• 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

Georgia proposes bill outlawing “insult of religious feelings”

Feb 8, 2016 6:47 am By Robert Spencer

“Critics fear law will limit freedom of speech in one of the world’s most devout Christian countries.” This bill is extremely foolish; the Christians may want it in Georgia, but it coincides with the global push by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) to compel the West to adopt Sharia blasphemy laws. The Christians of Georgia may ultimately find this measure, if it becomes law, being used against them. It is Islamic supremacists worldwide who are constantly claiming that their feelings have been hurt, and that non-Muslims have to change their behavior accordingly. A bill like this one plays into the hands of such claims, and paves the way for the tyranny of the insulted.

Patriarch Ilya

“Georgia proposes ‘blasphemy bill’ to outlaw religious insults,” by Giorgi Lomsadze, Eurasianet.org, February 8, 2016:

Georgia is planning a “blasphemy bill” that will make religious irreverence punishable by law, prompting concerns about freedom of expression in the devoutly Orthodox Christian society.

Critics say the bill, which has been approved at committee stage and is headed for the parliamentary floor, could be used against any organisations not following the official church line.

Georgia ranks among the world’s most religious nations, with residents extremely sensitive to any criticism of the church which is seen as the historical defender of the country’s national identity. In 2013, Patriarch Ilia II ranked as the country’s most trusted public figure.

The proposed bill would impose a 100 lari fine ($120) for “insults to religious feelings”, which would double for a repeat offence. Desecrating a religious symbol could cost up to 1,000 lari. With the average monthly salary no more than about 818 laris, the amounts are not insignificant.

Supporters argue that the bill is intended to protect all religious persuasions, although minority groups say they don’t expect to benefit. “This law is not going to protect anyone; at least not the minorities, and will be a powerful tool against freedom of speech,” said Rusudan Gotsiridze, an Evangelical Baptist bishop, to Liberali.ge.

In the west of the country, Georgian Orthodox congregations have opposed the opening of mosques and madrasas. In a sign of inter-faith tensions, a pig’s head was nailed to the door of a planned Muslim school.

The Georgian ombudsman’s office has expressed doubts about the law. “The current wording proposes the ‘insult of religious feelings’ as the sole criterion for limiting freedom of expression, which … subjects one individual to another’s will and places the believers in a privileged position,” said ombudsman Ucha Nanuashvili.

The Georgian Orthodox church is already in a privileged position because of its constitutional pact with the state, an ever-growing network of basilicas and a tendency to weigh in on secular matters. Although it has called for a mechanism to protect religious beliefs, authorities insist that the church is not behind the proposed bill.

The draft is likely to be passed, particularly in a parliamentary election year. The ruling Georgian Dream Coalition endorsed the document on 2 February at a human rights committee hearing that was snubbed by minority MPs. The bill is sponsored by conservative actor-turned-MP Soso Jachvliani.

But the bill has caused divisions both within and outside the ruling coalition. Tamar Kordzaia, an MP from the moderate Republican Party, a member of the Georgian Dream coalition, has spoken against it.

Its catch-all restriction on remarks about the church would upset the existing balance of civil liberties and comes short of international human rights standards, she said.

“In many cases, there can be a clash between freedom of expression and freedom of religion, but it is a matter of priorities among the liberties,” Kordzaia told Netgazeti.ge. “A perceived insult to religious feelings should be disputed by an individual. The state can never know if some particular action is offensive to a particular individual.”

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: blasphemy, Georgia Tagged With: Ilya II


Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Comments

  1. pennant says

    Feb 8, 2016 at 7:06 am

    It’s a good thing nothing like this could happen here in the US. Oh wait, I forgot, just last month Democrats introduced a bill called HR 569: Condemning violence, bigotry and hateful rhetoric towards Muslims in the United States.

    As Robert pointed out all these efforts to shut down criticism of Islam are rooted in Islamic sharia laws against blasphemy. Mention this pertinent fact to anyone who gets their news exclusively from the MSM and you will be ridiculed as a tin foil hat wearer.

