MUSLIM TERRORISM SUSPECTS AWAIT SYDNEY COURT'S VERDICT

Australia's longest running terrorist trial nears its conclusion as 5 men, Mohamed Ali Elomar, Abdul Rakib Hasan, Mohammed Omar Jamal, Khaled Cheikho and his nephew Moustafa Cheikho await the jury's verdict. The men, all allegedly devout Muslims, are accused of conspiring to commit an act, or acts of terrorism on Australian soil between July 2004 and Novembr 2005. During the trial, the men were allowed time to pray. They are accused of purchasing guns, explosive chemicals and with the intention carrying out a violent attack.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Islamic
• Islam
• Terrorists
• 9/11
• Lockerbie
• Muslim
• Muslims
• Extremists
• Terrorism
• Bomb
• Bombing
• Pakistan
• Liquid
• Security
• plot
• Atlantic
• London
• Bombers
• Holsworthy
• Abdul
• Rakib
• Hasan
• Mohammed
• Omar
• Jamal
• Khaled
• Cheikho
• Moustafa
• australia
• sydney

[SherynneAnn]

There is a deeper irony here. Just as the jury found that the intent of these men was to coerce the Australian government to change it polices regarding the invasion of Muslim countries, the Western invasion of Afghanistan, to which Australia is a party, not only continues but has been intensified. Yet all we get from the media and the politicians is a shameful sweeping under the carpet of this original injustice.

[AustraliaProud]

People can hold whatever views they wish in Australia. But there are anti terror laws in place protecting the public against how those views are expressed.

Under The Anti-Terrorism Act (No 2) 2004 it an offence to intentionally associate with a person who is member or who promotes or directs the activities of a listed terrorist organisation. There was sufficient evidence to successfully prosecute this case on the balance of probability that a malicious act would follow.

[ridicileous]

their "extreme views" as you call them dont belong in civilised society and in all honesty i dont care what they do in muslim lands.

if they love killing each other who's stopping them. just stay away from us and our families

[ridicileous]

jihad means a holy war. in case you didnt know

are you living in a civilised country?

are you muslim?

do you know what its like to be treated like a dof because you were born a woman?

perhaps you should walk a mile in a muslim womans shoes before you condemn us.

your full of propaganda you have no facts to your arguments.

and on top of that you hardly make sense.

what do you mean criminalising their views? if their views break our laws then yes its a crime.

is it ok for them to kill us?

[SherynneAnn]

We find that many of the extreme' views, as mentioned in the sentencing remarks, are basic Islamic views which Muslims generally hold. Views like Muslims being obliged to defend themselves and Jihad being the way to do this. Criminalising these views is to criminalise criticism of Western foreign policy in Muslim lands, and this is the crux of the matter. The anti-terror laws were designed to silence Muslims through fear and intimidation, and are now being used for that purpose.

[ridicileous]

sounds like you have no idea what the facts of this case are yet you look for every possible way to defend the actions of these people who stock pile chemical weapons, bomb making equiptment and firearms. which is the one fact that isnt disputed or circumstantial.

i would bet you would be the first to cry blue murder and ask why wasnt more done to prevent this catastrophe should one arise. they have already proved in america how they can cause billions in damage with a simple box cutter.

[AustraliaProud]

Ah yes, I quite agree SherynneAnn. It's quite normal for people to stockpile arsenals of firearms, chemicals, thousands of rounds of ammunition and attend combat training courses in Pakistan and the bush. Everyone does it. I can't possible see what all the concern is. Afterall, such an arms cache in your neighbours house would be of absolutely no concern whatsoever would it?

I'd be interested in a list of your "various other conclusions" ??

[SherynneAnn]

This is yet another example of the travesty of justice delivered courtesy of the anti-terror laws. Here we have a case where there is no direct evidence, no established intent to kill, and no specific target. All we have is circumstantial evidence pieced together in a particular way, where various other conclusions could be reached.

[tonyrita]

our ability to act diplomatically is what sets us apart from terrorists.

whilst these commentors views seems a little over the top im sure you would change your view if you or a loved one was badly injured or worse by a non discriminating bomb or chemical attack.

[SherynneAnn]

You people comment about killing these Muslims. But really your the Terrorist so go and kill them. Are you going to wait for them at court to get them or you prefer behind the keyboard Ambush!