked the boat at one of these foolish interfaith Events.

    http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/world/2014/February/German-Woman-Publicly-Rebuking-Islam-Goes-Viral-/

    ‘Brave German Woman’ Rebukes Islam’s Lie

    “…when the Muslim imam began his call to prayer during the concert, he was interrupted by a small woman in the balcony proclaiming that “Jesus Christ alone is Lord of Germany,” and shouting, “I break this curse.”

    Before her, there was Thilo Sarrazin, warning the country they had a problem.

    Now there are all those Germans who turned up for PEGIDA street rallies.

    Those of us who pray should take a leaf out of Heidi Mund’s book…pray *with* her, for Germany, for the breaking of curses, the throwing down of the spiritual strongholds of Islam that have been established there; *and* we can pray *like* her, for our *own* countries. Remember Ephesians 6: 10-18.

  25. tilda says

    May 21, 2015 at 10:07 pm

    I might have misunderstood this, but I rather like the decision.

    The court found that calling someone a ‘hate preacher’ is covered by freedom of speech. (Which means we are free to call someone a ‘hate preacher’.)

    At the moment it’s mostly Islam that is accused of preaching hate.

    * IF * the court had found that you cannot call someone a hate preacher, then that would have been a restriction on freedom of speech. And how many pedlars of Islam would have lined up at the court doors to bring their own actions for any and every online comment that uses Islam and ‘hate preacher’ in the same paragraph?

    • Barnaby says

      May 22, 2015 at 5:55 am

      Exactly. Jihad Watch are letting themselves down here, acting like hypocrites. Freedom of Speech is exactly that, the freedom, for everyone, to say what they believe.

    • Angemon says

      May 22, 2015 at 9:12 am

      tilda posted:

      “I might have misunderstood this…”

      No, you understood it just fine. The court decided that the butthurt muslim was allowed to call Mr. Nuhr a “hate-preacher” because it was covered by freedom of speech. And I agree with that decision. The thing is, words have meanings, and I think Mr. Nuhr should sue the bastard for slander, preferably stuffing his case with quotes from actual islamic hate-preachers. That would certainly make for an interesting case – would a court of law have the courage to rule that cracking jokes about any given religion is not equivalent to preaching hatred of the followers of that religion?

    • voegelinian says

      May 22, 2015 at 6:26 pm

      Several Jihad Watchers insist on treating Islam as an unremarkable part of our society, to be accorded equal rights. Islam should not be so fairly treated; it should be regarded as a unique threat, and in addition, evil and pernicious and (obviously, flowing from that) against all our values and virtues. But the main point is that it is a deadly threat, as an ideology being stealthily advanced through propaganda and deceit, and through myriad forms of violence including terrorism (Muslims have only refrained in our time from launching formal military invasions because they lack the wherewithal; not because they don’t want to).

      Given this constellation of factors one intelligently (but it doesn’t require rocket science — just more brains than apparently many Jihad Watchers have to put two and two together) unpacks from “unique” (dear reader, please move your eyeballs ever so incrementally upward to see my first mention of “unique”), Muslims should not be accorded rights of any kind — certainly not the right to purvey and foment their seditious propaganda against us by using the very buzzwords (e.g., “hate”) that have thus far helped to enable their edge in the stealth jihad they have been waging against us. When someone is trying to destroy you literally, that’s no time to be fussing about his “rights”.

      • Angemon says

        May 22, 2015 at 7:36 pm

        voegelinian posted:

        “Several Jihad Watchers insist on treating Islam as an unremarkable part of our society, to be accorded equal rights.”

        Exactly who said that and where? Do you have any evidence for what you’re asserting? Because I’ve seen plenty of opinions about islam here in JW, and they range from “islam is a death cult, not a religion” to “ban islam”. I don’t recall anyone (on the CJ movement at least, can’t vouch for muslim trolls) saying “we need to give islam more rights”. The closest I’ve seen to anyone treating islam as unremarkable was you, actually, during your “never mind islam, that’s not important, focus on the muslims” phase.

