• 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

MSNBC’s Chris Hayes & Hamas-linked CAIR rep agree Pamela Geller is “odious”

May 9, 2015 8:49 pm By Robert Spencer

ChrisHayesZahraBillooHayes is winning kudos on the Right for this, because he defended Pamela Geller’s freedom of speech. The Left has become so authoritarian that a Leftist defending the freedom of speech is a spectacle, like a monkey riding a bicycle. But he and his guests, the contemptible Michael Moynihan of the Daily Beast and the sinister Zahra Billoo of the Hamas-linked terror organization the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) agree that Geller, for holding various opinions they misrepresent and taking various actions they detest, is “odious.”

Another spectacle, but a far more common one in the mainstream media: Leftists trash a freedom fighter with the active aid of a representative of a group that was named an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas terror funding case by the Justice Department. CAIR operatives have repeatedly refused to denounce Hamas and Hizballah as terrorist groups. Several former CAIR officials have been convicted of various crimes related to jihad terror. CAIR’s cofounder and longtime Board chairman (Omar Ahmad), as well as its chief spokesman (Ibrahim Hooper), have made Islamic supremacist statements. Zahra Billoo leads its California chapter that distributed a poster telling Muslims not to talk to the FBI. CAIR has opposed every anti-terror measure that has ever been proposed or implemented. It has itself been labeled a terror group by the United Arab Emirates.

Chris Hayes and Michael Moynihan sit with a representative of this odious pro-jihad group and agree that someone fighting for human rights and freedom against jihad terror and Islamic supremacism is “odious.” That’s what’s really odious. And that’s the mainstream media today.

Meanwhile, another unlikely defender, “Allahpundit” of HotAir, in praising Hayes for breaking ranks with the Left-fascists and coming out in defense of the freedom of speech, offers his own good explanation of why the contest was necessary and justified:

Hayes counters that with an analogy to editorial freedom. If MSNBC told him he couldn’t run a segment because it might reflect badly on an advertiser, he’d feel obliged to run it even if he thought initially that it was too weak to air. Once you’ve been extorted over something you have a right to say, it’s more important to resist the extortion than to worry about whether what you have to say is particularly interesting. It’s about incentives, and reducing the extorter’s incentive to extort is a valuable contribution to free speech even if airing your crappy segment isn’t. Geller’s cartoon contest, like Charlie Hebdo’s post-massacre cover, is an attempt to show jihadis that attacking blasphemers won’t end the blasphemy; if anything, by making martyrs and celebrities of them, it’ll encourage it. It’s a bid to reduce the incentive to kill. Whether it’s a smart strategy is hard to say — some jihadis may want to encourage public expressions of sympathy with Charlie Hebdo and Geller, to show western Muslims that the decadent infidel sides with those who insult the prophet — but it’s not, as many stupid media types have claimed this week, an attempt to get people at the event killed. On the contrary, it’s a way to show would-be killers that they need to try another tactic if they’re serious about ending blasphemy, or at least ending public interest in it. Take away the risk of bombs going off and Geller’s cartoon contest wouldn’t have gotten any press at all this week. That’s the lesson. Nice to know that one left-wing media personality got it.

“MSNBC’s Chris Hayes Defends Pamela Geller: She Has the ‘Right to Be Horrible,’” by Andrew Kirell, Mediaite, May 8, 2015:

While prominent Fox News stars Bill O’Reilly, Greta Van Susteren, and Geraldo Rivera have repeatedly slammed Pamela Geller and her “Draw Muhammed” contest that was the subject of a thwarted attack, the anti-Islam activist has gotten support from a seemingly unlikely place: Chris Hayes.

The MSNBC primetime host joined his Fox competitor Megyn Kelly in offering a stern defense of Geller’s speech rights, refusing to suggest that her bigoted speech somehow invites violence.

“This idea that this was a provocation — which, yes it was a provocation — but I don’t care if it was it was a provocation if what it’s provoking is attempted murder,” Hayes said Thursday evening, “because I want to live in a society that that is essentially not okay and not tolerated.”

Both Hayes and his guest, Daily Beast columnist Michael Moynihan made it abundantly clear they do not particularly care for Geller’s “odious and cretinous views,” but that such views should never be met with the threat of violence, nor should they ever be used as justification for murdering the views’ holders.

