“Her husband’s family in Sydney has welcomed her being charged and wants the mother of two children, aged six and nine, to be jailed. Ms Issa, 29, travelled to Tripoli on June 20 to see her new boyfriend after recently separating from her husband. She was about to return home on the weekend when she claimed she was contacted by Lebanese police informing her she had been charged with adultery.” But Lebanon’s Muslims are moderate, so she only faces a six-month jail sentence, rather than facing being stoned to death.
“Sydney mum Mahassen Issa charged with adultery while on holiday in Lebanon,” by Ashlee Mullany, The Daily Telegraph, July 24, 2014 (thanks to Kenneth):
A DESPERATE Sydney mother is pleading for help from the Australian government after she was charged with adultery during a short holiday in Lebanon.
Mahassen Issa’s lawyer said last night she would face court in Tripoli, Lebanon, today and could face six months jail if convicted.
Her husband’s family in Sydney has welcomed her being charged and wants the mother of two children, aged six and nine, to be jailed.
Ms Issa, 29, travelled to Tripoli on June 20 to see her new boyfriend after recently separating from her husband.
She was about to return home on the weekend when she claimed she was contacted by Lebanese police informing her she had been charged with adultery.
“We got a phone call stating my partner and I have both been charged and that we need to go and see the police,” Ms Issa said.
“My passport has been alerted to all the authorities and that I’m not allowed to exit the country. “I will be facing the charges tomorrow at court.” A distraught Ms Issa yesterday said she believed the allegations were made to prevent her from returning to Sydney, where she was born, to live with her children.
“The thought of not seeing my children again and my whole family disowning me, it’s too much,” she said.
A relative of Ms Issa’s husband said he raised the court order for adultery charges in Lebanon because the couple were still married in Australia: “His family and her family are very happy that she’s getting charged and she’s getting what she deserves.
“We raised the court case and he’s going ahead with it.”
Ms Issa claimed the pair separated in September but her former husband said they separated in April.
Their children are currently being cared for by their father in Western Sydney.
Ms Issa was last night at the Australian Consulate General in Beirut, saying she feared for her life and that of her boyfriend.
“I’m in a huge panic and I have no one to turn to. My family has disowned me. We have been receiving threats, my partner has received threats,’’ she said.
“The holiday that I thought would just be some time out has turned into a nightmare. I have never seen these jails and hope to never see them, because we have done nothing wrong.
“Hopefully the Australian government can help me get back into Australia safely.”
The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade confirmed support was being provided to Ms Issa in Lebanon but would not provide further details.
Carlos Danger says
She better keep her fingers (and her legs) crossed and hope that Lebanon remains beyond the sway of the “Islamic State” while she is locked up.
No Fear says
Jailed? Is that all? I expected them to behead the woman.
Darryl K. Clark says
The article said they were MODERATE Muslims so she would not suffer the loss of her head… sssshhhheeesshhh this is crazy.
islamisdeath says
I just cannot muster any sympathy for this adherent to satanic islam. This is the treatment her ilk want to impose on all of us. Boo f’ng hoo!
john spielman says
i wonder if she was born muslim or converted, either way she should have known better. She is doomed as there is no forgivness in islam, only Satan/Allah’s murderous ways. If she leaves Lebanon alive, she will most likely suffer an “HONOR KILLING”
Jovial Joe says
This ‘Islam’ thing seems to have come as a bit of a shock for her. Ignorance is bliss I suppose.
Gail Griffin says
Well I have done stupid things in mu s lim countries and lucky me lived to tell this tale. She is just a fool like I was
dazman says
I think the family who disowned her are fools. They’re here in aust but still strongly follow the rules from the country they left (or have they, maybe they just want to suck the benefits aust has out of the system).
So strongly, that they`re prepared to ring up Lebanon and dob her in.
Incredible. Now that`s what I call assimilation.
Mark says
Notice how the story is written: “Her HUSBAND’s family…” Not her “estranged husband’s family” or “ex-in-laws” . Also, they aren’t going by just the former country’s rules, but by Sharia law as well.
Semeru says
O dear
Also, they aren’t going by just the former country’s rules, but by Sharia law as well.
No they are not, the law she is being charged with is based on the Napoleonic Code
BOOK I. Of Persons.
Decreed 21st March, 1803. Promulgated 31st of the same Month.
TITLE VI.
Of Divorce.
CHAPTER I.
