What is the difference between this case and that of Danny Nalliah and Daniel Scot, the Christian pastors in Victoria, Australia?

The were charged with hate speech/religious vilification when they quoted directly from the Koran. How can it be used as a defence in this case?

At least the contents of the Koran are being discussed in courts and this may lead to a decision where certain parts of the Koran are declared hate speech. I wonder what effect that would have?

Posted by: AngryMuppet at January 20, 2006 6:31 PM

It's not rocket science exactly. We know he was preaching murder, and we know that his preaching came from the Koran. Therefore - (and this is that logical leap that we have to get people to take) - the Koran. Preaches. Murder.

Does anyone else in Britain find this one as simple as I do? I'd love to hear another explanation for such simple math.

Posted by: religion_of_peas at January 20, 2006 6:44 PM

In a sane world, this would not be seen as a valid defense at all. Instead, it would raise questions about the Qur'an and Hadith themselves. But that is so far off the radar screen in Britain, Eddie Fitz has nothing to worry about.

Er... quick reminder - Edward Fitzgerald, sometime poet, is now counsel for the defence. It's the adversarial system, doncha know? Perhaps we should adopt the inquisitorial system that the French use? Let's adopt the Napoleonic Code while we're at it.

It is the duty of the counsel for the defence to defend his client, even if he knows that the hook-handed bastard is as guilty as hell. As any fule kno.

Let the jury decide. If the (black) cap fitz...

Posted by: Interested at January 20, 2006 6:51 PM

WOW Wonder what the the Jury thought about that??

Yes the Quran says to kill all non-mulsums if they won't convert??

WOW wonder how the Jury took that in??

Will the Papers point out what is in the Quran and how it is every mulsums duty to kill and rape to make the world mulsums??

WOW??

Is the Judge Mulsum and what does this do to the mulsums who say but, it is a religion of Peace OH I SAID PEICE NOT PEACE ROTFL!!!

"spiritual quest"

Well jail is the prefect place not much time to get off his Quest..

Johnny's Father needs to know he is lucky we didn't use our right to put him to death........

We have a right to Kill tratiors!!!!

http://www.senate.gov/~rpc/releases/1997/iran.htm

January 16, 1997
Clinton-Approved Iranian Arms Transfers Help Turn Bosnia into Militant Islamic Base

Stepping-Stone to Europe
The intended targets of the mujahedin network in Bosnia are not limited to that country but extend to Western Europe. For example, in August 1995, the conservative Paris daily Le Figaro reported that French security services believe that "Islamic fundamentalists from Algeria have set up a security network across Europe with fighters trained in Afghan guerrilla camps and [in] southern France while some have been tested in Bosnia." [(London) Daily Telegraph, 8/17/95] Also, in April 1996, Belgian security arrested a number of Islamic militants, including two native Bosnians, smuggling weapons to Algerian guerrillas active in France. [Intelligence Newsletter, Paris, 5/9/96 (No. 287)] Finally, also in April 1996, a meeting of radicals aligned with HizbAllah ("Party of God"), a pro-Iran group based in Lebanon, set plans for stepping up attacks on U.S. assets on all continents; among those participating was an Egyptian, Ayman al-Zawahiri, who "runs the Islamist terrorist operations in Bosnia-Herzegovina from a special headquarters in Sofia, Bulgaria. His forces are already deployed throughout Bosnia, ready to attack US and other I-FOR (NATO Implementation Force) targets." ["State-Sponsored Terrorism and The Rise of the HizbAllah International," Defense and Foreign Affairs and Strategic Policy, London, 8/31/96] Finally, in December 1996, French and Belgian security arrested several would-be terrorists trained at Iranian-run camps in Bosnia. ["Terrorism: The Bosnian Connection," (Paris) L'Express, 12/26/96]
The Radical Islamic Character of the Sarajevo Regime
Underlying the Clinton Administration's misguided policy toward Iranian influence in Bosnia is a fundamental misreading of the true nature of the Muslim regime that benefitted from the Iran/Bosnia arms policy: "The most dubious of all Bosniac [i.e., Bosnian Muslim] claims pertains to the self-serving commercial that the government hopes to eventually establish a multiethnic liberal democratic society. Such ideals may appeal to a few members of Bosnia's ruling circle as well as to a generally secular populace, but President Izetbegovic and his cabal appear to harbor much different private intentions and goals." ["Selling the Bosnia Myth to America: Buyer Beware," Lieutenant Colonel John E. Sray, USA, U.S. Army Foreign Military Studies Office, Fort Leavenworth, KS, October 1995]
The evidence that the leadership of the ruling Party of Democratic Action (SDA), and consequently, the Sarajevo-based government, has long been motivated by the principles of radical Islam is inescapable. The following three profiles are instructive:
Alija Izetbegovic: Alija Izetbegovic, current Bosnian president and head of the SDA, in 1970 authored the radical "Islamic Declaration," which calls for "the Islamic movement" to start to take power as soon as it can overturn "the existing non-Muslim government . . . [and] build up a new Islamic one," to destroy non-Islamic institutions ("There can be neither peace nor coexistence between the Islamic religion and non-Islamic social institutions"), and to create an international federation of Islamic states. [The Islamic Declaration: A Programme for the Islamization of Muslims and the Muslim Peoples, Sarajevo, in English, 1990] Izetbegovic's radical pro-Iran associations go back decades: "At the center of the Iranian system in Europe is Bosnia-Hercegovina's President, Alija Izetbegovic, . . . who is committed to the establishment of an Islamic Republic in Bosnia-Hercegovina." ["Iran's European Springboard?", House Republican Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare, 9/1/92] The Task Force report further describes Izetbegovic's contacts with Iran and Libya in 1991, before the Bosnian war began; he is also noted as a "fundamentalist Muslim" and a member of the "Fedayeen of Islam" organization, an Iran-based radical group dating to the 1930s and which by the late 1960s had recognized the leadership of the Ayatollah Khomeini (then in exile from the Shah). Following Khomeini's accession to power in 1979, Izetbegovic stepped-up his efforts to establish Islamic power in Bosnia and was jailed by the communists in 1983. Today, he is open and unapologetic about his links to Iran: "Perhaps the most telling detail of the [SDA's September 1, 1996] campaign rally . . . was the presence of the Iranian Ambassador and his Bosnian and Iranian bodyguards, who sat in the shadow of the huge birchwood platform. . . . As the only foreign diplomat [present], indeed the only foreigner traveling in the President's [i.e., Izetbegovic's] heavily guarded motorcade of bulky four-wheel drive jeeps, he lent a silent Islamic imprimatur to the event, one that many American and European supporters of the Bosnian Government are trying hard to ignore or dismiss." [NYT, 9/2/96] During the summer 1996 election campaign, the Iranians delivered to him, in two suitcases, $500,000 in cash; Izetbegovic "is now 'literally on their [i.e., the Iranians'] payroll,' according to a classified report based on the CIA's analysis of the issue." [LAT, 12/31/96. See also "Iran Contributed $500,000 to Bosnian President's Election Effort, U.S. Says," New York Times, 1/1/97, and Washington Times, 1/2/97] Adil Zulfikarpasic, a Muslim co-founder of the SDA, broke with Izetbegovic in late 1990 due to the increasingly overt fundamentalist and pro-Iranian direction of the party. [See Milovan Djilas, Bosnjak: Adil Zulfikarpasic, Zurich, 1994]

