Monday, September 20, 2010

Sheikh Mojib

I Seriously questiuon this version. However, I would like to know the true stoy. Could you kindly investigate this item and tell us the truth.

Faruque Ahmed


Saturday, February 13, 2010

“Rum Colony” Magistrate got the power over rest of the world?!

“Rum Colony” Magistrate got the power over rest of the world?!

People of Iraq, Palestine, Afghanistan, Lebanon … are defending their own homelands from outsiders who have invaded their land illegally and immorally. Surely, people who are defending their own mother and homeland can not be and must not be branded as terrorists.

Any one who dares to do so should be referred to lunatic asylums.

Australians were forced to fight other peoples’ war before and after Gallipoli. Naturally the illegal and immoral invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan based on totally false and fabricated reason and ground are a sad indictment for Australia. Political leaders, media moguls and elite power brokers made these decisions without proper debate or discussions inside or outside parliament. Virtually they black mailed our nation towards immoral, illegal and un-winnable wars. In short, people who are pushing our nation in wars outside Australia and not in defense of Australia are worse than this silly Sheikh Haron.

When a non-Muslim commits any crime no one expects the respective community and community leaders to come out and condemn their fellow member. Therefore no one should expect Muslim community and Muslim leaders to condemn any individual’s alleged crime. Let’s stop any trial by media as well as stop inciting against Muslims based on Israel centric tradition.

By the way, since when and under what law an Australian Magistrate got the power over rest of the world?

Faruque Ahmed

Moderator, Free Australia Now

In the name of God

Report about Sheikh Haron’s Court for Bail Hearing 9th February 2010

Sheikh Haron for the second time represented himself in court.

Sheikh Haron gave his written reasons to court to explain why he did not agree with the Prosecution’s application which was made in the last court. Below is the Sheikh’s document:

Note: In the original document which was given to court there was the surname of a General who is related to Sheikh Haron. However, that surname has been deleted here for the privacy reasons.

The reasons I do not agree with the prosecution’s application for new bail conditions

1. The application of the Prosecution states that “Protected persons are any current or former member of the Australian Defence Force .....”

This is against the law because it prevents me from communicating with the Australian Government. The Minister for Defence is classified as a member of the Defence personnel, and that member of defence force is a member of the cabinet of the Prime Minister, so in fact the application prevents me to communicate with the Australian Government. According to the law every Australian citizen should have the right to communicate with the Australian Government including the Minister for Defence.

2. The clause which says “any foreign defence force or a member of such person’s family” and also the next clause about civilians serving or has served with any foreign defence force or a member of such person’s family, is very broad and it bans me from contacting the defence personnel all over the world. I have some relatives and friends in different countries who are members of the defence forces in some countries and I should have right to communicate with my relatives and friends. This clause prevents me to contact one of my relatives General Hassan ........ (Surname deleted). I have a message for one of my relatives and I need to contact General .......... (Surname deleted) to pass my message. This clause prevents me to contact a good friend of mine who works for Pentagon in USA. This clause stops me to contact my nephew who is a pilot. This clause bans me to communicate with my cousin who is a General in the army. I just contacted this General few months ago from my mobile, the AFP has the record of my mobile’s sim card and they know that it’s true. It stops me from contacting many relatives and friends around the world. And more importantly I won’t be allowed to contact my mother and my sister because they are the “family” of defence members.

3. I have sent the British Prime Minister a letter dated 8 December 2009 and I informed him that I would like to send 237 baskets of flowers attached with 237 condolence letters to the families of the British soldiers who have been killed in Afghanistan since October 2001. Mr Gordon Brown on 7th January 2010 has thanked me for that. Public also knows about this. In such conditions it is not right for a democratic country like Australia to stop me sending these baskets of flowers and condolence letters. This will be against the democratic principles and it will not have a good impact for Australia in the international community to stop basket of flowers and condolence letters which the Prosecution and Court are aware of their content.