Of the Causes of Divorce.
229 The husband may demand a divorce on the ground of his wife’s adultery.
230 The wife may demand divorce on the ground of adultery in her husband, when he shall have brought his concubine into their common residence.
which in the lebanese Lebanese penal code Articles 487 488
If a man has had sex with someone other than his wife in the marital home, he may be imprisoned for one month to one year. If a married person engages in a same sex relationship both they and their partner can be tried for adultery and for unnatural sexual intercourse.
Women who have committed adultery anywhere (unlike the clause for males, which specifies that extra marital sex must have occured in the marital home) can be imprisoned for three months to two years for having consensual sex with someone other than their husband. Her partner in crime receives the same punishment if he is married, and a lesser sentence of one month to a year if he is unmarried. If a married person engages in a same sex relationship both they and their partner can be tried for adultery. Regarding same sex liasons, the potential sentence for a married female adulteress who sleeps with another woman is higher than the potential sentence under article 534.
Jovial Joe says
Read the rest of the posts in this thread before you make an even bigger fool of yourself.
Semeru says
Read the rest of the posts in this thread before you make an even bigger fool of yourself.
It would be much better if you and the majority of commentators would learnt the difference between sharia law and the Napoleonic Code.
The punishment for adultery under the Napoleonic Code is
i) If a man has had sex with someone other than his wife in the marital home, he may be imprisoned for one month to one year.
ii) Women who have committed adultery anywhere (unlike the clause for males, which specifies that extra marital sex must have occured in the marital home) can be imprisoned for three months to two years for having consensual sex with someone other than their husband
Now take a look at the punishment under Sharia.
Married adulterers will get capital punishment(Stoning), while unmarried adulterers will be flogged 100 times.
DingDong says
Silly bint deserves all she gets. She must have realised what she was doing.
RichardTheLionheart says
More muslims need to learn about how horrible their religion is, it disgusts me that they actually believe we are the problem and it is they who are the beacon of hope for the world.
How idiotic these people really are… They claim to be superior to jews, yet jews kick their ass in every fight they have, that alone is proof Allah is a fake.
Now a muslim woman, pleads to the Christian “West” for assistance.
But you want sharia here in the UK, and in the US, EU and the rest of the world… Yet only when its imposed on others
If you wanted to sum up Islam in one word what would it be?
Hypocrisy
PJG says
“Now a muslim woman, pleads to the Christian “West” for assistance.
But you want sharia here in the UK, and in the US, EU and the rest of the world… Yet only when its imposed on others”.
Indeed. We in the West allow these people to have their cake and eat it too. They can show off to us infidels with their hijabs and religious demands, all which are met and make them feel superior, while ignoring the demands Islam makes on THEM. They want a good measure of sharia in the West because it is to their benefit, while “panicking” about sharia in the Islamic countries they come from.
Maybe if they are so keen on sharia in the West, we could give it them by returning them to their countries of origin for punishment when they infringe Islam’s rules just to remind them that their religion isn’t ONLY about them imposing their will on us (yes, I know it won’t happen, just saying…)
PatnCat says
Hit the nail on the head with your comments! Yes indeed, these muzzle-emias parade themselves around us regular folks all superior in islam as the ‘best of people’ in their nijabs and hijabs and other black bags then scream “UNFAIR” when held to ISLAM barbaric standards? Hmm, let me think….Ha! Now hoping the Aussies deport the whole clan back to Country of Origin. Oh, born in Australia for the woman? Tough, want to be a muzzle-emia, then take the consequences of such in an islamic country. Who would go to an islamic country and play around with another man, knowing that her own family and hubbie’s family is gunning for her? They got her in their sights alright. Guess she’ll have to lay in the bed she’s made. What an islamic quandary!
Mark says
Brutal Over-reaching Inflexible Overbearing Cruel Repressive Plagarizing badly Evil Satanic How’s that for a start?
jewdog says
Australia, do yourself a favor and ship her husband and her husband’s family back to Lebanon where they belong.
dumbledoresarmy says
Seconded!
You took the words right off of my keyboard.
ken says
Maybe it’s a plot to get his BF to Australia
Angemon says
Here’s what she should have said to the police:
quran 24:13
Why did they [who slandered] not produce for it four witnesses? And when they do not produce the witnesses, then it is they, in the sight of Allah , who are the liars.
OK, why is she acting surprised? Are we supposed to believe she had no idea how her family would react?