READ THE WHOLE THING THERE IS MUCH MORE!!!

SO NOW WE SEE THAT AINT THE VICTIM BUT THE BULLY!!

Part of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
Spider Killer
GOD BLESS THE USA AND HER FIGHTING FORCES AND ALL WHO FIGHT WITH HER GIVE THEM STRENGTH, WISDOM, SIGHT, AND COURAGE TO STAY THE COURSE TO DESTROY ALL ISLAMIC TERRORIST AND ALL WHO SUPPORT THE LET NOT THE WORLD BE DECEIVED BY THEM GIVE THE WORLD COURAGE TO STAND UP TOGETHER AND FIGHT THIS EVIL AMEN

Posted by: Catherine at January 20, 2006 6:54 PM

"...it would raise questions about the Qur'an and Hadith themselves. But that is so far off the radar screen in Britain,..."

Jihad Watch Radar Control to ground...come in...

At least Robert's helping the likelyhood of getting these open-ended seed texts of violence on the radar.

Posted by: Report at January 20, 2006 7:05 PM

The Koran is a poisonous mass of pus, coated in a thin-layer of mock-compassion marzipan.

Let its dismal sayings be read everywhere.

But especially as a propaganda plaintiff in courts throughout the despised Infidel world.

It will raise disgust in every spiritually-expectant but then gradually-horrified peruser of this 'holy' book.

Read it, and weep.

(Or marry a 9 year old girl, whichever seems more "moral".)

Posted by: profitsbeard at January 20, 2006 7:13 PM

What a lame defense. But with that defense, there's a great opportunity to put Islam and its calls to kill unbelievers and overthrow governments on trial... or in pc-speak, "create an interfaith dialogue." ;)

This opportunity will probably be squandered, but it's a priceless chance to subpoena "mainstream" clerics and go down a list and ask them: "Sura X, Verse Y: Do you or do you not believe it justifies violence against unbelievers? Do you think it applies literally in modern times?"

Many would take whatever equivalent the UK may have to the Fifth Amendment (against self-incrimination). But we'd have them on record, either for (orthodox Islam), against (Infidel! Ulululululu!), or spineless and wishywashy. It would be an altogether awkward affair for the "moderates" to, under oath, have to address the "elephant in the room" that is the hatred and bloodlust contained in the Koran.

Posted by: Shinoliite at January 20, 2006 7:16 PM

This is the moment for the prosecution to start calling in all of the Islamic leaders in Britain. Make them take the stand and explain in Koranic terms how Hamza is wrong. The result should be interesting. Either they will equivocate so much that their claims for peace are obvious lies or they will practice taqiyaa in full force. Of course, the Muslims who just can't wait, will start pronouncing death-sentences on all of those who denounce Hamza. It's a possible win-win situation.

Posted by: Terrahawk at January 20, 2006 7:25 PM

Sorry Shinoliite, I just realized you said the same thing. I apologize for not fully reading your post before spouting off.

