PDA

View Full Version : Two charged for lashing Sydney man



Shrek
19-07-2011, 08:08 PM
WTF is this shit? :mad::mad:


Two charged for lashing Sydney man

A second man has been charged over a western Sydney home invasion in which a man was lashed 40 times with a cable.

A 43-year-old man was arrested when he attended Auburn Police Station on Tuesday morning.

He has been charged with aggravated breaking and entering with intent to commit an indictable offence, detaining a person in company with intent to obtain advantage, and two counts of stealing from a dwelling.

The man has been refused bail and will appear in Burwood Local Court on Wednesday.

Police said a 31-year-old man was asleep in his Menton Street apartment in Silverwater when he woke to find four strangers in his bedroom about 1am (AEST) on Sunday.

Three of the intruders allegedly restrained him on the bed, while the fourth used a cable to assault him.

The latest arrest follows the arrest and charging of a 20-year-old Auburn man on Monday night.

Tolga Cifci faced Burwood Local Court on Tuesday charged with aggravated breaking and entering, and committing an indictable offence.

He was released on conditional bail.

Police prosecutor George Lolis told the court that the victim allegedly was targeted for "doing what many in the community do all the time" but Cifci viewed it as "something against Islam".

Two charged for lashing Sydney man (http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/8274302/man-lashed-40-times-with-cable-2-charged)

Rambodian
19-07-2011, 08:33 PM
jeepers they lashed him for fuuurk sake, arseholes. WTF are people taking these days, must be mind altering shit!

Shrek
19-07-2011, 08:35 PM
They took the"Law" into their own hands. A certain type of law.

Fadi
20-07-2011, 02:56 AM
This is what you call total ignorance of the religion, not to mention fanaticism, which incidentally has its roots in ignorance. The Islamic sharia law can not be implemented in Australia (or anywhere else for that matter) whenever one feels like it. If Muslims in Australia (or any other countries) do not abide by the laws of that country, then they should expect nothing less than to be met with the full force of that law. Otherwise what purpose would that law serve!

I hate hypocrisy, double standards, dictatorship, and Colonialism, (which incidentally is still alive and well but is disguised to the unwary).

The above act has nothing to do with Islam. From my understanding, (according to media reports), the man drank some alcohol, (or was a habitual drinker), and these Muslims were simply implementing the sharia law against him. Forgetting of course that we're not living under it in this country or in any other country (at least not in its fullest and comprehensive form).

Example:

I'm sure all have heard of cutting the hand of a thief for stealing (under sharia law). However what people fail (conveniently) to mention is that under an Islamic state each and every citizen is provided and cared for. The center-link system is an Islamic system that no Muslim country implements (unfortunately). So if Australia was a Muslim country (abiding by the Islamic sharia law), and has its citizen taken care of (financially), then and only then would a thief hand be cut, (for there would be no reason/or excuse to steal other's property).

This is a vast subject and I don't claim to be a Muslim scholar, however I can at least differentiate between what is Islam and what is hypocrisy.


Fadi.

Shrek
20-07-2011, 10:14 AM
Why do they do it then?

I hope the Court does not go soft when handing out punishment.

tat maytals
20-07-2011, 11:07 AM
I wish we lived in a world where religion and state could be separate.

tat maytals
20-07-2011, 11:16 AM
This is what you call total ignorance of the religion, not to mention fanaticism, which incidentally has its roots in ignorance. The Islamic sharia law can not be implemented in Australia (or anywhere else for that matter) whenever one feels like it. If Muslims in Australia (or any other countries) do not abide by the laws of that country, then they should expect nothing less than to be met with the full force of that law. Otherwise what purpose would that law serve!

I hate hypocrisy, double standards, dictatorship, and Colonialism, (which incidentally is still alive and well but is disguised to the unwary).

The above act has nothing to do with Islam. From my understanding, (according to media reports), the man drank some alcohol, (or was a habitual drinker), and these Muslims were simply implementing the sharia law against him. Forgetting of course that we're not living under it in this country or in any other country (at least not in its fullest and comprehensive form).

