Sydney's Occupied Territories : Malek Fahd Islamic "School" placed on Notice by NSW Department of Education

Malek Fahd Islamic School, Ordered to repay $9 Million to Australian Tax Payers

Melbourne's Occupied Territories : Man asks if if worshippers are" Yahudi" then runs a mock with Knife inside Melbourne Mosque KILLING one

One man is dead and two are hurt after a stabbing at a mosque in Dallas, Melbourne

Wayne Flower,Mark Butler 
Herald Sun
December 5,2013

WORSHIPPERS ran for their lives during a stabbing attack during morning prayers that has left one man dead and two seriously hurt at a mosque in Melbourne's northern suburbs.

Horrified witnesses said the attacker went beserk in the Broadmeadows Mosque.

"It was crazy. A rampage," one man said. "Six people locked themselves in the billiard room when they saw the knife and the president was locked in his office."

Several men claimed the attacker was at the mosque with his sister when he went berserk.

"He was asking if people if they were Yahudi (Jewish)," a man said. "He then became agitated and not long after he pulled a knife."

Of the two victims who survived the attack, one remains critically injured, after violence broke out at the mosque in King St, Dallas, just before 11am.

Det Sen-Sgt Stuart Bailey said the shocking attack happened before about 40 members of the mosque.

"Many of those were female and elderly," he said.

It is alleged the 22-year old Broadmeadows man attempted to gain entry into the mosque but was refused because of his agitated state.

"Three people in that mosque tried to prevent his entry - they were all in their 70s - the male has produced a knife and has stabbed all three of those (people)," Sen-Sgt Bailey said.

A sergeant, who was first on the scene, attempted to apprehend the man but was also assaulted.

"Fortunately for police a Critical Incident Response Team (CIRT) were also nearby and attended," Sen-Sgt Bailey said.

"They deployed capsicum spray which didn't stop the offender. He's then ran out of the mosque car park into King St where he was tasered by the CRT members."

It took six CRT and two uniformed officers to arrest the alleged killer.

The arrested man remains at St Vincent's Hospital under police guard.

The critically injured victim was being treated at the Royal Melbourne Hospital, the other victim has been taken to the Northern Hospital and was in a stable condition.

Homicide squad detectives are at the scene, which was sealed off today.

Witnesses told the Herald Sun that a man turned up at the mosque asking for financial help.

The man, believed to be of Turkish descent and unknown to regulars, allegedly became violent when other worshippers refused to let him enter morning prayers.

A witness claims the man began making racist remarks before pulling out a knife and slashing people.

Police have called on witnesses to contact Crime Stoppers on 1800 333 000

Sydney's Occupied Territories: Lefty Loons Pap Piece on Lakemba,"Nothing to see here"

Lakemba "Nothing to see here"

Labor Green Loons VOTE People : Enriching Sydney's Occupied Territories

Ram-raid Muslim radicals - police fear crimes are funding Syrian war fighters

Yoni Bashan 
The Daily Telegraph
December 5,2013

COUNTER-terrorism officers have charged a figurehead of last year's Muslim riots and infamous Sharia "whipping" case over an attempted ATM ram-raid in Sydney's north.

Wassim Fayad, 46, one of two head spokesmen during the riots, was arrested at 7.30am last Friday at Auburn and charged over the failed ram-raid involving at least two other men at North Ryde on May 15.

The investigation, kept under wraps until now, has been continuing for several months, running at the same time as another case with the Joint-Counter Terrorism Team examining a syndicate sending young Australian Muslims to fight in the Syrian civil war. Police also have been investigating Fayad's activities to see whether he has any connection with the Syrian syndicate.

While the ATM attack would normally be left with local authorities, counter terror police are understood to have led the investigation because of their interest in how the alleged assailants had planned to spend the proceeds of the crime.

SYDNEY MEN 'SENT AUSSIES TO FIGHT IN SYRIA'

In 2011, Fayad was one of two central leaders at the infamous riots in Sydney's CBD though he worked with police and made public statements to try to quell the angry crowd.

Earlier that year he told The Sunday Telegraph after the death of Osama bin Laden that the 9/11 master­mind "died a martyr".

Fayad is presently on bail, a court heard last week, awaiting the outcome of an appeal against a two-year sentence he received for his role in whipping a Muslim convert who confessed to drinking alcohol and taking drugs in 2011.

The new charge, laid by the Counter Terrorism and Special Tactics Command, is over the aggravated break and enter on a shopping centre at Waterloo Rd, North Ryde.

The incident involved a four-wheel drive and a van driven into the shopping centre about 4am. Police will allege the four-wheel drive was used to ram two ATMs before Fayad and at least two others allegedly tried to access the cash inside. They left empty-handed.

Fayad was also charged last week by the Middle Eastern Organised Crime Squad with being an accessory after the fact in an unrelated attempt to murder case - he appeared in court on both charges.

That accessory charge was laid following an investigation into the attempted murder of a man outside the Aarows sex club at Rydalmere, on May 1, two weeks before the alleged ATM attack.

Several other men have been charged over the shooting. This includes known-radical Milad Bin Ahmad-Shah al-Ahmadzai, 23, who was charged with numerous offences over the incident, the most serious being shoot with intent to murder.

Another man, Osama Sarwat Toffic, 23, also faces a series of charges including shoot with intent to murder.

Fayad's accessory charges allegedly stems from providing Toffic with assistance to leave Australia on November 16, police will allege.

Toffic was arrested at Sydney airport about to board a flight to Germany, en route to Istanbul, Turkey.

It was revealed yesterday the syndicate sending individuals to Syria were helping them enter the country via Turkey.

NSW Police confirmed officers with the Joint Counter-Terror team laid the charges in relation to the attempted robbery.

Police are continuing to probe links between the men and others who have been radicalised in the community.

An associate of al-Ahmadzai, Mirwaice Rahemi, 23, pleaded guilty this year to conspiracy to commit an armed robbery on a cash-in-transit van at Cecil Hills on September 28, 2011.

Rahemi was photographed outside the Downing Centre Local Court in June 2011 supporting Muslim woman Carnita Matthews, who in 2010 claimed police tried to rip off her burqa but was later found guilty of making a false statement. The charge was subsequently overturned on appeal.

Her husband, Hamdi Alqudsi, 39, was on Tuesday charged with being the principal of the syndicate sending Australians to Syria.

More than 150 Muslims turned out last night to a meeting to discuss the arrests of two men who are alleged to have been helping young men travel to Syria to fight alongside al-Qaeda.

Several speakers at the meeting - organised by Hizb ut-Tahrir Australia - condemned the arrests, saying they were unjustified and that authorities had been unable to stop the "tide" of people travelling to Syria to fight.

Group representative Uthman Bader said the Australian government was supporting the Assad regime in Syria and `"secula" elements of the opposition armed forces.

``We shouldn't be surprised. The Australian government has supported … despots and tyrants in the Muslim world," Mr Bader said.

He said it was hypocritical to allow Australian-Israeli citizens to fight overseas with the Israeli Defence Force, and for no action to be taken against Muslims who fought against the Russians in Afghanistan.

Speakers also advocated establishing a Muslimstate, or caliphate.