The MSNBC host related the threats against Geller’s speech to a quandary often discovered by media folk: “If we were going to do a segment that was about someone that was advertising on the network and I was kind of on the fence about it, or actually didn’t like the segment, right, I thought it was a little unfair maybe, but then someone came to us and said ‘you can’t do that segment because of an advertiser.’ I’d be like, ‘now we have to do the segment.’ Because I have to — it has to be the case that we can do that segment.”

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: CAIR, free speech, journalistic bias Tagged With: Chris Hayes, Zahra Billoo


Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Comments

  1. Papa Whiskey says

    May 9, 2015 at 8:59 pm

    Pamela Geller is a tough broad and a great American. As for her critics, f*ck them right in the eye!

    • Shane says

      May 10, 2015 at 10:57 am

      Chris Hayes comments are about the best that you can expect from liberal commentators. I am disapponted in O’Relly and other Fox commentators for not supporting Pamela Gellar. I wish that Fox News would have the balls to show the winning drawing of Muhammad, which really was not so offensive. It showed Muhammad waving a sword at a blasphemer, which certainly fit his character.

      • Darren says

        May 10, 2015 at 1:40 pm

        Saudi and Qatari Petro Dollars go a long way.

  2. Jay Airahs says

    May 9, 2015 at 9:02 pm

    CAIR and their pals at the Islamic Circle Jerks of Islam rummage through trash piles of excuses and insults in hopes of salvaging Islam from the dump of the mother load of bad ideas.

    Meanwhile we must always be alert to avoid stepping in a pile of Islam.

  3. Richie says

    May 9, 2015 at 9:17 pm

    MSNBC is the vile network that gave race baiter and tax dodger Al Sharpton his own show, as well as the insane Keith Olberman. The network has zero credibility

    • Jay Airahs says

      May 10, 2015 at 8:07 am

      MSNBC would now like to take a ‘Special Moment’ to issue a heartfelt Islamic Happy Mothers day to all of Boko Haram’s captured sex slaves.

  4. Angemon says

    May 9, 2015 at 9:18 pm

    but I don’t care if it was it was a provocation if what it’s provoking is attempted murder,” Hayes said Thursday evening, “because I want to live in a society that that is essentially not okay and not tolerated.”

    Hammer, meet nail head.

  5. Jay Airahs says

    May 9, 2015 at 9:36 pm

    Even NPR pulls out their mandatory token (intro) — “We believe in free speech” …BUT
    Then the true PAYLOAD of their story bows effusively to Islam.

  6. Don McKellar says

    May 9, 2015 at 9:41 pm

    To be completely honest, I find Pamela Geller a truly annoying person. However, that does not make her “horrible” or “odius” in what she does — because she is on the side of the greater good for the human species. Luckily, she has not yet dropped down into somehow making this an “Israel” issue as she does far too often on her website, where she seems to imagine that Israel is somehow the most remotely located of States. It results in much of her good work being obscured with a personal religious-political agenda. Please, don’t let this golden moment degrade into that yet again, Ms. Geller.

    Having admitted this inconvenient truth about her — as unpopular as it may be with some — I wish her the best and cheer her on in her fight against the Islamization of the Free World. And will continue to obliterate the left-fascists and Islamic supremacists on internet jihad across the web who do everything they can to try and lie and derail the truth about her.

    • dsinc says

      May 10, 2015 at 3:17 am

      You are way off track there. Dropping down into making this an Israel issue? Having admitted this inconvenient truth about her? What a load of bullcrap you are spouting. Pamela supports freedom from Islam in America and Israel, and all other countries under attack from Islam. What position on Israel should she hold? Would you like her to be anti-semitic like you?

      To be completely honest

      • Don McKellar says

        May 10, 2015 at 10:19 am

        Finding Pamela Geller annoying is a right I reserve. Also, the fact that all religions are based on pure fantasy means that I find the idea of a country based on one to be quite silly. I reserve the right to feel that way, too. I am not anti-semitic by holding such an opinion, and your trying to slap a label like that on me demonstrates that you’ve a bit of a nutjob.

        • ron hargreave says

          May 10, 2015 at 11:09 am

          Don, while I applaud you for understanding that Geller, in her Texas show, was standing up for the First Amendment, I think you don’t quite fully understand the Israel thing. You wrote: ” the fact that all religions are based on pure fantasy means that I find the idea of a country based on one to be quite silly.”

