“..by about 40 Muslim men…”.
About 40?? And the rest…!
The good Judge appears to be further along the path to Awful Realization than many others in Infidel officialdom right across the world; but he still has a long way to go.
As reported by the ABC ‘s David Spicer, this evening.
“Australia “Under attack” for 15 Years from Group of Muslim Men, Judge Tells Court.”
“Australia has been “under attack” from a group of Muslim men wanting “to kill as many unbelievers as they can” for about 15 years, a Supreme Court judge has said.
Strictly speaking, of course, the options offered to unbelievers by Muslims waging jihad are three: convert, or submit to subhuman near-slave status as a Dhimmi (humiliated, degraded, and in constant physical peril), or … death. As Joseph Schacht observed in his scholarly tome, “An Introduction to Islamic Law”, “The basis of the Islamic attitude towards unbelievers is the law of war: they must be converted, or subjugated, or killed”. And although the judge mentions ’40’ Australia-resident Muslims who – hatching plots to wage outright military jihad on Australian soil – came to the attention of Australian homeland security and law enforcement, the Judge seems as yet not to be prepared to recognise that they are nothing but… perfectly ordinary bog-standard Allah gangsters, taking their Islam fully to heart, just as all good Muslims are supposed to do. We are under attack not just from ‘about forty Muslim men” (those are just the ones who’ve tried so far) but from the entire Allah Gang, the Ummah or Mohammedan Mob; it’s about time we realized that every majority-Muslim OIC country is a menace to us, and not to be trusted, any more than we would have trusted the Axis, in WWII, or the Comintern, during the Cold War. – CM
‘Justice Desmond Fagan made the comments while sentencing Tamam Khaja, 20, who pleaded guilty in October to planning and preparing a terrorist attack two years ago.
‘The then 18 year old (18? – old enough to vote, old enough to be considered an adult not a juvenile – CM) was arrested while preparing for a lone wolf (sic: but how come there are other Muslim men connected to him? that is not what I would call a lone wolf! – CM) massacre, either at the US embassy in Sydney, an Army barracks in western Sydney, or at a court complex in Parramatta.
Parramatta is where western Sydney begins. Certain suburbs in Western Sydney have been taken over by the Ummah; they are up to 50 percent Muslim. They comprise the most heavily-Islamised portions of Australia. And not coincidentally, it was in Parramatta that a young Muslim man went into a mosque, was handed a gun, and then, on departing from the mosque, walked to police headquarters not far away and murdered Curtis Cheng, a harmless Chinese-Australian Christian who offended the Ummah in that he was a/ not a Muslim and b/ worked (as an accountant) for non-Muslim law enforcement. One may note that Tamim Khaja’s intended targets were 1/ the embassy of a sovereign Infidel state or 2/ the military and judiciary of another sovereign Infidel state. This was not simple criminality; this was intended to be an act of war. Tamim Khaja ought to be viewed and dealt with as an enemy agent, a Fifth Columnist caught plotting to carry out an act of war inside our gates. – CM
‘Counsel for the defendant, Ian Temby, QC, tendered to the court a list of recent sentences handed down to other men (sic: other Muslim men – CM) who had been convicted of terror offences.
‘In response, Justice Fagan told the court that Austraila had “been under attack for 15 years by about 40 Muslim men, to kill as many unbelievers as they can and impose Sharia law”.
“The ideology that underlies each is Islam”.
Keep thinking about that, Justice Fagan. You’re on the right track. You need to read Joseph Schacht, “An Introduction to Islamic Law”. You need to read Al-Qaradawi, “The Lawful and the Prohibited in Islam”. You need to read Ibn Warraq, “The Islam in Islamic Terrorism”, and S K Malik, “The Quranic Concept of War”, and Mark Durie “The Third Choice” and Sam Solomon, “Al HIjra: The Islamic Doctrine of Immigration”. Or just read Conor Cruise O’Brien’s article from the mid-1990s, “The Lesson of Algeria: Islam is Indivisible”. And then you will know that it isn’t just about a mere forty Muslim plotters on Australian soil nor a mere 15 years; it is the whole damn Ummah, or Mohammedan Mob, that has been persistently and incessantly waging war one way or another on the entire infidel world – us, and every other non-Islamic society and state and belief system – for 1400 years, and counting. And that the Muslims do this because their cult – the religion of blood and war – instructs them so to do. – CM
‘Sitting at Sydney West Trial Courts at Parramatta, Justice Fagan referred to verses in the Koran which, he said, described the duty of “a Muslim to wage Jihad”.
