Symptomatic of a larger problem, namely, the frequent lack of respect for secular law among Muslims living in the West. "Judge slams car-racket mum who blames Islam," by Kate Jones for the Herald Sun (thanks to Supercargo):
A young mother has argued her Muslim beliefs forced her into a life of crime.
Shahida Karim-Hawchar, 24, sold stolen cars to unsuspecting buyers because it was her cultural duty to obey her father and her husband, a court heard.
Her lawyer, Tom Danos, said her father, Omar Zayden, and husband Imad pressured her to join their car rebirthing racket.
"This was a religious Muslim family, where the hierarchy was the father, the husband, and then the wife," Mr Danos told the County Court. "It's an additional pressure on her to be involved."
But Judge Felicity Hampel, suspending a 2 1/2-year jail term because the young mum has three sons aged under five, said that argument was an abuse of religion.
"It's a very sad and debasing thing to hear it suggested that adherence to a religious tenet can justify criminal behaviour," Judge Hampel said.
"I don't accept that Islam requires a daughter to obey a directive of the husband or the father, where the directive involves the commission of a criminal offence."
However, Judge Hampel accepted the obedience argument last year when she allowed Karim-Hawchar to change her plea to the charges.
In August 2006, the Karim-Hawchars both asked to change pleas of guilty to not guilty.
Imad was refused, and was later jailed.
But Shahida was successful: Judge Hampel accepted she'd only admitted guilt because Imad had told her to.
The judge was told Shahida was also only obeying Imad in changing her plea.
But Judge Hampel was satisfied Shahida's original plea had not been made freely or with an understanding of what it would mean, but in accordance with her religious or cultural duty.
Last month, Shahida appeared before Judge Hampel yet again -- this time to change her plea a second time, back to guilty.
Welcome to Western Civilization: You are responsible for your own behavior.
Shahida?
I'd check under the car before running any errands for your dad, honey.
Marisol at midnight....mmmmmm....good.
Thank you Marisol, for all your efforts.
(PLEASE POST THIS ANNOUNCEMENT AT OTHER WEBSITES)
The Jihad Awareness Project (to wake up the U.S. Senate and Congress) currently has 109 volunteers in 44 states.
WE ARE STILL SEEKING ADDITIONAL CITIZEN VOLUNTEERS
FROM ALL 50 STATES, ESPECIALLY THE FOLLOWING 6:
Delaware
Mississippi
North Dakota
South Dakota
Vermont
West Virginia
THE PROJECT: We're looking for people in every state of the Union who would be willing to purchase, from Amazon or any other source, a copy of Robert Spencer's new book Religion of Peace? Why Christianity Is And Islam Isn't and mail it, on an agreed upon date, to one of the senators in your state. We want to get the book simultaneously to all 100 senators, in order to send a strong message. If we get more than two people per state, books can also be sent to the U.S. House of Representatives.
If you'd like to participate (or you just have questions), please write to me at traehnam@yahoo.com under the subject heading "Senate," and tell me the state your senator represents, and a nickname. No need for your real name. And I will never share your email address with anyone, not even with other volunteers for this project.
And visit jihadawareness.blogspot.com to get more info on this project and to leave comments other volunteers can read. You can also see there the growing list of participants in this project, and the states their senators represent. I've also designed a graphic that might amuse. Scroll down when you get to the site.
Once we have at least two people from every state, we can agree on a mailing date and then each of us can mail a copy of the book on that date.
Right before each of us mails the book, we’ll issue a press release to media outlets in as many states as possible, and in that way announce and explain the mailing. And perhaps we can come up with some other ways of maximizing the effectiveness of this project and gaining as much positive attention as possible.
One of the project's volunteers suggested contacting Rep. Sue Myrick, who started the Anti-Jihad Caucus in Congress. When we reach the goal of having all 100 senators covered, I'll call Rep. Myrick's office and see if she can help. I've called several congressional offices to get advice on how best to proceed.
"It's a very sad and debasing thing to hear it suggested that adherence to a religious tenet can justify criminal behaviour," Judge Hampel said.
