• 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

European Court of Human Rights: Insulting Muhammad not “free speech”

Oct 25, 2018 8:29 am By Robert Spencer

This is clearly the case of Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, who was fined and given a jail sentence for calling Muhammad a pedophile. He married a six-year-old and consummated the marriage when she was nine, but “the Austrian courts had held that ES was making value judgments partly based on untrue facts and without regard to the historical context.”

The problem that the Austrian courts overlooked here was that Muhammad is held up in Islam as the perfect example of conduct for Muslims (cf. Qur’an 33:21). Accordingly, his example does lead to pedophilia, and in any case the distinction between pedophilia and child marriage can be very fine. In Afghanistan virtually all girls above third-grade age are married, and because of Muhammad, but the Austrian court would have us believe either that there is no pedophilia in these child marriages, or that they have nothing to do with Muhammad, both of which could be proven false readily.

And as for “untrue facts,” the hadith collection that Muslims consider most reliable, Sahih Bukhari, affirms more than once that Aisha was nine at the time of the consummation of the marriage.

Finally, would the European Court of Human Rights rule that someone deserved a fine and imprisonment for criticizing Jesus? The case wouldn’t even come to them.

This is an important step toward the imposition of Sharia in Europe, as it is a tacit acceptance of Sharia blasphemy restrictions on criticizing Muhammad.

“Insulting Prophet Muhammad not ‘free speech,’ ECtHR rules,” Daily Sabah, October 25, 2018:

The European Court of Human Rights ruled Thursday that an Austrian woman’s criminal conviction and fine for her statements accusing the Prophet Muhammad of pedophilia did not breach her right to free speech.

The woman, named only as ES by the court, had held seminars on Islam in 2008 and 2009 for the far-right Freedom Party (FPO) where she discussed the prophet’s marriage to his wife Aisha, a child at the time, and implied that he was a pedophile.

An Austrian court convicted her of disparaging religious doctrines in 2011 and fined her 480 euros (548 dollars), a judgment that was upheld on two appeals.

Stating that the court had found that “the applicant’s statements had been likely to arouse justified indignation in Muslims” and “amounted to a generalization without factual basis”, the ECtHR said that the woman’s comments could not be covered by the freedom of expression.

ES’ statements “were not phrased in a neutral manner aimed at being an objective contribution to a public debate concerning child marriages,” the ECHR held, adding that the moderate fine imposed on her could not be considered disproportionate.

The Austrian courts had drawn a distinction between pedophilia and child marriage, which was also a common practice historically in European ruling families.

The ECtHR also underlined that it classified the ‘impugned’ statements as “an abusive attack on the Prophet of Islam, which was capable of stirring up prejudice and putting at risk religious peace.”

It noted that the Austrian courts had held that ES was making value judgments partly based on untrue facts and without regard to the historical context….

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: European Union, Featured, free speech, Islamic supremacism, Muhammad, Sharia Tagged With: European Court of Human Rights


Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Comments

  1. mike9a says

    Oct 25, 2018 at 8:51 am

    What is next? Insulting European Court is not free speech!

    • Flavius Claudius Iulianus says

      Oct 25, 2018 at 2:23 pm

      This court is exactly like the Nazi puppet courts during the war. They only did the bidding of their political keepers. Nobody, then and now, is fooled by these perverted charades.

      • Lydia Church says

        Oct 25, 2018 at 5:11 pm

        Here’s the thing: EVERYTHING is covered under freedom of speech, or it is not ‘freedom of speech’!

        YES, we DO have the right to insult mohammed, we do have that freedom of speech!
        mohammed was a camel fondling false prophet! There, you see?!

        • Wellington says

          Oct 25, 2018 at 7:10 pm

          No, Lydia, not EVERYTHING is covered under freedom of speech per the First Amendment here in America. You can’t falsely yell “fire” in a crowded theater and then claim freedom of speech. Neither can you make direct physical threats to an individual and then also claim freedom of speech.

          Freedom of speech in America is the most expansive of liberty in all of man’s history but it is not absolute. It approaches absoluteness but it is not absolute, as my two examples above have illustrated.

          Learn this and become a wiser and more informed person.

        • gravenimage says

          Oct 26, 2018 at 3:42 pm

          Everything is covered save things like falsely crying fire in a crowded theater–which puts people in danger–and directly inciting violence, which does the same.

          Certainly, criticizing historic figures like Muhammed is covered by the First Amendment.