RADICAL WILL KEEP PENSION UNTIL HIS TERROR CASE IS FINISHED

Clementine Cuneo

AN investigation has been launched into a radical Australian Muslim receiving a disability pension while allegedly helping to finance young men to travel to Syria and fight alongside al-Qaeda.

The Daily Telegraph yesterday reported Hamdi Alqudsi, 39, was accused of being the mastermind behind a network which recruited young Australian men and sent them to Syria to fight with terrorists.


Human Services Minister Marise Payne yesterday said a "review" would be undertaken after it was revealed Alqudsi was receiving a pension at the same time he was alleged to have had access to funds to help finance several overseas trips.

"I have asked my department to review the information outlined in the media relating to this matter," Ms Payne said. But it is understood Alqudsi will continue to receive his pension, despite the charges, until there is an outcome in the court matter.

Alqudsi and a co-accused Amin Iman Mohammed, 23, were arrested on Tuesday by Joint Counter Terrorism detectives, and charged with offences relating to assisting someone to travel abroad, or travelling abroad, to engage in hostile activities. In applying for bail, Bankstown Local Court was told Alqudsi was a disabled pensioner with little more than $500 to post as bail. Late yesterday, Alqudsi was released from jail after raising $10,000 for bail.

His co-accused Mohammad remains in prison, unable to raise the bail money.

Sydney's Occupied Territories :Cultural Diversity and Harmony Day Ambassadors Gone Wild, and its all the fault of the NSW POLICE

Police had no tip-off on Sydney shooting

Lema Samandar
The Daily Telegraph
December 4,2013

A MAN living in a southwest Sydney house that has been shot at three times this year is well known to police and involved in gangs.

A man fired nine shots from a handgun into the Greenfield Park house on Tuesday night before fleeing, police say.

The house was also targeted by gunmen in June and July.

Deputy Commissioner Nick Kaldas said the three people living in the house were unharmed but were cooperating with police in a limited way.

"There was a number of family members inside the house, one of whom is a 24-year-old male, who is actually well known to us," Mr Kaldas told reporters in Sydney on Wednesday.

He said the man was linked to a number of criminal gangs but not the notorious Brothers 4 Life gang.

Mr Kaldas rubbished remarks by the family that police had prior warning about the shooting and had visited the home three times on Tuesday.

"They received one visit earlier in the day and it was from Operation Talon as part of their tasking they carry out on an ongoing basis," he said.

"We had no information they were at risk."

The 24-year-old man is before the courts and on bail, police confirmed.

Operation Talon, which is focused on tackling gun crime in Sydney, has resulted in more than 140 arrests and 135 charges in the past few months.

Officers have also had more than 5000 interactions with the people they have been tasked to check up on.

Opposition Leader John Robertson said the state government should use laws already at its disposal to outlaw the gangs shooting up western Sydney.

"(Premier) Barry O'Farrell has the power in his hands to outlaw these gangs and give the police the opportunity to shut these clubs down," he said.

Mr Robertson said there had been 302 shootings since Mr O'Farrell became premier and 119 so far this year.

However, Mr Kaldas said the NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research (BOCSAR) would release figures on Thursday showing that the number of shootings had been halved.

"We feel that we have halved the number of incidents; we are not stopping them obviously."

Labor Green Loons and THEIR ABC

Why the ABC distorts the news agenda

Piers Akerman – 
Sunday Telegraph
December 01, 2013

IT came as no surprise to be quoted by the extravagantly paid Tony Jones, the host of the ABC’s Green-Left oriented Q & A program, last Monday as he sought to justify the taxpayer-funded media organisation’s attack on Australian-Indonesian relations.

Jones’ sniggering, simpering remarks are usually aimed at the luvvies and no doubt he hoped to embarrass me and all those in the media who believe that the national interest might just trump the public interest occasionally. 

During a program which featured an extraordinary riff about a truly inexplicable conspiracy theory from the human rights lawyer Julian Burnside, Jones reverenced my view in response to a serious question from Roslyn Coutinho, who asked: “The Australian public trust and value the ABC as a source of truth, however, the Indonesian phone tapping story could potentially have negative consequences for innocent parties, such as Australian cattle farmers and asylum seekers in Indonesia. So my question is for the whole panel, including Tony, but this could be wishful thinking, was the choice to run this story a selfish decision by the ABC or should governments be more careful about the potential implications of their intelligence operations in general? 

His reply, which must have been researched and prepared in advance, was: “I might answer your question by quoting News Limited columnist Piers Akerman who wrote last year, ‘I believe freedom is absolute. You either have a free press or you do not.’ The information came to the ABC, they published it. I wonder whether News Limited would have published it or held it? That’s a very interesting question we probably won’t know the answer to.” 
The quote is accurate, although it came from a blog written on March 18 this year, not last. 

But Jones was, as usual, a little too smart. He needs to be reminded of the context of the quote and it was this — and I shall now quote from blog which the ABC employee found irresistible. 

“It would not be news to readers of this site that this dysfunctional government’s ham-fisted attempts to muzzle the media anger me. 
“Unfortunately, I permitted that anger to show on the ABC’s Insiders program yesterday. 
“Flanked by two people who laughed at the notion that press freedom was threatened, and mocked by the show’s host, I raised my voice. 
“Perhaps I should not have. 
“I was angered by their naiveties, by their apparent belief that freedom can be trifled with. 
“I believe freedom is an absolute. 
“You either have a free press or you do not.” 
And I still believe that. 

The point that needs making for people like Jones however, who are more than willing to play the idiot if they think it will portray conservatives in a poor light, is that even a free press must be responsible. 
While the US Constitution goes further than any other to enshrine the notion of free speech, US law (and commonsense, a trait obviously absent from the halls of the ABC) make it a crime to recklessly falsely shout “fire” in a crowded venue.

Jones, of course, was only trying to justify the decision taken by the ABC to promote The Guardian’s publication of intelligence material stolen from the United States by the defector Edward Snowden, now living in Russia where he enjoys the hospitality of that nation’s security services. 

No doubt the Russians will keep him a long way from their computers but whether Snowden, The Guardian and the ABC would ever dream of publishing documents that would damage the national interests of Russia, is as Jones’ might muse “a very interesting question we probably won’t know the answer to”. 

I would hazard a guess though that The Guardian would not release such material because it is not interested in exposing Russian secrets, only those which would damage the web of Western nations which share democratic values. 

As an Australian, I have no qualms considering the national interest. 
The Guardian was always going to publish the material stolen by the defector, but I question the need for “our” ABC to assist that media group in promoting the damaging allegations in our region. 

If the ABC was truly interested in freedom of the press, I would never have had to challenge Insider host Barrie Cassidy last March, or later in the year when I asked why the ABC had so consistently failed to broadcast any news about the ongoing Victorian police investigation into former Prime Minister Julia Gillard’s involvement as a lawyer in helping to set up the AWU Workplace Reform Association (which she later described as a “slush fund") and providing legal advice to her former boyfriend Bruce Wilson and AWU member Ralph Blewitt. Ms Gillard has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing.

The case will be given yet another airing in the Victorian courts tomorrow, though whether the ABC breaks with its habit and reports this is “a very interesting question we probably won’t know the answer to”. 
Meanwhile, the ABC continues its attempts to smear the Abbott government over the spying allegations. 