Wonders will never cease! A Judge who, confronted with the necessity of presiding at the trial of a bunch of Mohammedan jihad plotters, has actually done his homework! He – or one of his staffers – has read the Enemy’s book! You will, of course, observe that the reporter hints that the Judge might be getting the Quran wrong: – “…verses in the Koran which, he said, described the duty of a Muslim to wage jihad”. However… the reality is that any sane Infidel who reads the Quran can see that it is chockful of incitements to wage Jihad – to wage deadly war – against those who refuse to view Mohammed as a ‘prophet’ and do not follow the sharia of Islam. And if the curious Infidels then consult the other canonical Islamic texts: the Sira, or life of Mohammed, and the Bukhari and Muslim Hadiths, their alarm does not abate but, rather, grows. – CM
‘He said he was not making generalisations about Islamic beliefs
A pity that Judge Fagan felt it necessary to backpedal thus. Because it’s way overdue – it must happen, if our infidel societies are to have any hope of withstanding the onslaught of the Third Jihad – for persons such as Judges, Generals, Police Commissioners, and heads of state, to start ‘making generalisations about Islamic beliefs”. Jacques Ellul, who knew a thing or two about history, and law, and theology, in the foreword – on the subject of Jihad – that he wrote for his friend Bat Yeor’s historical tome, “The Decline of Eastern Christianity Under Islam”, did not hesitate to ‘generalise’. He – who never said a word that he had not weighed – states that Islam is “fundamentally warlike“. As he explains in the same essay – “…In Islam, on the contrary [that is: contrary to the state of affairs that obtains with other belief systems such as Christianity or Buddhism- CM], jihad is a religious obligation. It forms part of the duties that the believer must fulfil; it is Islam’s normal path to expansion. And this is found repeatedly dozens of times in the Koran. Therefore, the believer is not denying the religious message. Quite the reverse, jihad is the way he best obeys it. (My bolding – CM).
“And the facts which are recorded meticulously and analyzed clearly show that the jihad is not a “spiritual war” but a real military war of conquest. It expresses the agreement between the “fundamental book” and the believers’ practical strivings…”.
One might refer also to Winston Churchill, who in his book “The Story of the Malakand Field Force”, describes Islam – Islam, plain and simple – as “the religion of blood and war”. Or to the immensely-erudite John Quincy Adams, who said of Mohammed that “he declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind. The essence of his doctrine was violence and lust – to exalt the brutal over the spiritual part of human nature…”. More, from John Quincy Adams – “The precept of the Koran is, perpetual war against all who deny, that Mahomet is the prophet of God. The vanquished may purchase their lives by the payment of tribute; the victorious may be appeased by a false and delusive promise of peace; and the faithful follower of the prophet, may submit to the imperious necessities of defeat; but the command to propagate the Moslem creed by the sword is always obligatory, when it can be made effective. The commands of the prophet may be performed alike, by fraud, or by force.” And to these three makers of generalisations about Islam I might add a fourth, the formidable Irish intellectual, Conor Cruise O’Brien, who in a lapidary article entitled “The Lesson of Algeria: Islam is Indivisible”, published in the “Independent’ on 6th January 1995, offers the following, shamelessly ‘generalising’:
“Fundamentalist Islam is a misnomer which dulls our perception in a dangerous way. It does so by implying that there is some other kind of Islam, which is well disposed to those who reject the Koran. There isn’t. Islam is a universalist, triumphalist and political religion. It claims de jure dominion over all humanity; that is God’s will. The actual state of affairs, with unbelievers of various sorts dominating most of the world, is a suspension of God’s will, and a scandal to the faithful. The world is divided between the House of Islam, and the House of War, meaning, the rest of us. For more than two centuries now, the House of War has been in the ascendant, and the House of Islam has been abased. The remedy for this unnatural and intolerable state of affairs is Jihad. Jihad is defined as “the religious duty imposed on all Muslims (note well that “all” – CM) to wage war upon those who do not accept the doctrines of Islam“. The Prophet Mohamed himself not merely preached but waged jihad. God’s word, dictated to the Prophet and preached by him, is binding on all Muslims, and his example is their inspiration…. What is going on today in the Muslim world is not the advent of some aberrant thing called Islamic fundamentalism, but a revival of Islam itself – the real thing… The jihad is back….“. And then, toward the end of O’Brien’s trenchant essay, this, “The Prophet Mohamed did not offer his followers a chance to live in harmony with their neighbours. He taught them to fight their neighbours, if they were unbelievers, and kill them, or beat them into submission. And it is futile to say of those Muslims who faithfully follow those teachings today that their actions are not ‘intrinsically related to Islam.’ We are facing an Islamic revival..”.