          The trouble is, whether or not the religion that Israel wishes to retain as the majority religion is based on pure fantasy did not matter to the Nazis who conducted their Holocaust; did not matter to the Russians who conducted their pogroms; did not matter to the French and Spanish who conducted a five century, intercontinental Inquisition; did not matter to most Europeans who, beginning in the 13th century, ghettoized “their” Jews, did it? The primary reason for Israel’s existence is security for Jewish people. Hitler, you might not know, did not care whether Jews were religious or not; the only thing that mattered was ethnicity. You could be one quarter Jewish, living as a Christian, and still be sent to die in the death camps. In every example I have provided above, the Jews were unarmed and had absolutely no protection and no power. Israel is an armed state (as is every state that seeks to survive). In order to survive, it must remain predominantly Jewish, because it is a democracy. The goal of the Arab states is to obliterate Israel. They had given up accomplishing this militarily until recently, although Hamas and Hezbollah have never given that up; they are also trying to destroy the country demographically. If they can create an Arab majority, they can institute Sharia law and effectively destroy the very reason the state was founded: for survival.

        • ron hargreave says

          May 10, 2015 at 11:22 am

          “Also, the fact that all religions are based on pure fantasy means that I find the idea of a country based on one to be quite silly.”

          Since your comments on Geller’s show were very intelligent, I’m surprised you don’t know much history of the Jews. They have been subjected to not only the Holocaust, but also to a five century long, intercontinental Inquisition, as well as to Pogroms in Russia and Ghettoization in Europe (since the 13th century). All this time they had no protection. Israel provides that protection.

          It did not matter to Hitler, to the Russians, to Europe whether or not the Jews they attacked were religious or not or whether what they believed was a fantasy. They tortured and murdered them anyway. Israel is an armed homeland that provides the first true security for its Jewish population–provided they retain a Jewish majority, because Israel is a democracy. If the Jews once again become a minority, their rights will once again be curtailed.

          I hope that helps you understand things a bit more.

      • Alex says

        May 10, 2015 at 9:17 pm

        Oh come on, there was absolutely nothing anti semitic about Don’s comment. You’re greatly exaggerating.

  7. Scott says

    May 9, 2015 at 10:02 pm

    xxx

  8. Scott says

    May 9, 2015 at 10:07 pm

    First the smear, than the “she’s entitled to yada, yada”.
    It’s the smear that is heard…..
    This is why Chris Hayes who is feckless, attempts to stand up for free speech. NOT.
    He has no idea what Pamela Geller believes, nor does he care.

    The funny thing is, he and Tucker Carlson almost sounded the same in their two op eds…..

  9. CogitoErgoSum says

    May 9, 2015 at 10:26 pm

    If I understand correctly, the ban against the drawing of images of Muhammad has to do with the Islamic prohibition against idolatry. The early Muslims wished to avoid the “error” of the Christians (who in Muslim minds had turned a man into a god) and it was feared that Muhammad could become an object of worship similar to Christ. Muhammad is supposed to have told his followers that he was just a man and he did not want to be worshiped as a god. So the prohibition against drawing Muhammad’s image came into being.

    If this is true …. that Muhammad wanted to be remembered as just a man …. why all the concern over a cartoon of Muhammad? The cartoons obviously treat Muhammad as just a man and not a god. The problem for Muslims should arise only whenever someone begins to worship the pictures they draw of Muhammad. This is obviously not happening by way of any cartoon. In fact, the cartoonists ARE treating Muhammad as just a man who is eligible for criticism the same as any other man who has ever existed.

    Come to think of it, those who become irate over cartoons of Muhammad are actually the ones guilty of elevating Muhammad to a position equal with that of a god. They have made Muhammad into someone more than human and put him on a holy altar high above any criticism.

    Muhammad was just a man. He supposedly said so himself. No one is worshiping his picture. No idolatry is being committed by any cartoonist. In fact, no one could possibly draw an image of Muhammad since nobody alive knows what Muhammad looked like. ?????

    Once again, Muslim logic eludes me.

    • PRCS says

      May 9, 2015 at 10:33 pm

      As I recall, the prohibition is against drawings of ALL animate objects: for the reason you noted.

