The fundamental assumption that Islam is benign and that bringing large numbers of Muslims into the country is risk-free and entirely beneficial must not be questioned, even in the trial of a would-be jihad mass murderer who was clearly acting in the name of Islam and in accord with its teachings. The West collectively seems bent on committing suicide.
“‘Islam not on trial here,’ judge tells jury as ‘would-be firebomber’ Adnan Karabegovic fronts court,” The Age, May 9, 2016 (thanks to Hugh):
A judge has warned a Supreme Court jury that a man accused of discussing making a bomb to start a bushfire as part of a terrorist plot was the one on trial, not Islam.
Justice John Dixon on Monday said the jury had a duty to decide the case against Adnan Karabegovic on the evidence and nothing more.
“In particular, you should dismiss any feeling of sympathy or prejudice that you may have, whether it is sympathy for or prejudice against the accused or anyone else,” Justice Dixon said.
“Most importantly, religion, particularly Islam, is not on trial here.”
Mr Karabegovic has pleaded not guilty to one count of possessing the al-Qaeda magazine, Inspire, “connected with assistance in a terrorist act”.
Justice Dixon told the jury that Mr Karabegovic was living with his wife in Officer at the time, and the offence he faced involved “an offence of terrorism created by the Commonwealth criminal code”.
He said the Crown case was that between May and September 2012, Mr Karabegovic had had an issue of Inspire downloaded to his computer connected with the preparation of a proposed terrorist act.
“The prosecution will allege a conversation between the accused [Mr Karabegovic] and his brother Nihad reveals the accused was contemplating making an incendiary device which could start a bushfire in Australia,” the judge said.
“The allegation is that Inspire 9 [the magazine] was intended to assist in or be used in preparations for that contemplated terrorist act, as it contained material about fire bombs and bushfires.
“The prosecution will also contend that making an incendiary device which could start a bushfire is a terrorist act because the action was intended to advance a political, religious or ideological cause, namely the pursuit of violent jihad against the enemies of Islam.”
The judge told the jury Australians were fortunate to live in an open and tolerant society and the jurors had to maintain that essential value in our society.
“This is particularly important with a terrorism offence.
“Terrorism is the subject of much political and media discussion, not just here but worldwide.
“This trial is not a part of that discussion and it would be quite wrong and unfair for feelings of sympathy or prejudice flowing from public discussion of terrorism or public discussion of Islam or of the ways of Muslims, to intrude into your decision making.
“No such emotion has any part to play in your decision.”
Justice Dixon said the jury’s task was to identify if Mr Karabegovic was guilty of the offence he had been charged with, nothing more.
“You must put aside, if you have them, any prejudice or misconceptions about Muslims or people who practice the religion of Islam.”…
The prosecutor said Mr Karabegovic attracted police attention in late 2011 when the joint counter-terrorism taskforce was investigating a group of people linked to the Al-Furqan Islamic Information Centre in Springvale.
He said that in January 2012, Mr Karabegovic and two other men drove to an overpass in Malvern and hung up a banner which read, “Get your troops out of Muslim lands you filthy kafir.”
Covert recordings of conversations between Mr Karabegovic and his brother revealed how he wanted to take action instead of just talking, and it was a Muslim’s duty to be prepared to sacrifice their lives for Allah, Mr Rapke said….
KrazyKafir says
I often wonder how many major fires in North America are set by Jihadists. So easy to get away with it.
Carmel says
Sorry , but it is not so easy to get along with a fire . The darkest spot in a fire is where it took place first . When you have found this point , there is always something left on the ground that speak : cigarette, bar-b-q ashes , thunder etc…
In national parks , one has to register. Camera are rolling too. Witness around might have see something too . On the ground , there might be tire print or foot print , objects left .
Look more discovery channels videos.
E.L.O. says
I was thinking the same…. God forgive us “IF” we are wrong…BUT….”Refugees” “ISIS….umm????
Infidel from Down Under says
In Victoria, Australia in 2009 we had devastating bush-fires where hundreds of homes were destroyed and over 100 people died.
A number of muslims living here celebrated believing it was punishment from Allah for our military participation in Iraq and Afghanistan along with our offensive infidel lifestyles !
dumbledoresarmy says
Not only in North America.
Many non-Muslim lands are vulnerable. Australia, Israel, Russia, Spain, Portugal, Italy, are all vulnerable to this sort of attack. Many African countries and S American countries would be vulnerable too.
Muslims regularly start forest fires and brush fires in Israel. And this is to destroy the forests that the Jews have laboriously planted, from the 19th century onward; forests that have regenerated and beautified the land, providing shade, reducing erosion, restoring soil and helping water soak into the aquifers. But the Muslims hate the forests and wish to destroy Israel, so they set fires.
Muslim jihad raiders from the 7th century onward, attacking the borderlands and the lands along the Mediterranean northern coast, regularly set fire to orchards, standing crops, and forests. Their aim was to kill – people and livestock, to demoralise, and to lay waste.
At the core of Islam is a sadistic impulse not merely to dominate, but to *destroy*.
Pere LaChaise says
Let’s not talk about the bulldozing of Palestinians’ mainstay olive orchards, shall we?
If we are to prevail, we must be better than the moz in every way. We should never act in mean-spirited and hateful ways. This does not mean we should be suckers, but wise enough to maintain conic ups moral authority. Israeli zionists regularly stoop to base attacks against Christians, scrawling “price tag” in Hebrew on churches and monasteries. A Zionist even defaced ancient fresco icons in the Georgian-established monastery of the Holy Cross in Jerusalem. How is this any better than jihadi Moslem behavior?
gravenimage says
Pere LaChaise wrote:
Let’s not talk about the bulldozing of Palestinians’ mainstay olive orchards, shall we?