So she can get back to her family, who disowned her, and to face the family of her soon-to-be-ex-husband, who had her arrested. Lovely prospect. I wonder if her kids will be completely brainwashed against her by the time she gets back…
Mirren10 says
If the Australian government are foolish enough to actually **help** this stupid bint get back to Australia, the next thing that will probably happen, is that she will be ‘honour’ murdered.
I have to concur with what everyone else has said. She is a mohammedan, whether born into it, or a convert. For her now to feign shock and anguish at the workings of sharia, and demand help from Australia, which she has metaphorically spit upon anyway, is the ultimate in hypocrisy.
No, I can’t summon up any sympathy for her. Let her realise to the **full** what it means to be a mohammedan, living under sharia.
voegelinian says
” Let her realise to the **full** what it means to be a mohammedan, living under sharia.”
I agree; now if we can only get our mainstream West to realize to the full what it means, we’d be beginning to turn this gigantic H.M.S. Titanic of the West from its blithely dead-set course.
paula says
Allah is great, he will let you get stoned and be taken to hell!
Wellington says
As other commenters one way or another have already indicated, why should anyone have sympathy for this woman? She either knows what Islam teaches about women or she should have known by now.
Not our problem. It’s hers.
Reality Check says
I have reached the point where I don’t care myself anymore. Years or even months ago, that would have made me feel ashamed of myself but now it does not.
Why care about a woman who does not care enough to keep herself out of danger’s way if she knows what Islam teaches? Why spend any time in anguish over the poor decisions of someone who doesn’t even know how you feel and won’t even appreciate it if she did?
What a waste on people who would kill and subjugate us all if they had the chance – and those pious Muslimas are not any better because they find lifelong solace in the thought that non-Muslim women’s supposed immorality is the perfect foil for their high ground.
Yet here we have someone who could not stop herself from following a boyfriend while still married to another man.
Let her deal with it and don’t turn back at all!
dazman says
…but of course, the family who’s disowned her have come to this country to suck up its benefits whilst making a call to Lebanon due to the fact that their daughter has defied their rules (which they`ve kept from Lebanon).
Ironic.
Paul says
Hopefully this will be enough to make her reasise how evil islam is, but I doubt it very much because only a complete fool would defend it or join this vile barbaric cult.
Mazo says
Lebanon inherited its legal code from France, under which adultery was criminalized during France’s mandate over Lebanon. This is from French law, not Islam.
Another infamous law, article 340 in Jordan which allows a husband to murder an adulterous wife and lover if he catches them, comes from the 1810 French penal code, article 324, codified under Napoleon. It has nothing to do with Islam.
France passed its penal code onto Lebanon in 1943-1944 during its Mandate, where that law code was then copied by other Arab countries including Jordan.
The law in Lebanon which punishes women more harshly for adultery (maximum sentence for up to two years for women compared to one year for men- and men have to actually be openly caught in the act while committing adultery, women can be accused without even being caught), comes from France.
The law in Lebanon, Jordan, and other Arab countries allowing men to murder adulterous wives and their lovers, again, comes from France.
France abolished the adultery law in 1975, over 20 years after they left Lebanon and Syria. Lebanon and other Arab countries retain these French laws.
So much for the supposed western colonialists bringing “civilization” to “savage” countries.
Mazo says
The 1810 French law under Napoleon allowing a husband to murder an adulterous wife and her lover, probably originate ultimately from Roman law, when Augustus Caesar passed the Lex Julia de adulteriis coercendis, allowing fathers or husband to kill an adulterous daughter or wife, and her lover.
Jovial Joe says
And what have Islam’s votaries done in that country to de-legislate these evil infidel laws? Exactly, nothing. We here in the civilised West don’t claim to be perfect (as you guys do) and there’s a direction of travel to our moral development which has benefited the majority of us who live here (women especially). The only direction of travel Islam has is backwards; reverse gear the only one it possesses, taking it back to when the evil first sprouted.
voegelinian says
Back in 2008, an egregiously inflammatory (and dubiously anti-Islamic) commenter on JW (“Morgaan Sinclair”) made essentially the same claim as Mazo — with as little evidence:
At the time, as I wrote on my blog:
One particular commenter claims that honor killing legal codes in various parts of the Muslim Middle East are due to the Napoleonic Code being introduced there in the late 18th, early 19th centuries, then apparently becoming part of the texture of Islamic laws from then until now. I will not here and now dispute this, but I did find it instructive to take a look at one source given by this particular commenter:
Stefanie Eileen Nanes, “Fighting Honor Crimes: Evidence of Civil Society in Jordan,” Middle East Journal, vol. 57, no.1 (Winter 2003), p. 6.