On Wednesday, the AM program began its report of the Indonesian response to Prime Minister Tony Abbott’s letter to Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono thus: “Mr Abbott’s initial refusal to explain documents showing Australia spied on the President, his wife, and senior ministers, angered Indonesia, causing the President to suspend cooperation.” 

Get it? Most reasonable people would think the Indonesians were angered by the spying but the ABC wants its audience to see Abbott as the villain. 

The ABC sucks more than $1 billion from the taxpayers. 
What’s more, Labor rewarded it for its support with more money and was prepared to twice ignore a tender process and award it with the Australia Network to pursue “soft diplomacy” on Australia’s behalf in our region. 
The ABC is a bloated failure in the hands of ideologues. It should be stripped back to its charter, at the very least, or broken up and sold, if possible to commercial interests. 

In a world of expanding media, the notion of a taxpayer-funded national broadcaster is anachronistic. 
Those who want to keep “our” ABC, should fund it. Those who don’t should not have to pay for it.


Biased ABC leads a howling media mob

Miranda Devine
The Daily Telegraph
December 4,2013 

THE government has been in office 77 days but the Canberra press gallery has already written it off. Where fault can be found it will be furiously exaggerated. Where success occurs it will be ignored.

It began with the so-called expenses "scandal", when Tony Abbott's electioneering at sports events was recast as some sinister attempt to rort the public purse.

Then he was blamed for the Indonesia spying scandal which occurred under Rudd.

BLOG WITH MIRANDA DEVINE

On border protection, Immigration Minister Scott Morrison has been hammered for not divulging operational detail about exactly how asylum boats are being stopped. He revealed this week that November had seen the lowest boat arrivals in five years, but all anyone wants to talk about is his "hostile" attitude to the media. Well, hello. He's only human.

Education Minister Christopher Pyne is the latest punching bag for refusing to implement the Gonski education funding model, as prescribed by Julia Gillard. Why was that a surprise to anyone, least of all Barry O'Farrell?

Treasurer Joe Hockey is being lambasted over the non-sale of GrainCorp, over which, hilariously, lefties are siding with the free market - anything to beat up on Abbott.

The contrast to the honeymoon period of the Rudd government is staggering. Kevin Rudd was feted as a messiah for more than a year.

At the end of his first three months, he was preferred prime minister over Brendan Nelson by 68 per cent to 10 per cent, according to ABC-TV's Insiders' "poll of polls", which relishes Abbott's less impressive lead of 44-29 over Bill Shorten.

Rudd's popularity soared to record highs thanks in large part to all the positive coverage lavished on him and his lame-brained ideas, like the 2020 summit, FuelWatch, GroceryWatch, an ETS, green loans, free pink batts, the end of homelessness, and dismantling border protection.

The media was dazzled, especially the ABC-Fairfax Media axis of love. But even conservatives gave Rudd the benefit of the doubt for too long.

To its eternal shame, The Australian newspaper even named him Australian of the year in 2010. Uh oh.

Rudd's media honeymoon was so prolonged that it seemed few people were more surprised when his party ditched him for non-performance later that same year than the press gallery.

More than any other news organisation, the ABC gave Labor a free pass over the past six years of calamitous government.

Remarkably, it has run dead on serious crime allegations against senior Labor figures which are currently being investigated by police, while
ferociously hunting down every verbal misstep or stumble by the new government.

Labor bodies are piling up and stinking behind the doors the ABC refuses to open.

Instead it fires all its barrels at the poor saps who barely have their feet under their desks.

So when Liberal Senator Cory Bernardi launched a scathing attack on the ABC in the Coalition party room yesterday, he was reflecting the opinion not only of his party's conservative base but of the bulk of his parliamentary colleagues.

The applause he received was a pointed rebuke to his old foe, Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull, who continues to defend the national broadcaster.

"I'm concerned because it's not our ABC, it's not my ABC, it's 'their' ABC," Bernardi said.

"It's a taxpayer-funded behemoth that is cannibalising commercial media while spreading a message that ignores the majority views of Australians."

Bernardi told colleagues he does not advocate privatising the ABC since it has a role to play in regional communities.

But the national broadcaster "no longer complies with its charter of fairness and balance.

"It is politically biased, regularly unfair and has priorities completely at odds with its raison d'être,'' he said.

"Gone are the days when it simply operated TV and radio services. It has a massive online presence providing at taxpayers expense what commercial media operations need to charge for, four television channels and who knows how many radio licences.

"It is out of control and needs to be reined in. It needs to be broken up and returned to its primary purpose rather than the engorged propaganda unit it has become."

Bernardi is on the backbench because he was marginalised by many in his own party before the election for refusing to maintain a safe, politically correct line. Turnbull particularly targeted him because Bernardi led the revolt against the ETS which ended his leadership and launched Abbott.

Now Bernardi is leading the conservative revolt against the ABC, and again he is on the right side of history 


The ABC's evil plan to get tentacles into kids

Miranda Devine 
The Daily Telegraph
December 4,2013

http://www.abc.net.au/btn/

THE ABC is an enormous beast, with tentacles stretching across the internet and digital TV at a time when other media organisations are struggling to survive.

Its success at enforcing the narrow groupthink of the Left cannot be over-estimated, and not just on obvious flagship programs such as Q&A.

Take its controversial education show Behind The News, watched by more than one million unsuspecting children each week.

With a cheery youth-friendly style, it promotes the soft-left line on everything from asylum seekers to gender equality to big government spending.

Yesterday's episode of BTN began with a story about Education Minister Christopher Pyne's "broken promise" on Gonski funding.

Next was "Why sorry seems to be the hardest word over the Indonesian spy scandal", complete with footage of Kevin Rudd making his Stolen Generations apology. Praise for Rudd was cleverly delivered using Tony Abbott's words.

"So it seems Tony is a fan of people who say sorry too. Well, he was."

That is, until the Indonesia spying scandal erupted. No mention that the spying occurred during Rudd's sainted reign.

At the end of the package the young BTN host, sitting in a school he identifies as Norwood Primary, asks the children around him if they think "Tony" should have said sorry.

It's no surprise that the majority, about 30 children, put up their hands to say yes the Prime Minister should have apologised.

A scan of other BTN stories this year finds similar examples of loaded commentary: "The new PM Tony Abbott hasn't repaid some money that he claimed for going to a few running and cycling events. The fitness freak says they were genuine community events, so it's OK for the taxpayer to help foot the bill."

Subtle propaganda to children is all part of the ABC's long march.

Harmony Day Ambassador, Spartaco Marciano Di Bella,pleads not guilty for Jew Bashing at Bondi

Man accused of attacking five Jewish people in Bondi appears in court with broken leg and pleads not guilty 

The Daily Telegraph
December 3,2013

A MAN accused of being involved in an anti-Semitic brawl that caused community outrage has turned up to a Sydney court with a broken leg and pleaded not guilty.

Four men aged 66, 48, 39 and 27, and a 62-year-old woman were taken to hospital after a melee on Bondi's Blair Street in the early hours of October 26.

Multicultural Sydney: Mother of accused Jew Basher says ""When he's at home he's not racist but when they get together they like to pick on people - it only takes drinking," she said.

Spartaco Marciano Di Bella was charged with affray and pleaded not guilty at Waverley Local Court on Tuesday.

The 23-year-old Mascot resident turned up to court with crutches and a broken leg and was supported by family.

