Quote:

Centrelink unwittingly revealed a clash between Islamic laws and Western life, writes Bellinda Kontominas. TO THE people in their ethnic community, the man and his wife showed all the hallmarks of a happy and loving marriage. But it was all a lie. The sad reality of being caught between Eastern culture and Western values, they told a court. The man, a professional in his home country, had converted to Islam in order for the couple's marriage to be legally recognised. But when they separated after moving to Australia, they maintained the outward appearance of a married couple to avoid physical harm, or even death, at the hands of Islamic extremists back home, they claimed. The pair told of their clandestine double life at a District Court trial in which the husband was charged with lying to Centrelink by claiming he was single in order to obtain a Newstart allowance. The two cannot be named after the District Court Judge Stephen Norrish made a non-publication order preventing their identification to avoid harm to them and their family overseas. ''It is feared that if there be publicity in relation to this matter and it gets back to [their home country], then people will die,'' he said. For this reason, the Herald has omitted details about the couple to maintain their anonymity. The Crown alleged the couple had never separated and were still mostly living together during the more than five years the husband had fraudulently obtained benefits. But the jury saw differently, acquitting the man of seven charges against him. The jury was not told he had pleaded guilty to another charge of dishonestly obtaining about $12,000 in unemployment benefits while he was working. During the trial a former colleague told the court he believed the man was single as there were no shoes kept at the front door. Another former colleague said he had been untidy and unkempt, which gave the outward appearance he was unmarried. She had felt sorry for him and felt he needed a woman's touch, so she attempted to set him up with a friend during a dinner at her home. A blind date was organised but did not eventuate. Under Islamic law, marriage between a Muslim woman and a non-Muslim man is not legally recognised and would be considered an adulterous relationship. Such a union is usually considered proper and legal if a religious conversion takes place. An Islamic law expert who gave evidence in the trial told the Herald that separation or divorce, particularly by those who have married in controversial circumstances would result in questions about the legitimacy of the initial conversation. The academic, whom the Herald has chosen not to name, said this could bring shame to the couple's family and result in violence towards them by members of the community. Often when couples marry under controversial circumstances, such as a religious conversion or without family blessing, the end of that relationship can reignite bad feelings about the match, leading to violence, the academic said. ''[The separation] could have been perceived as proof that these sort of relationships don't work or it could be perceived as additional harm to the family name, reopening old wounds.'' Dr Shakira Hussein, who also gave evidence in the trial, told the Herald there could be ramifications for the couple and their family if he was seen to have abandoned the religion. An expert in Islamic studies at the University of Melbourne, Dr Hussein said religious minorities in Islamic countries were particularly vulnerable to accusations of blasphemy by neighbours or family members holding grudges. For this reason, many mixed-marriage couples maintain a happy front. ''In Australia, too, it is considered not good conduct to be too open about marriage break-ups,'' Dr Hussein said.

http://www.smh.com.au/national/couple-kept-sham-marriage-to-stop-violent-reprisals-20100730-10zt2.html

their backward poxy religion has NOTHING to do with them ripping off the aussie govt. ie, us tax payers.

Add in the cost of the court session, this case has cost us $100,000s.

The excuse.............. oh, it's their religion.
So all the leftards wring their hands and apologise.

Just bugger off from here and don't come back.
you are not welcome, you do not assimilate and we don't like you.

Quote:

But the jury saw differently, acquitting the man of seven charges against him. The jury was not told he had pleaded guilty to another charge of dishonestly obtaining about $12,000 in unemployment benefits while he was working.

It doesn't matter what religion he is - there are a lot of people doing this unfortunately. It is so wrong that a jury can't hear of previous crimes committed. Justice can't be decided unless the full truth is disclosed.

I don't know why anyone would feel sorry for him - he's obviously lying. He just had better "evidence" than most - so escaped punishment.

It works the same way with other criminal acts - juries don't hear of prior convictions in case it prejudices the case.

mantra wrote on Jul 31^st, 2010 at 4:20pm:

It works the same way with other criminal acts - juries don't hear of prior convictions in case it prejudices the case.

And that's the way it should remain.

"Oh they did it before, so they have probably done the same crime again" should never come into a conviction by a jury. Prior convictions should only be made known during the sentencing process.

sprint, the article seems to be talking about a non-Muslim who put on a front of being a Muslim.

So if the idea of the thread is to attack Islam, you've done a pretty poor job.

The guy probably never had anything to do with Islam, but knew once he claimed in court "evil Muslims were going to harm me and my family" then idiots not unlike yourself would jump to defend and acquit him.

You're a goose and you and your kind promote an environment in which scheisters like this can thrive.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jul 31^st, 2010 at 2:50am:

their backward poxy religion has NOTHING to do with them ripping off the aussie govt. ie, us tax payers. Add in the cost of the court session, this case has cost us $100,000s. The excuse.............. oh, it's their religion. So all the leftards wring their hands and apologise. Just bugger off from here and don't come back. you are not welcome, you do not assimilate and we don't like you.

But we like to be with you, friend. We love you like a brother.

Australi man is welcome to assimilate if he wish. We like to bugger with him, all together, but he must come in love.

Also, he must have cash. You pay, we can bugger with you, jiggie jig.

abu - get buggered
bugger off
how is your sheltered forum on islam defending your paedophillic sex addict ?

do you understand me you shithead?

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jul 31^st, 2010 at 10:12pm:

abu - get buggered bugger off how is your sheltered forum on islam defending your paedophillic sex addict ? do you understand me you shithead?