The above-mentioned commenter describes this source thusly:
She explains how ARTICLE 340 of Jordanian Code, which is the problem, came into Jordan from the Napoleonic Codes via the Ottomans.
I have just accessed that very same article and read it. There is nothing about the Napoleonic Code in that article, nor is there anything about the Ottomans. A search for “napoleonic” and “ottoman” confirmed my conclusion from my perusal of the article.
The only thing in that article that even hints at what the above-mentioned commenter claims is the following:
Article 98 closely approximates the “crime of passion” defense found in Western law, and reads:
1) he who commits a crime in a fit of fury caused by an unrightful and dangerous act on the part of the victim benefits from a reduction of penalty.
Notice that the above is not about Article 340, but about Article 98; and, of course, only mentions in passing—with no mention of the Napoleonic Code nor of the Ottomans—and with no documentation or references some vague “approximation” of a certain type of legal defense “found” in Western law.
(The author, Nanes, also makes other unreferenced claims in her article, claims whose importance nevertheless demands documentation, and these significant lacunae tend to cast into doubt her merits as a scholar—e.g., “Autopsies of the murdered women show that the overwhelming majority are virgins at the time of their deaths”; and “this practice [i.e., honor killing] predates Islam, and young men who commit these murders have been quoted as saying that in these cases, despite what Islam says, tradition is stronger than religion”.)
_______________________
Someone then commented on my blog post — Ellen R. Sheeley (author of the book “Reclaiming Honor in Jordan”). She wrote:
“…the Speaker of the Lower House in Jordan told me in 2006 that Article 340 has never been used as a dishonor killings defense, though it could be. Most often, it is Article 98 (having to do with acts committed in a “fit of fury”) that is used. Article 97 also provides an escape hatch for the perpetrators. All three penal code articles are still on the books. The average sentence for dishonor killings in Jordan is six months.
“It is the case that Jordanian law consists of elements of constitutional law, Shari’a law, and tribal law. Dishonor killings are believed to have their origins in misinterpretations of pre-Islamic Arab tribal codes. So the penal code articles relating to them probably have their origins in that, not Napoleonic code.
“The autopsy results cited by Nanes might come from the results of a 1997 World Bank study that examined post mortems of victims. The World Bank found that 95% of the victims that year were still virgins at the time of their deaths.
“All this is copiously footnoted in my book.”
I responded:
“It is the case that Jordanian law consists of elements of constitutional law, Shari’a law, and tribal law.”
The question for those of us who are alarmed at the trans-national prevalence of Sharia-supporting Muslims (in Western countries as well) is: Does Shari’a law countermand honor killings? It seems that not only does it not do so, it positively helps foster a sociopolitico-cultural environment of misogyny & pathological puritanism by which honor killings, whatever their ultimate source in the mists of time, are enabled.
Mazo says
http://www.centerforinquiry.net/isis/articles_and_books/intrafamily_femicide_in_defence_of_honour_the_case_of_jordan/
The Jordanian legislative system is based on and borrows from different sources such as German and Ottoman laws. Although a common belief is maintained that article 340 is either related to Islamic Shari’a law or tribal law it can be traced back to the old article 324 of the French Penal Code of 1810. During both the Ottoman rule and the French mandate in Lebanon the laws used were those of the Ottoman Empire. In 1944 the laws were changed, but a number related to family and public conduct remained the same such as article 188 of the Ottoman Penal Code which deal with honour killings. Ironically article 188 was based on article 324 of the French Penal Code of 1810, which states that the husband must be given a reduced sentence in the case of a crime of passion. In 1975 this article and other laws related to adultery were abolished in France.[lxvi]
http://digitalcollections.sit.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1427&context=isp_collection
The article itself is a combination of the French Penal Code of 1810 and the Ottoman Penal Code of 1858. Article 324 of the French Penal Code was abolished by Article 17, Law no. 617/75 issued on the 7th of November 1975:
http://www.comparativelawreview.com/ojs/index.php/CoLR/article/viewFile/18/22
This Article owes its historical origin to two legal sources that are not unharmonious when it comes to the issue of “crimes of honor”. These two sources are the Ottoman Penal Code of 1858 and the French Penal Code of 1810.