    • nothosaur says

      Feb 8, 2016 at 5:50 pm

      A “Hate-speech” statute was found to be unconstitutional in RAV v. City of St. Paul. They have a lot of work to do if they want to reverse course and trash the constitutionally proctected right to free speech.

    • Peter Charles says

      Feb 8, 2016 at 8:10 pm

      You know, such laws insult MY religion, so I insist you STOP THIS CRAP!!!!!!!!

  2. SAHANI says

    Feb 8, 2016 at 7:14 am

    Can any one measure feelings ,can any one will be truthful what are the feeling means ,feeling changes with time and space. laws based on feeling is nothing but a way to destroy a civilization. looks like after materiel progress now death of human soul as laws are going to be based on feeling .

  3. john spielman says

    Feb 8, 2016 at 7:26 am

    living in a democracy WITH FREE SPEECH means that it is a privilege to have your religion INSULTED by unbelievers ! It gives one the opportunity to refute their insults by the TRUTH. If one cannot , it is because your religion if false.
    head. Jesus did not shy away from controversy and insults but took them on and made the pharisees look foolish.

    • manuel paleologus says

      Feb 8, 2016 at 8:29 am

      You are right by stating the way the freedom of speech it has to be understood.

    • Dom107 says

      Feb 8, 2016 at 3:35 pm

      While I don’t agree with gratuitously insulting religions which are non -violent they must not be held in a privileged position beyond criticism which any such law seeks to achieve.If a single being could create the vastness of the known Universe and the possible Multiverses then I would think he wouldnt be concerned about a creature or creatures almost infinitely small in size and ability to him.Why he would care about us ,as the Bible tells us, might have been believable to ignorant desert people thousands of years ago and spread by various empires by force since it is not credible at all in 2016 when we know so much about the Universe and ourselves and how we actually came about.?

      • Carolyne says

        Feb 9, 2016 at 8:11 pm

        That’s what free speech is: Speech with which you do not agree. While many will not agree with your idea of the universe and man’s importance in it, you are free to say it because of the First Amendment. Long may it wave.

  4. Les Peoples says

    Feb 8, 2016 at 7:41 am

    Christians follow the Word of God–not mans or Satan’s prophets or books of hate and death!
    God has given believers in Jesus–the Only name by which you can be saved obtaining eternal life and to share that good news called the “Gospel.” Christians are commanded by the Authority and Power of the name of Jesus to Go into All the world sharing this fact to unbelievers! Being Ambassadors, and disciples we are to be sent out to share this news. We are not to be rebuked, but to speak, exhort with All Authority of God! Titus 2:14, 15 King James Holy Bible. Gods Word will not return void. You will believe and be saved or reject and be judged to outer darkness and the flames for eternity!

  5. Angemon says

    Feb 8, 2016 at 7:42 am

    Georgia proposes bill outlawing “insult of religious feelings”

    Why not simply outlaw islam? After all, the quran falsely states that the Christian Trinity is God, Jesus and Mary, denies the divinity of Jesus, as well as His death and Resurrection, and exhorts muslims to attack non-muslims. Anyway, this is a bad idea, and it’s a shame to see it brought forward in an European nation.

    • Panmelia says

      Feb 8, 2016 at 12:03 pm

      Phew! When I first read this news item, I thought it referred to the US State of Georgia. But even with Obama as president, Americans have more sense than to accept something like this – don’t they?

      The ex-soviet Georgia would be nuts to pass such a law: the mozzies would be all over it like flies on jam.

      It will be a wonderful day when some country outlaws islam and others follow suit. The nation that’s come nearest is Japan where islam is strongly discouraged and not given a foothold.

  6. Matthieu Baudin says

    Feb 8, 2016 at 7:43 am

    There ought to be a defence of plain speech, throughout the world, in relation to commentary concerning any religious establishment or set of beliefs.

  7. Laurence says

    Feb 8, 2016 at 8:21 am

    No nation, especially a non-theocratic nation, ought ever have on its books such a thing as a blasphemy law. . . which brings me to Canada:

    Canada’s Criminal Code Section 296

    296. (1) Every one who publishes a blasphemous libel is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years

    (2) It is a question of fact whether or not any matter that is published is a blasphemous libel.
    (3) No person shall be convicted of an offence under this section for expressing in good faith and in decent language, or attempting to establish by argument used in good faith and conveyed in decent language, an opinion on a religious subject.