My friend, you have much buggery in your country. This can be good for the man if done in love between two brothers.

You are a man.

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 31^st, 2010 at 8:33pm:

You're a goose and you and your kind promote an environment in which scheisters like this can thrive.

While you and your kind attempt to create an environment where a mindset of ultra-puritanical contempt for Australian society can thrive.

Karnal wrote on Jul 31^st, 2010 at 8:40pm:

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jul 31st, 2010 at 2:50am: their backward poxy religion has NOTHING to do with them ripping off the aussie govt. ie, us tax payers. Add in the cost of the court session, this case has cost us $100,000s. The excuse.............. oh, it's their religion. So all the leftards wring their hands and apologise. Just bugger off from here and don't come back. you are not welcome, you do not assimilate and we don't like you. But we like to be with you, friend. We love you like a brother. Australi man is welcome to assimilate if he wish. We like to bugger with him, all together, but he must come in love. Also, he must have cash. You pay, we can bugger with you, jiggie jig.

They need to find a room though. It's just not decent for Sprint and Abu to flirt on open forum like that .  ;D

muso wrote on Aug 1^st, 2010 at 9:40am:

Karnal wrote on Jul 31st, 2010 at 8:40pm: Sprintcyclist wrote on Jul 31st, 2010 at 2:50am: their backward poxy religion has NOTHING to do with them ripping off the aussie govt. ie, us tax payers. Add in the cost of the court session, this case has cost us $100,000s. The excuse.............. oh, it's their religion. So all the leftards wring their hands and apologise. Just bugger off from here and don't come back. you are not welcome, you do not assimilate and we don't like you. But we like to be with you, friend. We love you like a brother. Australi man is welcome to assimilate if he wish. We like to bugger with him, all together, but he must come in love. Also, he must have cash. You pay, we can bugger with you, jiggie jig. They need to find a room though. It's just not decent for Sprint and Abu to flirt on open forum like that .  ;D

This is very true, my friend. Is it the custom in Australi for two men to take bath together?

helian,


Quote:

While you and your kind attempt to create an environment where a mindset of ultra-puritanical contempt for Australian society can thrive.

What on earth are you on about?

Please demonstrate where I have done such a thing.

Thanks dude....

abu_rashid wrote on Aug 2^nd, 2010 at 9:18pm:

helian, Quote: While you and your kind attempt to create an environment where a mindset of ultra-puritanical contempt for Australian society can thrive. What on earth are you on about? Please demonstrate where I have done such a thing.

abu_rashid wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 11:22pm:

Islam raised up the lands it opened, it did not occupy and drain them of their resources as imperialists do. A prime example of how Islam differed from pretty much all other states that existed before and after it, is that it's capital moved throughout the new lands that came under its domain. As the Ottomans for instance opened a new land, a city in that new land would become the capital. There was no concept of the dichotomy that exists in imperialist states where there is a homeland and then there are imperial possessions. All lands were one, and all shared the same status.

these guys ........


Quote:

A CONTROVERSIAL Australian Muslim preacher, Feiz Mohammad, has refused to comment on reports he called for the beheading of the Dutch anti-Islamic politician Geert Wilders, as Muslim leaders in Sydney condemned his comments. Sheikh Feiz yesterday declined to confirm or deny to the Herald that he made the threat that anyone who ''mocks, laughs or degrades Islam'' like Mr Wilders should be executed ''by chopping off his head'' in a speech at a sermon in Campbelltown last week. However, senior Muslim sources said there was some doubt whether the speech, which has been posted on the internet, was made in Sydney or in Malaysia several years ago. Sheikh Fedaa Majzoub, the vice-president of the NSW branch of the National Imams Council, said that wherever the comments were made, they were ''completely rejected by us as Islamic authorities'' and were just as extreme as those made by Mr Wilders. ''I have no doubt that greater Australian society would not be at all welcoming to Wilder's Islamophobic rants,'' Sheikh Fedaa said. ''Addressing Wilders should only take place through dialogue … within the legal framework that governs our fair nation.'' The comments were reported in a Dutch newspaper, De Telegraaf, late last week after Dutch intelligence officials were tipped off about the threat to the politician. The circulation of the comments by Sheikh Feiz follows the broadcast of a recent interview with Mr Wilders on SBS TV's Dateline in which he revealed he was planning to visit Australia. Sheik Feiz was investigated after the discovery of DVDs of his sermons in which he urged children to become holy warriors and made derogatory comments about Jews. He was also condemned for a speech in Bankstown in 2005 when he said a rape victim had no one to blame but herself for wearing ''satanic skirts''. Sheik Feiz left Australia later that year and has spent the intervening years living and studying in Malaysia and Lebanon. He is believed to have returned to Australia this year. The outspoken Sheikh Taj el-Din al Hilaly, the former mufti of Australia and imam at the Lakemba mosque, said that the comments were stupid and idiotic and only caused harm to the Muslim community. ''These stupid threats from Feiz will unfortunately only serve to draw more Islamophobic people to Wilders's hate-filled cause, giving it value when it has none,'' he said. A spokesman for the Islamic Friendship Association, Keysar Trad, said the comments were appalling and only "gave oxygen" to Mr Wilders.

http://www.smh.com.au/national/preachers-call-for-beheading-condemned-by-muslim-leaders-20100905-14w4j.html

My dear one, Mr Geerty has offended Islam, and for this he must die. Anyone who casts a shadow on the Prophet, peace be upon him, must die as God wills it.

Allah is a severe God and shows no mercy to those who blaspheme his name. Submit, my friend, and you shall know peace.