    • Dg says

      Oct 26, 2018 at 1:14 am

      Elisabeth – Let me take some heat off of you. Mohammad was a rancid, POS pedophile. Shows you who Muslims really are!

      Mayhem

  2. Krishna says

    Oct 25, 2018 at 8:54 am

    EU is becoming totaleration state

    • Salome says

      Oct 25, 2018 at 3:56 pm

      Brexit’s looking even better.

      • Yokel says

        Oct 26, 2018 at 1:43 pm

        1. Brexit is going to be betrayed by our own government. They are adopting the Hotel California solution, we will have checked out but we won’t be able to leave.
        2. ECHR is not an EU institution (28, soon 27 I hope, member states), instead it is part of the Council of Europe (47 members) so we won’t be leaving its jurisdiction any time soon.

  3. Peter says

    Oct 25, 2018 at 9:10 am

    Muhammad was a terrorist: “I have been made victorious [by Allah] with terror.” The true insult is digging your head in the sand and expecting everyone else to do the same. Face the facts: Islam is the third of mankind’s totalitarian ideologies, and the most dangerous, not just to non-Muslims but to individual liberty.

    • Michael Copeland says

      Oct 26, 2018 at 3:54 am

      “No one can regard any field of his affairs as personal and private. … the Islamic State bears a kind of resemblance to the Fascist and Communist states”
      Abul Ala Maududi.
      https://libertygb.org.uk/news/extremism-–-there-problem-within-islam

  4. duh swami says

    Oct 25, 2018 at 9:14 am

    Is it OK to insult Allah? I have a whole book of those…

    • Joe says

      Oct 26, 2018 at 9:12 am

      The Koran insults Allah. Almost every page in the Koran tells Muslims to hate others. That makes Allah look like the God of Hate. Is Allah so stupid and weak that he allows the Koran to insult him?

  5. Elisha says

    Oct 25, 2018 at 9:20 am

    What an utterly weak and craven little god “allah” the muslims serve. Not strong (or wise) enough to preserve the “uncorrupted” Bible – we’re supposed to just take their word for it. No one can change “allah’s” word, except the eeeevil apostle Paul, who appears to be too mighty for the most fragile “allah”.

    And when THE DEVIL hath seen that they have set so little by him, after certain essays, made in such times as he thought most fitting, he hath given that temptation quite over. And this he doth not only because THE PROUD SPIRIT CANNOT ENDURE TO BE MOCKED, but also lest, with much tempting the man to the sin to which he could not in conclusion bring him, he should much increase his merit. – Thomas More

    Dialogue of Comfort Against Tribulation (1553), Book Two, Section XVI

    The fear of man brings a snare, But he who trusts in the LORD will be exalted. – Proverbs 29:25

  6. Eigil says

    Oct 25, 2018 at 9:29 am

    Soo.. Is it not okay to freely Insult Kim Il-sung (semi deity, eternal leader and all that) or Mao
    and Joseph Smith(one example of a prophet after the *last one*) for that part. Heck is it okay to criticize Trump?

  7. Kay says

    Oct 25, 2018 at 9:33 am

    This is unbelievable that this happened in Europe.

  8. WPM says

    Oct 25, 2018 at 9:35 am

    Someone said those you fear to criticize rules you .Islam rules you from fear and terror ,unquestioning authority of a slave master relation to a master god to man as his slave. A unloving god who needs his man slaves to keep unbelievers in there place, a weak that can not allow anyone to debate his illogical book the Koran as the real word of god.

  9. Wellington says

    Oct 25, 2018 at 9:38 am

    What about insulting Jesus or Noah or Abraham or Moses? OK to insult Joseph Smith or Brigham Young? How about Buddha? Yes, who can be insulted and who can’t be? It’s a puzzlement, no? Or is it the case that it is only matters Islamic that cannot be subject to insult?

    This is what happens when you make a distinction between free speech and hate speech. It gets all very confusing and stupid, replete often times with double standards, and the loser in it all is free speech. A once free Western Europe is rapidly becoming free no more. This is not just pathetic but tragic.

    • gravenimage says

      Oct 26, 2018 at 3:44 pm

      Grimly true.

  10. WPM says

    Oct 25, 2018 at 9:39 am

    Correction
    A unloving god who needs his man slaves to keep the unbelievers in there place , a weak god that can not allow anyone to debate or question his illogical book the Koran as the real word of god.

    • gravenimage says

      Oct 26, 2018 at 3:59 pm

      Good post.