    • Marty Sanchez says

      May 10, 2015 at 3:34 am

      The Muslim brain-washed robots are looking for any way to “please allah” and because of a few stories in koran where mo didn’t punish followers who killed people who insulted him, in their genius logic they think that killing people who insulted mo pleases allah. Brilliant, huh?

      • saigaj says

        May 10, 2015 at 11:09 am

        Islam =satans army.We all no how this ends.

        • saigaj says

          May 10, 2015 at 11:10 am

          Sorry know Sp check!

    • ToastedHam says

      May 10, 2015 at 11:58 am

      Ward off idol worship??? The Hell you say!
      The “Hadschar al Aswad” in the Kabah is the most well known example of meteorite worship in newer times. Despite the prohibition of portraying God and adoration of objects, pilgrims to Mecca kiss this “Hadschar al Aswad” (black stone) which, according to the prophet is “Yamin Allah” (the right hand of God), supposedly a divine meteorite or Bethel-stone predating creation that fell at the feet of Adam and Eve. It is presently embedded in the southeastern corner of the Kabah. Muslims touch and kiss the black stone during Hajj.

    • somehistory says

      May 10, 2015 at 12:40 pm

      They wanted to go one better than the Bible’s commandment not to make an image of God…Whom people cannot see and live….and the commandment not to make images of anything on earth or in the heavens…in order to bow down and serve the image of the created thing.
      By ordering that no drawing or image of their false prophet be made on pain of death, the devil was trying to be like God…and failing miserably…but for different reasons. The devil just likes the idea of people being slaughtered. He knows he is not worthy of worship.

  10. PRCS says

    May 9, 2015 at 10:27 pm

    I watched this MSNBC program as it was airing.

    I got the idea that poor Zahra thought she’d been invited to bash intolerant, bigoted, hateful, Islamophobes; and it seemed headed that way at first.

    I could see that things had started to go wrong for her when that Hayes began to defend the reason and the need for doing what Geller did.

    Knowing that CAIR “reps” hate being asked specific questions about Qur’an and Sunn’ah, I was really hoping that Hayes would ask the poor girl to explain the specific passages which get Muslims in a lather about drawing animate objects and what SHE personally feels about it.

    Alas….

  11. mortimer says

    May 9, 2015 at 10:51 pm

    Chris Hayes and Michael Moynihan are craven cowards shielding the beheaders, the slaughters, the genocides against criticism.

    Jihadist intimidation works on the craven cowards Chris Hayes and Michael Moynihan.

  12. mortimer says

    May 9, 2015 at 10:55 pm

    Chris Hayes and Michael Moynihan are examples of instant experts on Islam who are too lazy to read Islam’s source texts.

    Without even having read Sharia law, they are out of their depth on this topic as much as if they were discussing theoretical physics.

    • Whiskey and Pork Rinds says

      May 10, 2015 at 4:11 am

      I agree. We are in the internet age and it is so easy to read the fLlcking Koran. Why the hell are people continuing to argue what is in it when the evidence is right here? Moronic.

  13. mortimer says

    May 9, 2015 at 11:01 pm

    Defiance becomes necessary when laws are unjust, amoral and irrational…as Sharia law is…unjust, amoral and irrational.

    The Left is unaware that every Muslim is deputized by Sharia to be a vigilante murderer of apostates and blasphemers.

    Yes…every single Muslim is deputized to take the law into his own hands by Sharia.

    • ron hargreave says

      May 10, 2015 at 11:26 am

      But not every single Muslim acts upon that. Only the extremists do. Let’s focus on them for awhile. There are billions of Muslims but only thousands of them are murdering people in the West who break their (Muslim’s) religious laws.

  14. R Cole says

    May 10, 2015 at 12:02 am

    But the CAIR representative would not be arguing about free speech – in the Islamic world they done away with free speech a long time ago – her point would go more to Islamic law.

    It’s the personification of Islam. Offending Islam, insulting Islam.

    Can Islam be offended?

    Can you insult an ideology?

    ::

    The first Muhammad cartoons – the most popular of the Danish cartoons – that showed Muhammad with an explosive in his turban – was a satirical drawing of the rise in violence perpetrated in the name of Islam and the Prophet.

    These cartoons – the average western would have had a chuckle at and few might have remembered – found their way to the Islamic world – after which the whole of the Muslim world became ‘outraged’.

