• 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

WaPo and The Atlantic promote fake news that Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan is “far right”

May 4, 2019 8:30 am By Christine Douglass-Williams

Outlandish fake news and the desperate impulse to brand all threats as “right wing” is showing up the sloppiness of mainstream media sources, even worse than already expected.
Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan is a far Left, Islamic supremacist thug along with his crony supporters that constitute the Leftist-Islamic supremacist alliance.

“WAPO, ATLANTIC RUSH TO CHANGE STORIES AFTER LABELING LOUIS FARRAKHAN ‘FAR RIGHT’ IN FACEBOOK BAN STORY”, by Scott Morefield, The Daily Caller, May 2, 2019:

Two major media outlets on Thursday described Nation of Islam founder Louis Farrakhan as “far right” in stories about Facebook and Instagram’s most recent platform ban.

Before changing their stories later, both The Washington Post and The Atlantic at first lumped Farrakhan in with right-wing figures Alex Jones, Milo Yiannopoulos, Paul Joseph Watson, Paul Nehlen and Laura Loomer in stories describing the social media giants’ latest attempt to regulate online speech.

“Facebook said on Thursday it has permanently banned several far-right figures and organizations including Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan …” the Post article’s lede by Elizabeth Dwoskin read.

Later, the correction called Farrakhan an “extremist leader who has espoused anti-Semitic views.” The reworded article included “anti-Semitic figures” to describe the Nation of Islam leader:

Correction: Louis Farrakhan is an extremist leader who has espoused anti-Semitic views. An earlier version of this story and headline incorrectly included him in a list of far-right leaders.

Facebook said on Thursday it has permanently banned several far-right and anti-Semitic figures and organizations, including Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, Infowars host Alex Jones, Milo Yiannopoulos and Laura Loomer, for being “dangerous,” a sign that the social network is more aggressively enforcing its hate speech policies under pressure from civil rights groups.

The Atlantic made the same mistake.

The original Atlantic write-up by Taylor Lorenz reads:

In an effort to contain misinformation and extremism that has increasingly spread across the platform, Instagram has banned several prominent right-wing extremists.

Specifically, Instagram and its parent company, Facebook, have banned Alex Jones, Infowars, Milo Yiannopoulos, Paul Joseph Watson, Laura Loomer, Paul Nehlen, and Louis Farrakhan under their policies against dangerous individuals and organizations.

The new write-up separated the ideologies of the extremists mentioned in the post:

In an effort to contain misinformation and extremism that have spread across the platforms, Instagram and its parent company, Facebook, have banned several prominent right-wing extremists including Alex Jones, Infowars, Milo Yiannopoulos, Paul Joseph Watson, Laura Loomer, and Paul Nehlen under their policies against dangerous individuals and organizations. They also banned Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, who has repeatedly made anti-semitic statements.

The Atlantic’s header, however, remained the same at the time this story was published.

The New York Times’ social media team even got in on the action with a tweet that seemed to lump Farrakhan in with “other fringe right-wing personalities.”….

Share this:

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

Follow me on Facebook

Filed Under: Featured, Leftist/Islamic Alliance, United States, Useful idiots Tagged With: Louis Farrakhan, Nation of Islam, The Atlantic, Washington Post


Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Comments

  1. No Muzzies Here says

    May 4, 2019 at 8:54 am

    Farrakhan is a Black nationalist/separatist who hates Whites and Jews. If he weren’t Black he would have been banned a long time ago.

    • Martin says

      May 4, 2019 at 9:09 am

      “Farrakhan is a Black nationalist/separatist who hates Whites and Jews. If he weren’t Black he would have been banned a long time ago.”

      It’s one more glaring example of the Black Privilege in the USA that allows non-Whites to get away with acts that White people would never be allowed to get away with. Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, and the extremely fat Black guy, “I can’t breath, I can’t breath”, who was selling illegal cigarettes in New York City, you’d have never heard of any of them if they had been White.

      Here is a link to an pertinent article that was written about this Black Privilege. It’s worth a look:

      http://www.unz.com/article/the-fulford-file-black-privilege-is-ultimate-cause-of-minnesota-mall-atrocity/

      • SemiDave says

        May 4, 2019 at 9:50 pm

        When you add “islamic privilege” on top of that (as any criticism of Islam is deemed “Islamophobia” ), you have a very nasty situation where black skinned muslims are nearly untouchable!
        This too shall pass…

  2. Victoria says

    May 4, 2019 at 8:58 am

    The constant drumbeat by the far left Democratic Sociocomunists to link Republican right wing nationalists to fringe parties is constant and must be addressed. To call Louis Farrakhan right wing is ludicrous. The left wings assumption that all right is bad and all left is good is an illustration of how far into never, never land our electorate has strayed.

