He refused to stand because he recognizes only the authority of Sharia, which he regards as divine law and superior to the manmade law of the Manhattan federal court. Many other Muslims have in the past refused to stand for judges for the identical reason. Yet authorities have shown no interest in pondering the implications of this phenomenon.
“Alleged bike-path terrorist refuses to stand for federal judge,” by Elizabeth Rosner, New York Post, January 23, 2018:
The accused West Side bike-path terrorist refused to stand as a Manhattan federal judge entered the courtroom Tuesday, despite his lawyer’s best efforts to get him to.
Sayfullo Saipov’s lawyer had motioned at him with her hand to get him to stand out of respect for the judge, as is courtroom protocol. But Saipov, 29, remained seated and stared stonily ahead….
Last week, Saipov’s lawyers indicated that their client would plead guilty in exchange for a life sentence without parole.
The accused lone-wolf terrorist, an Uzbek national, allegedly plowed his rented Home Depot truck down the popular bike path just after 3 p.m. Oct. 31, striking nearly two dozen pedestrians and cyclists.
He made it 17 blocks before crashing his truck into a bus near Stuyvesant High School and being shot by a cop as he fled, authorities have said. Saipov was allegedly screaming, “Allahu akbar!’’ — “God is great! in Arabic — as he ran.
Notes declaring his allegiance to ISIS — and a flag from the terror organization — were recovered from the truck, officials said. Saipov later allegedly asked cops if he could hang the flag in his hospital room while he recovered….
ConnectingDots says
Hey, New York Post: Allahu akbar does not mean God is great. It means Allah is greater or greatest.
PATRICIA FRANCES KOENIG says
ConnectingDots, you are so right and the real meaning of Allahu Akbar is important because it shows the competitive, supremacist attitude of Islam. And Allah does not really man God, either. The Islamic confession of conversion will NOT allow a convert to say: “God is God and Mohammed is his messenger.” A convert must say “Allah.” That is because Allah is not the same as God…and definitely not the same as God the Father. Walid Shoebat pointed that out.
Andy says
We don’t need this POS (and people who think like him) anywhere in the western world!
Stay in your damn own sharia dominant country and out of our backyard. We don’t need this nonsense anymore!
Andy says
AMEN
CRUSADER says
That’s right. Arabs always trying to put one over on another rival, being competitive with their “GREATER”
claims…but they themselves have a hard time competing historically, so they must conquer others and have their Dhimmis work for them, produce for them, think and create for them, while they, pure to Arab culture, take the credit. Typical of what has happened in what they proffer to the Art World, Architecture, and Science realms of actual civilization….most of which was duplication or morphed from earlier forms of creativity. Schmucks!!! Math from Phoenicians and Hindus, Science from Greeks, Domes from Persians,
Legal framework and administration from Romans, etc…
mortimer says
Andy wrote: We don’t need this POS…
The reason we don’t need ANY MUSLIMS in free democratic countries is because Muslims have a FUNDAMENTAL AND PROFOUND OBJECTION TO FREEDOM, TO EQUALITY and TO REASON.
Islam is SLAVERY, INEQUALITY and ANTI-INTELLECTUAL OBSCURANTISM.
Islam DOES NOT FIT in a FREE DEMOCRACY.
John says
Yeah, and allah in arabic means god so his god is greater, even a simpleton can decipher that, you are wrong
madpatriot says
Who cares what it means, it is wrong and he is no god…he is nothing. These people need to be told in no uncertain terms, if they come here to OUR country, they assimilate and adhere to OUR customs and laws or they do not come. It is time we demand that ALL people that come here are standing with us, pledge
the Flag, know the Constitution and laws and speak English—in other words be one with us under the
same patriotism. AND our own people in America must do the same to re-build the strength we once had or these kind of insane people will run OUR country!. What is the matter with people that are willing to accept this inanity in our own nation? We are living with the enemy!