4. I have given the sample of the letter that I want to send to British families, to the Prosecution and court. Ms Wendy Firth told court on 28 January 2010 that there was no problem with the letter but the Prosecution added: I am concerned what if the letter will be different with this particular one considering that he had said in his statement that if he would send a letter he might give advice for killing civilians (of course Ms Wendy meant: advice for NOT killing civilians). Then the prosecution gave a copy of Crescent Times newspaper and a copy of my statement that I have made outside court for the media dated 10th November 2009. That statement was about the Australian soldiers, not international forces. In that statement I have said: “a note of advice will be always attached to my basket of flowers written: Please ask the Australian army not to kill the Afghan civilians”. That statement was about Australians, not foreigners. It makes sense to ask Australians to advise the Australian Government not to kill civilians in Afghanistan but it doesn’t make sense if I ask British people to advise the Australian Government not to kill civilians. On 28 January 2010 the Prosecution told court that she was concerned regarding my advice about not killing civilians, I promise that in my letters I will not advise people not to kill civilians, so please let me send my condolence letters.

5. On Tuesday 2nd February Court extended the current bail conditions. On that day I said to court that at the moment I am allowed to send the basket of flowers and condolence letters to the British soldiers, I have time till next week to send the letters but in the next few days I won’t send them because I do not want the Prosecution to be worry. And the Magistrate admired me for my decision. By explaining this I am trying to say that if I wanted to write any advice for not killing civilians I could do it in the past few weeks quickly before the new bail conditions probably stop me to do so. But my aim is not that, I want to send my condolence letters and at the same time I want to keep the prosecution happy as well, I don’t want anyone to be worry about my acts, I like to cooperate with everyone and keep all happy, so there should be a balance and cooperation. The court on 28 January 2010 suggested that there will be a scanning process by the Prosecution to check my letters before sending them, although I was not happy about it I agreed with that suggestion but it seemed the Prosecution was not happy about it. I am not sure, maybe the Prosecution agrees if the court suggests this solution again.

6. The clause which states “any person wounded or killed in a terrorist incident or a member of such person’s family”, is also very broad and it bans me from contacting all victims of any terrorist attacks around the world without any exceptions. I have relatives and friends in different countries such as Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Greece, Germany, UK, USA etc. This clause not only stops me from contacting my friends who get hurt in a possible terrorist attack in Australia but also it bans me from communicating with my friends, relatives and even my immediate family if they get hurt in such possible attacks.

7. The application is against freedom of speech.

8. Considering the all points mentioned above the application is clearly against human rights principles.

Kind regards,

Sheikh Haron

Anyway in the end, the Magistrate decided to amend the bail conditions and she explained to the Sheikh that he is allowed to contact the relatives but about the friends it is necessary to show the letters to the Prosecution/AFP to check and approve them.

According to the Prosecution’s application Sheikh Haron must not communicate with:

(i) Any current or former member of the Australian Defence Force or any foreign defence force or a member of such person’s family;

(ii) Any civilians serving or who has served with the Australian Defence Force or any foreign defence force or a member of such person’s family;

(iii) Any person wounded or killed in a terrorist incident or a member of such person’s family.

According to the Prosecution’s application, Sheikh Haron must not communicate with the protected persons by any means (including post, facsimile, telephone and email) directly or through a third person.

Sheikh Haron was very happy and excited that at least he was allowed to call his mother and other members of his family overseas. We appreciate the Prosecution and Court for allowing the Sheikh to contact his mother who is old and sick. We note that Sheikh Haron’s mother and sister overseas are classified as the family of the defence forces and if there was no exception for the Sheikh’s family, it would be illegal for Sheik Haron to call his mother and sister or to email his nephew and cousin.

Then Sheikh Haron tried to explain to court that yesterday he had been told by NSW police that there was no need to report to police anymore but the Magistrate said that this subject was not related to court and she asked the Sheikh to discuss about it with the Prosecution/AFP.