    R.S., c. C-34, s. 260.

    Yup it is still in our Criminal Code; although, and thankfully, we are told ‘there have been no prosecutions for blasphemy in over 80 years.’ But that does not negate the fact that it still exists. It is an archaic law that is long overdo, and definitely in need of being repealed!

  8. Miao Zedong says

    Feb 8, 2016 at 8:49 am

    I hereby declare war on religion. Time of tolerance for desert superstitions is over.

    • Russell Kirk Was Right says

      Feb 8, 2016 at 12:54 pm

      “I hereby declare war on religion”

      And replace it with your own religious fantasies… no thanks.

    • Godfrey Johnson says

      Feb 9, 2016 at 9:09 am

      Well said, Miao. Love the name >^..^<

      High time the world woke up to the myths concocted by old cameleers for their own rapacious ends.

  9. mortimer says

    Feb 8, 2016 at 9:00 am

    A LAW BASE ON ‘HURT FEELINGS’?

    Blasphemy laws are highly subjective, because everyone will have a different opinion of the offense of blasphemy or what constitutes ‘HURT FEELINGS’ and no judge can compass every ‘feeling’ without shutting down all freedom of speech.

    U.S. law values and permits the right to blaspheme because THERE IS NO ESTABLISHED ‘American religion’. What is ‘sacred’ to one person may be highly ‘blasphemous’ to another. Without an officially defined state religion, it is not the responsibility of the judges to intervene.

    -Justice Clark in 1952 wrote: “…it is enough to point out that the state has no
    legitimate interest in protecting any or all religions from views distasteful
    to them. … It is not the business of government in our nation to suppress real
    or imagined attacks upon a particular religious doctrine.”

    -Justice Frankfurter noted that beliefs that are “…dear to one may seem the rankest ‘sacrilege’ to another,” and added concerning “sacrilegious” speech: “…history does not encourage RELIANCE on the wisdom and MODERATION of the censor.”

    INDIA’S SUPREME COURT – 2014 Landmark – Overturns India’s Hate Speech Laws

    The Supreme Court of India on Monday 3 March 2014, dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) by Advocate M L Sharma seeking intervention by the court in directing the Election Commission to curb hate speeches. Dismissing the plea, the Apex court said that it could not curb the fundamental right of the people to express themselves.

    “We cannot curtail fundamental rights of people. It is a precious right guaranteed by Constitution,” a bench headed by Justice RM Lodha said, adding “we are a mature democracy and it is for the public to decide. We are 1280 MILLION PEOPLE and there would be 1280 MILLION VIEWS. One is free not to accept the view of others”. Also the court said that it is a matter of perception, and a statement objectionable to a person might be normal to another person.
    – Wikipedia

    The Irish Law Reform Commission’s 1991 Report opined that “there is NO PLACE for the offence of blasphemous libel in a society which respects freedom of speech.”

    It refused to allow the prosecution, stating “in the ABSENCE of any legislative DEFINITION of the constitutional offence of blasphemy, it is IMPOSSIBLE to say of what the offence of blasphemy consists … In the absence of legislation and in the present uncertain state of the law the Court could not see its way to authorising the institution of a criminal prosecution”.

    WE ARE ALL FREE TO THINK AND SAY ANOTHER OPINION IS WRONG!

    Sharia law’s purpose is to remove the human rights of women and kafirs.

    • worldcitizen1919 says

      Feb 8, 2016 at 5:39 pm

      I think there’s a difference between incitement to violence and free speech.

      I don’t believe freedom to criticise and question each other’s beliefs should ever be revoked but say for instance hate preachers calling for death to America or death or Israel and Baha’is etc should not be permitted as it causes & promotes violence.

      Then everyone can claim to be ‘hurt’ and all freedom of speech will be banned?? If that applied here you could close all Internet forums as well as Jihad Watch and none of us would talk to each other anymore. Not going to happen.because people need and want communication and interaction and have the right to question what they don’t agree with.