  3. StacyGirl says

    May 4, 2019 at 10:15 am

    Didn’t the muzzie congress gals and Sarsour meet with and defend Calypso Louie? Maybe they should be banned from Twitter, fb, etc along with him.

    • Jule Bacal says

      May 5, 2019 at 4:12 am

      YES. And having the Qur’an/Hadiths banned from being TAUGHT/PREACHED in schools or Mosques as if it were the TRUTH. Not say burn all books but Not Allow it to be taught as Truth. Same with Mein kampf…it cannot be Taught in Schools or Church as TRUTH because it is Supremacist, bigoted and genocidal while USA is for Justice and Equality of all.It is supposed to be used as showing how people can be herded into Mobs and made to follow anything with the right ‘grooming’.

  4. Niemoller says

    May 4, 2019 at 10:20 am

    Seems like being described as “dangerous” and banned is slander.

    Facebook could have just dropped them as not economically or corporately compatible, and be done with it.

    Loomer should sue; she is hardly dangerous. Neither is Jones.

    • Jule Bacal says

      May 5, 2019 at 4:18 am

      Is Jones the one who said the Sandy Hook school shootings were just staged and never happened? (like Holocaust deniers like to say when we know it happened) Or was that someone else?

  5. Westman says

    May 4, 2019 at 10:22 am

    Another “clean the orange juice from the nostrils” moment. Farrakhan is right wing? Where are all his patriotic quotes about America?

    Farrakhan quotes:

    “A decree of death has been passed on America. The judgement of God has been rendered and she must be destroyed…” — Louis Farrakhan in 1997.

    “America will never be made great again. Her days of greatness are over. The God of justice has come.” — Louis Farrakhan in 2017.

    “God will destroy America by the hands of the Muslims. God will not give Japan or Europe the honor of bringing down the United States; this is an honor God will bestow upon Muslims.” – Louis Farrakhan

    Yes, good ol’ boy Farrakhan who ordered the hit on Malcom X because Malcom criticised the founder for making babies with the young unwed girls in the fold. Very Muhammad-like, no?

    • mortimer says

      May 4, 2019 at 10:49 am

      Farrakhan was no doubt merely practicing his sexual techniques with attractive young women in preparation for Allah’s playboy mansion in the sky! These dalliances were in fact ‘temporary marriages’ lasting a few hours or a few minutes. Mohammed himself DECREED ‘temporary marriages’ for his worthy followers.

      As far as the ‘far right’ label of is concerned, the Soviet Academy of Science once declared that ISLAM PER SE (not just the version of Farrakhan) is ‘REACTIONARY’ and that in general Islam’s polity was ‘feudal, trade merchant capitalism’. Is that ‘right wing’ or not?

      I emphasize … not JUST Farrakhan’s version of Islam, but ISLAM PER SE is ‘feudal, trade merchant capitalism’.

      So … that means … ladies and gentleman … that the GLOBLIST LEFTARDS HAVE JUST TURNED ON ALL OF ISLAM and called ALL ISLAM ‘right wing’.

      The RED-GREEN AXIS is officially now over … at this stage … the Muslims will have to fold their tents and leave in the middle of the night.

      • Westman says

        May 4, 2019 at 1:15 pm

        Elijah Muhammad was the founder of the NOI. Farrakhan was his successor. It was Elijah dipping into the NOI ink.

  6. mortimer says

    May 4, 2019 at 10:34 am

    The fallacy constantly used by Globalist-Socialist-Crony-Capitalism is the ‘RIGHT-WING’ meme … it is a form of the sweeping EXCLUSION OF EVIDENCE FALLACY. Heck! Even Stalin used that … Stalin called ALL of his enemies ‘fascist’ … even Trotsky, all his followers, all Trotsky’s family and all the Mensheviks were ‘fascists’. Only Stalin had the truth of pure socialism … just like a Moses figure but with the Commandments of the God Marx in Stalin’s arms.

    Globalist-Socialist-Crony-Capitalist-neo-Marxist-neo-Fascists have THE TRUTH, so they have concluded they are INFALLIBLE and CANNOT ERR. Thus, they may annihilate opposition to THE TRUTH by any means they choose.