Frank Anderson says
Mad. . ., consider the possibility that “Big Al” is the anti-God and “Big Mo” is the anti-Christ? Make a checklist and compare. You might want to look at the book The Islamic Antichrist by Joel Richardson, reviewed by our host Robert Spencer.
Linde Barrera says
I wish the NYC policeman who shot Saipov had a “shoot to kill” mindset when he was aiming at Saipov. I do not want my tax dollars spent on keeping this filthy creature alive in jail for years and decades. ?
bodega says
I think the next time a Muslim refuses to stand for a judge, a wire cage should be brought in. The cage should be as tall as the woman or man is sittng on the ground and as wide as necessary to accomodate his body. No wider and no bigger and no longer. S/he must be handled like that until the court find him innocent or guilty. Any accusations of cruelty should be dismissed as being frivilous. Our nation does not honor Sharia law or followers of Sharia. His position of assumed dominance must thwarted.
Phil Copson says
No court would put defendants in a cage such as you suggest, but passing the hand-cuffs over a rail or through a loop as a security measure to prevent the defendant from attacking lawyers/witnesses/courtroom staff etc or attempting to flee the courtroom would only be sensible.
If the bar/security-loop happened to be at a height where the defendant could comfortably rest his hands on it while standing, but couldn’t sit down again without suspending his weight from the hand-cuffs, that would just be a bonus….
There wouldn’t be many people who’d voluntarily spend several days hanging by their arms like a chimpanzee just to make a point.
Thomas Kimball says
I think if you put a rope around his neck and throw the other end around a strong beam and then pull on the rope he will pop right up!!!!
CRUSADER says
Why stand (or be caged) before a judge.
Just let it be a military panel, and an immediate firing squad nearby, with bullets already dipped in pigs’ fat and blooded bacon….
John says
Bullets have pigs fat in the wadding so islamic dimwits shot already have pig in them
Frank Anderson says
John, I have been shooting since 1954, and reloading *many* kinds of ammunition since 1964. I have never seen in the multiple tens of thousands of rounds I have loaded and fired a single round with fat on it. The lubricant used on the cartridge cases for sizing is lanolin, not fat, very little if any of which gets to the bullet. Please check your sources and information.
Winston says
Contempt of court. What’s the sentence for that?
CRUSADER says
Winston!
Loved you in “Darkest Hour”
Bravo! Nice to have you with us.
Lu says
Ticket to Gitmo. He belongs there. He is no civilian criminal – he is an enemy combatant.
I strongly oppose his right to be dealt with by our criminal law system used for citizens and during the time of peace – Gitmo has a better setup for the ones who chose to wage war against America.
Sarah says
So if he won’t stand out of respect, force him to stand.
Pretty simple.
Paul says
Agreed. Handcuff one arm to the table and take away his chair.
LeftisruiningCanada says
Exactly. If he wants to behave like a child, spank his botty and make him stand.
It really is simple.
Walter Sieruk says
First, it should be made clear that this jihadist /Muslim whose first name means “The Sword of Allah” who murdered eight people and injured twelve other people in New York City was following the instruction of the “holy book” of Islam, the Quran. For example, the Quran instructs in 9:123 . “O you who believe ! Fight those of the disbelievers who are close to you, and let them find harshness in you…” Maiming and murdering people who are non-Muslim in a jihad truck attack as the jihadist did is a very effective way show non-Muslims “Harshness.” Strange teachings for what some call a “peaceful religion.” Likewise the Quran teaches in 47:4 “When you encounter the disbeliever’s strike off their heads until you make a great slaughter among them…”A truck jihad attack can, for sure, make a greater “slaughter among them than a sword can.” As the Quran also instructs in 2:191. “Kill the disbeliever wherever we find them.”
All the while that jihadist was committing mass murder he was yelling out “Allah Akbar’ meaning “Allah is great” Islam is a false dangerous and deadly religion.