    If we could imagine – the Muhammad cartoon on one side of the scales – and the Islamic response on the other…

    The Muhammad cartoon was principally about Islamic violence – and the Muslim response has been one of violence…

    Then it is not about the drawing of the picture – more it is about control.

    And an effort to control those – far outside the places Muslims call the Conquered Lands – or Dar Islam. [Versus Dar al Harb – or Realm of War]

    ::

    In the Islamic world Muslims have control over Christians – and other non-Muslims – where there is not equality. As well as the Islamic world’s cohesiveness is maintained through control of each other – killing offenders is allowed in Islam. When they look out onto the world this is what they expect to see – and their conditioning is such that they have almost lost their immunity – to open question, criticism and challenge. In the Islamic world – one can justify – as having been so incensed – they had to kill someone, because that person has left Islam – and at the very least as Muslims – they should have the right to call the police. In the west – though to deal with this imported urge to do something about perceived offences against Islam – you almost have to put a baby’s bottle in their mouths – but the thing they are crying for – we can’t give them. Not if we are to continue calling ourselves free.

    ::

    This terror duo left their state – to drive to another – to shoot up an exhibition – held in protest of the Islamic law – they were intent on imposing.

    It is a war!.

    • PRCS says

      May 10, 2015 at 10:07 am

      Worse, even–concerning the “12 Danish cartoons of Muhammad”–5 of those pictures were not of Muhammad at all.

  15. RonaldB says

    May 10, 2015 at 12:13 am

    The cartoon exhibit was not simply an exercise of free speech, but a declaration of concepts which need to be freely discussed in the public marketplace of ideas.

    I care not in the least if the media or Hayes wax hot or cold on Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer, or the quality of the exhibits.

    To support free speech, they have to
    1) Display the cartoons, even if they criticize them. Anything else is simply submitting to censorship.

    2) Declare the ideas expressed by the cartoons, even if they criticize and denounce those ideas. For example, “There is a cartoon showing Muhammad with a bloody sword, indicating that Islam spread through violence. This is a false claim. Most converts to Islam outside of IS do so voluntarily (Note this is an illustration, not a claim.)”

    The impact of the exhibition was specifically discussion of details of Islam, which is currently all but suppressed in the mainstream media. There is nothing abstract or “pushing the boundaries” about that.

  16. Liam1304 says

    May 10, 2015 at 1:19 am

    I also note with dismay that the voices (predominantly on the Left) raised against Israel’s “disproportionate” response to Hamas in Gaza have remained starngely silent over the disproportionate response of the Muslims to the cartoons of their (false) prophet.

    Why the incongruity?

    OK, yes I am being sardonic…

    • Richard says

      May 10, 2015 at 4:42 am

      Some would say that news networks are businesses with owners who dictate the values, behaviors and ethics of the presenters… so we see changes of bias in globally pitched messages. Any erosion of the principle of freedom of speech is likely to be as prone to hubris as the support for sharia.

      It could hardly be claimed that there was an attempt to create idols and some would say therefore that any feigned feelings of insult must be considered in the context of other global ambitions.

      He who pays the piper plays the tune, as some would remark about news networks which change tune…

  17. somehistory says

    May 10, 2015 at 2:29 am

    They don’t truly believe something on which they must put a qualifier.
    She has a right to speak, BUT..she shouldn’t have.
    There’s free speech to say what she wants…BUT…what she says is hateful.
    She can draw a cartoon, HOWEVER….it causes terrorism.

    The only way to accept it is if they don’t put the “but” or the “however” With those two qualifiers, they may as well keep silent on the matter.

    And speaking of *odious*…the bilhoo woman qualifies for that title….and the many, many synonyms of odious. Per Google: revolting, repulsive, repellent, repugnant, disgusting, offensive, objectionable, vile, foul, abhorrent, loathsome, nauseating, sickening, hateful, detestable, execrable, abominable, monstrous, appalling, reprehensible, deplorable, insufferable, intolerable, despicable, contemptible, unspeakable, atrocious, awful, terrible, dreadful, frightful, obnoxious, unsavory, unpalatable, unpleasant, disagreeable, nasty, noisome, distasteful; ghastly, horrible, horrid, gross, godawful;
    beastly
    As are her cohorts at cair.