Posted by: Terrahawk at January 20, 2006 7:26 PM

Not to worry--

Great minds think alike. ;)

Posted by: Shinoliite at January 20, 2006 7:31 PM

"It ain't hate, it's the Qur'an"....... So now the defense team is agreeing that killing the infidel is not hateful, it's what good Muslims should do, I agree. Finally they come out and admit the truth. Well done to Abu Hamza’s cause, you have helped the world tremendously. :)

Posted by: MississippiMud at January 20, 2006 7:42 PM

HI,

I think I posted my first intro in the wrong place,, apologies, for duplicate posts.

I wanna make sure someone sees this!!!

Thanks for this great site! I share this one, and FF,, with everyone, and so on and so on.
The web, is a great place to get knowledge out to folks!

have you guys seen this????

http://www.susbloodlabs.com/homepage.html

check it out,, it's a pretty damn good idea, methinks.

harley rider livin in dar al harb
will never submit to ridin HD in a freakin' burka

)0(
goddess help us

I luv HAWGS,, OINKKKKK

HD4EVR
Shovelheads4EVR
'97 Heritage Springer Softail
'76 FXE Shovelhead

Freedom is just another name for nothing left to loose,,

Janis Joplin

Posted by: solsticewitch13 at January 20, 2006 7:59 PM

How ironic that the very arguments by which Robert is accused of hosting a "Hate Site" are being used in the defence of Hamza in a British Court of Law!
often I have joked in discussions with progressives, that it would be politically incorrect to criticise Hamza for preaching what is written in the Koran ! Accusations of racisn followed!
The new rule of multiculturism is that it is admissable to use the Koranic texts in the defence of Jihadists but is "religious hate crime" to use it in the prosecution of the above!
Goodness, what is British society becoming in the 21st century.

Posted by: chevalier de st george at January 20, 2006 8:20 PM

some reactions you might get when you tell people about islam (part 1):

the other day i commented to my two coworkers in a small graphic arts department that islam has a special place in hell for "picture makers". (footnote)

immediately, as usual, they began in about how bad christianity is (compared to islam in some ways), and how the islamic "verse" must be being misinterpreted. one guy actually said that judaism and christianity would condemn a non believing person to hell, while "with islam you still have a chance." i pointed out that i merely thought it was interesting that we "picture makers" in the graphic arts dept are singled out in islam as wrongdoers. just thought it was interesting trivia.

the other guy pulled up an islamic information site on his screen. i wonder how surprised he was to read that what i said was true. i also mentioned to him that i had seen interesting discussions among muslims about this very topic.

sources:
"All the picture-makers would be in the fire of Hell. A soul will be breathed in every picture prepared by him and it shall punish him in the Hell."
http://www.islambasics.com/view.php?bkID=151&chapter=61

Posted by: Jim at January 20, 2006 8:31 PM

An idiot defence lawyer acting on behalf of a client of the likes of Abu Hamza, arguing that his client was merely preaching to the faithful that they practice their faith is one thing. What scares me is whether the judiciary is just as stupid and will accept the argument that when the tenets of a "faith" run contrary to the laws of the land to the serious degree as in this case, what takes precedent?

Posted by: waterdragon52 at January 20, 2006 8:35 PM

In fact, whatever verdict is reached, the outcome will make it more difficult for slick PC politicians to dance around the issue of Islam and jihad.

It is amazing that it takes a decision to be made in a court of law for any notice to be taken. The same evidence and much more has been available for all to see but people seem blinded by their desire to be seen as PC.

Posted by: AngryMuppet at January 20, 2006 8:36 PM

It would be really great that the fact that such hateful verses from the quran are being used to defend a terrorist. The public would finally be able to see what Islam was all about were it not for the the fact that this part of the trial has been the only part not covered by the mainstream media in the UK. We hear about this trial every day but I have not yet heard about murderous aspects of the quran being used to say "It's OK, he's only quoting from the quran. This is what every Muslim believes". Don't hold your breath.

Posted by: calum at January 20, 2006 9:37 PM

[no relation whatsoever to Jihad Watch's Hugh Fitzgerald]

How 'bout this guy?

http://www.hughfitzgerald.com

Posted by: Shinoliite at January 20, 2006 9:49 PM

Solsticewitch13 said, "I luv HAWGS,, OINKKKKK

HD4EVR"

Welcome. Nice ride. Mine's a 98 FXDL and a new 06 FLSTCI. Hang around here and you will learn a lot.

Posted by: Caratacus at January 20, 2006 9:53 PM

Shinoliite

I don't know if this is a lame defense. We'll have to wait and see. Hook has a right to the best defense possible. That's a metaphysical absolute in all law rooted in English common law, whether we like it or not.

Posted by: ovidius_naso at January 20, 2006 10:01 PM

Here we see the fundamental paradox of Islam in Western civilization: if we allow freedom of religion to Muslims, our own freedoms - and lives - become at risk.

Posted by: Ibn_Iblis at January 20, 2006 10:03 PM

Capt hook is only going by the book.
Capt hook tells it like it is,
and if you don't like it,
well, just kiss his grits.

Capt hook looks like he comes
costumed from central casting,
in a 1930's grade b horror movie
about the middle east
where he plays the sheik,
a deceiving ugly beast.