"I don't accept that Islam requires a daughter to obey a directive of the husband or the father, where the directive involves the commission of a criminal offence."
You may not accept it now, but you will when Sharia gets here. This judge is ignorant about Islam, she has no idea why the father would view, ripping off infidels, as a completely Islamic thing to do. She has no idea why the daughter would obey him.
It's actually pretty simple. The judge worships the rule of law. The law derived from the American legal system. Muslims are locked into Sharia, as derived from The Quran, and the mumblings of Mohammad while having a seizure.
They are not the same. Yet, muslims who engage in criminal or shady enterprises in the US, and can justify them on the basis of the Quran, or the example of Mohammad, are not assimilating, and proving that many of them will only obey US laws, when convenient. If these people are not US citizens, they should be deported, otherwise, off to the hoosgow...The judge should be given a Quran and some hadiths from Bukhari...
"A young mother has argued her Muslim beliefs forced her into a life of crime."
Nothing too hard to believe about that!
Posted by: duh_swami, October 18, 2007 1:51 AM
"It's actually pretty simple. The judge worships the rule of law. The law derived from the American legal system. Muslims are locked into Sharia, as derived from The Quran, and the mumblings of Mohammad while having a seizure."
Um, Australian law, actually. Derived from British law. This case comes from Australia. But apart from that, spot on duh_swami.
The worrying thing is she had 3 Sons under 5 and she is only 24!
This is the "Mecca defense." A person has no individual responsibility or guilt for their crimes because the Koran made them do it! The defense consists of the explanation that they were just following orders. "Nicht shuldig" like at Nurnberg. "I am not guilty" like the Nurnberg defendants. Many Moslem jihadists are also like Nazis in that they are committing crimes against humanity.
""It's a very sad and debasing thing to hear it suggested that adherence to a religious tenet can justify criminal behaviour," Judge Hampel said."
....give me this judges address, i will send him a copy of "Why Christianity Is and Islam Isn't"
...Ban Muslim Immigration....
"car rebirthing racket..."
-- from the article above
What a sweet, inoffensive way of putting it.
"My son's in car rebirthing."
As for the judge's self-assured remark that "[i]t's a very sad and debasing thing to hear it suggested that adherence to a religious tenet can justify criminal behaviour," Judge Hampel said, perhaps she should take the occasion of this case to find out what Islam teaches. And what it teaches as not only permitted but commanded (for in Islam things are commanded, things are prohibited) is all kinds of behavior, based on an attitude of unremitting hostility toward Infidels no matter how kindly and welcoming they behave, and inculcates, through Qur'an, Hadith, and Sira, the belief in a permanent state of war (thoughnot necessarily open warfare) between Believers and Infidels.
Adherence to "a religious tenet" -- to tenets, and then not so much adherence as the effect of what may come out of those tenets, the attitudes of Islam, the atmospherics of Islam -- certainly, in Muslim belief and Muslim logic, justifies all kinds of things that non-Muslims would have no trouble describing as criminal behavior, including most importantly, the refusal to collaborate with, or identify with, the authorities of the Infidel nation-state if those authorities are merely trying to enforce laws, and engage in investigations, to protect the continued existence of the legal and political institutions of that nation-state, and the physical well-being of Infidels themselves.
"But Judge Felicity Hampel, suspending a 2 1/2-year jail term because the young mum has three sons aged under five, . . ."
Excuse me? What does having young children have to do with punishment of criminal offenses? Some time back, I was talking to my mama, and mentioned that I thought the government should release for adoption the children of all Muslims convicted of terrorism related offenses -- to practicing families of non-Muslim faiths. (Mama laughed and called me "diabolical.")
Surely there's a nice, devout Christian/Buddhist/Hindu/etc. family somewhere in Australian that is willing to take in these young children whilst their mama pays her debt to society.
So now having children is a "get out of jail free" card? "Isn't that convenient."
I'm glad the judge didn't buy the "Islam made me do it" excuse.