……………………..
Dumbledore’s Army said nothing about this. Why pretend that she did?
More:
If we are to prevail, we must be better than the moz in every way. We should never act in mean-spirited and hateful ways.
……………………..
As Fessitude notes, the Israelis are moral; the Mohammedans are not.
The idea that unless we set impossible moral standards for ourselves that we deserve to be murdered by Muslims is one of the suicidal canards of our times.
More:
This does not mean we should be suckers, but wise enough to maintain conic ups moral authority. Israeli zionists regularly stoop to base attacks against Christians, scrawling “price tag” in Hebrew on churches and monasteries. A Zionist even defaced ancient fresco icons in the Georgian-established monastery of the Holy Cross in Jerusalem. How is this any better than jihadi Moslem behavior?
……………………..
Christians in the Levant are not in danger from Jews, and it is ludicrous to pretend that they are.
Right now, Christians are experiencing sex slavery and genocide at the hands of ravening Muslims. If you don’t believe this is any worse from the equal rights they enjoy in Israel, then you are, with all respect, a moral idiot.
davej says
There is a comment downstream about the history of Muslim invaders using fire in their attempts to subjugate the indigenous populations. Also in recent times setting fire to carefully cultivated forests in Israel. Fires are extremely easy to set, especially in drought struck areas, and very difficult to control. Just the kind of nefarious, sneaky and cowardly tactic that Muslim terrorists love.
The Jihadists are bent on destruction and inflicting as much cruel suffering to the kaffirs as possible. Makes me wonder about the pilot who crashes his plane or the many unexplained train derailments and refinery explosions?
They have already tried to sabotage the power lines leading in to nuclear plants. Its like WW2 again, only with thousands of insurgents within the borders creating terror attacks while the Government complacently talks of assimilating the invaders and pays for their welfare.
Unbelievable!
Bazza says
How ould you possibly think thathey are a peaceful people.
Just ask one.We are the terrorists.we invaded their lands and they are only doing what Allah commands.
Phil Horaia says
Jurors will think of Islam in such a trial, and should examine the possibility that he did it and that Islam played a part in the crime.
Thankfully much of the general public equates terroristic crimes committed by Muslims with Islam and are not deceived by the media and the left.
Islam has already been judged and found guilty.
Infidel from Down Under says
This guy is on trial in the Australian state of Victoria.
Most the Judges in the last 15 years bar a brief interlude in Victoria have been politically motivated appointments by socialist left Labor Party Governments.All those appointed during this period of which Judge John Dixon is one, have left leaning bias of varying degrees , are extremely politically correct and usually highly sympathetic to minority groups and their various causes .
Muslims are very much a protected species in Victoria these days
Dean says
The anti-jihad movement and Spencer’s attention is being misapplied to this case since this Judge is taking no position regarding Islam and the instruction is intended to protect the prosecution from pro-Islam and multicultural feelings as much as how you are misinterpreting it. See my response below and near the end of these comments.
Lia says
Does justice Dixon understand that islam is a judicial, financial and political system and NOT a religion or a race?
Panmelia says
islam SHOULD be on trial for past and present crimes. If war criminals can be dragged to the tribunal in The Hague to be tried, examined and judged, why shouldn’t the political ideology of islam which has caused so much death and suffering in this world be scrutinised?
The instructions and exhortations to jihad in the koran should be gone through with a fine tooth comb and all the statements of jihadis presented as evidence that the koran is a book advocating perpetual war against ‘non-believers’. Its history speaks for itself and its present ambitions to create a global caliphate are well-documented.
This political ideology masquerading as a ‘religion’ needs to be exposed to the whole world for what it is with the maximum publicity and denounced as a threat to world peace.
islam needs to be taken by the throat and squeezed out of existence as a discredited, pariah set of beliefs, as revolting as totalitarian fascism and communism.
Tom Cox says
Very well expressed!
Pere LaChaise says
The judge’s orders are a rearguard action which he knows will only serve to moderate the thoughts and feelings of jurors infinitesimally if at all. They are instructed to consider Inspire #9 and jihadist Islamic ideology as material evidence damning this Boznak criminal. There is no way to separate premeditation of violent crime from its source in the religion which inspires it.
I’d have to say to the judge in his quixotic effort, “good luck with that!”
Angemon says
I concur – the goal of the jury is to ascertain whether or not this man is guilty of what he’s charged with (trying to wage jihad against the perceived enemies of islam by starting a bushfire), not whether or not islam is compatible with core Western values (spoiler alert: it isn’t). Ironically, the judge is the one muddling the waters here.
CogitoErgoSum says
True. The fact that the judge pointed this out to the jury says something quite negative about Islam. If the accused had been an atheist would the judge have felt it necessary to remind the jury that atheism was not on trial?
Champ says
Well stated, Angemon!
linnte says
Exactly Angemon. I wonder how many jurors they have gone through finding ones who can put aside their negative thinking on terrorism?
Salome says
And to be fair to His Honour–he also warned against the jurors having sympathy on account of Islam, as well as prejudice against it. Islam has nothing to do with the verdict, but the verdict will have everything to do with the opinion concerning Islam of the jurors and anyone else aware of the facts of the case.
Westman says
Prosecution: “…the action was intended to advance a political, religious or ideological cause, namely the pursuit of violent jihad against the enemies of Islam.”