Outside the court room, Sheikh Haron talked to the Prosecution and AFP (there was four of them, Mr Chris O’Donnel and Ms Wendy Firth as prosecution with two AFP agents). The Sheik said: Yesterday the NSW police has notified me that there is no bail on the computer system anymore and you don’t need to report on Wednesdays. The Sheikh then gave a copy of the NSW police notice with the handwriting of a police officer as evidence. Sheikh Haron added: If I would listen to police I would be in trouble. They responded: Yes of course, you should listen to the court, not the police. The AFP agent added that court was more important than police. Then Sheikh Haron asked: Is this a plan (to frame me) or it’s misconduct? An AFP agent who didn’t seem happy to hear that question responded: It’s too much reading (or: you do too much reading). The AFP agent meant that Sheikh Haron was wrong and there was not any plan to frame the Sheikh. (We hope that the AFP agent is right and there is no conspiracy against Sheikh Haron to frame him). Then the AFP agent said that they would contact the NSW police and investigate about it (fix the matter).

Then the Sheikh said to the Prosecution: Last time the Magistrate reminded you to give me the copy of my document from the laptop, I have checked my PO Box yesterday but I still haven’t received it. The Prosecution said: You should request it in writing. The Sheikh said: But you have already agreed to give me that and even the court has reminded you to give it to me. The AFP agent said: Last time we asked you to write your request. The Sheikh said: Nobody has asked me that, who has told me that? The AFP agent said: Yes, we told you, there are lots of thing going on your mind.

Next day (On Wednesday 10th February 2010 at 3.35 pm) Sheikh Haron for reporting went to Campsie police station assuming that the AFP had already fixed the matter and his bail was on the system. Sheikh Haron gave his driver’s licence to a female police officer and said: I have come for reporting. The officer checked the computer and printed a receipt (like other times) and gave the printed receipt to the Sheik. At this time Sheikh Haron was happy that everything was fine and he thought that the problem on the computer system had been fixed. The Sheikh thought to himself that he was wrong when he asked the AFP agent whether there was a plan or misconduct? At that moment Sheikh Haron was thinking that he should apologise to the AFP agent for his question. While the sheikh was thinking about these things the police officer said: There is no bail on the system! The Sheikh said: If there is no bail on the system how did the printer issue a receipt? The police officer said: I did it manually, there is no bail on the system. The Sheikh said: Although there is no bail on the system I’ll report every Wednesday, I have been told by the AFP that I must listen to court, not police. Then the police officer asked the Sheikh to sign a paper. This was the first time ever that Sheikh Haron was asked to sign a paper while he was reporting. Sheikh Haron said: Sorry, I don’t sign anything, I listen to court. The police officer raised her voice and few times repeated: Sign here. The Sheikh said: But I am scared (Sheikh meant he was concerned) to listen to police and sign, I just want to do what the court has ordered. The police officer while still raising her voice said: How come you are scared to sign but you haven’t been scared to send letters to victims? The Sheikh said: What do you mean? The police officer said: You have sent letters to victims, it’s in the news everywhere. Sheikh Haron responded: But that subject is not related to this subject.

Anyway in the end, the Sheikh said: Ok I’ll sign but I need to know your name for my record, would you please write down your name for me. The police officer refused to give her name and said: What for? You don’t need my name. At this time Sheikh Haron tried to look at the badge of the officer quickly to remember her name and then signed the paper.

The Sheikh Has kept the full name of the officer for his record.

Important Notice:

If any person sends an email to Sheikh Haron, the Sheikh before replying any email he will investigate first to make sure that the sender of the email:

1. Is not any current or former member of the Australian Defence Force or any foreign defence force or a member of such person’s family;

2. Is not any civilians serving or who has served with the Australian Defence Force or any foreign defence force around the world or a member of such person’s family around the world;

3. Is not any person wounded in a terrorist incident around the world;

4. Is not any member of the family of any wounded or killed in a terrorist attack around the world.

Once the investigation is finished the Sheikh will reply to the email. Sheikh Haron apologises for any late reply because the investigation may take quite a long time. If the investigation is not possible and the Sheikh is not sure whether or not the sender of an email is one of the protected persons in the bail, the Sheikh might not respond to the email because it might be against the law. Sheikh Haron does not want to do anything against his bail conditions.

Source: Sheikh Haron Web