His lawyer told the court he was pleading not guilty to the affray charge.

Wearing a white satin tie, a white business shirt and a black suit jacket with black shorts, he said outside court "I feel remorse for the family'' but would not comment on the matter.

Court papers showed co-accused Robert Tamaki Clifford, who remains in custody, has pleaded not guilty to affray and assault occasioning grievous bodily harm.

Clifford, 26, was also charged with having a knife in a public place.

Two 17-year-olds were also charged with affray and breach of bail.

Police allege they were among eight men who made anti-Semitic comments to the five victims, who were reportedly returning from a Jewish Sabbath dinner.

The five injured during the brawl suffered concussion, a fractured cheekbone, possible broken nose, lacerations and bruising.

They were treated at St Vincent's Hospital.

The incident caused outrage with Premier Barry O'Farrell saying at the time that there would be zero tolerance for religious discrimination.

The NSW Jewish Board of Deputies said the attack highlighted the need for effective criminal laws addressing racial attacks.

The NSW Anti-Discrimination Board president Stepan Kerkyasharian confirmed the body would investigate the attack.

The two men will return to Waverley Local Court on January 14.

Labor Green Loon VOTE People arrested for sending "Australians" to fight in Syria

Sydney men 'sent Aussies to fight in Syria'

Clemtine Cuneo
The Daily Telegraph
December 3,2013

THE husband of controversial Muslim woman Carnita Matthews is one of two people arrested today for sending Australians to fight on the front lines of Syria's civil war.

Hamdi Alqudsi, 39, was arrested at his St Helen's Park home, at the same time police were arresting a 23-year-old man in Lidcombe.

Alqudsi is the husband of Ms Matthews' who is best known for her run in with police, when she refused to remove her burqa during a random breath test, two years ago.

The pair has several children between them

Police allege Alqudsi organised travel and arranged overseas contacts for six Australians to fight in Syria.

This allegedly included fighting with the terrorist group Jabhat al-Nusra and affiliates of al-Qaeda.

NSW commissioner of special operations Catherine Burn told reporters in Sydney the arrests are notable.

``We have identified who we believe is the principal person involved in the facilitation method of sending people over to Syria to engage in the conflict,'' she said.

``That puts a significant dent into this particular network.''

Australian Federal Police deputy commissioner of national security Peter Drennan said the men were not involved in any terrorism threat against Australia.

But he said people travelling to Syria to fight were engaging in illegal activity and could find themselves associating with terrorists.

While police are confident they have dismantled this particular syndicate, he said they expected further arrests and would continue to investigate.

Mr Drennan said around 100 Australians are suspected of being involved in the Syrian conflict at the moment.

'`Our real concern is to get a handle on the number of people going, where they are going, and if possible firstly to prevent them going,'' he said.

He said investigations were ongoing into the five men whom the group allegedly organised.

Alqudsi and the other man are due to face court later today.

Carnita Matthews thug minders, linked to Radical Muslim Cleric

Carnita Matthews Driving Record

Carnita Matthews husband,Ibrahim Galiel claims “….my wife has suffered”

Australia’s Multicultural Media reports Carnita Matthews to seek costs and compensation from NSW Tax payers.

Judge Defends Decision & Carnita Matthews son Defends Lieing Mother on Sydney Radio

Lieing Muslim Carnita Matthews and former Guantanamo Bay inmate Mamdouh Habib engage in Muslim Festival of LIES and Deceit

Lieing Muslim Hag in a Bag’s supporters aka.Muslim Savages, charge Media and pedestrians whilst invoking the Head Hunters Chant of "allah ackbar" following the appeal of Carnita Matthews been upheld in Sydney Court.

Lieing Muslim, HAG in a BAG, Carnita Matthews Sentenced to six months in Jail, for Lies and Deception,by Sydney, Campbelltown Magistrate.

What CNN should have asked Madame JuLIAR Gillard.

Spy saga legacy of Left's flawed reign

Piers Akerman
The Sunday Telegraph
November 23,2013 

IF CNN's international audience knew what a low priority Julia Gillard placed on national security, the network may not have given her a soapbox on which to offer unhelpful and irrelevant remarks about the alleged spying during ­Labor's term in office.

It is astonishing that a media outlet did not make it clear that Gillard, as deputy prime minister, showed such scant regard for national security that she sent a junior staffer and former bodyguard, Andrew Stark, to attend meetings of 

the National Security Council in her place. It is staggering that neither she nor Kevin Rudd attended every meeting of the NSC when they were in Australia but that's the true measure of their priorities.

To hear her flapping her gums about a topic she cared so little for only serves to ­remind the electorate of how flawed she was, and how fortunate we are to be shot of them both, despite the adoration they both received from the ABC and its partner in hypocrisy, Fairfax Media.

One can expect those media organisations to willingly dance to the tune being played by the defector Edward Snowden and his conductors in the Kremlin, but to see Gillard, Opposition leader Bill Shorten and other former national leaders such as Malcolm Fraser stepping out diminishes any remaining respect.

Prime Minister Tony Abbott's dignified response to this Left-wing assault elevates him beyond measure.

Gillard's re-emergence so soon after being dumped by the ALP is an indication of the bitter battle being waged within Labor for some shred of consequence to show for the party's six years in office.

If only CNN had been better briefed, Gillard might have been asked about Labor's failure to provide any funding beyond December 31 for offshore processing of illegal boat arrivals, or of the cost of post-processing accommodation on Nauru and Manus Island.

She might have been asked about the lunacy of linking spending measures totalling over $16 billion over the current forward estimates period to the failed mining tax which is only raising $4.4 billion.

She could have been quizzed on the billions Labor ripped out of the Reserve Bank's reserves necessitating an injection by the Coalition of $8.8 billion to give the RBA a buffer with which to respond to international financial events.

She may have explained why Labor's debt ceiling would exceed its limit of $300 billion next month and is now forecast to break the $400 billion barrier. Under Labor and former treasurers Wayne Swan and Chris Bowen and former finance minister Penny Wong, the debt limit escalated four times, going from $75 billion to an eventual $300 billion, and it still couldn't keep up with ­Labor's wastrel tendencies.

Labor oversaw the fastest deterioration in debt, in dollar terms and as a share of GDP, in modern Australian history.

Just last week the public learnt Labor had planned secret cuts to the public service - but it had failed to fund more than 13,000 planned ­redundancies, leaving agencies to find the rest of the savings.

This has forced a large number of departments and agencies to offer voluntary ­redundancies, which were not funded by the former government and which have subsequently pushed some of them into operating losses.

".....she believes that a married woman is a prostitute.  (Quote) "Prostitution in marriage is the transaction of sex in return for love, security and house-keeping." (Quoted by Helen Trinca, The Australian, April 6, 1984, p.7).

Madame Gillard (l) without Tim "the Beard" Mathieson seen here playing dress up or something. 

If CNN wanted Gillard to be relevant it should have asked her why she failed to release a secret report that estimated the NBN would leave taxpayers up to $31 billion worse off. Instead of addressing Labor's failed policies and seeking answers to questions Labor has lied about, the international broadcaster gave Gillard a platform to talk about national security - an area in which, like so many others, she demonstrated no expertise.

