The sentencing magistrate said: “No evidence was presented that the teachings of Islam compel this conduct.”
That’s not true. The Islamic idea of tawhid is often understood as forbidding any gesture of respect to an earthly authority, in particular an infidel earthly authority, as being tantamount to idolatry.
“GIVING JUSTICE THE FINGER Terrorist recruiter’s wife gives the ISIS salute after refusing to stand for a judge because she ‘only stands for Allah,'” by Jay Akbar, The Sun, May 4, 2018 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):
A JIHADI bride gave ISIS’ one-finger salute outside court today after refusing to get up for a judge because she “only stands for Allah”.
Wearing a black burka and gloves, Moutia Elzahed became the first person in Australia to be convicted of not standing for a judge under tough new laws.
The ISIS recruiter’s wife, 50, was found guilty of nine charges of disrespectful behaviour during previous court hearings under the new state law.
She stayed seated with her arms folded in the Sydney courtroom as Carolyn Huntsman delivered the landmark decision.
Ms Huntsman ordered Elzahed to leave her seat and approach the bench, adding: “Remain standing… You remain standing when I speak to you.”
Elzahed said she only stood for Allah but Huntsman found no evidence she had acted on genuine religious belief.
Footage showed her giving the infamous one-finger salute as she walked away from Downing Centre Local Court while her friend called journalists “cockroaches”.
ISIS fighters are often pictured raising one finger to the sky in the battlefield or right after they carry out a depraved execution.
The motion represents the Islamic gesture of tawhid, the belief in a single God, and the terror group’s “violent and uncompromising posture toward its opponents”, according to Foreign Affairs.
The “disrespectful behaviour” law was introduced in New South Wales in 2016 after several Muslim defendants refused to stand for judges on religious grounds.
The magistrate found Elzahed repeatedly and intentionally flouted the rules that year when she failed to rise for District Court Judge Audrey Balla.
The sentencing magistrate said: “No evidence was presented that the teachings of Islam compel this conduct.”…
Walter Sieruk says
This Muslim said that she “Only stands for Allah” She is thus showing her strong and firm but blind and deluded faith in a false god. For the God of the Bible is not really Allah the god of Islam. To explain, through the passing of time it has become widely accepted that the word “Allah” is just the Arabic word for God. This started when truth compromising Bible “translators” substituted the word Allah where the word God should have had been uses in the Arabic translation of the Bible. Furthermore, in the glossary in the book ASSASSINS! By Dr. Haha Lung it defines Allah as the “Pre-Islamic Lunar god : the god of Islam. “ Likewise, in the book entitled INSIDE ISLAM by a former Muslim who is now a Christian, Reza F. Safa on pages 22, 23 it reads “In pre-Islamic times both Allah –worship and Baal-worship involved the worship of the sun, the moon and the stars which h defines them as astral religions. [Which are condemned in the Bible, Second Kings 23:5] The crescent moon, which was the symbol of moon worship, is also the symbol of Islam.” In conclusion the Islamic god, Allah, is not the God of the Bible.
The words in brackets are my own. In addition other some other books that expose this little known truths are WHO IS THIS ALLAH ? by G..J.O.. Moshay also UNVEILING ISLAM by Ergun Mehmet Caner and Emir Fethi Caner and THE ISLAMIC INVASION by Robert Morey . There is also PHILISTINE by Ramon Bennett and ANSWERING JIHAD by Mabeel Qureshi
PRCS says
“This Muslim said that she “Only stands for Allah” She is thus showing her strong and firm but blind and deluded faith in a false god.”
Of course, as you and I both know Walter, Muslims say the same thing about Jews and Christians.
Of the world’s billion+ Muslims (especially those who’ve grown up in, and live in, nations where Islamic law is the law of the land) very few will ever be persuaded to change that thinking.
Our own friends and neighbors must learn and accept what Islam really teaches before we–as a nation–can defeat the threat Muslims pose to the rest of us.
There’s still a long row left to hoe there.
J D S says
When people like this won’t “stand” for a judge there should be a rope, hung from the ceiling, placed around their neck to hoist them up…maybe a little higher than just their feet off the floor. Just a suggestion..No harm intended..
Ren says
She only stands for Allah her phony god.
gravenimage says
Australia: Islamic State recruiter refuses to stand for judge, she “only stands for Allah”
……………………….
Glad she was convicted!
Gaza says
Convicted then deported nothing less !
CogitoErgoSum says
And what was her sentence?
CogitoErgoSum says
Sorry …. I should have followed the link at the top of the article. I found the following at The Sun’s website:
“CCTV showed Elzahed refusing to stand in court nine times, with each offence carrying a maximum jail term of 14 days and a £610 fine.