"Symptomatic of a larger problem, namely, the frequent lack of respect for secular law among Muslims living in the West." Posted by Marisol
We are seeing this fruit of Islam more and more.
Who could have imagined it: a religion for pirates?
After reading the 'blogging the koran', this sort of crime does not surprise me. To a muslim it is basically a big nothing. If they didn't do 'shirk' then all is ok.
Basically, from what I understand is that if a muslim doesn't do 'shirk' then a muslim can do anything else - including torture and murder - and he will be ok in the with allah. They even might feel that it is bad for a person to be tortured and/or murdered, 'shirk' is what would send the muslim to hades though - and that at all costs should be avoided.
The more I read on islam the more I am disgusted with it. It is such a low life way.
"We are seeing this fruit of Islam more and more......
Posted by: Josephine "
.....this just popped into my infantile brain...could the lemon tree be Islam.....
When I was just a lad of ten, my father said to me,
Come here and learn a lesson from the lovely lemon tree.
Dont put your faith in love, my boy, my father said to me,
I fear youll find that love is like the lovely lemon tree.
Lemon tree very pretty and the lemon flower is sweet
But the fruit of the poor lemon is impossible to eat.
Lemon tree very pretty and the lemon flower is sweet
But the fruit of the poor lemon is impossible to eat.
Beneath the lemon tree one day, my love and I did a lie
A girl so sweet that when she smiled the sun rose in the sky.
We passed that summer lost in love beneath the lemon tree
The music of her laughter hid my fathers words from me:
Lemon tree very pretty and the lemon flower is sweet
But the fruit of the poor lemon is impossible to eat.
Lemon tree very pretty and the lemon flower is sweet
But the fruit of the poor lemon is impossible to eat.
One day she left without a word. she took away the sun.
And in the dark she left behind, I knew what she had done.
Shed left me for another, its a common tale but true.
A sadder man but wiser now I sing these words to you:
Lemon tree very pretty and the lemon flower is sweet
But the fruit of the poor lemon is impossible to eat.
Lemon tree very pretty and the lemon flower is sweet
But the fruit of the poor lemon is impossible to eat.
This was a religious Muslim family, where the hierarchy was the father, the husband, and then the wife," Mr Danos told the County Court.
Yup, just being true, genuine pure muslims, following muhdsaw's example of pursuing a life of crime.
It's so obvious, exsgt Brown is right, you do not want these people in your neighborhood . . ban muslim immigration.
Those three children being raised up in Islam...what will they become? What conceivable attitudes will they grow up to possess, what conceivable integration into an Infidel society?
Should they not be raised up in a Muslim land, among others like them, rather than among those whom their holy books tell them not to take as friends, but to treat as inferiors and even provide a whole system of regulating such treatment of those who, at best (for the People of the Book, Christians and Jews), are to be allowed to live, but live, ideally, in that condition of permanent humiliation, degradation, and physical insecurity, that is essential to the status of "dhimmi."
Lawyers and judges who work for the government should be among the first to inform themselves -- don't expect the fearful authorities to instruct you-- about the texts, and tenets, and attitudes, and atmospherics of Islam. As a start. And then they should work to inform others.
Do muslim women take off their scarves and burkas when getting their body cavities searched when they go to jail? How many muslim women are in prison, and our jails, now? What was it a year ago, 5 years ago?
I was just wondering on some of the things that will happen more often if we make sure our laws are obeyed while the muslims keep up their ways. I think we will be seeing this happen more often.
"Um, Australian law, actually. Derived from British law. This case comes from Australia. But apart from that, spot on duh_swami.
Posted by: truth-in-footnotes"
Thank you! You took the words right out of my mouth.
TIF.
Agree with those who say the judge is ignorant,tho'
....hey, these people were just following the teachings of their hero, who, by the way, was nothing but a caravan raiding, muderous thug....just take what you want.....yep...some hero...
They tell her what to PLEA. Kafkasque.
Islam: the insanity defense posing as a "religion".
Maybe the judge should comprehend and then outlaw it.
Since it excuses all crimes in its name.