Posted by: the poetess at January 20, 2006 10:08 PM

>>>Welcome. Nice ride. Mine's a 98 FXDL and a new 06 FLSTCI. Hang around here and you will learn a lot.

>>>Posted by: Caratacus

Hiya Caratacus,,

You have a couple of nice rides too! I live in winter country, so both my sleds are down till spring. Winter sux bigtime.

Next scoot I work towards getting is a RoadKing.
Then I'll have a herd of HAWGS.

Then I start to work on breeding rare macaws.

I have been lurkin' here for months and months. I am involved in some very large groups on the 'net, and we are workin' really hard to get Mr. Spencer's site, Dr. Sina's site, and others like this,, out to the sheeple of the world.

Slowly the sheeple are figuring it out,, and they are spreading the word too.

I love the idea of the EXPLODING PIG PEN,

whoohooooo!!

http://www.susbloodlabs.com/

l8r

HD4EVR
Wiccan Freedom Fighter
sux being a member of a type 0 civilization
)0(

Posted by: solsticewitch13 at January 20, 2006 10:35 PM

I don't know if this is a lame defense.

True. "Lame" may not have been the most accurate word, in hindsight... Perhaps "short-sighted" would have been a better choice, since if this defense strategy works (i.e., that Hamza's just following the Koran), the case should snowball all manner of additional problems, leading to the golden opportunity described above-- or so one can hope.

Posted by: Shinoliite at January 20, 2006 11:06 PM

Surely its our law vs Allah's law. If Allah gets off the hook here, and Ahmadinejad nukes Israel, well : "It ain't hate, it's the Qur'an".

Posted by: islamophobic pride at January 20, 2006 11:46 PM

Who cares where he got it from,the point is that he was inciting murder of infidels,and if he got it from the kuran that proves the point that the islamic book should be banned.

Posted by: adela at January 21, 2006 12:22 AM

"Who cares where he got it from,the point is that he was inciting murder of infidels,and if he got it from the kuran that proves the point that the islamic book should be banned."

The Holy Quran is the word of God. You may try, but you will not be able to blow out the Light of God. Islam is here in the West to stay. It is the True Faith, and is conquering hearts every day. It will enter your homes through those you love the most. You will see your children and grand children become Muslims and/or marry Muslims and/or rear Muslims. It is here, like Moses in Pharaoh's palace. Do what you want, you will fail. This will be your living hell, you will enter it well before you eventually enter the real (eternal) one.

Posted by: Batilshikan at January 21, 2006 12:42 AM

... and is conquering hearts every day.

Stopping hearts doesn't count as conquering them in a religious sense.

Posted by: Shinoliite at January 21, 2006 12:50 AM

OK I know this Edward Fitzgerald from a short foray at the Privy Council and I must say I found him at the time to be well researched and thorough. To read this post however leads me to believe that he has lost his marbles. By giving the jury a copy of the Koran(which might be interpreted as a thinly veiled attempt at conversion) he has, under the Rules of evidence in a common law jurisdiction, opened up the Defence to a full attack on the Koran.

May I suggest therefore to Mr. Spencer and Mr. Fitzgerald(Hugh) that you attempt to contact the prosecution and render your assistance by leading/pointing out to them the relevant verses of the Koran that need to be highlighted to the Jury. If successful we can call this one open and shut!

Anyone up for a pint?!?!

Posted by: Shunkleash at January 21, 2006 1:19 AM

Now turning to Baltshikans' post I must say I absolutely loved your brief spurt. Unfortunately, the Koran is not the word of "God" it is the creation of a deranged peodiphile and misogynist who loved his penis a littel too much. In additiona the Allah you speak of is the Shaitan and the term "allah" was borrowed from the word "il illah" the pagan moon god. By the way you and all the other ignorant people who profess islam are only deluding yourselves...islam will die just like your glorious prophet and now rests warmly in hell.

Kil kulb bi iji yowmee ou yowmetcon jayee ya ibn gahba!!

Posted by: Shunkleash at January 21, 2006 1:29 AM

"The Holy Quran is the word of God. You may try, but you will not be able to blow out the Light of God. Islam is here in the West to stay. It is the True Faith, and is conquering hearts every day. It will enter your homes through those you love the most. You will see your children and grand children become Muslims and/or marry Muslims and/or rear Muslims. It is here, like Moses in Pharaoh's palace. Do what you want, you will fail. This will be your living hell, you will enter it well before you eventually enter the real (eternal) one."
-- from a Muslim posting above

Take this attitude, shared by tens or hundreds of millions, seriously. Act accordingly. Plan vote accordingly. Do everything you can to make sure it does not come true. Study up. Start with the Benes Decrees.

Posted by: Hugh at January 21, 2006 1:40 AM

Abu Hamza:

At a mosque in Birmingham, the sheikh issued another call to arms.

He said: "Why should there be a battle? Why should there be an argument?

"But a struggle means sometimes arguing to convey the message. Even if it means you convey the message by carrying a sword.

"Allah wants to know who will sacrifice for him."

During a question and answer session, Hamza said banks were a Jewish establishment, the work of Satan.

Robbing them and kafirs, or unbelievers, could be acceptable because they were not protected by Allah. He said: "I say go and do it (steal), take shoot and loot.

"Every battle has its purpose. Ours is to put the authority of Allah and humiliate kafir who are challenging the authority of Allah and Muslims.