Judge: “Most importantly, religion, particularly Islam, is not on trial here.”
So, a prosecution where the motive should be suppressed in the juror’s mind? It won’t be suppressed. This must have been a political carrot for the Muslim community; assurance that the dhimmihood continues.
Guest says
Exactly Westman. It just doesn’t make sense.
John Stefan says
The devil’s faithful servant Muhammad says, “The man who fights to make Islam dominant is the man who fights for Allah’s cause.” (B1.3.125). By his actions did not this culprit do his part to make Islam dominant in due time together with many other culprits? Does not his intention to overthrow the government in which he lives and to make Islam dominant mean anything? Why are so many people, including religious leaders let alone political leaders and even judges who are to help us in our thinking, why are they so utterly blind? I think that one important reason is that they just don’t know Islam. Our nations are in deep trouble because of ignorance, ignorance of Islam and ignorance of the ways of God! God help us! Let us all keep on preaching and teaching the truths concerning Islam; our leaders certainly aren’t doing it.
Jay Boo says
You are getting careless Angemon
You wrote,
“I concur – the goal of the jury is to ascertain whether or not this man is guilty of what he’s charged with (trying to wage jihad against the perceived enemies of islam …”
——————————————-
Yes, very astute Angemon
However,
Is any Muslim ever really guilty of anything?
You failed to realize that:
1 — A Muslim must wage war against the — Dirty Kafirs
2 — A Muslim has no other choice but to desire to kill — Dirty Kafirs
3 — Sharia law is imperative to Muslims in reference to the — Dirty Kafirs
4 — Muslims are brainwashed and do not realize that it is immoral to rape, pillage and murder Dirty Kafirs.
We must (deprogrammed) ourselves of blaming Muslims who are obligated to ignore all rules of common human decency.
MORTIMER SAYS SO.
So it must be true.
He is an expert.
Isabellathecrusader says
In the U.S. it’s not unusual for a judge to muddle the waters; in fact it is now quite the norm.
concerned canadian says
eeerie as Fort Mc Murray Alberta is up in flames.
ALARM BELLS are ringing
Alarmed Pig Farmer says
Oh please don’t tell me Fort McMurray is mozzed up too. Is there nowhere to hide and live in peace?
PRCS says
Yes, it’s mozzed up, too.
See at 19 seconds:
http://uverse.com/watch/h___60723815?ref=yfp
Wellington says
“Islam is not on trail here.”
Should be, at least in the court of public opinion it should be. Way overdue in fact.
faraway says
We should even consider putting ourselves in harm’s way to force public exposure of the vileness of islam.
Alarmed Pig Farmer says
Islam is not on trial, terrorism is. The urgent need is for military leaders across the world to discredit the tactic of terrorism. The two professors at the War College should be the first to step forward, they are the ones who said that Jihad is only an internal struggle. Once they publish their paper on getting rid of terrorism, and talk about it with Jake Tapper and Bill O’Reilly on national TV, then the Moslems will calm down.
By ruling that Islam is not on trial, the judge precludes the prosecutors linking the would be mass murderer’s plans to any content in the Holy Ko-Ran. Here it is arson that is on trial, not conspiracy to commit mass murder. All nice and neat, with clear boundaries drawn around the whole mess to keep things orderly.
Ian H says
Actually no. A man is on trial here. He needs to be judged on the basis of the evidence presented. That is all. This is not a place for discussing the Islamic connection to terrorism. This is a courtroom where the guilt or innocence of the defendant beyond reasonable doubt on the basis of the evidence as presented is the only matter of importance being decided.
Isabellathecrusader says
But the problem is, what Muslims see as accepted behavior is criminal behavior to the rest of us yet it is never addressed by western courts as being inimical to our laws and the well being of the rest of us, and so it is not dealt with effectively. Part of the evidence of this case would be the defendant’s motivation, which if examined, will show that it comes from his Islamic beliefs. He’ll even probably tell you that in the courtroom. When are we going to listen, without a PC filter, to what these people tell us about themselves?
How many more years are we going to ignore the obvious, wring our hands and wonder why they do what they do? Connect the dots, folks. It is easier to do than you think.
Dean says
You are wrong. The Judge is taking no position regarding the influence Islam had on the accused and Spencer is mistaken as are you that herein is an example of incorrect law. My full explanation is below near the end of the comments. How would you feel if you are white, charged with a hate crime and the Judge allowed multiculturalist to consider your white privilege in reaching their verdict. This instruction is neutral and does not preclude the prosecution form presenting the entire theory and the jury from considering it
gravenimage says
Dean wrote:
How would you feel if you are white, charged with a hate crime and the Judge allowed multiculturalist to consider your white privilege in reaching their verdict.
………………….
This is not the right parallel, Dean.
This would be if your hypothetical criminal committed his crime in the name and on the tenets of “whiteness”.
WorkingClassPost says
Did we hear them say “Mr Goti is on trial here, not the Mafia.”?
Or is criminal conspiracy legal in Australia?
Alarmed Pig Farmer says
If the criminal conspiracy is operated by Moslems in the name of Allah, yes, it’s perfectly legal.
WorkingClassPost says
Yes, that does seem to be what he’s saying.
In any criminal trial, motive is of the utmost importance, it’s the difference between murder and manslaughter, for example.
The judge here is implying this should be treated as a random piece of mischief, rather than a premeditated and organized act.
In a trial where motive is everything, he’s saying it should be ignored.