  26. Barnaby says

    May 22, 2015 at 5:51 am

    You’re running a high risk of being total hypocrites here on Jihad Watch with stories like this. We’re talking about one individual’s right to criticise someone who he considers to be a preacher of hate. That’s freedom of speech. If you’re now saying that you don’t think Muslims should have the right to criticise those who criticise Islam, then you’re so far down the road to hypocrisy that you’ve lost all credibility. On top of that, you’re missing the point. Freedom of speech gives you the right to say what you think, no matter how ridiculous it is. It is the right to humiliate yourself and lose your own credibility by saying things that are clearly absurd. Don’t try to muffle the moron, let him speak and trust in the good sense of those around him to treat his comments with the scorn they deserve.

    • voegelinian says

      May 22, 2015 at 6:46 pm

      Barnaby’s argument is cogent when the only logical context is the asymptotic view of the problem of Islam. The only way to refute a Barnaby is to stop being asymptotic.

      • Ian H says

        May 22, 2015 at 9:51 pm

        … that word .. I don’t think eet means what you think eet means …
        princess bride

        • voegelinian says

          May 23, 2015 at 2:58 pm

          “. . . a curve is said to approach an asymptote endlessly and finally “touch” it only at infinity.”

          As I wrote in an essay just over five years ago:

          “It has been necessary to coin a term: the asymptotic analyst.

          “The word asymptotic in plain English essentially means “moving closer and closer to a position, but never quite getting there”.

          “The position in question here—the one that asymptotic analysis never quite attains though sometimes it might seem to be approximating it—is the one that affirms that Islam as a whole is the problem, and that all Muslims enable that problem.”

          More on that here:

          http://hesperado.blogspot.com/2008/04/our-asymptotic-analysts.html

          And for those who deride the term (yet never, naturally, provide an actual counter-argument), they may not realize that the great Hugh Fitzgerald himself seems to have coined it for this use — see for example:

          http://www.jihadwatch.org/2006/05/fouad-ajami-and-hugh-fitzgerald-lionize-bernard-lewis/comment-page-0#comment-167411

          I may well never have come up with that term had I not read it a few times in Hugh’s essays over the years.

        • Angemon says

          May 23, 2015 at 3:18 pm

          voegelinian posted:

          “I may well never have come up with that term had I not read it a few times in Hugh’s essays over the years.”

          Just so we’re clear: you’re claiming you “came up” with that term AFTER Hugh Fitzgerald used it?

  27. Baucent says

    May 22, 2015 at 6:53 am

    If you read the report carefully, the Court said the muslim could call Mr Nuhr a “hate preacher” as to say that was covered as freedom of speech. The court did not say Nuhr could no longer satirize Islam. Seems like a balanced judgement to me.

  28. Celtic says

    May 22, 2015 at 10:20 am

    I just read an article of a Swiss newspaper about this.

    “Wenn man nicht wüsste, dass der Koran Gottes Wort ist, könnte man meinen, ein Mann hätte ihn geschrieben». Sätze wie diese erweckten den Eindruck, der Islam sei eine gewalttätige Religion, meint Toka. ”

    Translated to English:

    If one does not know that the Quran is the word of God, one could think it was written by a man. Sentences like these could create the impression that Islam is a religion of violence, said Toka.

    This is just laughable – this bearded moron Toka went on comparing Nuhr with Suicide Bombers. I’m really speechless. Sure, if a comedian makes jokes about Islam, one could get the impression that Islam is violent – surely the violent passages in the quran, the documented crimes of Mohammed in Sahih-Bukhari and the extremly violent islamic expansion and the beheadings of nowadays have nothing to do with the violent image of Islam…

    • Celtic says

      May 22, 2015 at 10:23 am

      The newspaperarticle btw had “experts” predicting that the court would probably not even allow the lawsuit – … obviously they did not expect that the judges would treat Islam different from Christianity.

  29. rcourtemanche says

    May 22, 2015 at 12:47 pm

    There was a time that Germany needed to change but not to that extreme.Has it become islamitized beyond return?

    • joaquin says

      May 22, 2015 at 3:01 pm

      “There was a time that Germany needed to change but not to that extreme.Has it become islamitized beyond return?”

      What do you mean by that?

  30. Solange says

    May 22, 2015 at 4:26 pm

    Good points, however, the headline is misleading.

    • Mirren10 says

      May 22, 2015 at 5:19 pm

      ”the headline is misleading”

      In what way ?

      • John Boston says

        May 22, 2015 at 7:45 pm

        The headline suggests or implies that the court ruled Nuhr was a “preacher of hate”. Actually, it simply allowed Toka to call him that. Of course he is no such thing, any more than Bill Maher or anyone who satirizes Islam.