    The end of their TRUTH justifies the termination of freedom of expression.

  7. CRUSADER says

    May 4, 2019 at 1:39 pm

    Traditionally, the Right Wing and Left Wing came from the French Revolutionary period. It became codified accordingly, as the French would tend to do with socio-political matters.

    Various parties arrayed themselves in relation to the King at the National Convention. The less radical revolutionists, the Girondistes, who were more sympathetic than their opponents to the Royalist cause, arrayed themselves to his right, as is traditionally done for guests of honour. The Montagnards, who later evolved into the very radical Jacobin faction, arrayed themselves to the King’s left… “The Mountain”.
    Matters spun out of control afterwards, of course, as civil strife and revolution flared.

    Liberalizing politicos would become Left wing — stepping away from traditions, opening society up.

    Conservative, reactionary, monarchist, royalist politicos would become Right wing — keeping order and retaining traditions, in effect closing society and conserving as much of the status quo as possible.

    When appreciating that both wings can go to far extremes and dictate to others…

    ….considering the Nation of Islam and “Islamists” for instance…. they probably can be categorized as both Right and Left in the sense of how conservative minded they are socially — certainly not liberal minded; and yet how willing they are to use taxation, government planning, socialistic schemes to their advantage to impose policies over people, thinking they know better than anyone else, decreasing the individual (while propping up only certain individuals as enlightened leaders).

    Nazism, which the “Islamists” aligned with, were initially national socialists who fought off their competition of the old guard monarchists. Yet, they utilized the mega/militarist corporations and some of the barony to their advantage while fighting off the communists. All while on the path to gain power. Reactionary in some ways, traditionalistic in terms of imposing “Germanic” superiority and customs upon other people, yet imposing huge socio-political programs based on enormous revenue streams from government intrusion into the commercial realm.

  8. CRUSADER says

    May 4, 2019 at 1:55 pm

    Here is an interesting article, as food for thought….

    =======================================

    “You Can Be a Left Wing Republican AND Right Wing Socialist”

    (The psycho-philosophical differences between political people come down to the three psycho-philosophical differences between Jacobins and Girondins.)

    https://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/you-can-be-a-left-wing-republican-and-right-wing-socialist/2013/05/01/

    The political terms “Right” and “Left” were born in the French Revolution, when two different revolutionary factions took seats in the French National Assembly’s hall: the Girondins on the right wing and the Jacobins on the left wing. Their political outlooks were opposed and hostile to each other, although they shared the same ideology and aspired to the same goal: more “Liberty, Equality and Fraternity”.

    The Girondins started a process of creating a liberal-democratic regime, fashioned after the English model, which had been a stable system for six centuries, but the process lasted less than three years and halted when the Jacobins came to power. The new rulers drowned France with the blood of some 100,000 victims, during the period known as the “Reign of Terror”, and eventually crowned an emperor in the king’s place, then left Europe torn through a series of wars.

    This article attempts to examine the essential differences between the psycho-philosophical backgrounds of these two parties, thus seeking to understand the reasons for the horrific 20th Century drama, when hundreds of millions of people were murdered by their own governments. There are three psycho-philosophical differences between the two parties that seem most meaningful:

    A. Dividing human beings into “good ones” and “bad ones,” as opposed to recognizing the universal human weakness

    B. Atheism versus religiousness

    C. Rationalism versus empiricism

    A. “GOOD AND BAD PEOPLE” VERSUS RECOGNIZING THE UNIVERSAL HUMAN WEAKNESS

    The most significant difference between these two revolutionary outlooks seems to be that, unlike the Girondins, the Jacobins divided all people between good people and bad ones, honest people and wicked ones(1). The lower classes, who suffered from the nobility’s exploitation and tyranny, were the good and honest people. The oppressive aristocracy and its collaborators were the bad and corrupt ones.

    In line with this perception and due to their view of social processes as struggles between good and evil, the Jacobins’ rule started the darkest period of the French Revolution, first murdering aristocrats and then those suspected as their associates(2) . But this was only an introduction to the events that humankind was to experience a century later, when other arrogant “good people”, the Marxists, took over large parts of the world.

    Unlike the Jacobins, many of the Gerondins came from aristocratic background. Inspired by the Bible and the Greek philosophers, they held that all people were essentially equal. They had no fixed definitions for enemies who had to be fought, and their intention was to change the regime, from an absolute monarchy to a constitutional-parliamentarian one, much like the English model, thus abolishing the excessive privileges of the upper classes.