Mirren10 says
”This is from French law, not Islam”
Crap, Mazo.
”Another infamous law, article 340 in Jordan which allows a husband to murder an adulterous wife and lover if he catches them, comes from the 1810 French penal code, article 324, codified under Napoleon. It has nothing to do with Islam”
Crap, again. Are you **really** so stupid as to think we here have not read your foul book ?
Your inane tu quoquery won’t work here.
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran/001-adultery_punishment.htm
Mazo says
And what does the Sharia punishment for adultery have to do with these Lebanese and Jordanian laws which originate from France? Nothing. So don’t spam off topic links when this JWatch article is clearly mislabelled- deliberately.
http://www.centerforinquiry.net/isis/articles_and_books/intrafamily_femicide_in_defence_of_honour_the_case_of_jordan/
The Jordanian legislative system is based on and borrows from different sources such as German and Ottoman laws. Although a common belief is maintained that article 340 is either related to Islamic Shari’a law or tribal law it can be traced back to the old article 324 of the French Penal Code of 1810. During both the Ottoman rule and the French mandate in Lebanon the laws used were those of the Ottoman Empire. In 1944 the laws were changed, but a number related to family and public conduct remained the same such as article 188 of the Ottoman Penal Code which deal with honour killings. Ironically article 188 was based on article 324 of the French Penal Code of 1810, which states that the husband must be given a reduced sentence in the case of a crime of passion. In 1975 this article and other laws related to adultery were abolished in France.[lxvi]
http://www.comparativelawreview.com/ojs/index.php/CoLR/article/viewFile/18/22
http://digitalcollections.sit.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1427&context=isp_collection
Semeru says
FRANCE
Article 324 Penal Code 1810(repealed by Article 17 law no.617/75 of 7/11/75)
He who catches his spouse, his female ascendant, female descendant or his sister in the act (en flagrant délit) of adultery or illegitimate sexual relations with a third partyand commits unpremeditated homicide or wounding against the person of one or theother of them may be exempted from liability.*He who commits murder or wounding may be liable to a lesser penalty [in view of extenuating circumstances] if he has surprised his spouse, female ascendant or descendant or sister with a third person in a suspicious situation.
OTTOMAN:
Article 188 Penal Code 1858
He who has seen his wife or any of his female mahrams* with another in a state of disgraceful adultery and has beaten, injured, or killed one or both of them will be exempted [from liability] (ma`fu). He who has seen his wife or one of his female mahrams with another in an unlawful bed and has beaten, injured or killed one or both of them will benefit from an excuse (ma`dhur). *mahram: relative within the prohibited degrees of relationship (i.e. the woman cannot marry the subject)
And below is a list of countries that have Napoleonic Code article 324 written into their penal codes
ALGERIA
Article 279 Penal Code 1991
EGYPT
Article 237 Penal Code (no.58 1937)
IRAQ
Article 409 Penal Code 1966
JORDAN
Penal Code No.16 1960: Article 340
KUWAIT
Article 153 Penal Code
LEBANON
4August 2011: Parliament votes to remove article 562 from the Penal Code.
Previous developments:Article 562 Penal Code 1943 (as amended 1983, 1994, 1995, 1996 and 1999):
Article 193
Article 252
Article 253
LIBYA
Penal Code Article 375
MOROCCO
Penal code 1963 as amended: Article 418
OMAN
Penal Code Article 252:
PALESTINE
Decision on Law no.71 of 2011 regarding the amendment of the Criminal Code in force in the Northern Governorates and the Criminal Code in force in the Southern Governorates (Official Gazette no.91 of 10 October 2011) (signed by President Mahmoud Abbas 5 May 2011):
Article 1: repeals article 340 from the 1960 (Jordanian) Penal Code that was till then in force in the West Bank;
Article 2: amends article 18 of the (British Mandate-issued) Criminal Code in force in the Gaza Strip (by adding “and this does not include crimes of killing women against the background of ‘family honour’” at the end of Article 18 which allows the court to“accept the excuse” made on grounds of self defence or defence of one’s own honouror that of other persons etc);
Article 3: repeals “anything which contradicts this Decision in the law”
SYRIA
Article 548 Penal Code 1949 (as amended 1953)
TUNISIA
Article 207 of Penal Code 1991 (repealed)
UAE
Article 334 of law no.3/1978
YEMEN
Article 232 of law no.12/1994
Reality Check says
fair_dinkum says
why the hell should we care?
fair_dinkum says
hopefully she stays in jail for a few months…is treated the way women are usually treated in such circumstances..and comes back to Australia denouncing this foul system, and people take notice..
ha!