  10. Westman says

    Feb 8, 2016 at 9:02 am

    The 10% Muslim population of Georgia will be very happy with such a law and its usefulness.

    Imagine the Gospels if every criticism Jesus said, in regard to his contemporary religious leaders, was removed. Apparently, Georgia intends disallow the example of the entity they worship. Doesn’t that make them a little less Christian?

    • Pere LaChaise says

      Feb 8, 2016 at 11:21 am

      My popodia (wife of a priest in Georgian) translated this story to me the other day. She decries the “dark-mindedness” of contemporary Georgian clergy who are illiberal in the extreme. I heard from a Georgian deacon that there is a big split within the ranks of the Georgian Orthodox Church between liberals and conservatives.
      While this bad bill limiting free speech doesn’t originate among churchmen, it does arise in the context of a dialectic between Church and state peculiar to Georgia, but in some ways paralleling Russia’s ‘symphonia’ with its Byzantine roots. The privilege and access enjoyed by these nations’ Orthodox Churches derives to some degree from their Eastern Roman origin where the Church exerted power to limit secular government and played a partner role in sustaining civil order. More Importantly, the spiritual guidance of the Church was sought as a source of social self-concept, morality and ethics.
      The idea of free speech doesn’t enter this arrangement with much currency. It may be an overstatement to construe this,latest development as merely a product of a historical tendency predicated on Byzantine roots, as more recent history figures largely. Specifically, the regime of Mikhael Saakashvili, who arose in the tumult to oust Shevardnadze’ corrupt regime. The current regime is in reaction to Saakashvili, who as a virtual cadet of the American Republican Party enacted Neoliberal policy wherever he could. Neoliberalism (in its specific 90s American guise “Neocon”) exerts pressure to eradicate elements of traditional national culture as obstructionary to the needs of Capital. Saakashvili was nothing if not a neoliberal reformer, and many in his clique were openly hostile to, and insulting of the Georgian Church and particularly its head” Patriarch-Katholikos Ilia II. I recall many occasions where he was mocked by young apparatchiki of Saakashvili’s party.
      It’s been several years since the Georgian Dream party came to power and much of the former regime’s work has been effaced. Russian influence is much stronger in the absence of the Republican party’s virtual tutelage. There are few persuasive voices for liberalism. All the Georgians know of that is neoliberalism.
      In a country like Georgia, with no history of autochthonous democracy, one can hardly hope for the sudden and rapid growth of openness from cultural soil so rocky and uncultivated. Saakashvili’s impetuous drive for change damaged the country in many ways. It certainly did little to build a strong middle class, universally shown to be the best ground for democracy. His tying of Georgia to the European Union and NATO earned him Putin’s ire, expressed as constant war by Russia, covert and overt. The result was the loss of large proportion of territory to Russia and after the expiry of Saakashvili’s term, reversal of many of his reforms.
      I think that Georgians see freedom to criticize the Church in this light. I think they are going in the wrong direction by following Putin’s lead.

      • Westman says

        Feb 8, 2016 at 1:27 pm

        Pere,

        Thanks for the historical roots of this tendency toward prohibiting criticism of the Georgian Orthodox Church. It also provided some additional understanding of the animosity periodically expressed by Russian aggression.

        I’m not certain if NATO does more harm than good in the buffer countries; creating polarization rather than letting time and modernization automatically afford more liberalization. I’m concerned that internal manipulations of nations in the interest of maximizing the profit-per-unit-time for Plutocrats is a recipe for eventual large-scale war.

  11. mortimer says

    Feb 8, 2016 at 9:13 am

    Without a clear, legislative definition of BLASPHEMY, the Georgian court will not be able to decide what is ‘blasphemy’ on its own. The term ‘religious feelings’, I take it, is being left entirely nebulous and subjective. That means it will be unenforceable, though, without lawyers to defend human rights of speech, many people will be jailed unjustly! It is likely a future Georgian government will be able to twist this law to stop criticism of its policies!

    Will I have the right to critique or mock Aztec human sacrifices, the nonsensical marijuana cult of Rastafarians or the absurd Cargo Cult of the South Sea islands?

    If I declare myself a follower of the ‘Great Spaghetti Monster’, will the court defend me from mockery?