    B. ATHEISM VERSUS RELIGIOUSNESS

    The Jacobean atheism was integrated with rationalism, which is discussed in the next section, and with the dismissal of Judeo-Christian scriptures(3). The act that expressed this attitude was the introduction of a statue into the Notre Dame Cathedral of Paris, declaring it as “the god of reason”. Their rise to power was probably the first time in history where an atheist ideology, as opposed to atheist individuals, took over an entire country.(4)

    On the other side of the French National Assembly, the Girondins, who shared the ideology of English Liberalism, supported the freedom of religion and the equality of all churches and religious movements, thus abolishing the privileges and the official status of the Catholic Church as the state religion(5) . Their views were religious in essence, deeply influenced by the Bible, the Greek philosophers and the Freemasons(6) . They combined religious values and the humility of the ruler who kneels before a higher being, with the values of free speech and thought(7).

    C. RATIONALISM VERSUS EMPIRICISM

    The impressive achievements of Newtonian mechanics in describing the laws of movement of both earthly and celestial bodies, through a small number of simple mathematical formulas drove many, including the Jacobins, into a certain type of megalomania – Rationalism, an exaggerated faith in human logic. Lacking the knowledge about Newton’s empirical methods, based on Tycho Brahe’s experiments a century earlier, and the lack of understanding of the process of trial and error through which science makes progress – a process that is basically not different from the way mice find their way in a labyrinth, made them believe in the human ability to find out the absolute truth through deductive methods. These methods are wrongly thought to be employed in mathematics, and especially in geometry. Therefore, the scientific progress that followed from Newton’s contribution encouraged a new form of an old arrogance, described in the Bible: the arrogance of the builders of the tower of Babylon.

    Unlike the Jacobean rationalism, represented by Voltaire, the chief Girondin ideologue Montesquieu, followed Aristotle’s empirical method. He added to the research of around 150 regimes, which served as the basis for Aristotle’s “Politics”, another twenty years of study, with a team of assistants, for writing his book “The Spirit of the Laws” (1748). Together with the Bible and the Greek philosophers, this book guided the founding fathers of the American Revolution in shaping the principles and institutions of the United States. This Liberal Democracy has proven its viability for over two centuries, to this very day.

    ….

  9. CRUSADER says

    May 4, 2019 at 1:56 pm

    ….

    A. FAITH IN “GOOD AND BAD PEOPLE” VERSUS HUMAN EQUALITY

    The Liberal revolutions in England and the USA contained all the psycho-philosophical aspects of the Girondin right wing and luckily for their success and stability, they had no faction similar to the Jacobin Left. The English revolution was led by aristocrats and the clergy. The former used their influence and the latter contributed the ideology. It took place in the 13th Century, i.e. before the Renaissance and the spread of the Classical Greek culture in Europe. Thus, the only source for this Liberal ideology was the Bible, which emphasizes the basic duality of human nature, whose soul and psyche combines good and evil, generosity and egotism, love and hate, cowardice and courage. (8)

    Most of the founding fathers of the American Revolution were pious Christians. As devout Protestants, they were committed to studying the Bible which, together with the Greek philosophers and Montesquieu, guided them in shaping their constitution and institutions. All three sources have in common a religious and empirical approach that stresses the complexity of human nature, which is fundamentally equal in all human beings.

    Following the Jacobin example, the Marxists accurately defined themselves as Left and divided all human beings into “good” and “evil” ones. The “good people” were the proletariat who had no means of production, and the “bad ones” were the bourgeoisie who monopolized the means of production. As a result, while the Jacobins “kindly” murdered around 100,000 people, the Marxists killed in their “war against the bad people” – their “class struggle” – over 100 millions. They turned the 20th Century, “the century of lights” that started with high hopes for the rule of reason, into the most horrible era in human history. (9)

    The Nazis too divided humankind into “bad” and “good” people. The Jews were bad and Aryans, particularly the Germans, were good. They added to the 20th Century’s balance of slaughter around 20 million victims, 6 millions of them were Jewish. In contrast, the Fascists followed the Girondins in this respect. They defined no enemies and committed no genocide in their own countries except for 8000 Jews sent from Italy to Germany. (10)

    B. ATHEISM VERSUS RELIGIOUSNESS

    We mentioned above the Bible-based religiosity of the founders of the American and English Liberal revolutions.