"Sometimes you will feel too weak to go on, but you say 'I still have some strength to humiliate and kill and remove some of the germs who are making me weak so that people who come after me can carry on with weaker enemies'."

Hamza also backed burglary and theft from non-believers. He said: "I can't see any problem giving yourself a free hand - getting yourself a new car.

"Go for their houses where you can loot and come back. It is like going to the forest and picking up wood from no man's land."

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/page.cfm?objectid=12146169&method=full&siteid=50143

Posted by: DCWatson at January 21, 2006 2:30 AM

The defense should understand that while they're trying to get Captain Hook off the hook, they are proving and illustrating that the Qur'an and the Islamic ideology are what many already say they are.....violent. So let them keep talking.

Posted by: DCWatson at January 21, 2006 2:34 AM

Abu Hamza

Profile: Abu Hamza


The controversial cleric has always denied recruiting terrorists

Sheikh Abu Hamza al-Masri is one of the most distinctive radical Islamic figures in Britain.
Condemned by many Muslims as too extreme, the former Soho nightclub bouncer denies any involvement in terrorism.

But the 47-year-old has also defiantly justified the attacks in New York and Washington in September 2001.

Now he has been arrested in London on an extradition warrant issued by the US government.

He was born Mustafa Kamel Mustafa in Alexandria, Egypt, to middle-class parents. In 1979, he came to London with plans to become a civil engineer.

Divorce

He studied in Brighton and later worked as a doorman in the West End.

He married a western woman, Valerie Fleming, in 1981 and received his British citizenship, although the Home Office is currently trying to have that removed.

"Bin Laden is a good guy. Everyone likes him in the Muslim world, there is nothing wrong with the man and his beliefs."

Ms Fleming is reported as saying her ex-husband became more radical after their marriage and the couple divorced five years later.

In Afghanistan, he sustained the injuries to his hand and eye - apparently clearing landmines for the Mujahideen - that make him such a distinct figure."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3752517.stm

Now what's a good Muslim boy doing working as a bouncer in a nightclub? Was it a non-alcoholic night club? Hope so, cuz Allah would get mighty cantankerous if he knew this sweathog was anywhere near booze......

Posted by: DCWatson at January 21, 2006 2:44 AM

I could bear to know what translation of the Koran Fitzgerald QC handed out. Bearing in mind the common excuse from Muslims that whichever English version one refers to is not an accurate one. Is it bowdlerised one, with Sura 9 cut out? That would be unwise. So it must be a mainstream version agreed by the prosection. Jurors have inquiring minds and often think outside the box. And they can spend quite a lot of time in the jury room while points of law which they are not privy to are discussed in court. They get bored. What better reading matter to dip into, at random, and then with more direction, could they have?

Posted by: Granny Weatherwax at January 21, 2006 3:31 AM

I was waiting for this point to come, in truth it was his only defence and it has openned up a whole can of worms for them that should be taken advanatage of, normally I would think that this would not happen because of the PC attitude of our leaders and court system, but luckily two BNP leaders are being preesecuted at the same time for hate speach for what I can only describe as truthful remarks on the Koran, so now it sets the scene for some serious investigation of the Koran and the religion of peace, I am extremely hopeful at this point that it will start a serious debate on Islam.

I wonder if the two cases occuring at the same time was more than chance, the Labour party is so manipulative and I am seeing signs across Europe that there is a move towards changing the publics attitude, Chirac's speach on nukes is one such comment.

Posted by: Daffersd at January 21, 2006 4:18 AM

Batilshikan,

Islam might have a brief time in the sun, God makes the sun to shine on the good and evil alike.
Then, no more Muslims...none anywhere, at all.

Islam will cease to exist.

In the future we will all rejoice,

Islam's passed on!
Islam is no more!
Islam has ceased to be!
Islam's expired and gone to meet it's maker!
Islam's a stiff!
Bereft of life, Islam rests in peace!
Islam's pushing up the daisies!
Islam's metabolic processes are now 'istory!
Islam's off the twig!
Islam's kicked the bucket, it's shuffled off it's mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisibile!!
THIS IS AN EX-ISLAM!!

Posted by: Mike_W at January 21, 2006 5:23 AM

Four people were arrested during clashes between rally supporters and far-right demonstrators. Two speakers were also arrested.

Two British National Party supporters were bundled to the ground by police and handcuffed before being led off for public order and breach of the peace offences as a banner proclaiming "Bin Laden is a murderer" was unfurled

DCWatson~ Hold on. Am I reading this right? This monster, who is on trial, is holding a rally while the trial is going on? Is that possible? And two people were arrested for unfurling a banner that reads BinLaden is a murderer? Is that because they are BNP? Is is against the law to hold up a banner like that or is it only against the law for BNP members? Because Hamza supporters got angry. Shouldn't THEY be the ones getting arrested?

~Watching as insanity rules in London.

Posted by: Borg at January 21, 2006 8:08 AM

Of course it's the Koran. That's the point. The Koran informs and inspires all Muslims that take it as whole cloth. Let them all return a Muslim paradise outside of the West.