Defence lawyers initially disputed whether Elzahed was the woman under the black robes who failed to stand – but later said they would not contest her identity.
Elzahed, who will be sentenced on June 15, is married to Sydney resident Hamdi Alqudsi, who was sentenced to eight years in prison for helping young Australians fly to Syria to fight for ISIS in 2016.”
PRCS says
“Defence lawyers initially disputed whether Elzahed was the woman under the black robes who failed to stand.”
A very good reason to prohibit any and all such garb which limits or prevents positive identiy–by anyone–during legal proceedings.
The burqa–in particular–is NOT prescribed in Qur’an.
Save Europe says
Agreed ?
CogitoErgoSum says
She doesn’t like being seen but she has no problem with making herself heard:
https://www.9news.com.au/videos/cjgrjdqnc00hp0hmnopo75fqi/is-recruiters-wife-found-guilty-of-disrespecting-court
BTW, I wonder if the other burka-clad woman with her might not be another one of her husband’s wives?
CogitoErgoSum says
Oh, my mistake. That’s her “friend” making the remarks (hard for me to tell them apart).
PRCS says
What!?
You couldn’t tell them apart?
Me neither.
Savvy Kafir says
Let her “stand for Allah” in Syria or some other godforsaken sh*thole country in the Muslim world. She has NO business being in Australia.
It’s time to expel the hostiles!
Save Europe says
So true. If you find a fox in a hen house, you don’t allow it to stay there, but remove it.
PMP says
Is there not a law for immigrants that once the are granted citizenship, that they pledge some kind of allegiance or at least agree to “abide by all of the laws” of the respective country?
Save Europe says
The problem is that there is so much taqqiya.
Angry Aussie says
She only stands for Allah, of, and of course in a line at Centrelink to collect welfare from the government she refuses to acknowledge.
Jay says
Centrelink payments to these people are the Jizya that Non-Muslims should be paying to Muslims in order to live.
David says
Yes Jay. Muslims prefer not to work, but rather collect benefits for which they are eternally ungrateful, and make babies.
One good way to stop the flow of immigrants is to stop paying benefits to muslims.
PRCS says
Though too few paid attention, Anjem Choudary made that quite clear.
Jason says
A question for the judge. What if Islamic teachings did compel this conduct? Would she be exempt from standing before the judge? Should Islamic law take priority over Australian law?
The woman was convicted on the premise that her behaviour was not required by her faith. This leaves the question of what would the verdict have been if the judge did understand that her behaviour was required by her faith.
PRCS says
Really spot on!
And this to consider, along that line, too: I purchased my first computer in 1982 (A computer for the price of a toy). That judge has (likely) owned a computer and had Internet access for years, now.
That she came to the conclusion that the Muslim woman’s behavior is not compelled by Islam’s teachings suggests that she has apparently not done even basic subject matter research.
And that it actually does should mean nothing in an Australian court of law.
IMO.
Robyn Todhunter says
And of course her legal representation was funded through the largesse of the Australian taxpayer.
Wazza says
To be honest they should have a garbage truck roll by and throw this trash in the back, after all they look like black garbage bags with holes
Send them packing ASAP, we don’t want this filth on our soil, where so many Aussies have fought and died protecting it
tim gallagher says
Of course, the really objectionable aspects of Islam are its violence, its calls for Muslims to kill non-Muslims along with its barbarity in many other aspects of life (its misogyny, which the civilised, non-Muslim world left behind long ago), its paedophilia with child brides, etc, but, whenever I see appalling sights like this totally covered up woman, I think that, even if hideous looking creatures like this were members of some weird cult which was actually peaceful, people dressing in this bizarre way truly have no place in our western societies. I mean, what the hell do people dressed in this appalling, throwback type of dress have in societies which have people who dress and walk around in normal, human garb. Western civilisation has been hard won over many centuries of enlightenment. The sight of these hideous creatures sickens me. Their style of dress is a revolting freak show amongst the normally dressed population and also, of course, a security problem. Who knows what is inside the foul garb? They should not be allowed to foul up our civilised societies where people dress like normal human beings. But, of course, then there is the violent intent they have towards us which is far worse than the disgustingly ugly garb they wear..