I guess he thinks that muzzies don’t hate kangaroos, so they can’t be all bad.
Alarmed Pig Farmer says
I wonder if kangaroo meat is considered halal.
Jay Boo says
1 — Vultures of Victimhood
or
2 — Islam is a free-speech Mecca of multi-culturalism.
It is a peace loving bohemian Laissez-faire utopia filled with songbirds.
http://www.lgbtmuslimretreat.com/muslim-alliance.php
Alarmed Pig Farmer says
It so happens that I’ve been to Mecca, although unfortunately I had to do it posing as a Moslem out of respect for their traditions. But it was fun. I hung out all day long at various sidewalk cafes getting maybe a little drunk on too many beers. My only critique of the place is that when you pick up women over there you don’t know what you’re getting yourself into cuz they wear Glad Bag attire. One time when we got to the hotel room it turned out to be a 300 lb Moslima with a wispy moustache and too many warts for my personal taste. Another time the Moslema turned out to be a Moslem, and boy was he hairy. When I screamed at him that I’m not gay, he said “I’ll gay joe ass” and beat me. Then he robbed me of all my riyals and dollars, and my credit cards. With the cards he robbed me of my identity. Which led me to mull this question: what is the identity of those wearing Glad Bag clothing? I’ll never know, cuz I was later beaten by the Religious Police who had me deported from the country as a Moslem gone bad. Apostate, they said. They also had a big argument whether to kill me for the crime, but decided to deport me instead because of a pending sale of F-15 jet parts.
Next time I’ll take my vacation in Abu Dhabi, where they have sex slave rentals and you’re allowed to inspect the merchandise first. They say the place is the Vegas of Dar al-Islam.
DFD says
To Alarmed Pig Farmer:
‘was nice, enjoyed it. You said: “…They say the place is the Vegas of Dar al-Islam….”
Don’t. I think that’s just a commercial, like ‘religion of peace’. Try the real Vegas instead. Alternatively, we have some good places in Europe, and believe it or not, relatively Muslim free…
Charli Main says
Most European casinos are packed to the brim with Saudi and Gulf Musrats, knocking back single malt whiskey by the bucket and groping their bought for the night ” escorts” Fxxxing two faced hypocrites.
DFD says
Hi Charli,
Greetings, you said: “….Most European casinos…” Please, don’t be such a stickler for detail. 🙂
You also said: “… Fxxxing two faced hypocrites.”
Oh dear, how can you say that, two faced? When we live in ‘multi-culti’ society? Believe me they have more then just two faces. There, now you stand corrected.
Salute
Charli Main says
@DFD
I promise to eat a DOUBLE bacon sandwich as an act of contrition !!!!
PRCS says
Pardon me for asking, AFP, but how many warts are you O.K. with?
Alarmed Pig Farmer says
No more than ten. But I’m a stickler. If even one wart has a pubic hair sprouting out from it, then my love is denied. Good question, though.
mortimer says
‘Terrorism’ appears in a vacuum? Oh, really?
Koran 8.60 “Terrorize them.” (Arabic: turhibunna)
mortimer says
Starting bushfires? Inspired by Al Qaeda?
Will Muslims be starting bush fires and/or forest fires in other countries? Are the authorities looking for that?
Fergus says
Yes, and Yes.
gravenimage says
This has come up before, Mortimer:
“Islamic jihadists setting Europe-wide forest fires”
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/10/as-threatened-is-this-happening
Mike says
Its ironic and perverse that this judge by raising the separation of Islam from the charges that were brought to the court, has now firmly connected the two. Its like telling a kid not to do something which they had no intention of doing and then being surprised when they go and do it.
Perhaps he should have kept quiet instead of being politically correct and the jury would have reached a verdict on neutral terms whilst now they might not. Liberals seem to have a ‘death wish’ in so many aspects of life these days where if they left well alone, matters would resolve themselves easily but by making politically charged comments they just create or exacerbate problems.
Mirren10 says
”Its ironic and perverse that this judge by raising the separation of Islam from the charges that were brought to the court, has now firmly connected the two.”
It would be nice to think he did it on purpose …
Mubarak says
A keen remark, Mike.
The judge gives himself and Islam away, when he points this out to the jury.
Isabellathecrusader says
But the deed has been done and it can’t be taken back. The jurors will now be afraid and not know how they are supposed to decide this and will be more likely to err on the side of caution and let this guy off with more leniency. I wonder if Doug Hooper of CAIR talked to this judge before he said that?
Mirren10 says
”The jurors will now be afraid and not know how they are supposed to decide this and will be more likely to err on the side of caution and let this guy off with more leniency.”
Good point, Isabella.
How’s your mum ?
Isabellathecrusader says
Hello Mirren,
She’s really good. Thanks for asking. Going on 91 years this fall and still driving me crazy. (She doesn’t like when I wash blue jeans in the washing machine…don’t get me started. ; )
‘Hope you are well!
Mirren10 says
”(She doesn’t like when I wash blue jeans in the washing machine…don’t get me started. ; )”
Tell me about it. My mum still asks me if I know how much fluff has accumulated behind the cooker. 🙂
Dean says
The judge is not doing what you and Spencer think he is doing and the prosecution is free to present their entire case and the jury from considering the specifics regarding what influenced this defendant. This standard instruction is intended to protect both sides from prejudice and does not advocate the position you are misinterpreting. My direct response to Spencer, who I greatly admire, is posted below and near the end of the comments.
