This could have been a group of louts thinking it would be fun to cause a mass panic, and knowing that when people hear “Allahu akbar,” they think “jihad violence and terror,” not “benign religion of peace.”
Or it could have been Muslims decided to “strike terror in the enemies of Allah” (Qur’an 8:60).
“Men storm NSW cinema shouting Allahu Akbar,” 9News, June 13, 2017 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):
NSW Police are investigating after a group of men reportedly screaming “Allahu Akbar” entered a western Sydney cinema leaving customers rattled.
Officers were called to the Hoyts Blacktown at Westpoint shopping centre about 8pm on Sunday night after reports of a disturbance.
Investigators were told four men yelled comments within two cinemas at the complex causing some concerned patrons to leave the building, a police spokesman told AAP on Tuesday.
Cinemagoers told News Corp Australia the group of men shouted Allahu Akbar before they fled. One of the cinemas was showing Baywatch.
The cry, which means “God is great” in Arabic, is associated with Islamist terrorism…
No, it doesn’t mean “God is great.” Here is what it really means.
Mo says
Ugh, and here I was JUST looking at movie times/prices for later this week.
I hate crowds (of any kind) to begin with. But to be trapped in a dark room like that has got to be one of my worst nightmares.
JMB says
I understand that back in the days of the Iranian Revolution, I think about 1975, terrorists torched a movie theatre, the exits had been locked and about 300 women perished. This was before the Shah was deposed and there was a general attack on all Western influence in that country. Islam may be a dark medieval religion but they are up to date on terror. I understand that their holy book tells them to strike fear into the infidel. Movie theatres and shopping malls are very crowded and very vulnerable places. We have been warned. It would be nice if our authorities could take notice.
mortimer says
Is it a crime to cry ‘ALLAH AKBAR’ in a crowded theater?
How would a judge respond to that question?
(Oh, ‘Allah akbar’ simply meant the accused was enjoying the movie…’ ) Yeah, sure. (sarc/off)
RationalVoice says
I hope the judge would regard it as a serious crime and hand down five year sentences at least.That should remove the smirks from their faces !
WPM says
It would be like shouting fire in a crowded theater which is a crime in America not protected under free speech. It was a case heard in 19 century America, the people in the theater could get killed in stampede. The least they should do to these individuals is a blanket party!
mortimer says
Allat or Al-‘Uzzá was called ‘Chabar’ (the great) or ‘Allat-al-Chabra’.
Mohammed using a pun, twisting this into ‘Allahu Akbar’, meaning ‘Allah is greater than Allat’.
Mohammed’s cruel misogynistic joke is similar to the war cry “Allah wa-Kubâr” = Allah (Hubal) and (his) Great (goddess Uzza…Venus).
The Moon Crescent of Hubal and the Star of Venus are the symbols of early Islam.
Lookmann says
Spencer wrote :-
Or it could have been Muslims decided to “strike terror in the enemies of Allah” (Qur’an 8:60)
of course. …..with or without swords
newUser says
Scary. It could happen in the US too and everywhere.
David M says
Well Baywatch has everything in it that is haram to Muslims, it pretty much covers the whole spectrum of things that would upset Muslims.
It also appears to be a really crappy movie, maybe they were trying to make the point “Allah is greater than this movie” after watching a bit of it.
Tom says
Shouting fire in a crowded theatre is illegal because it will kill people in the ensuing panic.
Shouting a well used and easily recognized term “Allahu Akbah” that is associated with terror attacks and the carnage that they cause is exactly the same and those shouting it in a theatre or any other venue that has a crowd must be treated exactly the same as those shouting fire.
Tom says
Does this mean that someone who shoots and kills someone who shouts “Allahu Akbah” in a crowded theatre is justified in claiming they did it in self defense as they thought it was a terror attack?
Just think about that for a moment you would be shouters.
Bill says
Did this happen here? Did someone shoot one of the shouting men? Has that happened anywhere? Or, are you just projecting a little here? I know in London that men shouting this were also using knives and killing and maiming people who could not defend themselves. Just think about that for a moment.
The shooter would have to be in fear of death or serious bodily harm in order to justifiably use lethal force. Those circumstances were not present. I do not fear law-abiding citizens making these judgements.
I fear the London police chief more. She has demonstrated herself to be incapable of discerning a threat to public safety at any level — and she is in charge of defending people who have been deprived of the right to defend themselves. Now that is scary.
Tom says
Yes I was simply asking the question because although, in hindsight, and as we all know hindsight is 20/20, there were no actual weapons brandished, who, at that moment, is to know if they did not have knives or even a suicide vest?
Knowing as we do that panic in a crowd kills, the “weapon” used is the term “fire” or in this case “Allahu Akbah” and as a result one may be in fear of losing ones life or grevious bodily harm occuring to oneself or others as a direct result.