Posted by: epg at January 21, 2006 8:46 AM

Posted by Borg

"Two British National Party supporters were bundled to the ground by police and handcuffed before being led off for public order and breach of the peace offences as a banner proclaiming "Bin Laden is a murderer" was unfurled"

I think you'll find that came from the Daily Mirror lol
Truth is not real important to them

I can only assume D.C. Watson dosn't know what sort of trash that "paper" is !!

Reminder it's the one that published fake photos of British servicemen torturing Iraqi prisoners,thus putting our boys at much greater risk !

Posted by: TrueBrit at January 21, 2006 9:01 AM

This is VERY interesting. It looks like the defense is trying to build a case whereby it is not Abu Hamza , himself as a person, who his preaching murder and hate - he is just preaching what is in the Koran itself.

Ergo - it is the religion itself that is hateful, not Abu Hamza as a person.

Therefore, on this technicality, it is possible that Hamza could well win the case.

And also, the UK government could well be facing a judgement from the judge, whereby the Judge looks at the law, and this case, and says that in order to legally supress Koranic inspired hate speeches, the UK government would first have to ban Islam outright.

As I said, a most interesting development.

JihadWatch readers should also follow another case that is currently running - the case against the BNP leader Nick Griffin - he's in court because he called Islam "evil". And again, Koranic verses are being put before the Jury.

just type in "nick griffin" into google news and you'll find all the news stories:
http://www.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&q=nick+griffin&btnG=Search+News

Posted by: archduke at January 21, 2006 9:11 AM

I think the defendant's attorneys have grasped onto a particularly effective strategy. Once the jurors have the Qur'an in their hands and read the contents, they will have no further mental resistance to the superior reasoning of Moslem thought. The jurors will convert en masse and as their first act of jihad will declare the defendant not guilty, take the judge hostage and maybe a couple will blow themselves up in the court cafeteria for good measure. In the jurors subsequent trial they will plead not guilty as they were only performing acts mandated by their religon. As they have freedom of religion they are not guilty. In the trial the defense will introduce copies of the Qua'an and the cycle will repeat.
I think I am going to move to Antartica, but on second thought, Do penguins read the Qur'an?

Posted by: GrimReaperxxx at January 21, 2006 12:38 PM

archduke

What you just described is not a "technicality." It's a simple syllogism that underlies a theory. It's up to the jury now to say the theory is valid or not.
A technicality in law is a matter of procedure, e.g., how evidence was collected, whether the defendant was informed of his rights, if motions and such were done in the time prescribed by the specific court, if disclosures to each party were done properly and timely.

Like you, I'm glad this has happened. It may lead to a trial of Islam--or it may not. Cases get derailed all the time on technicalities, generally because the parties did not follow the rules of the game.

Posted by: ovidius_naso at January 21, 2006 12:40 PM

He is telling the truth...

This is what the muslims dont want the west to see.

If you are a TRUE and GOOD muslim
You must obey the Koran..
And YES Mohammed commanded his Islamic Jihadists.
To
Steal
Kill
Destroy
Rape
Plunder
Butcher.
Mass murder
Lie
Cheat
Whatever it takes to WIN..

So i am not surprised

Posted by: jingoist at January 21, 2006 1:46 PM

Looking at the timing of the two court cases (Hamza & Griffin) certainly raises some eyebrows. This certainly could be a major battle in the war against Islam and it will be interesting to see how the results come out. However given the evidence of Britain/Europe’s slide into dhimmitude and its loosing demographic battle against the DaWa I don’t hold out much hope for a satisfactory result in either case.

I have the sneaking suspicion that Hamza will be allowed to walk or at least only be given a slap on the wrist because the Islamoapologists who have such a grip on the UK’s legal system and media still believe in the concept of Islam as a religion of peace. These people with their skewed cultural relativism would rather assuage their own guilt regarding their culture of origin (Islamists should be supported, with the West deserving everything it gets due to its colonial past and support for Israel). In their minds it would be better for Britain/Europe to atone for their more successful cultural development by being assimilated into the Umma.

At the same time the authorities will attempt to try and put down grass roots condemnation of Islam by non Muslim British by making an example out of Nick Griffin and Mark Collett. The UK is turning into a multicultural powder keg and the establishment is going to do all they can to delay that keg from exploding in their face. I can’t comment on the BNP past, but I have been following them since I came across the story regarding this current case ‘the freedom of speech two’. I personally find nothing illegal about the comments made by the two defendants for which, they are being tried, but it appears that telling the truth is no longer a defense in multicultural PC Britain. I just hope that this court case raises the issue of Islam to a wider public audience which in turn prompts the public to start looking for alternatives views on Islam and not what is forced down their throats by the MSM especially the dhimmi BBC. Maybe JW will see a spike in hits to the site as a result of these cases (actually Mr Spencer is there anyway we could see the stats for hits to the sites, it would be a good way of gauging how the message is getting out.)

I believe this is the time to let the powder keg blow up, both these cases should be given as much coverage as possible and the issues raised about the RoP should be debated at all levels. Somehow though I don’t think this is going to happen.

Posted by: km at January 21, 2006 2:56 PM

It makes no sense to us normal folks that it would be ok to spout hate and murder just because it is written in the Qur'an. It's not like it says it's ok for men to have sex with 12 year old girls, oh wait, it does..