It is understandable a global audience may be enthralled by stories of spooks told by ­defecting traitors, but there is really nothing new to these tales. What is more important to the nation is the truth and nothing but the truth about ­Labor's six deceitful and ­immensely damaging years in office.

Meet Miss Tourism Australia - Sarah Czarnuch from Victoria

Meet Miss Tourism Australia ... So far So Good, I believe she is on the verge of finding a cure for Poverty, Sweet Child, God Bless her, and might I say them too.

Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth the second's "Loon in Residence" and Lu Kewen aka. Kevin 07 Emissary shows just how suited to her role she is... yet again.

Labor opposition Leader Bill Shorten's Mother In Law and Infamous Progressive Feminist Misandrist Australian Governor General, Mrs./Miss/Mz Quentine Bryce dribbles the usual blah blah blah Labor Green Loon Socialist propaganda. 

Former Union,(ACTU) and now Labor Green Loon Opposition Leader The Hon: Comrade William (call me Bill) Shorten (R) pictured here with the Lu Kewen aka, Kevin 07 Australian Governor Generals Daughter (Chloe ?)  on their Wedding / Commitment / Pledge /I LuvYa Caus you are a good root,Consort Day, Civil Ceremony. 

Labor's Lu Kewen / Kevin 07 appointed Emissary,UN Pay Master at Large, Progressive Australia's Governor General and Misandrist Loon the ACTU's Labor Green Loon's Idiot Servant at Large, Comrade Shorten's Mother In Law, Australia's Governor General, aka. Madame Quentine Bryce 

The Gang Rape of "Aussie Pigs and Sluts"

The Pious Muslim Gang Rapists were facilitated in their RAPE Jihad / Cultural Enrichment / Cultural Diversity, by the State Labor Green Loon Socialist Multicultural Government of Bob Carr, every crime had to pass the Racist test, crimes could ONLY be committed by Australians,as all enlightened citizens know, Ethnics, Labors VOTE People,were as pure as the driven snow and beyond reproach and even if they did Fuck over a few Australian Mothers and their daughters (and in some case Son's) it was all part of the Multicultural Revolution that was necessary for Labor / Green Loon's Vote People's ascendancy.

Remember When: Crown Prosecutor Margaret Cunneen,The woman who fought back for the victims.

What actually happened when Labor / Green Loon's VOTE People; Islam's Finest, Gang Raped some "Aussie Pigs and Sluts"

Full transcript of rape sentencing.

24aug02

THE DISTRICT COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES 
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION 
Judge Michael John Finnane QC 
FRIDAY 23 AUGUST 2002 
01/11/0877 
Regina v H. 
SENTENCE 
HIS HONOUR: 
X was the leader of a brutal gang of rapists, who on three occasions, raped four young women. His activities and those of his gang spread terror in Sydney in August 2000, just before the commencement of the Olympic Games. 

The gang consisted of varying numbers of men, up to about fourteen. Not all of them have been caught. Those who have been caught and brought to justice were either identified by the victims or pleaded guilty because evidence had been found to connect them with the offences. 

The activities of the gang were organised by the use of mobile phones and there was a considerable degree of planning and co-ordination involved in each set of attacks. 
As is common with rapists, the gang members treated each of their victims with callous indifference and considerable cruelty. 

H was a member of this gang and in common with X, Y, Chami, Hajeid, X1, Z, M and M1 participated in rape episodes in which each of these offenders was involved. He participated in the rapes of Miss A and Miss B on 10th August 2000 and was one of the 14 rapists to attack Miss C on 30th August 2000.

Apart from his participation in those two episodes, he with three other males detained Miss E on a train, indecently assaulted her, committed acts of indecency towards her and committed a series of common assaults. She was 14 years old. 

The courts must attempt to protect society from the possibility that those who have been caught will engage in this type of activity again and the sentences which I impose have as their principal aim, the protection of society, but, as my reasons will indicate, I also give weight to evidence that H is remorseful, that he can be rehabilitated and that he has some intellectual disability. The combination of these factors, together with the fact that he has pleaded guilty from an early stage, has resulted in my imposition of sentences which separately and in total are less than the sentences imposed on X and Hajeid who expressed no remorse, called no evidence and offered no reason for me to exercise leniency in any way.

Sentencing Principles 

The principles upon which I must act in sentencing this offender are laid down by Statute and in case law. The statutory provisions are are now expressed in Section 21A of the Crimes( Sentencing Procedure) Act,1999. This section came into force only on 15 April 2002 and applies only to proceedings which commenced after that date. All 
the proceedings against H had commenced before this date, but it is convenient to set out the provisions of the Act, because the principles have in practice been applied for many years. 

Crimes ( Sentencing Procedure) Act,1999 
Section 21A. General sentencing principles 

(1) In determining the sentence to be imposed on an offender, a court must impose a sentence of a severity that is appropriate in all the circumstances of the case. 
(2) For that purpose, the court must take into account such of the following matters as are relevant and known to the court: 
(a) the nature and circumstances of the case, 
(b) if the offence forms part of a course of conduct consisting of a series of criminal acts---that course of conduct, 
(c) the personal circumstances of any victim of the offence, including: 
(i) the age of the victim (particularly if the victim is very old or very young), and 
(ii) any physical or mental disability of the victim, and 
(iii) any vulnerability of the victim arising because of the nature of the victim's occupation, 
(d) any injury, loss or damage resulting from the offence, 
(e) the degree to which the offender has shown contrition for the offence: 
(i) by taking action to make reparation for any injury, loss or damage resulting from the offence, or 
(ii) in any other manner, 
(f) the need to deter the offender or other persons from committing an offence of the same or a similar character, 
(g) the need to protect the community from the offender, 
(h) the need to ensure that the offender is adequately punished for the offence, 
i) the character, antecedents, cultural background, age, means and physical or mental condition of the offender, 
(j) the prospect of rehabilitation of the offender. 

(3) In addition, in determining whether a sentence under Division 2 or 3 of Part 2 is appropriate, the court must have regard to the nature and severity of the conditions that may be imposed on, or may apply to, the offender under that sentence. 

(4) The matters to be taken into account by a court under this section are in addition to any other matters that are required or permitted to be taken into account by the court under this Act or any other law. 

(5) This section does not apply to the determination of a sentence if proceedings (other than committal proceedings) for the offence were commenced in a court before the commencement of this section. 
. I have paid particular regard to the judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeal in Regina v AEM and others.([2002] 

CCA 58 ). 
In my opinion, that decision is important because it gives guidance on the correct principles to apply in sentencing for offences of sexual intercourse without consent in circumstances of aggravation, where the aggravation alleged is that the offence was committed in company, where the offenders were young and the victims were young. 
There are, of course, significant factual differences between the facts of that case and the facts of these three cases. However, each of the accused in Regina v AEM and others, pleaded guilty well before trial, just as H has done and the sentences imposed by the Court of Criminal Appeal were imposed on that basis. The case came before the 

Court of Criminal Appeal as a Crown Appeal and the Court made it plain that although it increased the sentences significantly, the principle of Double Jeopardy meant that the sentences it imposed were the least that could properly have been imposed by the sentencing judge (See Judgment paras 144 and 145). 