        • Angemon says

          May 22, 2015 at 9:12 pm

          The headline is fine. “Germany: Court rules that satirist who criticizes Islam can be called a “hate preacher””.

  31. marblenecltr says

    May 23, 2015 at 4:29 pm

    In reply to questioning of population, muslimpopulation.com claims 2.04 billion and Carnegie Endowment for Peace, 2.08 billion. I prefer 1.7 billion, but I have no say about it.

  32. Uncle Vladdi says

    May 23, 2015 at 8:49 pm

    These days, the truth needs official protection!

    In all these new “hate-crimes laws” it’s illegal to hate crimes and the criminal who commit them.

    They supposedly “replace” our basic anti-slander laws, which had the defense of the Truth (it’s not slander if it’s true) and where real, actual (not hypothetical) damages had to be proven in court!

    These days, you’re slanderoulsy pre-judged as “Guilty Until (Never) Proven Innocent!” BY the government courts, and if you even only *might* hurt some criminal’s feelings by accusing them of their crimes, and those silly facts that what you’re saying is true, no longer apply!

    Well, I DO hate crimes and the criminals that commit them – don’t you?

    Hate is only the perfectly natural human response of perpetual anger towards ongoing injustices (like islam); without hate, nobody’d ever even bother to accuse any criminals of their crimes, and so hope to end those crimes.

    In fact, liberals today try to pretend there’s no such things as crime and criminals, because we’re all really only victims anyway!

    They’d make it “illegal” to accuse any criminals of their crimes, if doing so might hurt their feelings, and so “make” them commit even more crimes!

    But when they try to make “hate crimes” illegal, they really only ever end up making it illegal to hate crimes!

    😉

FacebookYoutubeTwitterLog in

Subscribe to the Jihad Watch Daily Digest

You will receive a daily mailing containing links to the stories posted at Jihad Watch in the last 24 hours.
Enter your email address to subscribe.

Please wait...

Thank you for signing up!
If you are forwarding to a friend, please remove the unsubscribe buttons first, as they my accidentally click it.

Subscribe to all Jihad Watch posts

You will receive immediate notification.
Enter your email address to subscribe.
Note: This may be up to 15 emails a day.

Donate to JihadWatch
FrontPage Mag

Search Site

Translate

The Team

Robert Spencer in FrontPageMag
Robert Spencer in PJ Media

Articles at Jihad Watch by
Robert Spencer
Hugh Fitzgerald
Christine Douglass-Williams
Andrew Harrod
Jamie Glazov
Daniel Greenfield

Contact Us

Terror Attacks Since 9/11

Archives

  • 2020
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2019
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2018
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2017
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2016
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2015
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2014
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2013
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2012
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2011
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2010
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2009
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2008
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2007
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2006
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2005
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2004
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2003
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • March

All Categories

You Might Like

Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Recent Comments

  • gravenimage on Erdogan: ‘Turks must defend the rights of Jerusalem, even with their lives’ for ‘the honor of the Islamic nation’
  • gravenimage on Erdogan: ‘Turks must defend the rights of Jerusalem, even with their lives’ for ‘the honor of the Islamic nation’
  • Walter Sieruk on Iranian Kurdistan: Muslim brothers behead their sister in honor killing over her romantic relationship
  • gravenimage on Uighur leader: ‘We’re actually quite worried’ about what Biden might let China get away with
  • James Lincoln on Iranian Kurdistan: Muslim brothers behead their sister in honor killing over her romantic relationship

Popular Categories

dhimmitude Sharia Jihad in the U.S ISIS / Islamic State / ISIL Iran Free Speech

Robert Spencer FaceBook Page

Robert Spencer Twitter

Robert Spencer twitter

Robert Spencer YouTube Channel

Books by Robert Spencer

Jihad Watch® is a registered trademark of Robert Spencer in the United States and/or other countries - Site Developed and Managed by Free Speech Defense

Content copyright Jihad Watch, Jihad Watch claims no credit for any images posted on this site unless otherwise noted. Images on this blog are copyright to their respective owners. If there is an image appearing on this blog that belongs to you and you do not wish for it appear on this site, please E-mail with a link to said image and it will be promptly removed.

Our mailing address is: David Horowitz Freedom Center, P.O. Box 55089, Sherman Oaks, CA 91499-1964

loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.