Posted by: dmwalker at January 21, 2006 9:20 PM

"It makes no sense to us normal folks that it would be ok to spout hate and murder just because it is written in the Qur'an. It's not like it says it's ok for men to have sex with 12 year old girls, oh wait, it does.."

dmwalker (aka dimwit) posted the above lies. dmwalker (dimwit) please post where in the Glorious Quran is it said that "it's ok for men to have sex with 12 year old girls,"

dmwalker's/dmwit's lies prove that people who run this site, and the torglodytes who support it are not only ignorant (an easily curable state) but also malicious liars (a state only cured after massive moral surgery).

I urge all of you to hate Islam enough to read and understand it. Read the Quran and the Hadith (for the sake of hate). If you don't undersatnd something then ask a Muslim scholar, so that you have correct information about the object of your hate. After you have gone through this procedure you will have miracles happen to you, Inshallah (God Willing).

Posted by: Batilshikan at January 22, 2006 12:40 PM

Qur'an 65:4 The same shall apply to those who have not yet menstruated

meaning girls who are VERY young-average age 12. Iran made the marriage law of 9 year old girls based on this and Aisha. It was discussing divorcing but can you divorce if you are not married first?

Posted by: Borg at January 22, 2006 4:29 PM

Borg the liar posted "Qur'an 65:4 The same shall apply to those who have not yet menstruated

meaning girls who are VERY young-average age 12. Iran made the marriage law of 9 year old girls based on this and Aisha. It was discussing divorcing but can you divorce if you are not married first?"

This just proves how the enemies of Islam depend on lies to mislead the sheep masquerading as the American public.

The 64th chapter of the Glorious Quran is called "At-Tagabun." The following are its first TEN verses as translated by A. Yusuf Ali (a standard translation), thus liars like Borg et al, and the Spencer guy are exposed and shamed:

"
1. Whatever is in the heavens and on earth doth declare the Praises and Glory of Allah: to Him belongs Dominion and to Him belongs Praise: and He has power over all things.

2. It is He Who has created you; and of you are some that are Unbelievers and some that are
Believers: and Allah sees well all that ye do.

3. He has created the heavens and the earth in just proportions and has given you shape and
made your shapes beautiful: and to Him is the final Goal.

4. He knows what is in the heavens and on earth: and He knows what ye conceal and what ye reveal: yes Allah knows well the (secrets) of (all) hearts.

5. Has not the story reached you of those who rejected Faith aforetime? So they tasted the evil result of their conduct; and they had a grievous Penalty.

6. That was because there came to them apostles with Clear Signs but they said: "Shall (mere) human beings direct us?" So they rejected (the Message) and turned away. But Allah can do without (them): and Allah is free of all needs worthy of all praise.

7. The Unbelievers think that they will not be raised up (for Judgment). Say: "Yea by my Lord ye shall surely be raised up: then shall ye be told (the truth) of all that ye did. And that is easy for Allah."

8. Believe therefore in Allah and His Apostle and in the Light which We have sent down. And Allah is well-acquainted with all that ye do.

9. The Day that He assembles you (all) for a day of Assembly that will be a day of mutual loss and gain (among you). And those who believe in Allah and work righteousness He will remove from them their ills and He will admit them to gardens beneath which rivers flow to dwell therein forever: that will be the Supreme Achievement.

10. But those who reject Faith and treat Our Signs as falsehoods they will be Companions of the Fire to dwell therein for aye: and evil is that Goal.
"

Posted by: Batilshikan at January 22, 2006 5:52 PM

Borg the liar quoted chapter 65, while I in my previous post quoted form Chapter 64. Here are the first 5 verses from Chapter 65, called "At-Talaq" or "Divorce", and gives the procedure for divorce. From verse 4 it is obvious that the reference is to a woman who has passed menapause. Once again the lies of the pagans are exposed:
"
1. O Prophet! when ye do divorce women divorce them at their prescribed periods and count
(accurately) their prescribed periods: and fear Allah your Lord: and turn them not out of their houses nor shall they (themselves) leave except in case they are guilty of some open lewdness. Those are limits set by Allah: and any who transgresses the limits of Allah does verily wrong his (own) soul: thou knowest not if perchance Allah will bring about thereafter some new situation.

2. Thus when they fulfil their term appointed either take them back on equitable terms or part with them on equitable terms; and take for witness two persons from among you endued with justice and establish the evidence (as) before Allah. Such is the admonition given to him who believes in Allah and the Last Day. And for those who fear Allah He (ever) prepares a way out

3. And He provides for him from (sources) he never could imagine. And if anyone puts his trust in Allah sufficient is (Allah) for him. For Allah will surely accomplish His purpose: verily for all things has Allah appointed a due proportion.

4. Such of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses for them the prescribed period if ye have any doubt is three months and for those who have no courses (it is the same): for those who carry (life within their wombs) their period is until they deliver their burdens: and for those who fear Allah He will make their path easy.

5. That is the Command of Allah which He has sent down to you: and if anyone fears Allah He will remove his ills from him and will enlarge His reward."

Posted by: Batilshikan at January 22, 2006 6:05 PM

Posted by: Batilshikan at January 22, 2006 06:05 PM

GUESS YOU AINT BEEN READING YOUR OWN BOOK??