Regina v AEM and others, also involved threats to kill, the use of a knife to enforce compliance and forcible vaginal sex against one victim who was menstruating at the time. 
The Court of Criminal Appeal also made it clear that these were adult offences and the offenders deserved to be sentenced on that basis. Clearly, a trial judge sentencing should give serious consideration to imposing sentences which are more severe in respect of such offences than the sentences imposed by the Court of Criminal Appeal. 
4th August 2000 – a train going to Punchbowl. 

Miss E who was 14 years old was returning to Punchbowl by train from the city where she had been doing some part time work. She was still a schoolgirl. It was probably about 8.20pm when four males approached her. The offender, H, took the leading role in what happened. 

One of them called her by her first name, probably because he attended the same school, but she did not know any of them. 
One of them asked her: " Do you suck?". Being an assertive young woman, she told him in no uncertain terms what shethought. 

H sat beside her, put his arm around her in a rough fashion and placed his right hand on her thigh. He tried to move this up to her groin area and he then said: 
" Will you fuck me? Come on, you'll like it. It' s really big" 
She pulled his hand from her thigh and tried to remove his other arm. The moving of his hand up her thigh constitutes the form 1 offence of aggravated indecent assault. 
He then put his face close to hers and said : " You're a slut, will you come out with me?" and made various other unpleasant remarks. 
She pushed him away, but he and the others persisted in this very unpleasant and harassing conduct. 
In the course of this, she was punched twice and threatened her with violence. She also was grabbed around the neck by one of this gang who put a condom in her face and said: " come for a fuck." This assault was another form 1 offence and the punching was another form one offence.

H pulled down his pants, exposed his penis. He then put a condom on it and proceeded to masturbate in front of her, although she turned her head away. This was count one on the indictment, the committing of an act of indecency. 
Miss E then said to H :" you wonder why people don't like the Lebanese". He then slapped her. This is count two on the indictment, a charge of common assault. 

The other males laughed when H slapped her. H got a call on his mobile phone and said to the caller in English:" I've got a slut with me, bro, come to Punchbowl". Having regard to the other evidence to which I have referred, and to evidence given in the trials relating to offences against Misses A,B and C that H and X were frequent callers to one another, it seems likely to me that he was in fact talking to X. He certainly was not talking to any of his brothers, who are completely innocent men. I am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that he and the caller were planning to abduct Miss E for the purposes of rape by H and other men. 

H then pushed his crutch up to her face and said "come for a fuck." She was unable to push him away. This is the subject of a Form one offence of committing an act of indecency. He then demanded that she give him a "head job" and told her that she would have to give a head job to the others too. They all laughed.

He then placed his arm around her waist and began rubbing her legs before touching her on the vagina outside her clothes. This was the subject of count 3 , aggravated indecent assault ( aggravated , because she was under the age of 16 years.) 
H and the others kept her under their close control, which is the subject of count 4 of detaining her for advantage. 
They kept hold of her as they were getting out of the train at Punchbowl. As they were alighting, H, who had hold of her, pointed out a man in the distance and said: my friend wants a head job." She then broke free, ran up the stairs, got to her home and told her mother what had happened. Mother and daughter then ran back towards the station. H and the others were still there and someone in the group said loudly and contemptuously, :" Here comes the slut's mother." 
These offences were very serious. H and the others were prepared to attack a 14 year old innocent and helpless victim on a public train, assault her, insult her, sexually molest her and kidnap her, obviously intending to do worse after they got off the train. 
H and the others were bullies, cowards, and acted in a contemptible and mean way. These crimes warrant stern punishment. A message must go out to any like minded individuals, no matter what their age, that all persons are entitled to travel in public transport with the protection of their safety guaranteed by law. If anyone should take it on himself to harm a fellow traveller, he should expect to receive a heavy sentence for doing so. Those doing this as a prelude to gang rape should expect very severe sentences.

Northcote Park Greenacre 10 August 2000. 

Miss A and Miss B were together at the Mall at Chatswood. It was a Thursday night and both of them had been at the shopping centre, browsing around. Eight men, of whom X was one, and which included Y, Hajeid, H and another man to be known hereafter as S1, approached them and persuaded them to accompany them in two cars. 
Miss B was quite keen to go, but Miss A went only because she felt she should accompany her friend. 

Both got into a white van, which contained four of the men. The other four men got into a red car. Y, H and Hajeid were passengers in the red car. 
The white van had no seats in the back and it was to this area that Miss A and Miss B went. X introduced himself to them as Adam and claimed he was 22 years old. 
All the men, being of Lebanese origin, spoke Arabic and at various times during the night, the men in each car communicated with one another in that language, using mobile phones. Neither of the victims understood Arabic. 

Y, Hajeid, X and H came from the Greenacre area and it seems likely to me that all the others came from this same area. It was to a park in this area that the men in the van and those in the car went to for the purposes of committing the offences of which they were convicted. H and S1 pleaded guilty before trial. 

I cannot be sure precisely when the plan that these eight men should sexually assault their two victims was hatched but the facts establish beyond reasonable doubt, in my opinion, that the plan had been agreed on before the van got to the park at Greenacre. I come to this conclusion because there was evidence in the trial, which was in no doubt that there was almost constant communication between the men in the two vehicles from the time they left Chatswood and the time they arrived at Greenacre. This communication was by mobile phone calls. Some of it was in English, but much of it was in Arabic. 

In my opinion, the almost constant telephone communication, together with the fact that the men in the red car, as I shall recount, arrived at the park at Greenacre just after X had told Miss A that she would be bashed if she did not have oral sex with him, enables me to conclude, beyond reasonable doubt that the crimes committed by X, Y, Hajeid and their companions were carefully planned and well co-ordinated.

The two victims were in their last year at school and believed, perhaps foolishly, that the men, who were all young, would treat them well and give them some marijuana to smoke. In fact, both of them believed that the van would be going somewhere nearby to Chatswood and that they would be dropped to their homes after they smoked marijuana. 

In fact, the van and the red car went South over the Harbour Bridge, then west onto Parramatta Road. The van stopped for a short while at a McDonald's store at Stanmore. Neither girl had expected they would be embarking on such a trip and both were surprised when they realised that the van was crossing the Harbour Bridge. 

I am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that neither of them entered the van for the purpose of having sex or believing that this was why they were being invited to go with these young men. 

Neither of these young victims knew where Greenacre was and neither of them suspected that they were being taken there. Indeed, as I have already said, each was surprised to find that the van was going over the Harbour Bridge. 

The van stopped at McDonald's at Stanmore and the men got out. Both young women could have left the van and Miss A did so, but Miss B stayed in the van, notwithstanding Miss A trying to get her out. Neither of them was exactly clear on where they were. 
On the trip to McDonalds, X used a mobile phone to contact those in the red car and arranged with them to meet at McDonalds During this part of the journey, Miss B was with X and at one stage, she kissed him a couple of times. He asked her for oral sex on a number of occasions and she refused. 

A male sitting behind Miss A kept touching her around her breasts and tried to put his hands down her pants. She resisted all these assaults. 
When she got out at McDonalds, Miss A attempted to persuade Miss B to leave the van, but she would not do so. Miss 

A, I am satisfied, wanted to leave these men at this stage but did not want to abandon Miss B and so she stayed with the van and the men in it. 
These men then proposed to Miss A that she should engage in oral sex with them, but she refused to do so. A number of them became quite insistent and even angry, but she maintained her refusal. 