    • mortimer says

      Feb 8, 2016 at 9:21 am

      This proposed law would not survive strong challenges by well-prepared lawyers. But it would take Georgians a great deal of determination and money to defeat it and defend their rights against this ultimately very foolish bill.

      The Georgian human rights organizations need to turn up their volume!

      • Tom says

        Feb 8, 2016 at 10:30 am

        Mortimer, you did not identify the deity correctly
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster
        You’ve hurt my religious feelings wahhhh!!!

        • mortimer says

          Feb 8, 2016 at 4:39 pm

          Is your ‘denominational’ preference marinara or carbonara or pesto?

    • Miao Zedong says

      Feb 8, 2016 at 12:59 pm

      “That means it will be unenforceable”
      —
      I fear it will be enforced anyway, to anything, everything and everyone. Religious people asking from agnostics and atheists that their delusions are respected are asking for trouble – again.

      I’m sick of islam that brought back religious questions to the same perverted, inhumane, intolerante level as during the religious wars and who really thinks that it will be handled in other way then before until everygbody is sick and tired of all the bloodshed.

      I must credit chrisitans though that they worship an entity that rather sacrificied itself than asking for human sacrifice.

  12. somehistory says

    Feb 8, 2016 at 9:52 am

    The law passes and a moslim murders his daughter for not wearing a scarf. The police come to arrest him and he asks, “For what?” and when the police say, “For murder,” he says, “You have hurt my religious feelings as it is not murder, it is for my family honor.”

    The police, having been accused of “hurting religious feelings” cannot proceed as they are now lawbreakers.
    More officers are dispatched to arrest for murder, and the sequence repeats.
    The moslim goes free after murdering, but the police must pay money for their “crime.”

    The beast has opened its mouth wide and the people are marching willingly inside to be devoured by those worshipping satan.

  13. dsinc says

    Feb 8, 2016 at 11:02 am

    Religion is an idea, and idea’s don’t have rights. People have rights.

    • Miao Zedong says

      Feb 8, 2016 at 1:01 pm

      Ideas are there in order to be debated, disputed, challenged. Anyhting less speaks unfavourably for the ideas.

  14. Wellington says

    Feb 8, 2016 at 2:21 pm

    Freedom, as with civilization in general, is fragile and must be sustained with great appreciation for and understanding of it. Often it must be fought for. Tragically, such appreciation, understanding and willingness to fight are not in an ascending mode across the earth but rather in full fledged descent.

    Ominous indeed. Nothing could be more ominous since freedom makes for greatness among a people more than any other single factor. It certainly has in the case of my country, America.

    • mortimer says

      Feb 8, 2016 at 4:46 pm

      Georgia will shoot itself in the foot. Blasphemy laws will have unintended consequences. If the Orthodox want special protection for their church in Georgia at the expense of the rights of minorities, that sort of discrimination will not benefit Georgia, but rob it of many, needed, talented people who will simply leave the country rather than suffer. There should be one law for all Georgians.

      The cost of freedom of expression is that we listen to a lot of rubbish.

      • Wellington says

        Feb 8, 2016 at 5:14 pm

        Agreed, mortimer. Freedom becomes sham freedom if you can’t offend others at times.

  15. sidney penny says

    Feb 8, 2016 at 6:01 pm

    Yes you have to be very careful that the law you want is NOT used against you.

    This is what happened in Quran Calcutta Petition where the law was to there to protect Muslims and was used by the Hindus against the Muslims.

    It is a book that everyone should read apart from Robert Spencer’s Books and of course Jihad Watch

    http://voiceofdharma.org/books/tcqp/chii4.htm

    “Chandmal Chopra tried to obtain an order banning the Koran, by filing a Writ Petition at the Calcutta High Court on 29 March 1985. The petition claimed that Sections 153A and 295A of the Indian Penal Code, and Section 95 of the Criminal Procedure Code were often used by Muslims to ban or proscribe publications critical of Islam”

    “The Koran, also spelt as Quran, the so-called religious book of the Muslims the world over.It is a Book which incites violence, disturbs public tranquility, promotes, on ground of religion, feelings of enmity, hatred and ill-will between different religious communities and insults other religions or religious beliefs of other communities.”