  11. Halal Bacon says

    Oct 25, 2018 at 10:09 am

    I would ask the court to prove the existence of mohamhead, or pay the fine with imaginary money

    • K. says

      Oct 26, 2018 at 12:41 am

      Our money -is- imaginary.

    • IanB says

      Oct 26, 2018 at 1:31 pm

      All gods are imaginary – always have been.

  12. Kilauea says

    Oct 25, 2018 at 10:57 am

    Muhammad, a Rabbi, and a camel walk into a bar. . . . . . . . . . . . Muhammad said, “Why do you think I brought a step ladder?

  13. Kilauea says

    Oct 25, 2018 at 11:00 am

    Muhammad, a Rabbi, and a Camel walk into a bar. . . . . . . . . . . . . ..Then Muhammad said, “That’s why I brought the step ladder.

  14. elee says

    Oct 25, 2018 at 11:20 am

    If you treasure free speech, then this item demonstrates your stake in a centuries-old British foreign policy: no single (or “united”) power must ever become dominant on the European continent. Not Napoleon, not the Kaiser, not Hitler, not Stalin. When the Continent unites under any regime, our liberties are endangered.

    • Ernie says

      Oct 25, 2018 at 12:19 pm

      How true Elee !

    • abad says

      Oct 25, 2018 at 6:25 pm

      Bingo.

      Precisely why it is time for all EU nation members threaten to leave, and the EU finally shut down.

  15. Gene says

    Oct 25, 2018 at 12:24 pm

    Insulting Muhammad is not “free speech,” it’s a civic duty.

    • abad says

      Oct 25, 2018 at 6:26 pm

      +1

  16. Anjuli Pandavar says

    Oct 25, 2018 at 12:34 pm

    What’s the fine for claiming that Muhammad split the moon, and would the ECHR back the court that imposes it? Would making such a claim be an abusive attack on the Prophet of Islam, would it be capable of stirring up prejudice and against whom, and what religious peace might it put at risk?

    What’s the fine for claiming that Muhammad went to Heaven on a flying horse, and would the ECHR back the court that imposes it? Would making such a claim be an abusive attack on the Prophet of Islam, would it be capable of stirring up prejudice and against whom, and what religious peace might it put at risk?

    What’s the fine for claiming that Muhammad recommended dipping a fly in your tea, and would the ECHR back the court that imposes it? Would making such a claim be an abusive attack on the Prophet of Islam, would it be capable of stirring up prejudice and against whom, and what religious peace might it put at risk?

    What’s the fine for claiming that Muhammad first tried his luck with the Jews (who saw right through him), and would the ECHR back the court that imposes it? Would making such a claim be an abusive attack on the Prophet of Islam, would it be capable of stirring up prejudice and against whom, and what religious peace might it put at risk?

    Those courts are going to get very very busy. Those judges are going to get very very dodgy. For a start, just think of all the books they’re now going to have to order burnt. Once you make your pact with Islam, you are quickly ensnared by its iniquities and must then forever cover your shame with further iniquities of your own, all the while fattening a laughing Islam.

  17. Guy Forester says

    Oct 25, 2018 at 1:01 pm

    In other words, free speech is what we tell you is free speech. You can speak freely what we approve. The court is currently working on guidelines for thought as well, I am sure.

    You cannot fix stupid.

  18. Merkexit says

    Oct 25, 2018 at 1:06 pm

    Dear Pedophile mohamandeggs:
    to quote the most famous philosopher of modern times “I fart in your general direction.”.

    A million gross insults for ever human butchered by the followers of that gross monstrosity they call “Mohammed”, the most vile Arab ever.

  19. CogitoErgoSum says

    Oct 25, 2018 at 1:16 pm

    I would say that instead of upholding human rights this court has just trampled all over the basic human right of freedom of speech. It’s simply incredible.

    Freedom of speech should always be considered a basic human right. It should stand equally with the right of every human being to know the truth. When a person speaks, others should be free to challenge what is spoken, by use of freedom of speech, to determine the truth. To help settle disputes concerning the truth, laws concerning libel and slander should be available as a peaceful means of settling disputes. Threats of violence or or actual physical harm to others with whom we disagree should never be supported — as this court has now done.

    What this court has said is that violence and threats of violence take priority over basic human rights. The court may as well dissolve itself right now because it has made itself completely irrelevant.

  20. Warren Raymond says

    Oct 25, 2018 at 1:18 pm

    “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam”– Barry Soetoro aka Hussein Obama.