Save Europe says
I have now twice – already – this year seen two kids, both in various parts of London, with their non Muslim parents, burst into tears when passing groups of burqa wearers. I’ve also seen many dogs start barking in both defensive and aggressive manners.
gravenimage says
This does not surprise, Save Europe.
tim gallagher says
That’s no surprise to me either, Save Europe, as gravenimage says.. I haven’t seen children crying, but I notice people just avert their eyes from the hideous ugliness of people wearing this garb. Look at the woman there with not even the eyes showing. It just is totally alien to our way of life and doesn’t belong in our societies. The same for the person with just eyes showing. As I said, if people who wore this horrendous type of garb were actually peaceful in their attitude towards us, then I’d say, well, OK, it’s bloody weird and ugly, but I guess I can accept it. But they’re not peaceful. In our civilised nations, seeing people’s faces and reading their facial expressions is basic to social interactions. Anyway, what I wrote above was the immediate gut reaction I had to seeing this woman leaving court on the news and it’s my gut reaction whenever I see people dressed like this.It shouldn’t be allowed in our societies. I wonder if anyone actually thinks this type of “diversity” is a positive, you know, just part of the wonderful multicultural riches. You’d have to be such a bloody idiot to think so.
Save Europe says
Agreed Sir. Totally agree ?
dumbledoresarmy says
That’s a very interesting observation about the dogs.
It suggests that the dogs are picking up the aggression vibe that simply *steams* off so many of those heavily-cloaked Allah Gang camp followers.
Dogs are aware of Evil.
Geller says
She only stands for Allah and Centrelink handout
Phil Copson says
“…. “No evidence was presented that the teachings of Islam compel this conduct….”
———————————————————————————————————
Again we see a public official showing tender regard for the “teachings of islam” – (similarly we saw British judge Haddon-Cave apparently more concerned that the defendant in the Parson’s Green London Underground bombing had – (in the judge’s witless view anyway…) – broken islamic law than by him breaking the law of the land by attempting to murder dozens of Londoners…) – what on earth is magistrate Carolyn Huntsman babbling on about ?
Whether respecting an Australian court is or isn’t part of islamic teaching is not the point – the point is that Australian law takes precedence, and the magistrate’s job is to spell that out unequivocally.
Huntsman is clearly indicating that if only Moutia Elzahed had “presented evidence” that she was acting under genuine religious belief, then this would have mitigated her offence, ie – that Sharia Law would be recognised as having some equivalence with Australian law.
Elzahed’s refusal to recognise the primacy of national law should – of course – result in the immediate cancellation of her citizenship and deportation, and Huntsman’s willingness to acknowledge islamic teachings should result in some firm advice being given on upholding the primacy of the law.
gravenimage says
Grimly true, Phil–often even when laudibly standing up for the rule of law–as here–Westerners still bow to the “sensitivities” of Muslims. Disturbing.
Still, less dhimmitude than usual here, which is something.
PRCS says
“the magistrate’s job is to spell that out unequivocally.”
The issue had no relevance to the case and should not even have been noted.
At least the Muslim woman was convicted and sentenced for her behavior.
Jay says
Unfortunately any laws which would prohibit the wearing of the Niqab in courts would be challenged in the High Court as voiding freedom of religious expression and be overruled. Our high court are pretty strict about following the exact letter of the constitution, unless it is giving the federal government more power that is.
Save Europe says
I think you legally could. Obviously the Hijab could never be banned, because the face can be seen, and Muslims’ arguments would be – how about Sikh turbans, yarmulkes, Nuns’ head attire.
The way to go would be to argue – for security purposes we need to see people’s faces in public places at all times.
gravenimage says
Agreed, Save Europe.
PRCS says
Only one way to find out.
Infidel says
Disgusting piece of garbage..
linda goudsmit says
If this Muslima only stands for allah she belongs in any Islamic country that agrees with her stance. ANY Western country that allows Islamic religious laws to supersede its own laws has surrendered to Islam and willingly become its dhimmi. Bravo to Australia for recognizing the existential danger that Islamists pose to their civil society. Islamists in Western jails should receive NO accommodation for any of their supremacist beliefs including religious beliefs. Islam is a comprehensive supremacist socio-political-religious-military system that cannot be recognized as superior in the West.
Ray Sears says
FINE, she refuses to follow the rules, so be it ! All the Court has to do is RECALL her before the Court every 14 days and if she refuses to stand, cite the bit ch for contempt and add another 14 days. At least that’s how such problems are dealt with in the U.S. because U.S. Courts don’t allow anyone to get away with contempt of court.
Older Canadian says
Only stands for an imaginary sky god! I would love to see this.
I once read when a person has illusions it is one definition of insanity; but when a group of people have iillusions they call it religion.
Now I am trying to figure out what to call canada’s liberal government being controlled by trudeau’s illusions. Ditto for the UN and EU.