Second, this jihadist /Muslim whose first name means “The Sword of Allah” who murdered eight people and injured twelve other people in New York City was following the instruction of the “holy book” of Islam, the Quran. For example, the Quran instructs in 9:123 . “O you who believe ! Fight those of the disbelievers who are close to you, and let them find harshness in you…” Maiming and murdering people who are non-Muslim in a jihad truck attack as the jihadist did is a very effective way show non-Muslims “Harshness.” Strange teachings for what some call a “peaceful religion.” Likewise the Quran teaches in 47:4 “When you encounter the disbeliever’s strike off their heads until you make a great slaughter among them…”A truck jihad attack can, for sure, make a greater “slaughter among them than a sword can.” As the Quran also instructs in 2:191. “Kill the disbeliever wherever we find them.”
All the while that jihadist was committing mass murder he was yelling out “Allah Akbar’ meaning “Allah is great” Islam is a false dangerous and deadly religion.
John says
islam is SATANIC
MFritz says
Take a knee? Sorry, could not resist. 😉
Nigel GFF says
“…Many other Muslims have in the past refused to stand for judges for the identical reason. Yet authorities have shown no interest in pondering the implications of this phenomenon…”
There are many ways to kowtow to Islamic supremacism but rolling over and ‘playing dead’ is particularly hateful.
https://www.rt.com/news/416930-bavaria-cross-courtroom-removed-muslim/
Granddaddy says
Running down people with his truck was actually from a suggestion in the ISIS declaration of war published in 2014.
gravenimage says
True–and many of the faithful have taken their advice.
Champ says
“Last week, Saipov’s lawyers indicated that their client would plead guilty in exchange for a life sentence without parole.”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This evil perp deserves the death penalty and stat. And if muhammad were alive today his crimes against humanity should receive the same.
steve says
Same in frightened England, the Muslims MAKE the rules and we stand by in awe…………
Wellington says
That this Islamic cretin refused to stand for a US federal judge should come as no surprise. Same old same old from the most devout of Mo’s believers. Nothing new here.
But this is what is most salient in all of this: Even though many Muslims would stand for an American judge, their belief system to its very core argues for ultimately not paying any respect to any system of law but Sharia.
Yes, Islamic law arguably does say to honor the law of a non-believer’s land but ONLY until Sharia can replace it. Everywhere. Across the earth.
And this is why EVERY Muslim is guilty because, in the final analysis, a Muslim adheres to a belief system that has no respect for any legal system but its own, just as Islam in general has no true respect for any religion but its own. In fact, the Muslims who would stand before a US federal judge actually concern me more than the ones that won’t. Anyone who really knows what Islam is about and who cherishes liberty will immediately grasp why I have written what I have.
LeftisruiningCanada says
There’s no trusting them when it comes down to it. Sad, but true. If you profess mohammad as your perfect role model, not one thing you ever say or do can be taken at face value ever again….unless it’s raping children or killing kufar.
Wellington says
Agreed. No one who adheres to a wretched belief system (and if Islam is not a wretched belief system then virtually no belief system is) can be trusted, at least in the judgment and common sense departments let alone the many active malevolent departments that function within the human psyche. This is my bottom line and will always remain my bottom line.
If one is a Muslim they are, at best, “merely” a confused human being; something far, far worse at worst. And I would not assert this about any other major religion on earth even though I am not a religious person in the least.
CRUSADER says
Wellington ~
You are not pulling any punches, here: “EVERY Muslim is guilty because….”
Even our spectacular Robert Spencer has mentioned that Islam could be reformed possibly by revolution,
albeit not likely, given the way things have gone with “reforms”…. See minute marker 32:00 on video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VmUmtD6AoUo
It is too bad that Tashbih Sayyed is no longer around:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIijSfA-Fx0
He had been an inspiration to Robert Spencer in regards to secularized Muslims…
Wellington says
Islam, CRUSADER, can no more be reformed than could Nazism or Marxism. Here’s why and as I have written many times at JW: Islam is a totalitarian ideology and there is no reforming a totalitarian ideology.
Bertrand Russell, almost a century ago, in his The Practice and Theory of Bolzhevism, stated that Islam is the only major religion which is totalitarian in structure and ideology. This is why Russell, himself a completely non-religious person (as is the case with yours truly), went on to compare Islam to fascism and Marxism.