Example:

I'm sure all have heard of cutting the hand of a thief for stealing (under sharia law). However what people fail (conveniently) to mention is that under an Islamic state each and every citizen is provided and cared for. The center-link system is an Islamic system that no Muslim country implements (unfortunately). So if Australia was a Muslim country (abiding by the Islamic sharia law), and has its citizen taken care of (financially), then and only then would a thief hand be cut, (for there would be no reason/or excuse to steal other's property).

This is a vast subject and I don't claim to be a Muslim scholar, however I can at least differentiate between what is Islam and what is hypocrisy.


Fadi.


P.s. +1 for fadi for this post.

Fadi, do you have any further knowledge on the topic? Under sharia law when you say the citizens are taken care of financially, to what degree? is there a measure used to determine whether or not a person needs more money or an improvement in their conditions?

Gunner
20-07-2011, 12:54 PM
Did you hear the guy on 6.30 last night. He reckons Australia will become a muslim nation. Not fucking likely

Fadi
20-07-2011, 07:51 PM
Why do they do it then? I've answered that in my very first sentence above.


I hope the Court does not go soft when handing out punishment. We're on the same page here also Shrek, as I've already stated in my post, that these culprits should face the full force of our law (which is so damn weak it's pathetic)!


Fadi.

Fadi
20-07-2011, 08:01 PM
Under sharia law when you say the citizens are taken care of financially, to what degree? is there a measure used to determine whether or not a person needs more money or an improvement in their conditions? tat, I'm speaking here of basic human right that each and every human deserves. That is shelter, clothing, and food. And a system where if the person is able, to have him find a suitable occupation from which he can then look after himself and so on. Like I said, I don't claim to be an expert on Islamic jurisprudence (since it's a vast and complicated field of study), however I know what each Muslim aught to know without knowing all the intricacies of Islam.



Fadi.

Fadi
20-07-2011, 08:23 PM
Did you hear the guy on 6.30 last night. He reckons Australia will become a muslim nation. Not fucking likely With all the negativity that is spewed out by the media day in and day out about this religion, you would think (logically speaking) that people would run away from it. But if you dig a little bit deeper and go beyond the surface, you would find the exact opposite to be occurring. Do your research on what took place after 911 and you'll find what I'm saying to be true. I mention 911 because everyone knows about it and aught to figure out that if Muslims were behind this atrocious and most heinous of acts, then (again), you should find people running away from this "terrorist" religion; instead, many are embracing it…without any swords mind you. I say that because everyone was taught that Islam was spread at the point of a sword. Yes, Islam is spreading and growing in the west but not at the point of the sword, but by the sword of the intellect.

Whether Australia becomes a Muslim country or not in the future is not something I'm willing to speculate on. But it would be beneficial (I feel) for anyone who says: "Not fucking likely", to tell us why that is? If you view Islam as the enemy; what do you know about your enemy then and why is Islam the fastest growing and spreading faith on earth do you think?

And as a reminder to everyone who wishes to get involved in this thread, we are determined to keep things civil here. It’s fine to disagree, but do so with respect. Thank you.


Fadi.

Gunner
21-07-2011, 11:24 AM
With all the negativity that is spewed out by the media day in and day out about this religion, you would think (logically speaking) that people would run away from it. But if you dig a little bit deeper and go beyond the surface, you would find the exact opposite to be occurring. Do your research on what took place after 911 and you'll find what I'm saying to be true. I mention 911 because everyone knows about it and aught to figure out that if Muslims were behind this atrocious and most heinous of acts, then (again), you should find people running away from this "terrorist" religion; instead, many are embracing it…without any swords mind you. I say that because everyone was taught that Islam was spread at the point of a sword. Yes, Islam is spreading and growing in the west but not at the point of the sword, but by the sword of the intellect.

Whether Australia becomes a Muslim country or not in the future is not something I'm willing to speculate on. But it would be beneficial (I feel) for anyone who says: "Not fucking likely", to tell us why that is? If you view Islam as the enemy; what do you know about your enemy then and why is Islam the fastest growing and spreading faith on earth do you think?

And as a reminder to everyone who wishes to get involved in this thread, we are determined to keep things civil here. It’s fine to disagree, but do so with respect. Thank you.


Fadi.

Fadi, I have nothing against Islam or in fact any faith. But for someone who represents a group of people on national tv to say "we're taking taking over" is abit rich for my liking.