The whole article, by O’Brien, may be found here
and also here, with additional commentary
And so back to Judge Fagan, in his courtroom in Sydney, piously (or nervously) intoning that “he was not making generalisations about Islamic beliefs”
‘and that his courtroom was “not a forum for the rights and wrongs of the Islam (sic) or [the] Christian religion”.
‘An agreed statement of facts tendered to court revealed that Khaja had twice attempted to travel to Syria or Iraq, where he “intended to join the Islamic State terrorist organisation and engage in hostile activities”.
‘After his passport was cancelled in March 2016 (what a pity that he was not, rather, allowed to tootle off to Syria, with his passport cancelled after his departure had been firmly ascertained to have occurred; and his identifying details then communicated ‘under the table’, to President Assad and to Vladimir Putin, along with a statement to the effect that we didn’t particularly care whether this formerly-Aussie-passport-holding mohammedan mobster lived or died and that if an Alawite or Russian missile or other weaponry should happen to vaporise him, we would not shed a single tear – CM) Khaja began communicating via an encrypted messaging app with an overseas police officer who he believed to be an ISIS supporter.
‘On May 7 2016 Khaja told the police officer, known as Person A, that he “wanted to badly to be on the battlefield with my brothers”, but since his passport had been cancelled, he would “fulfil my obligation here”.
Note that word, ‘obligation’. It echoes the terminology used by the learned and well-read John Quincy Adams, who remarked that “the command to propagate the Moslem creed by the sword is always obligatory, when it can be made effective”. Or Jacques Ellul – “jihad is a religious obligation”. – CM
“I am currently sourcing a glock [handgun] but I want to do big damage”, Khaja told Person A.
“I am thinking more along the lines of Boston Marathon… I know how to make a portable microwave b..b [sic].”
‘Even with a handgun I would be able to cause a lot of damage”.
‘Khaja told person A that he had been considering locations for an attack, including the US Embassy in Sydney (embassy? – the embassy is in Canberra; he would be thinking of the US Consulate – CM), but it was likely to be heavily guarded, court documents revealed.
‘He told Person A that another option was the Timor Army Barracks in Dundas, where he could “launch an attack by ramming the lot of them with a car, and then firing head shots when they are on the ground”.
Run over the infidels with a vehicle, then emerge and attack those who have been incapacitated; where else have we seen Muslims employ this method of attack? In Israel, where Muslims have deliberately driven cars into Jewish civilians, then leapt out and attackded with weapons. In the UK – the murder of Lee Rigby, run over by a car and then hacked at with machetes; and similarly, at London Bridge and at Westminster. – CM
‘Mr Temby argued that at the time of the arrest Khaja was only at “a preliminary stage” of planning the offence and that he “had no accomplice”.
Except the Ummah from which he and so many, many others have emerged and from which yet more murderous jihadis will emerge in future; the Ummah which is taught by its cult texts to hate and despise the Infidels, taught that it is the allah-given right of Muslims to rule the entire planet and compel all people everywhere to submit to Islam, Islam, Islam. – CM
‘However the crown prosecutor said Khaja had accessed documents about bombs and creating suicide vests.
‘Justice Fagan said Khaja had spoken about “killing innocent people, as many innocent people as he could, like [he was] planning a picnic”.
That is because, dear Justice Fagan, this creature, this pious Mohammedan, Tamim Khaja, does not regard any of us Infidels as ‘innocent’. From the POV of any pious orthodox Muslim we filthy kuffar, ‘the worst of beasts’, are guilty by definition; guilty of rejecting mohammed’s claims to be a ‘prophet’, guilty of refusing to live under Muslim despotism, guilty of preferring our own non-Islamic belief systems and our own non-Islamic laws and governments. We are guilty, guilty, guilty; and we require, in Muslim eyes, to be punished; to be killed, or forced to Submit. – CM
‘The sentence hearing continues’.
We would have saved a great deal of money and trouble if we had let this Tamim Khaja go, back in the day; let him go to Syria, there to live or die; and then annulled his Australian passport, and stripped him of Australian citizenship status, so as to prevent his ever being able to return. He is not an Australian. He desires the destruction of the Australian infidel state; he intended, this Muslim who took Islam fully to heart, to carry out an act of war against us dirty Aussie infidels, on our soil. Let his Australian citizenship be annulled; let him be viewed and treated as an enemy combatant, which he is; as a Fifith Columnist, which he is. Let his punishment be decided in light of that grim realization, and in light of whatever historic precedents – for ways of dealing with enemy spies and saboteurs caught plotting or attempting mass murder within the gates of the city – might be adduced. – CM