    Infidels must not be allowed to “stir up prejudice and putting at risk religious peace.”

    Needless to mention that the communist clowns who infest this deplorable “European Court of Human Rights” are not just clueless about Islam, but also about the disaster they & likeminded fools have created for us.

  21. Fedup says

    Oct 25, 2018 at 2:55 pm

    Don’t allow them to become a majority in your countries, or you will all be in prison or beheaded for blasphemy. They put false charges on Christians just to get rid of them. Am sick of this cult of madness and the west pretending they’re just another religion and we’re all nazis and islamophobes. A nine year old is still a child and they’re all pedophiles whether they admit it or not. Damn these freaks are nothing but trouble wherever they’re allowed to plant themselves.

    • Yokel says

      Oct 26, 2018 at 1:55 pm

      It’s much less than 51% before they impose sharia on the entire state. If I remember correctly, more like 20%.

  22. Robin Datta says

    Oct 25, 2018 at 3:15 pm

    Coercion to refer to a tribal deity as divine, or to the agent of that deity as a prophet elevates that tradition to a state-sponsored status.

    It is all the more reason to reject that coercion.

  23. Lydia Church says

    Oct 25, 2018 at 5:14 pm

    We cannot wait for the ‘permission’ to speak the truth.
    We must speak the truth. If we do not, not only will freedom of speech totally disappear, but someday so will we. The more we stand up for our rights, that we know we have whether or not ‘they’ approve, the more our rights remain protected, but the more people cave and cower, the faster they disappear. It’s the good old ‘if you don’t use it; you lose it’ principle at work.

  24. Michael F Poulin says

    Oct 25, 2018 at 5:53 pm

    Many of the early European settlers in North America were fleeing persecution from European tyranny…
    Come to America again! Escape while you still can!

  25. Gnillik says

    Oct 25, 2018 at 7:30 pm

    From fighting the Nazis to becoming them.

  26. G179 says

    Oct 26, 2018 at 1:31 am

    Based on this, they should.have banned the Quran too. It contains countless insults to other religions, which are not factual or contextual, and obstruct interreligious peace.

  27. Neil Bochon says

    Oct 26, 2018 at 4:38 am

    ” If you want to know who controls you, look at who you are not allowed to criticize. ” Voltaire

  28. Daniel Clee says

    Oct 26, 2018 at 5:06 am

    This cannot be real. To begin, it is simply not possible to slander a man for recounting the things he has done. Second, it is a valid interpretation of the historically-document facts to say that Mohammad was a pedophile. As for context and the now tiring, “Well, that was normal back then.” Oh, really? You say that by citing what other example? And even if true, this is still is only a context established on opinion. If you want to assure me that the 54 year old Mohammad was not licking his lips in anticipation as he took his nine year old bride to bed, then you cannot express this anymore than someone else can say, “Bullsh*t!” And let’s say the court’s ruling now sets a precedent. So, since our era of “freedom” is so unusual in comparison with the overwhelming majority of human history, we can no longer say that slavery is bad, that taking the wives and children of the slain enemeny in battle is bad, that homosexuality is good, that transgender is “normal”. Do these judges not only see that they are enabling a blasphemy law, but through their reasoning they cut the roots of honest intellectual approach to the lessons we are meant to learn through reviewing history. This is precisely why Islam is so dangerous to the West. Their “greatest human being who ever lived” is a symbolic battering ram that will destroy the metaphysical foundations upon which our society is built.

  29. Christian Groenheide says

    Oct 26, 2018 at 7:04 am

    The discussion is UTTERLY false. There are a couple of implications in this court judgement.

    Paidion is someone who is still being raised (by parents) philia is love or friendship.

    A paedophile is thus someone who loves children. just like a homophile is someone who loves people of the same gender whether married or unmarried. the question here is if it is immoral or completely good and in accordance with the purpose of life. to have a marriage with a 6 year old child. The man is a paedophile simple as that. The question becomes if the perfect man has comitted an error with having a sexual relationship with a child which is monstrous. which makes the man into what we all consider to be a monster. Now the court has ruled that we in europe are comitting an error which is punishable by the law if we find the truth in our hearts that this is a morally reprehensible act and speak up about it. Because it might upset a muslim. We are now not allowed anymore to have our own autonomy. So now homosexuality is ok. with this judgement paedophilia is ok. What is next???