I have the upmost respect for people beliefs, as long as they are not trying to force it on me.

tat maytals
21-07-2011, 11:57 AM
tat, I'm speaking here of basic human right that each and every human deserves. That is shelter, clothing, and food. And a system where if the person is able, to have him find a suitable occupation from which he can then look after himself and so on. Like I said, I don't claim to be an expert on Islamic jurisprudence (since it's a vast and complicated field of study), however I know what each Muslim aught to know without knowing all the intricacies of Islam.



Fadi.

This sounds like underlying foundations in all communities and belief systems. Democracy covers such things as well. I personally know people, from when I was travelling through the middle east in countries with large muslim populations, that don't receive these basic human rights. Much like I know people in western countries that don't receive them either.

But I'm not sure if your reply answered my question. I think I will have to do some research on it. The standards and measures of these basic human rights and how sharia law ensures every person is taken care of financial as you have mentioned is intriguing. I've never heard of it before or noticed it. So I could have just been oblivious to it, but its something I'd like to know more about.

All systems are flawed though. I also tend to question why some people need a religion to believe in or guide them to be a good person. What's wrong with being a decent human being for the sake of being a decent human being and benefiting humanity as a whole? [/hippy]

Fadi
21-07-2011, 08:34 PM
Fadi, I have nothing against Islam or in fact any faith. But for someone who represents a group of people on national tv to say "we're taking taking over" is abit rich for my liking.
Gunner, I really do appreciate your response mate. Furthermore, if I was to put myself in your shoes, I would feel the exact same way. What I really hate and would like to get across to the wider Australian community is the fact that people who claim to represent us (Muslims) do not do so in the least. No one who represents Islam or the Muslim community would go out of his way to upset a non Muslim or hurt their feelings. That goes right against the teachings of Islam. Like I said in my earlier posts; ignorance and at times arrogance is what these "Muslim community representatives" really represent.

I have the upmost respect for people beliefs, as long as they are not trying to force it on me. We're very much alike on this matter then Gunner.


Fadi.

Fadi
21-07-2011, 09:32 PM
All systems are flawed though. I also tend to question why some people need a religion to believe in or guide them to be a good person. What's wrong with being a decent human being for the sake of being a decent human being and benefiting humanity as a whole? [/hippy] Though I do not agree with all that you've said Sir, I very much respect it and thank you for sharing it.


Fadi.

TheGiftToLift
22-07-2011, 11:27 AM
You shouldn't compare Sharia law to democracy or communism or any other system of government. If it is a system of law then it should be compared to our law; i.e. common law, which has evolved since the time of the romans and by its very nature seperate to government. I know very little of Sharia law, but I know a lot about the common law system, and a fair wack about the civil system too.

Common law is flawed, but its a pretty good system... at least in theory.

Skalatharx
22-07-2011, 12:08 PM
Abide by the laws of the country or GTFO

TheGiftToLift
22-07-2011, 03:59 PM
Abide by the laws of the country or GTFO

tell that to Nelson Mandela, or Ghandi, or Malcolm X, or Charles Perkins, etc...

Very parochial.

tat maytals
22-07-2011, 04:09 PM
tell that to Nelson Mandela, or Ghandi, or Malcolm X, or Charles Perkins, etc...

Very parochial.

I don't know how to applaud you enough. Possibly the best post I've read on this forum.

Skalatharx
22-07-2011, 04:13 PM
Its just the way I am, seen a fair bit of shit over in some of these countries because of these laws, now im not anti muslim, but I am anti extremist muslim or christian.

Christian
22-07-2011, 04:20 PM
anyone else getting muslima.com adds in this thread? lol

Shrek
22-07-2011, 09:38 PM
Four men allegedly broke into a western Sydney home to whip a man as punishment under religious law for drinking alcohol, a court has been told.

Two men have been charged by police over the incident. One faced court on Tuesday before being granted bail under strict conditions.

The assault has raised community concerns about the application of sharia, or Islamic law, by some people of Islamic faith in NSW, with the state's Police Commissioner Andrew Scipione saying there is no place for it in Australia.

In Burwood Local Court, police prosector George Lolis opposed bail for Tolga Cifci, 20, saying he had justified his role in the attack with a "particularised usage of religious law".