    Marxism, the atheist ideology that regarded religion as “opium for the masses”, fulfilled in the 20th Century the first of the two horrible centuries that Nietzsche foresaw. (see note 4)

    The Nazis were atheists too and specially resented religions and morality of Jewish origin.

    The fascists, on the other hand, joined the Right on the issue of religion, and coined the motto: “God, Fatherland, Family and Work.”

    ….

    https://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/you-can-be-a-left-wing-republican-and-right-wing-socialist/2013/05/01/

  10. CRUSADER says

    May 4, 2019 at 2:03 pm

    Dennis Prager has much to say on distinguishing Left from Right:

  11. CRUSADER says

    May 4, 2019 at 2:05 pm

    Prager U on inner forces, moral failings, outer forces, society failings…

    How Do We Make Society Better? Left vs. Right

  12. gravenimage says

    May 4, 2019 at 2:14 pm

    WaPo and The Atlantic promote fake news that Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan is “far right”
    ……………………..

    Just grimly laughable.

    More:

    Before changing their stories later, both The Washington Post and The Atlantic at first lumped Farrakhan in with right-wing figures Alex Jones, Milo Yiannopoulos, Paul Joseph Watson, Paul Nehlen and Laura Loomer in stories describing the social media giants’ latest attempt to regulate online speech.
    ……………………..

    Paul Nehlen really is a nasty piece of work–a Neo-Nazi, white supremacist, and antisemite who calls Trump a “cuck”. He has at least hinted at violence. He has also doxed those on the Right he sees as too moderate–hence exposing them to threats.

    But certainly Alex Jones, Paul Joseph Watson, Laura Loomer, and Milo Yiannopoulos are completely non-violent figures. I don’t agree with Jones on some of his conspiracy theories–especially his being a 9/11 “Truther”–but this a different matter. He still should have the right to speak.

    Farrakhan, needless to say, has always preached violence–towards Jews, white people, and all non-Muslims. He has also admitted his role in the murder of Malcolm X.

  13. elee says

    May 4, 2019 at 3:21 pm

    First I thought I’d come here to gloat and see how avowed rightists liked getting identified with Lewis Farrakhan. Then I decided that wasn’t really a constructive use of my time or energy, so I shunned this thread. And in my absence some serious dialogue has broken out. Now I’ll have to go back and read in detail. How about we all stop knee-jerking whenever “right” or “left” turns up on our screens?

  14. lisa says

    May 4, 2019 at 4:20 pm

    Shouldnt facebook and Instagram also ban ILHAN OMAR? She has written some offensive stuff about Israel and even Trump. She is definitely an extremist. She should be banned too.

    • Roderick MacUalraig says

      May 6, 2019 at 11:54 pm

      Yes, those that agree and support Louis F.?

      Aren’t they similarly ban able?

  15. Ric says

    May 4, 2019 at 6:52 pm

    The mentioned newspaper and magazine’s branding Farrakhan as far-right is an affront to anyone possessing any common sense or acumen about this sinister, bigoted Muslim. It is a fact that the far-Left is more dangerous not only to the stability of America but the entire West. One merely has to witness unhinging taking place in the EU and other Western nations feigning Democracy.

    As mentioned above, Ilhan Omar’s treasonous utterances and unbridled Jew, Israel-Hatred is as extremist as Farrakhan’s. She, of course, is a Democrat within which there is no restraint put on hatred and anti-Semitism sentiments. The MSM whether the WaPo or the Atlantic, CNN are not only supporters of the extreme-left but are affiliates.

  16. FYI says

    May 4, 2019 at 7:04 pm

    Farrakhan is hardly Far Right.

    But some might say that he does appear to be Far Gone…

  17. ntesdorf says

    May 4, 2019 at 7:24 pm

    The Far Right is in reality also the Far Left. As FYI says, they are both Far Gone.

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

  • Crusades Were Right on Muslim cleric: ‘We welcomed the takeover of ISIS because they wanted to implement the Sharia’
  • William Garrison on The Fantasy Islam of Rice University’s Craig Considine (Part 3)
  • Vladimir on Islamic Republic of Iran: Turkey’s Erdogan champions Islam only as a tool to further his own interests
  • John on Muslim cleric: ‘We welcomed the takeover of ISIS because they wanted to implement the Sharia’
  • Vladimir on Muslim cleric: ‘We welcomed the takeover of ISIS because they wanted to implement the Sharia’

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.