Victor Redlick says
If “Islam isn’t on trial” here, the wretched excuse for an Australian judge sure is. Crikey!
mortimer says
The judge is trying to protect his appearance of impartiality, while at the same time separating the FACT of terrorism from the doctrine of jihad terrorism (Koran 8.60).
The judge reflects the taboo against discussing discussing the jihad-terrorism doctrine.
Jay Boo says
The Mortimer Pedestal
You intimidate some commenters with your sometimes grandiose expert about Islam displays.
But — You can’t defend your positions honestly.
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2016/05/raymond-ibrahim-the-west-lies-down-before-saudi-lies#comment-1433186
Get off of your High Perch, Morty
You act exactly like a decrepit little Muslim man wearing a man-dress.
No wonder you offend defend Muslims against gun owning commenters, preach deprogramming of Muslims with a passion, kiss up their intolerance with gratuitous use of ‘dirty kafir’ in first person point of view expressions — and then go soft on trolls.
You are deep down a — MUSLIM WANABE
Ian H says
A trial requires a fair process. There is no fairness or balance in many of these comments.
Ralph Statum says
7th Century barbaric Inbred Idiots And As “GOD” Said; They Will Be As “Wild Donkey’s” And They Surly Are…
Rob says
If someone from a poor area commits robbery would the judge say ‘Poverty is not on trial here’?
Probably not but the defense would naturally offer it as a mitigating circumstance at sentencing.
Why then is Islam off limits either as an aggravating or mitigating circumstance?
mortimer says
Is the motive of a terrorist off limits for discussion? Would the motives of a murderer be off limits?
mortimer says
‘Reliance of the Traveller’ (an authoritative manual of Sharia law) definitely states that jihad is normative Islam and recommended by Islam.
What does the Reliance of the Traveller say about jihad?
Chapter O9.0: Jihad “Jihad means to war against non-Muslims, and is etymologically derived from the word mujahada signifying warfare to establish the religion.”
The scriptural basis for jihad, prior to scholarly consensus (def: b7) is such Koranic verses as:
-1- “Fighting is prescribed for you” (Koran 2:216);
-2- “Slay them wherever you find them” (Koran 4:89);
-3- “Fight the idolators utterly” (Koran 9:36);
O9.1: The Obligatory Character of Jihad
Jihad is a communal obligation (def: c3.2). When enough people perform it to successfully accomplish it, it is no longer obligatory upon others (O: the evidence for which is the Prophet’s saying (Allah bless him and give him peace),
“He who provides the equipment for a soldier in jihad has himself performed jihad,”
O9.3
Jihad is also (O: personally) obligatory for everyone (O: able to perform it, male or female, old or young) when the enemy has surrounded the Muslims (O: on every side, having entered our territory, even if the land consists of ruins, wilderness, or mountains, for non-Muslim forces entering Muslim lands is a weighty matter that cannot be ignored, but must be met with effort and struggle to repel them by every possible means.
O9.4: Who is Obligated to Fight in Jihad
Those called upon (O: to perform jihad when it is a communal obligation are every able bodied man who has reached puberty and is sane.
O9.8: The Objectives of Jihad
The caliph (o25) makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians (N: provided he has first invited them to enter Islam in faith and practice, and if they will not, then invited them to enter the social order of Islam by paying the non-Muslim poll tax (jizya, def: o11.4) -which is the significance of their paying it, not the money itself-while remaining in their ancestral religions) (O: and the war continues) until they become Muslim or else pay the non-Muslim poll tax (O: in accordance with the word of Allah Most High,
O9.9
The caliph fights all other peoples until they become Muslim (O: because they are not a people with a Book, nor honored as such, and are not permitted to settle with paying the poll tax
Of course, Justice Dixon can make remarks exonerating Islam as the source of jihad only because he has not studied Sharia law and lives in a country where practically no one has learned the classical jihad doctrine…the judge himself included.
Ian H says
Where did he “make remarks exonerating Islam as the source of jihad”. Read it again. He was simply telling the jury that their job was not to debate Islam but to evaluate whether the defendant was guilty of the charges as laid on the basis of the evidence presented to the court. I would expect a judge to make a statement like that in a case like this. If the defendant was a gang member the judge would tell the jury to set aside their opinions on gangs and judge the defendant on the basis of the evidence. If the defendant was a transsexual, the judge would tell the jury to set aside their opinions on transsexuals and judge the defendant on the basis of the evidence. If the defendant was a tattooed neonazi skinhead the judge would tell the jury to set aside their opinions on neonazi skinheads and judge the defendant on the basis of the evidence. The judge is just doing his job. No big deal.
Peggy says
I seriously doubt that a judge would point out every group that the defendant might belong to and tell the jury to forget that and not judge the group but the defendant.
I don’t think that would even cross his/her mind.
If the defendant was Jewish would the judge deliberately point that out and tell the jury to set aside any biases they have or perhaps a Hindu or a Buddhist.
I don’t think the person’s religion even gets mentioned when they are on trial.
Peggy says
Just should add this, why the need to point at Islam specifically? Has anyone elver heard that a judge has said any group or religion is not on trial here except for Islam?
We all belong to some group so why not point that out every time one of us is on trial?
There is no need but there seems to be the need here.
Ian H says
If a Catholic priest was on trial for kiddy fiddling the Judge would definitely tell the jury that Catholicism was not on trial and that attitudes towards Catholics, either positive or negative, should be disregarded and the defendant judged purely on the basis of the evidence. In any case where religion was an issue there would be a jury instruction of this type. The judge is REQUIRED to issue this kind of instruction. In fact as I understand it in Australia the defence counsel can request that certain types of warnings be given to the jury in the jury instructions and if it is reasonable to do so then the judge is then obliged to issue such a warning, although the wording of the warning is left up to the judge.