The alleged victim, 31, was asleep in his home in Silverwater in the early hours of Sunday morning when he woke to see four men in his bedroom.

Mr Lolis said police would allege Cifci and three others broke into the victim's unit and restrained him before he was lashed 40 times with a cable.

Mr Lolis also told the court while Cifci was not accused of taking part in the lashing attack, he had shown "a complete and utter disregard for the laws of this state".

He said the victim was targeted for "doing what many in the community do all the time" - a reference to drinking alcohol.

But Cifci viewed it as "something against Islam".

The court heard the alleged crimes were "extremely serious and violent" and carried a maximum jail sentence of 20 years.

Magistrate Tim Keddy said the police allegations against Cifci, of Auburn, were of "significant seriousness".

"The prosecution case at this stage would appear to be a strong one," he said.

"The conduct (of Cifci) was particular to this victim and for religious reasons."

Cifci was granted strict bail on charges of aggravated break and enter and committing a serious indictable offence, inflicting actual bodily harm.

His solicitor, Tunc Ozen, told the court his client was willing to agree to the strict terms and that his prior good record and strong family ties meant it was unlikely he would re-offend or flee the country.

"These conditions are, in one sense, over the top," Mr Ozen said.

He said there was absolutely no prior link between Cifci and the victim "other than one of religious belief".

Mr Keddy ordered Cifci to remain at home between 8pm and 7am and not to leave the residence without his mother or father.

Cifci is not to approach the alleged victim, must surrender his passport and cannot visit airports or other points of departure from Australia.

On Tuesday afternoon, police charged a second man, 43, with a number of offences, including aggravated break and enter with intent to commit an indictable offence.

He will face Burwood Local Court on Wednesday.

Cifci's matter has been adjourned for mention on September 14 at the same court.

Man given bail after 'Sharia law' whipping (http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/8274302/man-lashed-40-times-with-cable-2-charged)

Fadi
23-07-2011, 01:11 AM
15 years ago, an Australian terrorist by the name of Martin Bryant killed 35 people and wounded 21 in Port Arthur, Tasmania. What did he get for his evil deeds? Life without the possibility of parole. How do I feel about it? Great! Not really, not at all. I still call our Australian law pathetic. That terrorist is getting more food and pleasure time than some free people outside of prison!

Now let’s get to the case at hand. As a Muslim, a just Muslim that is, there won’t be a single one of you here on this forum who would want what I want done to these three ignorant Muslim fools. Muslims like these serve nothing but to expose their ignorance of what Islam is all about and how a Muslim aught to conduct himself towards other fellow human beings be they Muslims or non Muslims.

These three should be so happy that the Sharia law is not in charge of their affairs in court, or else 20 years may seem bit of a joke. You can not insult the law and get away with it, plain and simple. I’ve said it in my first post and I’ll say it again: I hope these three are met with the full force of the law.

All sensible Australian Muslims realise that what these three did was wrong and unacceptable, be it under the sharia law or the Australian law. Oh by the way, let no one here (non Muslim) that is, fear these types of Muslims. Why? Because they would sooner attack me than you for being, mmmm, well… according to them, a "bad Muslim"!


Fadi.

vegas
23-07-2011, 10:31 AM
terrorist - a radical who employs terror as a political weapon

I disagree that Bryant was a terrorist Fadi, I believe that terrorists believe they have a cause to fight for and Bryant did not, he was/is simply deranged or mentally ill- or both.

I do agree that he shouldn't be in jail for his crimes, he should be put to death in my opinion but that's a whole different debate.

Out of curiosity, would you be willing to share what you as a Muslim would like to see as punishment for those involved in the whipping?

Fadi
23-07-2011, 05:01 PM
terrorist - a radical who employs terror as a political weapon. I disagree that Bryant was a terrorist Fadi We'll just have to agree to disagree vegas.


Out of curiosity, would you be willing to share what you as a Muslim would like to see as punishment for those involved in the whipping? Islam makes it obligatory for all Muslims to mind each other’s business. There's no such thing as my business and your business in Islam. Meaning that if one sees a wrong, then one is to do something about it, not because of some monetary gain but rather due to one's obligation to uphold what is good and shun what is evil according to the Qur'an.