Booty. They are supposed to rip the kufaar off.
The question is, why do our judges allow them any slack?
All I see is crime coming out of this cult whoops I mean religion of peace. Is there a list somewhere that actually shows any good (for lack of a better word) deeds that muslims do for other non-muslims or heck even other muslims?
"But the fruit of the poor lemon is impossible to eat." Posted by: exsgtbrown
That's why...
"You put the lime in the coconut..."
Is stealing not prohibited in the religion of peace. The impression I have is, it must be permitted as long as victims of theft are infidels. It might also act to impoverish infidels and as economic version of Jihad. After all robbing infidels of wealth quite justifiable as all the wealth in the world belongs to Allah and his beloved slaves.
Your honor, simply deport the whole family.
There, FTFY.
So it's not even a matter of her religion.
What a stupid woman to come up with that argument/excuse. Robbetry is robbery in any culture. It's not as if the islamics would let her get away with that. They do know between right and wrong. In her country her right hand would have been chopped off.
Stupid scum is lucky she's living in the West!
More like both her hands AND feet.
http://www.apostatesofislam.com/media/handcutting.htm
Question:
Are Muslims permitted to steal from others?
Summary Answer:
Muslims may not steal from each other. In fact, Muhammad had people's hands cut off for that. But the same is not true of unbelievers. Property rights for them exist only at the discretion of their Muslim rulers. Unsubmissive infidels frequently had their property stolen from them by Muhammad's warriors, which sometimes included wives and children.
The Qur'an:
Sura (5:38) - "As to the thief, Male or female, cut off his or her hands: a punishment by way of example, from Allah, for their crime: and Allah is Exalted in power."
Sura (48:20) - "Allah promised you many acquisitions which you will take, then He hastened on this one for you and held back the hands of men from you, and that it may be a sign for the believers and that He may guide you on a right path." Allah promises Muslims that they will profit materially in their war against unbelievers.
Sura (33:27) - "And He caused you to inherit their land and their houses and their wealth, and land ye have not trodden. Allah is ever Able to do all things." Referring again to the property of unbelievers, which is given to those Muslims who defeat them.
From the Hadith:
Bukhari (81:780) - The Prophet said, "The hand should be cut off for stealing something that is worth a quarter of a Dinar or more."
Bukhari (81:792) - Narrated Aisha: "The Prophet cut off the hand of a lady, and that lady used to come to me, and I used to convey her message to the Prophet and she repented, and her repentance was sincere."
As for taking from unbelievers, perhaps the most illuminating example among many comes from the aftermath of the battle against the Khaybar as recorded by Muhammad's earliest biographer, Ibn Ishaq. The Khaybar were a peaceful community of Jewish farmers who did not even know they were at war until Muhammad led his men against their town one morning, taking them by surprise and handily defeating them.
Not only did Muhammad take much of the town's possessions and land, but he actually had the tribe's treasurer, a man named Kinana, tortured until he gave up the location of hidden treasure. Muhammad then beheaded the man and "married" his traumatized widow, Safiyya (who passed through the hands of one of his lieutenant's first due to the luck of the draw).
Additional Notes:
After being chased out of Mecca, Muhammad and his small band sought refuge in Medina, where he was accepted as a mediator between disparate factions. In order to make ends meet, he raided caravans carrying goods from Syria to merchants in Mecca, taking what he wanted and killing or capturing whoever resisted. Aside from establishing the rule that stealing is permissible, Muhammad's raids also laid a firm foundation for Islamic terrorism.
In later battles, Muhammad ordered his men to set aside a fifth of whatever they were able to take from a conquered population and give it to him. This is how he eventually accumulated great wealth (which his eleven widows did not inherit, even though they were forbidden from remarrying).
Despite this heritage, Muslims today are not taught to steal from others. Those who become thieves do so in contradiction to what is practiced in mainstream Islam.
Bhutto returns to Pakistan and welcomed with a blast
KARACHI, Pakistan - Two bombs went off Thursday night near a truck carrying former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto on her triumphant return to Pakistan after eight years in exile, killing at least 51 people and wounding 150, an official said. Party workers and police said Bhutto was unhurt.