    • ron hargreave says

      May 10, 2015 at 11:16 am

      “She has a right to speak, BUT..she shouldn’t have.” I don’t think you understand fully what she did. Freedom of speech is under attack in the West and the attackers are violent, extremist jihadis for radical Islam. No one in America had been able to stop this attack on our freedoms–until Geller. She did not create this show in order to be mean; she created it, with carefully planned and paid for ($10,000) security, in order to stand up for the First Amendment. If no one can do that, there might as well not be one. What has been happening is that Sharia Law has become the de facto law with respect to free speech in America. But we have chosen to live under our Constitution and we cherish our First Amendment rights. These rights say this: if you don’t like any speech, speak out against it. Sharia says: if you don’t like any speech, murder the speakers.

      Choose your side, somehistorysays, because that is the stark choice.

      • somehistory says

        May 10, 2015 at 2:25 pm

        Sir, You don’t seem to understand what I said. Please…re-read my comment. Then, perhaps you can re-write yours to me. Thank you. You may even see you might just owe me an apology.
        But, I won’t threaten you in any way if you do not apologize or even if you don’t acknowledge that you wrote a response to my comment without understanding.

  18. Spooked Pork Consumer says

    May 10, 2015 at 4:05 am

    I notice the woman is not wearing the full face-covering. Doesn’t she know that she can burn in hell forever for turning guys on?

    Sarc-off

    Doesn’t she believe in the hadith that says that? Next thing you know she’ll be wanting to drive.

    Rest of sarc-off.

    • WCM says

      May 10, 2015 at 6:58 am

      Billoo is one who should be kind enough to wear her hijab backwards to keep from frightening the children and animals, and causing men (except muslim men) to become celibate while in her presence. Even the photo…..

  19. Randell says

    May 10, 2015 at 5:36 am

    of course the left will run to the arms of facist islam – as nonsensical as it is – they do it!

  20. cs says

    May 10, 2015 at 7:23 am

    Look, I hate offending, but this woman looks like a retarded, trying to impose her filthy repression on us. Get a life bitch.

  21. PRCS says

    May 10, 2015 at 12:17 pm

    In addition to all of the media “stars” who parrot the–drawings of “the prophet Muhammad” are blasphemous to Muslims line–there are a few here who have said the same.

    So, here’s another Mediate video, in which Anjem Chaoudary reiterates the truth: that Islam prohibits drawings of ALL animate objects, not just those of “the prophet Muhammad”.

    http://www.mediaite.com/online/anjem-choudary-clarifies-whether-he-thinks-pamela-geller-should-die/

    Beginning at about 10:05

    • Richard says

      May 10, 2015 at 1:42 pm

      Is it necessary for us to adopt Choudhury’s value system in order to understand it, as some would ask ?

  22. Xero_G says

    May 10, 2015 at 1:48 pm

    Those who criticize Pamela Geller are all making the same mistake. Pamela is anti-Islam, not anti-Muslim. O’Reilly and the others can’t seem to differentiate between the two. You can insult PEOPLE but not an Ideology.

    • Beth says

      May 10, 2015 at 4:15 pm

      Thumbs Up! Xero

      I have a little bit of a problem with the word “Muslim” – but I get your point.

  23. Beth says

    May 10, 2015 at 3:53 pm

    I’d be like, ‘now we have to do the segment.’ Because I have to — it has to be the case that we can do that segment.” (emphasis, mine)

    And THAT is what all the ‘wise’ and ‘responsible’ journalists have missed.

  24. Tequila not Taqiyya says

    May 10, 2015 at 4:04 pm

    I think Bill O’ and Billoo should get married since they have so much in common. They would make a lovely couple.

  25. kenny finlayson says

    May 11, 2015 at 1:45 am

    I do not find Pamela horrible at all. I really do not know what they’re talking about.
    They must have gone so far to the left they have lost their way.
    Let’s not worry: they have no way but to come back to reality.

  26. Gamaliel says

    May 11, 2015 at 7:42 am

    Pamela Geller is not odious, she is glorious!

  27. rcourtemanche says

    May 11, 2015 at 9:00 am

    Proof again that the Muslim world isn’t compatible with Western values as admitted by almost 50% of Muslims.

    • FredvanH says

      May 11, 2015 at 12:48 pm

      Almost 50%? I think the number is much higher.

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.