    The purpose of the litigation was to show Muslims who use the law to ban books and material critical of Islam, that the same can also apply to them.

    In short, if Muslims want to ban material critical of Islam because of Sections 153A and 295A of the Indian Penal Code,then the same Sections of the Code will be used against the Muslims.”

    So ,Christians of Georgia be aware that this law will be used against you.

    http://indiafacts.org/revisiting-a-classic-the-calcutta-quran-petition-book-review/

    “On 29 March 1985, one Chandmal Chopra filed a writ petition in the Calcutta High Court seeking a ban on the Quran under Sections 153A and 295A of the Indian Penal Code
    because it “incites violence, disturbs public tranquility, promotes, on the ground of religion, feelings of enmity, hatred and ill-will between different religious communities, and insults other religions or religious beliefs of other religious communities of India.

    The Calcutta High Court disallowed the petition, but the issues raised by it remain relevant, especially now when the need to understand the causes of terror in the name of Islam is greater than ever.”

    I am not in favor of banning books and neither was the petitioner ,the litigation was to draw attention to the contents of the Quran (Koran)

  16. sidney penny says

    Feb 8, 2016 at 6:15 pm

    “Critics say the bill, which has been approved at committee stage and is headed for the parliamentary floor, could be used against any organisations not following the official church line.”

    What is the church so frighten of ?

    What are Muslims so frighten of ?

    What is the point of having laws and legal courts to apply the laws.

    What we need is a different court.(the court of “Ideas” as Robert Spencer puts it,in this excellent speech to the university. http://www.jihadwatch.org/2014/05/video-robert-spencer-at-cal-poly-may-13-2014

    This was in answer to a woman who said to Robert Spencer that hate speech is not freedom of speech and that there is a difference and that hate speech should be banned.

    http://www.faithfreedom.org/oped/Sundaram60315.htm

    Court of human reason, of human values, of human conscience, of human aspiration for a purer and loftier life. The Quran should be taken up for review by that court.(not legal court not Georgia laws )

  17. Mark A says

    Feb 9, 2016 at 3:05 pm

    This is a very shortsighted bill.

    Muslims have a long history of being offended by any criticism of Muslims or Islam and the Muslims in Georgia and outside Georgia will use this legislation to their advantage in shutting down any criticism of Islam in Georgia.

    If this bill becomes law, Georgia’s Christians will soon find it being used against them if they offer any criticism of Islam.

  18. valda purvis says

    Feb 10, 2016 at 9:17 am

    Muslims themselves cannot criticize islam ,so it’s only natural they don’t want others to talk about something they can’t,we have freedom of speech to discuss ,debate anything and we must not lose this ,there have been many cults and religions that need investigating ,if we can’t discuss them how do we know if they are good or bad ,just another action by islam to get us to submit to sharia.

  19. Carolyne says

    Feb 10, 2016 at 5:27 pm

    The Attorney General of the United States, Loretta Lynch (aptly named) recently said that her worst fear was that there would be hateful speech against Muslims. This was shortly after the San Bernardino massacre. I think she tried to back peddle a couple of days later, but she meant it and she thinks we should not be allowed to criticize Islam. So does Hillary Clinton, since she attended a United Nations meeting in Istanbul on that very subject when she was Secretary of State. Folks, the United Nations, composed and run primarily by and for Muslim countries, but financed for the most part by the US is trying everything to pass an international law forbidding criticism of Islam. I do not recognize any law instituted by the United Nations and I will insist on my First Amendment rights until the day I die. And maybe later.

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

  • iconoclast123 on India: Police make first arrest for ‘love jihad’ under new law
  • gravenimage on Greece, Cyprus, Egypt, France and UAE conduct joint military exercises amid rising Turkish threat
  • Brando on New study reveals that Muslim religiosity strongly linked to hatred towards the West
  • gravenimage on Audio: Robert Spencer on Muslim Brotherhood influence in a Biden/Harris administration
  • Boycott Turkey on New study reveals that Muslim religiosity strongly linked to hatred towards the West

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.