CdnCrusader says
Tough love might be best for her. It’s only 6 months max. Maybe that will give her time to think about what Islam has brought her. Maybe, just maybe she will leave the evil cult when she gets out. Until then there needs to be travel restrictions placed on those children or she may never see them again.
Gail Griffin says
She must wake up to the fact you are either Muslim or not. The abhorrent ideology of Islam puts the screws to you if you are. Don’t think in a free fashion that you have freedom as if you were a western train of thought. Nope sorry toots, Muslim is as Muslim does.
Vapourking says
His family and her family are very happy that she’s getting charged and she’s getting what she deserves.
Um that would be the same family when you marry your cousin.
Their children are currently being cared for by their father in Western Sydney,
Yep the father might be doing the caring, but the taxpayer will be doing the paying.
I have no sympathy left for this cult, I hope she gets sentenced to 6 months of hard asslifting.
duh_swami says
No one, not the guilty, not the stupid, ‘deserve’ Islamic justice.
Anne Marie Buch says
If it’s her on the picture, she is wearing hijab. Indicating she follows islams laws. How can she be surprised?
Jamie says
finally a site where real comments are. All the Australian news sites are filtering any post that doesn’t support her.
FYI she actually married that guy in Lebanon, check out the wedding photos at dailymail.
Regardless of religion or laws, she is a disrespectful b@#tch .
Rezali Mehil says
Only the man can talaq her…she cannot leave him…this is pathetic on her part .
There is no room for boyfriends et al…
If she wanted to play “dirty” like the kuffar …then she should have had her boyfriend IMPORTED to Australia…now she is in trouble…
More Later….
Rezali
Reality Check says
I did a little research on the Internet and “Uncle Google” told me that Rezali Mehil is, by her own admission, a Muslimah living in the United Kingdom.
Here is her Disqus account with the inevitable “More later …”:
http://disqus.com/rezalimehil/
So, Rezali, I have a question for you:
How does it work for you to sit before your laptop in the UK, posting crap about the “dirty kuffars” whose taxes sponsor your lifestyle while your pious Muslim husband keeps whoring around because he sees you as nothing more than a piece of boring property – if he sees you at all?
And who is “Ivan Bogdanov”, your alter ego on this blog? The Eastern European boyfriend with whom you want to play “like a dirty kuffar” when the pressure of being ignored by your pious Muslim hubby becomes too much? And when the thought of having several inbred children with special needs becomes a little too much?
Tell me! Elucidate me! Sniff, sniff … Pllllleaaaaassssseeee!
More later …
🙂
RC
Mirren10 says
Hi, Reality Check, hope you’re doing well.
Ah, the repulsive ‘rezali’ ! Good sleuthing !
Myself, I think the bumf about being a ‘muslimah’, ‘living in the UK’, is just bs.
**I** think the revolting ‘rezali’ is actually a bloke, living maybe in pakiland.
Reason being, he has slipped up in several posts, describing himself as going to have a cigar in celebration of something or other, and in one post, said ”here in pakistan”.
Also, he’s particularly sensitive on the subject of the lack of obedience and possible adultery on the part of wives, speaking about how awful it is to suffer the ‘whispers and pointing fingers’ of the community. Strikes a nerve, I think ! 🙂
Anyway, whether old ‘rezali’ is male or female, it’s a particularly revolting species of mohammedan.
Thaddeus Lovelock says
So she wants, Australia’s help, the problem with some Muslims, is that they want to be Australian when it suits them. Having said that, I think the Australian Government , should do what it can, but Australian Muslims should not take the benefits of Australian citizenship for granted. Its a two way street.
chuka says
I am very much saddened by the lack of compassion in the previous comments. Moslem or Non- Moslem, one can love a person and be with that person. The “Australian Moslem Mom” case is a clear cut human right issue.
I , myself, immigrated to the US from the country where freedom is very much restricted. I understand how people incluing myself suffer because of oppression and ignorance .
I sincerely wish she and her boyfriend get help and are able to settle in a country where they can live in peace with kids.