| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
Jihad in Australia update from ABCNews, with thanks to JE:
A Victorian court has heard an alleged member of a Melbourne terrorist group met Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan.A bail application will continue tomorrow for 29-year-old Shane Kent and 26-year-old Amer Haddara.
Both men have been charged with belonging to a terrorist group.
The Melbourne Magistrates Court was told a witness made a police statement that Kent trained with Al Qaeda in Afghanistan.
The court was told Osama bin Laden was at the training camp and that Kent met with him.
A police officer told the court he believed Kent pledged allegiance to bin Laden while there.
The officer said Kent used his Al Qaeda training to help the Melbourne group become more organised and focussed in their objectives.
The officer agreed that during a police interview, Kent rejected any suggestion that he was willing to be a martyr for Islam.
Haddara
The court also heard that during a police interview Haddara said Australia and the United States were oppressing Muslims by attacking Afghanistan and Iraq.
He told police that Australia's foreign policies, the Australian Security and Intelligence Organisation (ASIO), police raids and the media's representation of Muslims were examples of oppression within Australia that theoretically justified jihad.
The court heard that when asked if he would ever be a fighter for Islam Haddara answered: "I wish".
Haddara went on to say that the Koran did not allow for the targeting of innocent people or deliberate destruction of buildings.
Oh, well then, carry on!
Posted by Robert at December 20, 2005 7:17 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
29 and 26 year old's claiming to have met BL would only surprise me if this article would give a relative time frame. These fellas are old enough to have met BL pre 9/11.
Posted by: miira![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at December 20, 2005 7:29 AM
Haddara went on to say that the Koran did not allow for the targeting of innocent people or deliberate destruction of buildings.
Of course innocent means muslim, not civilian infidels.
Posted by: kevin at December 20, 2005 10:55 AM
Who is innocent in a religion based on Dar al-Islam (house of Islam) vs. Dar al-Harb (house of war) concept . . .
I thought there wasn't an Arabic term for the word 'innocent'?
If there is an equivalent term (in the Arabic of the koran), kindly inform.
at December 20, 2005 2:47 PM
Of course innocent means muslim, not civilian infidels.
Posted by: kevin
They kill their own in the name of allah and Islam.
I would like to know the time frame on these meetings as well...I think Osama has fallen and is now serving time in hell with the rest of his comprades.
Posted by: chuck at December 20, 2005 5:20 PM
I am not certain of the specifics so maybe someone can provide further details but from the wording of the article I'd say that thet were in Afganistan prior to 2002. After 9/11 laws were introduced making it an offence to train with a terror organisation. However, you cannot charge anyone who had already trained before the laws were introduced. That's the main reason Australia hasn't made more of an effort to get David Hicks out of Guantanamo.
Because the article above states that both men have been charged with "belonging" to a terrorist org rather than "training" with one, I would assume that they cannot be charged as their training occurred before the laws were passed.
Posted by: AngryMuppet at December 20, 2005 9:58 PM
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)