I found in my reasons for sentence on 15th August 2002 that the evidence satisfied me beyond a reasonable doubt that 

X, who was the eldest man in the group, was the dominant figure at all times in the white van and the one who made and received most of the mobile phone calls. 
At the park, he was the person claiming to be in charge and acted as the dominant figure at all times.

I am satisfied that by this time, X and those with him, including H, had decided to force oral sex on both women when they got to Greenacre. I am also satisfied that at no time did anyone in this group of men tell either of the complainants where they were going. 
On the way to the park, X , who was in the back of the van, pressed Miss A to have sex with him. She refused, but he kept pressing the point. She continued to refuse. 
During this part of the journey another man was with Miss B and he pressed her to have oral sex with him. She refused to do so. 

Eventually the van was driven to Northcote Park , Greenacre and all on board got out. By this time it was well after 11 p.m. The man who had been with Miss B in the second part of this trip, grabbed her by the neck and dragged her unwillingly to a spot behind a toilet block . He had her head in a headlock and she tried to get away from him. She was very scared. She saw X drag Miss A to another part of the park. 
Meanwhile, X had Miss A by the hand. She went with him out of fear. He kept insisting that she have oral sex with him and she kept refusing. She could see that Miss B was being dragged to another part of the park.  am satisfied that both girls were by this time in a state of emotional terror. 

This state of terror in each was increased by what followed. 
In the case of Miss A, X demanded oral sex repeatedly and she repeatedly refused. 
They then had the following conversation: 
X: "Just do it now before they come." 
A " No, I don't want to. 
X " if you don't do it, they will probably bash you for not doing anything. It will be in your best interests if you do it now before they come. I will tell them you don't do anything and they will leave you alone." 
A "Why would they listen to you? 
X "Well, I'm the oldest and they all respect me. 
A" Okay, but I still don't want to do anything. 
X " Just do it now and get it over and done with before they come." 
At this time the red car in which Y, H and Hajeid were, with two other men, pulled up behind the white van and Miss A heard a number of male voices which were shouting and yelling. 
X then forced oral sex on Miss A, even though she continued to say she did not want to do it. 
When he finished, she stood up and walked away from where he was. The four men from the red vehicle came running towards her. One of them crash tackled her to the ground. While she was on the ground, some of the men started to kick her about her legs. When they stopped kicking her, she was pulled to her feet and one of the four men from the red car, picked her up on his shoulder and threw her into some bushes. She was screaming and crying at this stage. 

Y, H and Hajeid all participated in these assaults on her. This episode of assault was the subject of the first item in the Schedule of offences which the offender H asked to be taken into account when I sentenced him in relation to the eighth count in the indictment. These assaults were violent and calculated to cause fear and alarm. It is clear beyond doubt, in my opinion, that the men concerned and X intended by these assaults to achieve a total physical domination of Miss A and to crush any resistance she might have had. 

From this time, until he left the park, H joined with his co- accused and the other men present in the park in detaining Miss A for advantage and in detaining Miss B for advantage, in each case for himself, and six other males. 

X then approached Miss A again. She was by this time sitting on a park seat. Before speaking to her, he motioned the other assailants from the red car to go away and they stood some distance away in a group, apparently obeying him. 
The following conversation then occurred: 
X. "I told you it would happen. I warned you what they would do. 

A. You didn't tell me they were going to get violent and tackle me. 
X. Yeah, well if you don't do what they want to do, that's what they do. So, do it now. I'll go over and tell them you don't do anything and they will leave you alone. Do you want to get bashed or not? 
A. No." 
He then had oral sex with her for the second time. He ejaculated in her mouth and she spat out the semen on the ground. 
When she did this, X walked away and the four men, who included Y, H and Hajeid approached her and all stood around her, demanding "head jobs". After further threats of violence from these men, she had non consensual oral sex with a man described by her as 'the fat male', ie, H. He said to her:" There's no point crying, it won't get you anywhere." 
The male described by her as the "WRX male", then said, " Listen guys, I'm the one with the WRX, I'm next." He then demanded oral sex or her would bash her, he pulled down his pants and had non- consensual oral sex with her. 
H then came running back and again demanded oral sex, saying he would bash her if he didn't get it, but he was pushed away by another man who also forced non consensual oral sex on her, after putting a condom on his penis. 

During this sexual assault, this man yelled out " She's not doing it right. This Chick's shit at head jobs". 
H assaulted her sexually again, after uttering further threats and Y also sexually assaulted her, after threatening to bash her. Both of these sexual assaults were oral. 
Following this, a group of men ran over to her. She could not identify them. They were not from the red car. One of them said: 
"Your friend told us you had AIDS or herpes or hepatitis or something. Is it true? 
Miss A said:" No. I don't. I don't think my friend would have said that because I don't." 
The man then said:" I swear to God, if you're lying, we'll get you." 
This last exchange in itself indicates the type of person involved in these incidents. 
Following this, she saw that the red car had arrived and that the four occupants were in the park. These four men then surrounded her and demanded oral sex. She inquired about her friend and caught a glimpse of her near some bushes. One of the men assaulted her, by snatching a necklace from her neck and breaking it. Hajeid, then grabbed her by the arm and pulled her behind the toilet block. She struggled and protested. A conversation ensued: 
"Hajeid. Give me a head job. 
Miss B. No. I want to go home. 
Hajeid. I'll take you home after you give me a head job. 
Miss B . No." 
She then tried to walk away and was assaulted by another male, the man who had first had non consensual oral sex with her. 
Hajeid then grabbed her, forced her behind the toilet block, onto her knees and holding her head, forced his penis into her mouth. He ejaculated into her mouth and she spat the semen onto the ground. 

Following this, Hajeid, H, Y and the other men from the red car got into it and left the park. 
However, the attacks on the two victims continued. It is not necessary for the purposes of the present proceedings that I should again set them out in detail. 
Following these terrible events, X and his companions then abandoned these two helpless victims, late at night, in a park in Greenacre. They had no phones, no money, did not know where they were. They were distraught, crying and feeling the effects of these repeated rapes and assaults. They were terrified. 
Fortunately, a man and his wife were returning home in a car at the time, saw them and rescued them. 