I reiterate – the judge is just doing his job.
Jay Boo says
Here is one of many easily searchable resources for the fashionable anti-jihad commenter who wants desperately to sound like an intellectual on the cheap.
http://www.bible.ca/islam/browser-koran.htm
CAUTION
While there is nothing wrong with referencing:
“Reliance of the Traveller” and other sources.
BE AWARE
That when one who is more interested in showing off about how smart they are like Mortimer , they will inevitably begin to treat their cut and paste Islam with an undeserved reverence.
SD says
The easiest way to prevent islamic terrorism in a western country is by not letting in any muslims. Yes youl be called islamophobic but they wont be in your midst and as a result you wont have islamic motivated threats and violence in your country. YES TO THE MUSLIM BAN
Bill says
The Jurors have no choice. They must follow the dhimmi judge. They must betray their own common sense, abandon their own judgement, and abandon their own conscience. Australians have been disarmed. They just have to sit down and take what their government tells them. If it means suffering terror attacks, too bad. If it means denying the source and motivation of the attacks, too bad. They surrendered their capacity to resist when they individually surrendered their firearms. Think of that everytime you see one Western nation after the other surrender to Islam.
Ian H says
That is a fairly ordinary judicial instruction to a jury. Nothing to see here. Move on.
billybob says
I think Islam should be put on trial, and I have an idea how… Have a web site, or alternatively, hand out literature that makes you look like someone promoting hate speech, anti semitism, racism, misogyny, etc.
Your literature will be quotes from the Quran, disguised by only tiniest changes of wording or sentence structure to make the phases more plausibly normal speech. You don’t want it recognized for what it is too quickly. This hate speech could of course also be directed at Jews, (to whom you would apologize profusely afterward, explaining it was for a good cause) to up the odds of getting arrested.
So then you go to trail, never once having mentioned that every line of your hate material is almost word for word quotes from the Quran and widely accepted versions of the Hadiths and Sunna.
Hopefully you get convicted of a hate crime. Then you reveal the source of your material. You now have a ruling that it is hate speech because it is the very material in essence that the judge ruled on.
PRCS says
Hmmm.
Interesting.
Dean says
Islam should be on trial in public opinion and judged guilty of advocating savagery, but it is not on trial in this criminal trial. The defendant is on trial and nothing in this neutral instruction prevents the prosecutor from presenting influence of Islam’s influence regarding his criminal intent and the jury from considering it. This case, the judge and this instruction is just not a good example of the problem we are dealing with. If you support letting juries apply their prejudices against someone for being a Muslim than nothing prevents them from prejudices against you for reasons independent of any evidence like being on trial for a hate crime and letting them consider your white privilege independent of any evidence. .
Peggy says
So when they ask this creature why he did it and his reply is because I did it for Allah is the jury supposed to shut their ears then? One way to get a conviction is to present a motive. How can the prosecution do that when they are not allowed to mention it?
Ian H says
You are jumping to ridiculous conclusions. They are allowed to mention these things and the jury can consider them.
The judge is simply telling the jurors to park any preconceived notions of Islam they might have at the door and judge the defendant purely on the basis of what is said in court.
Peggy says
This man is only thanking his new country for supporting them in Bosnia.
Hey, why not bring more when they are so grateful?
Angemon says
What the hell does that have to do with this case?
Peggy says
I would think it’s obvious to an intelligent person.
Is there anyone else here who doesn’t get it?
Angemon says
Peggyposted:
“I would think it’s obvious to an intelligent person.”
And you obviously don’t like to show you’re an intelligent person. Unless, of course, you can’t see the emperor’s new clothes. Now, before you go off the rails and start whining about me asking you questions, you wrote:
What the hell does that have to do with this case?
Andrew Schonberger says
Islam is on trial daily, here in Australia, and so it should, despite leftist judiciary and leftist elites. Our friends at JihadWatch may not realise that The Age in Melbourne, and it’s sister newspaper Sydney Morning Herald do not represent australian public opinion. These papers may be highly quoted overseas by members of the global leftie-league, but their circulation is dwindling, to the point they might need to stop publishing on daily basis.
sidney penny says
“Covert recordings of conversations between Mr Karabegovic and his brother revealed how he wanted to take action instead of just talking, and it was a Muslim’s duty to be prepared to sacrifice their lives for Allah, Mr Rapke said….”
“and it was a Muslim’s duty to be prepared to sacrifice their lives for Allah, Mr Rapke said….”
and Islam is not on trial here?
Lizzy says
Indeed, it is blatantly obvious Mr Karabegovic is following the teachings of islam.
This idea that islam is beyond scrutiny and criticism has become an epidemic, like smallpox, highly contagious and unchecked by those who have the means to eradicate the disease.
davej says
Its not Islam, he was just mentally ill.
Well Islam definitely is a mental illness but that does not give it’s practitioners a free pass on civilized behavior or an excuse for murder and rape.
Fuck these savages and fuck their lame leftist apologists.
Jay Boo says
The Leftist cavalry are on the way
This Rubber Duck link gives me the impressing of Leftists trying to whitewash the Islamic State of any evidence of Islam while giving the false impression that they are not all just a bunch of sorry ass Islam groveling cowards.
Jay Boo says
Rubber Duck link
Leftist Whitewash ????