Qur’an 33:51 “You may have whomever you desire; there is no blame.”

MAYBE THIS IS WHY THERE IS SUCH A PROBLEM IN THE MULSUM WORLD WITH CHILD RAPEST??

http://www.arabnews.com/?page=13§ion=0&article=65814&d=23&m=6&y=2005
Child Molestation — a Serious Approach Needed
Nahid Bashatah • Al-Riyadh

According to an online newspaper, one quarter of Saudi children have been molested at least once during their lives. The paper, Al-Wifaq, said that 62 percent of the victims refused to identify the molesters while 6.16 percent said the molestation was done by relatives or individuals who had close contact with the child’s family.
The newspaper based its information on a study done by a Saudi professor; it was conducted in three of the Kingdom’s regions and included college students as well as other groups in society.

OH MY??

Tabari VII:7 “The Prophet married Aisha in Mecca three years before the Hijrah, after the death of Khadija. At the time she was six.”

NOW THAT IS 6YEARS OLD??

Tabari IX:128 “When the Prophet married Aisha she very young and not yet ready for consummation.”

YES WE CALL THIS A CHILD RAPEST.

Tabari IX:131 “My mother came to me while I was being swung on a swing between two branches and got me down. My nurse wiped my face with some water and started leading me. When I was at the door she stopped so I could catch my breath. I was then brought in while the Messenger was sitting on a bed in our house. My mother made me sit on his lap. Then the men and women got up and left. The Prophet consummated his marriage with me in my house when I was nine years old.”

NOW THIS IS WHO YOU CALL A PERFECT MAN??

Bukhari:V9B87N139-40 “Allah’s Apostle told Aisha, ‘You were shown to me twice in my dreams [a.k.a. sexual fantasies]. I beheld a man or angel carrying you in a silken cloth. He said to me, “She is yours, so uncover her.” And behold, it was you. I would then say to myself, “If this is from Allah, then it must happen.”’

NOW I CALL THIS JUST PLAN SICK

YUES THIS IS YOUR Prophet JUST A CHILD RAPEST AND A RAPER OF WOMEN!!!

Part of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
Spider Killer
GOD BLESS THE USA AND HER FIGHTING FORCES AND ALL WHO FIGHT WITH HER GIVE THEM STRENGTH, WISDOM, SIGHT, AND COURAGE TO DESTROY ALL ISLAMIC TERRORIST AND ALL WHO SUPPORT THEM LET NOT THE WORLD BE DECEIVED BY THEM AMEN

Posted by: Catherine at January 22, 2006 9:50 PM

Catherine said "Qur’an 33:51 “You may have whomever you desire; there is no blame.”

Chpater 33 of the Glorious Quran is called Al -Ahzab. It delineates the limitations on the Holy Prophet as to who he can wed. He is given permission to receive in his company the wife he wants to receive. The following are verses 48 through 52:

"
48. And obey not (the behests) of the Unbelievers and the Hypocrites and heed not their annoyances but put thy trust in Allah for enough is Allah as a Disposer of affairs.

49. ye who believe! when ye marry believing women and then divorce them before ye have touched them no period of `Iddah have ye to count in respect of them: so give them a present and set them free in a handsome manner.

50. O prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives to whom thou hast paid their dowers; and those whom thy right hand possesses out of the prisoners of war whom Allah has assigned to thee; and daughters of thy paternal uncles and aunts and daughters of thy maternal uncles and aunts who migrated (from Mecca) with thee; and any believing woman who dedicates her soul to the Prophet if the Prophet wishes to wed her this only for thee and not for the Believers (at large); We know what We have appointed for them as to their wives and the captives whom their right hands possess in order that there should be no difficulty for Thee. And Allah is Oft-Forgiving Most Merciful.

51. Thou mayest defer (the turn of) any of them that thou pleasest and thou mayest receive any thou pleasest: and there is no blame on thee if thou invite one whose (turn) thou hadst set aside. This were nigher to the cooling of their eyes the prevention of their grief and their satisfaction--that of all of them--with that which thou hast to give them: and Allah knows (all) that is in your hearts: and Allah is All-Knowing Most Forbearing.

52.It is not lawful for thee (to marry more) women after this nor to change them for (other) wives even though their beauty attract thee except any thy right hand should possess (as handmaidens): and Allah doth watch over all things.
"

Posted by: Batilshikan at January 22, 2006 11:48 PM

Further comments on Catherine's posts:

America is a country where according to statistics in 1978, 10% of boys and 20% of girls are raped by their own fathers or brothers. It is a society absolutely riven by incest, promiscousness, fornication and adultery. For such people to point fingers at Muslims is like the people of Sodom and Gomorah accusing a decent people of being immoral.

According to most ahadith, Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) was well within her teens when she married the Holy Prophet. All his other wives were either divorcees or widows. As Aisha commanded an army against the 4th Caliph, some people like Tabari tried to give the impression that she did that out of youthful enthusiasm, and tried to show her younger than she was.

MAY ALLAH BLESS AMERICA, AND BRING THE LIGHT OF ISLAM TO THIS LAND SO THAT PEOPLE HERE WOULD STOP WORSHIPPING SATAN AND COME TO THE TRUE FAITH.

Posted by: Batilshikan at January 23, 2006 12:03 AM