Yes, EVERY Muslim is guilty in the same way that every KKK member, every Neo-Nazi, every Marxist, every anarchist, etc. is guilty. No way in my book you can adhere to an ideology that is a menace to liberty to the very core of its make up and yet claim that you are not a threat to freedom. Oh yes you are. No exceptions, only the degree of culpability is a variable. After all, many Nazi Party members back in the 1930s and many Communist Party members during the Cold War were, on a daily basis, good with family and friends, nice people in their day-to-day life, but this didn’t make Nazism or Marxism OK. Ditto for Islam.
gravenimage says
Good posts, Wellington.
CRUSADER says
The more this topic gets fleshed out, as well as flushed out, the more we get to the pith.
I applaud your efforts and many of the others on JW comments.
CRUSADER says
Even when the media gets it wrong about “God being Great” (instead of “Greater”),
doesn’t that mean they acknowledge by this reporting that this is a RELIGIOUSLY inspired
event?
(It’s not like it was a Commie killer going around saying “Mao is Great”, “Stalin is Great”, after all.)
gravenimage says
Very important point, CRUSADER.
CRUSADER says
Albeit, it is more of an ideology.
But we have to take the fight wherever we can, at all angles.
Philip McDonald says
A devout Muslim male isn’t going to stand for a female Judge. The perfect man, Mohammad would never bow/stand/respect a kafir female.
CRUSADER says
Funny how that perfect man, Mohamhead, is mentioned fewer times in the Quoran than Jesus is,
(Yes, given that it is a false Jesus, but even so….) Also, funny how that perfect man being a prophet
and the final prophet doesn’t come around at the end of time, but the prophet Jesus DOES….
Quoran is such mullarky !
gravenimage says
True. Of course, these Jihadists rarely stand for male judges, either.
CRUSADER says
Patriotically symbolic Super Bowl nevertheless:
Eagles of Philadelphia
Patriots of Boston
Just looking at the silver lining of both teams, mate.
Could’ve been worse with Muslim owning Jags
or the BLM finger pointers of Falcons….
Just sayin’
LeftisruiningCanada says
The question is, do we respect out own laws and institutions enough to charge him with contempt?
The instant that this guy, or anyone, shows contempt of court, everything stops and they get called on it. Anything less is equally contemptuous of court on our side.
gravenimage says
Agreed, LeftisruiningCanada.
StellaSaidSo says
Refusal to stand for a judge should be met instantly with Contempt of Court charge. If we make exceptions, we are sending the wrong message, undermining our own laws, and destroying our own credibility. This is not a small matter. It should be completely non-negotiable.
Frank Anderson says
S.S.S., a reaction from the judge as you describe could easily be taken on an appeal as prejudicial, possibly even before the trial starts (an interlocutory appeal). If it is in front of the jury, a claim of prejudicial impact on the jury could cause at least a mistrial. I am pretty sure many years ago this issue was appealed and resulted on major changes in the conduct of that case and the way the issue is addressed now.
It’s not just one judge who is ultimately watching this case but dozens through (since this is a Federal case) the Court of Appeals and Supreme Court, and then more dozens for subsequent writs and appeals that could be attempted, dragging this out at enormous expense for decades. The judge must control his/her response with “judicial temperament” or be removed or reversed. I have had judges explode on me and took appropriate action. The usual way I understand for a disruptive defendant is to remove him from the courtroom and make him watch on television. I would appreciate other thoughts, observations and experience on the issue.
StellaSaidSo says
Thankyou for your reply, Frank. I always read your posts with interest, and greatly respect your expertise on legal matters. Yes, I understand the points you make re ‘prejudicial impact’ etc. But I am speaking as someone who is alarmed by recent trends in judicial behaviour in Australian courts, where Muslim defendants have refused to stand for judges (esp female judges), and ‘compromise’ has been negotiated. This happens routinely in UK, and can only serve to undermine the authority of the court and the credibility of our laws.