So therfore my question is very relevant given the circumstances at that moment.
The law is based on the moment a crime is committed not what we later find to be the case in hindsight and what other possibilites MAY have occurred. Cause and direct effect come into play.
blitz2b says
“….. It has absolutely nothing to do with Islam….”
That’s the gist of what you will hear leaders of the western world say…. “A perversion of a peaceful religion..”
It’s a given folks the West has absolutely no will to survive. They have sold out to the forces of this evil ideology.
Unless something dramatic and catastrophic happens, before the turn of the century the world will be dominated by Islam.
The question remains though, will there ever be a revolution within the borders of the West to free the former free world from the crutches of this demoralizing religion, or will we simply carry on enduring Islam and it’s brutality like other former infidel, now conquered nations do under the devastating sword of Islam?
Good help the future generations who will have to bear the brunt of this evil nation destroying cult.
somehistory says
They were gauging the reaction to see if the words only could cause people to run for their lives.
A lion puts his head low to the ground in the jungle and roars. He does this to cause fear and to see what animals run and in which direction. It is useful to his lady lions of the pride that bring home the dinner. When the prey runs, the female hunters are waiting to catch them.
The roar alone causes fear in the animals of prey and they do not know exactly where the lion is.
Perhaps this is what the moslums were working on…to see if people would run when no shooting or stabbing took place. If the patrons ran, there could have have been killers waiting outside to attack.
ItsReallyQuiteClear says
I think that we may be repeating a rather dangerous logical error here, in attempting to analyze this incident from a non-Islamic point of view. If we assume that this was an act of Islamic-directed terrorism, then that would make it an attack against “non-believers”. If it was such an attack, then the attackers would be guilty of one of the seven greatest sins in Islam: retreating from the battlefield. That makes me think this was a “prank” (hard to use that word here).
See https://islamqa.info/en/200632 for a list of the seven greatest sins in Islam, all of which doom a believer to hell.
I think that the earlier comment, that it was likely a “prank” because no one was killed (or injured) was likely spot on.
I think that we’re less likely to be deceived if we attempt to view the actions of the jihadists from the point of view of their own belief system. We may not always avoid being deceived, but I think it’s an important step in understanding what’s going on, being able to effectively spread the word, and avoiding baseless conclusions and useless “strategies” (like assuming that the Islamic fundamentalists just want economic opportunities, or freedom to practice their own religion).
They have stated that they plan to exploit western values against us (speaking for myself, as a westerner). It’s about time that a critical mass of westerners develop enough of an understanding of Islamic doctrine to independently debunk the failed “strategies” and intentionally misleading interpretations. The question is, how to get to that point (and before more western countries treat that type of thinking and questioning as a crime)?
detolerable says
At what point are those words (Aloha Snackbar, sic) to be considered “Fighting Words” that no longer have First Amendment protection, and can be metimmediately with Second Amendment defense…
Cretius says
Such scum should be shot out of hand.
abc says
Yet, Allah is not Akbar. Call on nothing, get nothing…
Pumbar says
If islam is a religion of peace why are people jittery about such a fundamentally islamic proclamation?
Could it be that more people are secretely more ‘islamophobic’ than we thought?
Tom says
Good question. I disagree that more people may be “Islamophobic” as that word means an irration fear of Islam. Anyone who has a fear of Islam, knowing how violent its followers can be, isn’t being irrational. A new study in Germany of 45,000 young people has confirmed what many have previously realized that if the fundamentals of a religion are peaceful then the more devout a follower becomes the more peaceful they become and vice versa with a religion of violent fundamentals, like Islam. http://m.dw.com/en/study-finds-young-devout-muslims-in-germany-more-prone-to-violence/a-5655554 Here is a link to the report of the study.
Davegreybeard says
@Bill:
“The shooter would have to be in fear of death or serious bodily harm in order to justifiably use lethal force. Those circumstances were not present.”
Let me ask you a hypothetical Bill:
Suppose you were in a crowd of Infidels and you heard the shout “Allah hu Akbar;” knowing what you know of Islam and the methods of Muslim terrorists, would you be in fear of death or serious bodily harm? Do you think that this fear would be “reasonable” under the circumstances?
Let us further suppose that you were legally armed in the above situation. Would the thought of drawing your weapon occur to you and do you think that this would be reasonable?
Love to hear your thoughts on this, Bill.
Don Foss says
I hope they try that shit in Texas or Arizona. Dudes will immediately find themselves floored full of bullet holes…and justified.
scott says
Too bad the lot of them couldn’t turn around, take incessant photos of them, post on FB and other social media and shout them them OUT of the Theatre.
Martel says
Hmmm south western Sydney…as all marketers know so goes SW Sydney, so goes the nation.
First KFC, first McDonald’s, first shopping mall, first Islamic jihadis