WHINING CRYING & DRUNKENESS PAYS OFF FOR MUSLIM CRIMINALS IN THE UK

Well it seems that in the British justice system, muslims can expect to get reduced sentences and NO jailtime if they whine, cry and beg the teenage victim to not testify OR strum violin strings whilst using their drunkeness as a reason for sexual perversion. 

The first incident is the most egregious. A young 17 year old girl was sitting, minding her own business, waiting for a bus. Another male was also at the bus stop. Muslim Shazad Rahman sat down next to the girl and proceed to sexually attack her.The terrified teenager tried to fend him off but he carried out a sexual attack while the cowardly witness turned a blind eye and refused to help.  Rahman has multiple past offences - including prior sexual attacks, drunk driving, shoplifting, assault, etc and has spent time in jail. So what does the idiotic judge do? - While voicing outloud his opinion that Rahman should go to jail - the judge immediately changes his mind:

"Judge Anthony Hammond told him: "You deserve to go to prison for this offence. The only question is, `Do I suspend the sentence?' At the end of the day I have decided to suspend it."

He also handed Rahman a two-year supervision order. "

What caused the change? Why is a man, with a long history of criminal behavior, given such a lenient sentence for such a serious assault? " Well - Rahman had "consumed far too much alcohol" and had been involved in a fight with his ex-girlfriend's brother, the court was told. So being drunk and upset is an excuse for repeat sexual assault in the UK??!! Sounds like more pandering to muslims --- who by the way -- are not supposed to consume alcohol.

The second incidence involves the abduction of a 15 year old girl by muslim Mahmoud Miah - who pled guilty to the charges. Undoubtedly this serious offense should lead to jail time but the "28 year old man sought out his victim, dropped to his knees, cried, begged and physically shook saying he would do anything for the girl so that she would drop the charges - using the excuse that his mother was ill. He also offered her money for a taxi. Again, one would think that jail time might be in order?? BUT

"Judge Mushtaq Khokar, sentencing, called the matter a "very serious offence", and said that normally a custodial sentence would be given. However, he had considered the circumstances and agreed with the defence that "no threat was made".

He told Miah he would spare him jail and added: "I am sure that these proceedings would be difficult for your family."

Yes, I'm sure being the perpetrator of an abduction of a young girl is very difficult for poor Mahmoud and his family.

So the lesson to be learned by muslim defendants is - whining, crying, and drunkeness are legitimate reasons, for British judges, to not incarcerate sexual molesters and abductors.  Having a muslim judge doesn't seem to hurt either.

Comments

[ThePatriot]

We are all doomed I say..

[Philip Saenz]

It's easy to explain that type of behavior. Muslim criminals stick together, and defend each other regardless of their status or crime.

A priest, who worked in the Philippines, once told me that accused Muslims in the Philippines are never guilty if they have a Muslim judge. Of course I can believe that because Islam, as we have learned, is a very insidious religion. Like I said, Muslim criminals stick together.

[Harkamel]

I bet the muslim judge fullfilled his muslim obligation of supporting his fellow muslim rather than convicting him. Prophet Mho (pbuh) was mercifull to his fellows and ruthless to the unbelievers.....

[Harkamel]

Death to the pedophile prophet - Pigs blood be upon him

[Sam]

Go to this link for more indepth knowledge about this cult religion. Please do not be ignorant anymore, spare your 5 minutes to read and educate yourself so that you will be able to wake up your society's slumberness.

http://www.answering-islam.org/BehindVeil/btv4.html

Ibn Timiyya

Ibn Timiyya emphasizes forcefully in Volume 14,

"Nothing in the law of Muhammad states that the blood of the disbeliever is equal to the blood of the Muslim because faith is necessary for equality. The people of the Covenant (Jews or Christians) do not believe in Muhammad and Islam, thus their blood and the Muslim’s blood cannot be equal. These are distinctive texts which indicate that a Muslim is not to be put to death for (murdering) one of the people of the covenant or an unbeliever, but a free Muslim must be killed for a free Muslim, regardless of the race" (Vol. 14, p. 85).

He reiterates the same statement (Vol. 20, p. 282) that a Muslim must not be killed for one of the people of the covenant; that is, a Christian or a Jew

The Imam al-Shafii

In section one of "Ahkam al-Qur’an" ("The Ordinances of the Qur’an", page 275), he says: "A Muslim is not to be killed for an unbeliever". Then he says (page 284),

"If a believer murders an unbeliever, he has to pay blood feud to the Jew or Christian which is one-third of the blood feud of the believer, though Malik says it must be one half."

Ibn Timiyya inclines towards Malik’s opinion and indicates (Vol. 20, p. 385) that:

"The blood feud should be one half because this is what was transmitted by tradition about the prophet Muhammad and as the Sunnis said also."

Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya

In his book, "Zad-al-Maad" (Sec. III, p.124), he says:

"Muslim blood is alike (has the same value). A Muslim is not to be put to death for killing an unbeliever."

"Sahih" of Al-Bukhari and" Sahih of Muslim"

These are two authorized books acknowledged by all Islam scholars pertaining to Muhammad’s sayings. We read in Part 9 of al-Bukhari’s book (p. 16,) "A Muslim is not to be sentenced to death for an unbeliever." He stresses that this is also the opinion of Ali Ibn Abi Talib.

In "Sahih of Muslim" interpreted by Nawawi (Part 4, p. 244), we read,

"A Muslim is not to be sentenced to death for one of the people of the covenant nor for a free man or a slave."

The Jalalan

In their famous commentary, in the context of their interpretation of Sura the Women, the Jalalan clearly and distinctly states the following (p. 178),

"On the topic of punishment, whether or not a man embraces the same religion will be considered. Thus a Muslim is not to be sentenced to death, even if he is a slave and the victim was a free man—not a Muslim.

It is obvious from these words that there is discrimination between a slave and a freeman. What matters to us is that if a Muslim slave murdered a non-Muslim freeman, he is not to be sentenced to death because he is a Muslim and the murdered man is a non-Muslim.

These are the scholars who have quoted the words of Muhammad himself in this regard: Ibn Timiyya, Shafii, al-Jalalan, Ibn-Qayyim al-Jawziyya, Sahih of Muslim and Sahih of al-Bukhari. They are more acquainted with his sayings and | traditions than anyone else.

[AlaskanInfidel]

Truth is Islams greatest enemy. Spread it.
In the meantime...prepare for battle. They have...and you'd better.

[Douglas Reed]

Dickens said it best: "The law is an ass" (Oliver, I believe). Judges that put forth this kind of ruling should be removed from the bench, and disbarred for failure to uphold the law.

[Screamin' Scout]

As a Yank that enjoyed my time in England, let me quote a personal hero of mine and plead with British society to wake up. "An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last." ---Sir Winston Churchill