Needless to say, I am also alarmed – as are we all – by the relatively light sentences often handed to Muslim offenders, and the extraordinary frequency with which they manage to avoid any punishment at all.
LeftisruiningCanada says
Always value your legal experience Mr Anderson.
It sounds like you are saying that there isn’t really a way to penalize someone for disrespecting the court without it backfiring. Is that really so?
Frank Anderson says
For a conviction to stand all appeals everyone, judge, jury, prosecutor, defense and witnesses must follow the rules. When any break the rules the conviction fails and either there is a new trial or the accused walks.
Zimriel says
There was a cartoon from 2001/2 I recall (I think by Toles), about Moussaoui, the “twentieth hijacker” who may or may not have just been a loon who happened to hang out with the nineteen.
The judge asked how he would plead before the court. After listening to a spittle-flecked rant (in the cartoon) the judge said something like, I understand this as a plea of “evil”.
Indiana Tom says
Have him stand for a firing squad.
Frank Anderson says
The judge at trial has to walk a tightrope between maintaining order and dignity in the court while not displaying bias on the record to an appeal. Saipov’s goal is to really piss the judge off so that the judge will commit errors that will cause a reversal on appeal, a new trial, more publicity, more expense getting him a lot of what he wants. It will cost far more to try him through all of the 30 plus years of appeals to a death penalty being carried out than it would to defeat his previous dream of dying for “Big Al” (a local hotdog venue with nice people and really good hotdogs).
A clear example was given to us yesterday with the execution of a man in Alabama who killed officer Julius Shulte 35 years ago. I knew Shulte in the late 1960’s as he patrolled in my neighborhood which had serious crime problems. He came many times when called and caught many who needed catching. His death caused great sadness and loss. THIRTY FIVE YEARS later the man who killed him is finally killed, at what expense and anguish to all family and friends?
Having been in court many times in many different levels of criminal cases most judges understand the tactic of disrespect, and the need to keep judicial conduct in “due bounds” that an appeal risks. They will handle the matter by any means that does not create a successful appeal, including especially in many cases, removing the defendant and forcing him to view the trial over closed circuit television (removing both his chance to play “monkey faces” with the jury and communicate with his lawyer, whom I still insist is doing an excellent job at this point). Putting the defendant in chains, cages, straight jackets, ugly clothes. . . . can quickly backfire defeating the success of the prosecution, which this case certainly demands. Please think about it. We are not Pakistan, yet, and this is not Hitler’s Germany in 1944 after the failed assassination attempt. If Israel can try with utmost fairness, convict and execute Adolf Eichman with more than 6,000,000 dead people to his account, this insignificant pipsqueak and pimple on a pig’s ___ can receive a proper and fair trial to complete his sentence.
CRUSADER says
Or he can have a military court try and execute him.
Frank Anderson says
I am both embarrassed and disappointed that I incorrectly stated that the killer of Officer Julius Shulte had been executed in Alabama. I read a few minutes ago on the Fox News crawler that the United States Supreme Court has blocked the current execution date for another appeal on the 35 year old case. Estimate the total cost for all parties and reasons of this appeal alone to be another half a million dollars regardless of outcome. This was a simple “cop killer”. What about “real” terrorists?
Michael Warden says
We have muslims here in the UK who refuse to stand in the dock. But here the judge bows down before Islam and allows it. All you need is two large guards who each grasp an ear – and lift.
Better still, to misquote RMN : when you are after his heart and mind – take a firm grasp of his balls. His heart and mind will surely follow.
StellaSaidSo says
This has happened in Australia, too.
Dhimmi judges can’t see that, if we let the b*stards get away with this massive affront to our laws, we might as well toss them the keys now.
Hogdude says
This man can believe what he wants, but when he/it crosses the line into Christianity and/or our political system, then he’ll be judged, not by Sharia, but by our laws and codes. Let him sit. This goes to his credibility for the fact finder and likely will go against him. So be it.