Sahih Muslim Chapter 2: PROHIBITION OF INTRERCESSION REGARDING PRESCRIBED PUNISHMENT FOR THEFT AND OTHER (CRIMES) IN CASE OF IMPORTANT PERSONS Book 017, Number 4187: 'A'isha reported that the Quraish had been anxious about the Makhzumi woman who had committed theft, and said: Who will speak to Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) about her? They said: Who dare it, but Usama, the loved one of Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him)? So Usama spoke to him. Thereupon Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: Do you intercede regarding one of the punishments prescribed by Allah? He then stood up and addressed (people) saying: O people, those who have gone before you were destroyed, because if any one of high rank committed theft amongst them, they spared him; and if anyone of low rank committed theft, they inflicted the prescribed punishment upon him. By Allah, if Fatima, daughter of Muhammad, were to steal, I would have her hand cut off.

In simple English, what the above is saying is that Islam does not differentiate between the rich and the poor when it comes to a wrong doing. It should follow from this premise that when a Muslim commits an evil act, that Muslim should first and foremost fear his fellow Muslim brothers and sisters. Why? Because they would be first in line to hand him over to the authority, period...without asking for money or anything else in return.

I've said it already vegas; whatever the full force of the law would allow us to hand down to them as punishment, then so be it. You see, Islam is dynamic when it comes to cases of criminality. Meaning that you prescribe a punishment that would fit with the time and the place if a previous prescription has not been set before. Why not make an example of these culprits is what I am saying and I'm sure you (as well as others) can use your imagination of what would be suitable. Just because I'm a Muslim does not mean I have to be merciful towards other Muslims who have committed a crime, to do so would be going against what I believe in and would render me nothing short of a hypocrite.


Fadi.

vegas
23-07-2011, 05:56 PM
Thanks for the insight Fadi, much appreciated.

tat maytals
02-08-2011, 10:59 PM
Derp.

TheGiftToLift
03-08-2011, 11:14 AM
We'll just have to agree to disagree vegas.

Islam makes it obligatory for all Muslims to mind each other’s business. There's no such thing as my business and your business in Islam. Meaning that if one sees a wrong, then one is to do something about it, not because of some monetary gain but rather due to one's obligation to uphold what is good and shun what is evil according to the Qur'an.

Sahih Muslim Chapter 2: PROHIBITION OF INTRERCESSION REGARDING PRESCRIBED PUNISHMENT FOR THEFT AND OTHER (CRIMES) IN CASE OF IMPORTANT PERSONS Book 017, Number 4187: 'A'isha reported that the Quraish had been anxious about the Makhzumi woman who had committed theft, and said: Who will speak to Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) about her? They said: Who dare it, but Usama, the loved one of Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him)? So Usama spoke to him. Thereupon Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: Do you intercede regarding one of the punishments prescribed by Allah? He then stood up and addressed (people) saying: O people, those who have gone before you were destroyed, because if any one of high rank committed theft amongst them, they spared him; and if anyone of low rank committed theft, they inflicted the prescribed punishment upon him. By Allah, if Fatima, daughter of Muhammad, were to steal, I would have her hand cut off.

In simple English, what the above is saying is that Islam does not differentiate between the rich and the poor when it comes to a wrong doing. It should follow from this premise that when a Muslim commits an evil act, that Muslim should first and foremost fear his fellow Muslim brothers and sisters. Why? Because they would be first in line to hand him over to the authority, period...without asking for money or anything else in return.

I've said it already vegas; whatever the full force of the law would allow us to hand down to them as punishment, then so be it. You see, Islam is dynamic when it comes to cases of criminality. Meaning that you prescribe a punishment that would fit with the time and the place if a previous prescription has not been set before. Why not make an example of these culprits is what I am saying and I'm sure you (as well as others) can use your imagination of what would be suitable. Just because I'm a Muslim does not mean I have to be merciful towards other Muslims who have committed a crime, to do so would be going against what I believe in and would render me nothing short of a hypocrite.


Fadi.

So what happens when the crime is ambiguous? Like killing in self defence, but only some Muslims think it was self defence and others disagree? This is where judges and juries (sometimes) step in under the western legal tradition. What about in muslim law?

What I'm getting at is criminal law, with all its vigour (I'm not saying it's perfect) is meant not only to protect victims, but also to protect the wrongly accused.