    My question is this. Can a 6 year old EVER give moral conset to a sexual relationship if the age of moral accountability in ALL judeo/christian history was 12 or 13 for girls and 13 for boys? bar and bat mitzwah. So a child which CANNOT give moral consent is thus ALWAYS abused. And the moral question is answered. It is objectionable to have a sexual relationship with a child whether inside a so called marriage or not. The child has to reach maturity and then make up their own mind. It is not to be abused or taken advantage of. IF the pastor says: But this boy liked playing sexual games with me so what? Then the pastor is just as in error as the imam Muhammad would be with Aisha. PERIOD!

    We are NOT allowed anymore to have moral autonomy (to decide for ourselves what we find reprehensible or good) Because there was never any doubt in what paedophilia means, just if it is morally ok or not in the case of muhammad the false prophet.

  30. UNCLE VLADDI says

    Oct 26, 2018 at 7:45 am

    More “hurt feewings!” legislation from criminals. (Who else claims subjective hurt feelings should trump all objective facts when confronted with their crimes?)!

    Let’s have a look at what they imply: “The Strasbourg, France-based court found that her statements describing Muhammad as a pedophile “had been likely to arouse justified indignation in Muslims” and “amounted to a generalization without factual basis.” So they’re deliberately lying about official islamic facts.

    “Such comments, the court said, are not protected by the freedom of expression provisions of Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights.”

    So: It is illegal to report the truth about criminals if it might upset other criminals.

    “The court asserted her statements “were not phrased in a neutral manner aimed at being an objective contribution to a public debate concerning child marriages.”” One must remain “neutral” towards, (i.e: not oppose) all crimes.

    “The European court classified the woman’s “impugned” statements as “an abusive attack on the Prophet of Islam, which was capable of stirring up prejudice and putting at risk religious peace.””

    In asserting Muhammad was a Prophet of religious Peace, they Submit to islam.

    Conclusion: The European Court of Human Rights only supports criminals’ rights.

  31. End PC says

    Oct 26, 2018 at 9:47 am

    So in Europe Muslims – and Muslims only – have the right to not be offended. Insane.

    She was found guilty of words “capable of stirring up prejudice and putting at risk religious peace.” This is high hypocrisy & cowardice since the Court must know that Islam’s doctrines and its Qur’an in particular do exactly that to a much higher degree. Even Muslim’s daily prayers can be accused of such stirrings among Muslims.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnIsL1nWwr0 .

  32. GrumpyMel says

    Oct 26, 2018 at 1:28 pm

    Dear European Court of Human Rights,

    Orwells novel “1984” was supposed to be a cautionary tale, not a guidebook.

  33. gravenimage says

    Oct 26, 2018 at 2:58 pm

    European Court of Human Rights: Insulting Muhammad not “free speech”
    …………………

    What insanity. Criticizing a long dead public figure is the very definition of free speech.

    That, and Muhammed was a foul pedophile, kidnapper, rapist, slaver, pirate, war lord, and mass murderer. No figure in history deserves to be criticized more than the “Prophet” of Islam.

  34. Jean-Francois Morf says

    Oct 26, 2018 at 7:53 pm

    Has Aisha invented the 69 position, from 6 to 9 years old?
    When an Imam teach us what AntiChrist did, then it is NOT an insult, and when a Christian say the same, then it would be an insult to Muhammad?

    Allah+Muhammad+Sharia = Satan+AntiChrist+Bad Spiritus.
    Muslims say christians are polytheists, but they also have 3 gods!

  35. Genba says

    Oct 27, 2018 at 10:51 am

    Have you read the court’s sentence? It’s absolutely preposterous! It shows that Europe is much further down the road of dhimmitude than we thought (and we already thought it was quite far down that road).
    http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-187188

  36. Sande says

    Oct 28, 2018 at 2:28 am

    Only an unrepentant pedophile would think exposing pedophilia wrong. I would advice investigative reporters to spend some time digging into the acts of every judge who ruled against this woman for speaking the truth.
    At the very least one will probably find bribery or blackmail, and more likely behavior much like the perverted false prophet mohamed.

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 Muslim cleric: ‘We welcomed the takeover of ISIS because they wanted to implement the Sharia’
  • gravenimage on Iranian Kurdistan: Muslim brothers behead their sister in honor killing over her romantic relationship
  • gravenimage on New study reveals that Muslim religiosity strongly linked to hatred towards the West
  • Mojdeh Azad on Muslim cleric: ‘We welcomed the takeover of ISIS because they wanted to implement the Sharia’
  • Shaman 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.