Update and images
http://illustratedpig.blogspot.com/2007/10/on-this-day-oct-19.html
Two comments:
First:"
"Australia: Muslim woman argues her religious beliefs compelled her to obey husband and father, and sell stolen cars"
This sounds suspiciously like the "common cultural practices" defense used by that Saudi couple in Colorado during their trial for the virtual enslavement of their maid.
Second:
"Question:
Are Muslims permitted to steal from others?"
exsgtbrown wrote:"Despite this heritage, Muslims today are not taught to steal from others. Those who become thieves do so in contradiction to what is practiced in mainstream Islam."
That's sort of true. Like "peace" and "tolerance", however, the definition of "theft" is somewhat elastic. The English language edition of the Arab News has a weekly column called "Islam in Perspective" - sort of an "Ask the Iman" column.
One week a couple of years ago, the question of "What is theft?" came up. Stripped of all of the circumlocution, if you have property that is locked up, and someone breaks in and takes it, that's theft. If the property is unsecured, even if they know who owns it, that's different. You should have no real expectation of maintaining ownership. Allah provides. Basically, if it's not nailed down, it's not theft. And if they can pry it up, it wasn't really nailed down.
TIF and Gramfan...
Wrong country, well I'll be dipped. Thats what happens when you type in candle light, with one finger, and read through glasses with peanut butter on them. Thanks for bringing that to my attention.
The worrying thing is she had 3 Sons under 5 and she is only 24!
Posted by: Fred
And guaranteed that we taxpayers are footing the bill for her brood of mini-Mohammedans too. Soon to be expanding brood, no doubt. They're rolling in the dough when they come here. Government gives them big bucks for their big families, plus they make money under the table ripping off people. Common sight in Sydney & Melbourne is Muslims cruising around in Beemers and Mercs, but on welfare. How handy that our social benefit system (that I pay for but do not benefit from) rewards people who have big families. Oz is the Land O'Plenty for them. Half a dozen kids and you can pull in $50k+ tax-free. Equivalent to earning $75k/yr before tax. Just for breeding.
Message to Shahida Karim-Hawchar:
The devil made you do it, didn't he, Sweetheart? Personal responsibility is not in your vocabulary, is it? Of course not.
"...But Shahida was successful: Judge Hampel accepted she'd only admitted guilt because Imad had told her to."
Never mind that Shahida was born with a brain and was perfectly capable of making her own decisions. So, we have another weak-minded person, the judge, siding with Jesse James' daughter!
In other words, "The Devil made me do it"!
Hardball, you're forgetting that according to Islam, Shahida was born with half a brain and virtually no judgment skills at all.
Also, the "Devil" didn't make her do it, "Allah" did. (Oops! Maybe they're the same!!!)
The judge's comments suggest an imperfect understanding of the defendants's mindset. While one supposes that judges and lawyers can and do educate themselves in these matters, it still might be worthwhile for one of these experts to collect case histories of this type into a textbook for law and pre-law students in "Multiculturism and the Law"-type courses, the emphasis in such courses being defense of the existing laws of the land and the avoidance of setting precedent by rendering judgments unnecessarily favorable to Moslems based upon presumption of shared ethical values.
Welcome to Western Civilization: You are responsible for your own behavior.
Only relatively recently, though:
"[T]he principal case, where constraint of a superior is allowed as an excuse for criminal misconduct, is with regard to the matrimonial subjection of the wife to her husband . . . . And therefore if a woman commit theft, burglary, or other civil offences against the laws of society, by the coercion of her husband; or merely by his command, which the law construes a coercion; or even in his company, his example being equivalent to a command; she is not guilty of any crime: being considered as acting by compulsion and not of her own will. Which doctrine is at least a thousand years old in this kingdom, being to be found among the laws of king Ina the West Saxon." 4 William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England *28-*29 (1769).
Wait'll they get a load of what her religion compells her to do to the infidels, wherever she finds them.