Annak says
Jihad-denial seems to be some contagious disease of insanity or like some evil spell affecting many the Western world. Like a plague.
Unless it involves’ Palestinians’ terrorising Israel, then the same people seem to ‘miraculously understand’ the motive.
I cannot remember in the past when terrorists’ motives were not recognised.
Aton says
They are all afraid of Muslim reprisals. Which brings us to the true nature of Islam.
Q. What do you call an organisation that threatens to destroy property and people if you do not do what it says, or if you question its operation?
A. A protection racket.
Islam was set up as a camel-raiding protection racket 1300 years ago, and it is still a camel-raiding protection racket. It is no different to al Capone’s protection racket – do as we say, don’t criticise us, and pay us the jizya protection money. If you don’t, we will shoot up your offices, or bomb your night clubs, metro systems and airports.
Islam needs to ba called by its correct name – The Great Protection Racket.
Aton
Dean says
Our shared concern about Islam is being misapplied to this case and the Judge is taking no position regarding Islam’s involvement in this case. My full response is below near the end of the comments.
Aton says
Agree with the judge, this is a trial of the individual, not the religion.
However, there should be a separate trial for the religion itself. If this had been a fringe political party, inciting its members to arson, that leaders of that party would be in the dock charged with endangering life and property. So why are the leaders of Islam not in the dock, answering similar charges??
Aton
duh_swami says
Looks like jury nullification doesn’t exist in Australia…
Michael says
The Jury system in Australia particularly in Victoria is overwhelmingly leftist and are very protective of the Muslim community . What you describe in the above article is not surprising. The Judge would have been far more concerned about protecting the Muslim community of any backlash of another of theirs acting as a 5 th Columnist than of any potential harm to innocent citizens . There appear to be two sets of Laws here if a Middle east or African asylum seeker/refugee commits a crime such as an African [ Sudanese] Taxi driver arrested for molesting a young girl in the front seat of his taxi recently the Judge let him off [ some sort of good behaviour bond] because of his background. If one was to do a search for the last 5 years of all crimes committed by asylum seekers/refugees and the how many got off with a warning or slap on the wrist I would be surprised if it was less than about 90% . The Judge went on to tell the young girl in the Taxi she should have listened to her mother and not have sat in the front seat . So the victim got a lecture form the Judge and the perpetrator got let off .
If the molesting taxi driver was a white Australian Male I doubt he would have been let off so easily.
The crime by young mostly Muslim African refugees/ asylum seekers is out of control and the Police are shit scared of approaching any Middle eastern / African suspects because of being accused of Islamophobia or racist. We are starting to look like Europe with no go areas. Australians are in total denial whilst all this is going on they still support Middle Eastern/ African asylum seekers and appear to be willing to suffer the consequences .
Dean says
Spender was incorrect to try to use this Judge and instructions to support his position regarding intellectual and cultural decay, and the same applies to you if you think that this instruction is either left or irrational. See my extended comment at the below near the end.
Florida Jim says
Wherever Islam is it is on trial. Islam always wants to take over completely whether it is a town, a city, a state, a nation or another sect.Islam cannot exist with another religion or form of government it requires Sharia, Jihad , taqiyya, complete takeover everywhere step by step if it takes centuries as it it has.Islam cannot exist is a free nation and muslims will lie about this until they take over and either convert everyone, behead everyone or tax everyone making them slaves to muslims.
In the book “”The Devil We don’t Know-The Dark side Of Revolutions in The Mid-east” By Nonie Darwish
This is a book written by a Muslim lady who became a Christian after being raised as a Muslim in Egypt and Gaza. She has written several books exposing the fraud of Islam and sharia, the divine law of Islam,which supersedes all other laws, forbidding free speech, religion and gender equality. Under sharia law, any ruler who refuses to conduct jihad and advocates peace with non-Muslim nations can be removed from office. Under this rigid authoritarian class structure demanded by sharia law precludes any possibility of democracy or equality. She presents the fact that among all the protesters and all the signs there was not one demanding “down with sharia!!”
“Like a ponzi scheme Islam must have expand to survive. The ponzi scheme works as long as more and more people join the pyramid of Islam. When the light of truth reaches the pyramid, especially the majority on the bottom, who are not benefiting from the system and who are being sacrificed to preserve and perpetuate the fraud, then the whole system will collapse and the colossal deception will be exposed.
Tyrannical Islam will collapse when the civilized world exposes it for what it is and rejects it ; when its leaders get tired of their lies, fabrications, and incitement against innocent victims; and when Islamist are discredited and disrespected no longer given funds to enable terror groups and jihadist individuals.
The author dreams of a day when the snake of sharia will crawl back into its hole in mecca, as Mohammed himself said before he died. “
Dean says
The justified sentiments displayed by almost all of the responses to this article and directed against the Judge for this correct instruction fail to understand that the instruction is intended to protect even the prosecutions case against someone on the jury feeling sympathy for the man’s religion and then ignores relevant facts regarding intent offered by the prosecution. Nothing in a that instruction prevents this prosecutor from using everything these commenters support from being heard by and thereby influencing the jury. I am a big fan of Spencer but he misunderstands and misapplies his advocacy by trying to use this Judge and these instructions to demonstrate cultural moral relativism and ignorance about Islam.
Sam says
I bet you are a liberal. Jihadi can not be judged without Islam being the main theme.
What is it you are getting here, I wonder, reading the comments about Islam, Jihad and Muslims?
Dean says
Group identity beliefs have affected everyone including those on the right side of the Islamic invasion. Regardless of a judge’s personal views this instruction was standard, neutral and intended to protect the prosecution from jury prejudices that would influence him or her from thinking that he is on trail only because he is Muslim. If you are white and on trail for a hate crime involving an altercation with a black man, would you want the prejudiced jurist to consider your whiteness and white privilege independent of the evidence? Nothing in that instruction prevents the prosecutor from presenting his entire case and jurors from considering all relevant evidence, but merely him being Muslim is not evidence but relevant verses known and advocated by him would be. This article by Spencer is a mistaken application of his worthwhile opposition to western multiculturalism and moral relativism.
Dean says
Islam is not on trial in any criminal case, it is the perpetrator that is on trial and nothing in this instruction prevents the prosecution form demonstrating Islam’s influence on his actions
Ian H says
You have no rational answer to Dean’s entirely correct statement so you resort to ad hominems.
Aussie Infidel says
I agree with the judge’s remark that “Islam should not be on trial here”; Judge Dixon is correct that this trial is about assessing the guilt or innocence of Karabegovic – about judging a person not an ideology. However, the motivation for the bomb plot should also be addressed, for surely that is part of the evidence; and clearly, that motivation is Islam. In cautioning the jury, the judge is obviously protecting his own arse, because like so many other cases involving Islam, if this man is found guilty, it will surely go to appeal.
However, Islam should be on trial in our parliaments, where its tenets and ideology can be debated in open forum. But of course, the problem is that Islam is not on trial anywhere; and it won’t be until new politicians who understand its pernicious ideology, are elected to replace the politically correct apologists who dominate our legislatures now. One such Party contesting the forthcoming elections in this country is Australian Liberty Alliance. It will be interesting to see how it fares.
Dean says
The judge is doing more than covering his butt, he is following the law because these are legally required instructions and they are meant to be neutral. And nothing in those instructions prevents the presentation of specific and relevant evidence involving the accused motivation or forbids a jurors consideration of that evidence. Islam in not on trial in a criminal proceedings and no one should be judged by his or her biases, beliefs, race, professed religion of anything else so the instruction was intended to protect the prosecution side from a juror that thinks he is accused because of Islamophobia and ignores the evidence of his guilt as much as these readers fear about the opposite. This is not a good example of the ideological and political problem we are dealing with and Spencer made a mistake using it as an example.
Ian H says
I quite agree.
Peggy says
This man is only thanking his new country for supporting them in Bosnia.
What the hell does that have to do with this case?
===================
OK, I will explain it so read slowly.
Australia has supported Bosnian Muslim in the 90s and imported “the poor dears” in order to save them from those horrible Christians over there.
This is the thanks we get.
I would think my comment is easy enough to understand. It seem you are angling for another long drawn out debate on something in order to have another go.
Transparent much?
Angemon says
Peggy posted:
“Transparent much?”
Unfortunately, yes. I, for one, don’t think Australians had this coming.
Peggy says
Did I say you did and where are you getting the idea from?
Angemon says
Peggy posted:
“Did I say you did”
What exactly are you implying I say you said I did?
“and where are you getting the idea from?”
Whatever idea you’re ascribing me, I’ll go out and say it’s not mine. I thought my post was crystal clear. Obviously, I overestimated you. Or underestimated your capability and desire to engage in s***posting. You were transparent enough. I don’t think Australians deserve this. End of post.
Angemon says
“ It seem you are angling for another long drawn out debate”
Says the individual who used a 3rd-grade-recess put-down instead of answering a simple question…
Peggy says
Your question was a stupid question since it was obvious what my post meant and the only reason you could have to ask such a question was to draw me into some silly argument with you again.
You are the one behaving like a 3rd grader and obviously have as much intelligence because like i said you are transparent.
Angemon says
Peggy posted:
“Your question was a stupid question since it was obvious what my post meant ”
I’ve dealt with you before. You accuse me of making up assumptions and pretending it’s the real world or some s*** ike that. I ask you to explain what you mean so I won’t “make up assumptions and pretend it’s the real world” and I get insults. Damned if I don’t, damned if I do…
“and the only reason you could have to ask such a question was to draw me into some silly argument with you again.”
Or so you assume. Anyway, what better way to avoid being draw into a silly argument than giving a silly response, right?
“You are the one behaving like a 3rd grader”
A “NO U”? Well, that’s like, college level of debating there – totally not 3rd-grade-recess 😉
“and obviously have as much intelligence because like i said you are transparent.”
Again, petty and childish. And incredibly self-unaware – apparently, not wanting to be drawn into a long, pointless argument is not mutually exclusive with tossing petty and childish insults, just with me using my right of reply to rebut said insults…
Peggy says
@Angemon,
If dealing with me is so unpleasasnt to you then stop. Simple.
Angemon says
Ah, so this is where you increasing unwarranted hostility towards me is building up to.
Peggy says
Unwarranted!!!!???
Ok, let’s go with that. Anything to end it with you.
Angemon says
*ahem*
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2016/05/australian-judge-to-jury-in-jihadis-trial-islam-is-not-on-trial-here#comment-1434348
“If dealing with me is so unpleasasnt to you then stop. Simple.“
Burnerjack says
Inciting violence IS against the Law, is it not?
“Islam is not on trial here.” Should it be?
Remove the title of “Islam” with a non descriptive and ascribe to it the same tenets of Islam and then put it on trial. I think the results are a foregone conclusion.
On a similar note: “Should the world at large treat Muslims as the Muslims treats the world at large?
If not, why not? Questions worth considering.