The evidence at the trial established that each of the accused and some others had regular mobile phone contact with one another. I have set out earlier how these phones were used to co-ordinate the arrival of the red car just as X was prophesying what would happen to Miss A if she did not co-operate with him. 
These crimes are very serious crimes. Sexual intercourse without consent is always a serious crime. It goes without saying that a woman is always entitled to refuse to engage in sexual intercourse. Consent can be refused at any time, even if previously, the woman may have indicated a willingness to engage in sexual activity of some kind. There is evidence of some kissing and cuddling engaged in by Miss B, but it is clear beyond doubt that each of Miss A and Miss B at all stages made it plain they would not engage in any form of sexual intercourse. 
What makes the sexual assault offences in this case very serious, in my opinion, is that they were all committed in company of the assailant and of seven other men. This was the aggravating feature charged and proved. 
Additionally, each sexual assault offence charged against H and his companions, each assault offence and each offence of kidnapping was a joint criminal enterprise between him and those with him. 
However, H was charged with and pleaded guilty to fewer offences than those proved at trial against X, Y and Hajeid. He has pleaded guilty to two counts of detaining for advantage, two counts of aggravated sexual intercourse without consent against Miss A, and one count of aggravated sexual intercourse without consent against Miss B. He has asked that I take two charges of assault into account when I sentence him in relation to Count 8 on the indictment, that being the count in respect of his actual act of sexual intercourse with Miss A. The other counts of aggravated sexual intercourse without consent related to offences actually committed by others in the group, for which he was liable as a Principal in the second degree. 
Y and Hajeid were convicted of seven counts of aggravated sexual intercourse without consent, whilse X was convicted of nine counts of aggravated sexual intercourse without consent, three of them being for actual acts committed by him. 
Of course, it must not be forgotten that H has also pleaded guilty to one offence of aggravated sexual assault against Miss C and a count of detaining Miss C and he also faces sentence for offences of aggravated indecent assault, acts of indecency, assaults and detention in relation to Miss E. In an over all sense, he has been involved in more incidents than Chami or Hajeid, but less than X. As I have just mentioned, when it comes to sentence for the offences against Miss A and Miss B, he must receive less than that given to X and Hajeid because of this and also because of the other factors of an early plea of guilty, remorse , his intellectual disability and his prospects of rehabilitation. When it comes to the offences against Miss C, I consider his criminality is less than that of Chami or X and his sentences for those offences will reflect that and the other factors of an early plea of guilty, remorse , his intellectual disability and his prospects of rehabilitation. 
However, when it comes to sentence for the offences against Miss E, his sentence must be appropriately severe.

3. Bankstown 30th August 2000 

Facts: 
On 30th August 2000, Miss C was raped by 14 men in a series of orgiastic attacks. The first such rapes occurred in toilets in Marion Street Bankstown. Here she was sexually assaulted by four men, one of them assaulting her twice. 
She was then passed over to another group. I am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that this group, in a black car, had been summoned to the scene by mobile phone messages passed on by the first group of attackers. The men in this car talked with some of the attackers from the toilets and one of those attackers joined them. 
There were three men in this second group, H, who was . one of them, had been with the group which sexually assaulted her in the carpark toilets, but he had not assaulted her there. In fact, he behaved in a somewhat irrational way, running in and out of the toilets and shouting out loudly at one of the assailants of Miss C. 
She eventually found herself on her own and when she left the toilets, she was induced by a dishonest woman, who stole her money, to accompany her to a black car nearby. H was in this car and he and some other men nearby promised they would take her home. This was a ruse to get her into the car. 
She was then taken by this car to a carpark near the Bankstown Trotting Club. There, H got out of the car with her and despite her protests, forced oral sex on her in a shed at the carpark. He is a powerfully built man, she is very slightly built and I have no doubt at all that she submitted to this out of fear for her life. Despite her protests, she was vaginally raped once by another man in this car to whom Miss C was given by H and orally raped as well by one of the men in the car. H was not actually present when these rapes occurred, but I am certain he knew that they would occur. H was in mobile phone contact with X at this time and I am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that between them arrangements were made for the holding of Miss C until X, Chami, Y and another man, known only as Nike Sam, arrived. 
When the men who were with H in the black car finished with Miss C , a two door red sedan driven by Chami, and with X, another man known only as Nike Sam and Y, as his passengers pulled up in the carpark near the Bankstown Trotting Club. Y was the front seat passenger. 
The complainant saw the occupants of the black car go over to the red car and talk to its occupants. This enables me to conclude beyond reasonable doubt that the men in the black car, including H told the men in the red car of the rapes which had so far occurred. 
If there were any doubt about this matter, in his record of interview, Chami, who was in the red car, claimed ( page 2) " Well, I copped a phone call from X, he told me there's a slut at Bankstown Trotting Club". 
Thereafter, Miss C was raped by the men in the red car and another group of men in another black car. This last group included X1, the brother of X. I set out the details of these events in my reasons for sentence concerning X. 
Y,X and Hajeid were all involved in the attacks on 10th August 2000 on Miss A and Miss B. X and his brother, X1 were involved in similar attacks on Miss D on 12th August 2000. 
On 14 June, 2002, I sentenced Hajeid for his part in these attacks on Miss A and Miss B. 
In that matter, I imposed sentences of 15 years imprisonment for each offence of non consensual sexual intercourse and a sentence of 5 years imprisonment for each offence of detaining for advantage. 
I cumulated some sentences and made some concurrent, with the result that I imposed a head sentence on Hajeid of 23 years and a non parole period of 15 years. 
On 9th August 2002, I sentenced Chami for an offence of detention for advantage, for which I imposed a sentence of 7 years imprisonment and sexual intercourse without consent in circumstances of aggravation, for which I imposed a sentence of 15 years. I partly cumulated these sentences and imposed a total head sentence of 18 years with a non parole period of 10 years and 6 months. 
On 15th August, 2002, I sentenced X for his part in the events on 10th , 12th and 30th August 2002 and I imposed a head sentence of 55 years and a non parole period of close to 40 years. 
The prisoner, H, participated in the gang rapes on 10th, and 30th August 2000 as well as the events on 4th August 2000. As I have earlier observed, what occurred on 30th August was a series of gang rapes on that night 
As I have earlier remarked, the crimes on 10th , 12th and 30th August 2000 were carefully planned and co-ordinated. 

The degree of planning and co-ordination by use of mobile phones distinguishes these crimes from other cases of gang rape which have been reported from time to time, which are often, if not usually, perpetrated by intoxicated men, who have seized an opportunity which has been presented to them. It is also clear to me that what H participated in on 4th August was a series of violent and disgusting acts which were a prelude to other sexual assaults which clearly were being organised as he and the others were assaulting Miss E. 
Each crime was callous, violent, sordid and degrading. 
Moreover, the crimes were not something which happened on the spur of the moment and none of the assailants were in any way affected by alcohol or drugs. 
The crimes were planned and premeditated. In each instance they involved gang activity and the selection of a helpless young female victim. 
In my opinion, the evidence at the three trials establishes beyond reasonable doubt that X was the leader of the gang on all occasions and he must be regarded as the worst of all the offenders. He is a menace to society. 
He has declined to give any explanation of the reasons for these attacks and refuses to express any remorse or contrition. 
Chami and Hajeid were guilty of significant crimes, but when I imposed sentences on them, I imposed lesser sentences because their criminal activities, though significant, were not as serious as the total criminal behaviour of X. I regard H as being entitled to some leniency for reasons I have already mentioned. 

Submissions on sentence 
In the case of H, a considerable amount of material was presented concerning his background, his mental state, his remorse and his prospects for rehabilitation. None of the other offenders so far sentenced presented any meaningful material at all, though Chami did present some information about his background, his previous good character and he 
evinced some slight expressions of remorse. 
X and Hajeid defiantly denied their guilt. X went further by evincing contempt for the victims and the Court. 
Because I have this material, it is possible for me to consider imposing sentences of a lesser nature than those imposed on the others and in giving consideration to H's prospects of rehabilitation, to decide if that should result in a longer than usual period on parole. 
Background of the offender. 
He was born on 21st April 1983 and is the youngest of eight children. His parents came from Lebanon. His mother was married at the age of eleven years and his eldest brother, who is 35 years old is only 12 years younger than his mother. With the exception of his eldest brother, his brothers and sisters all suffer from physical or mental disabilities. One of his sisters is both mentally and physically extremely disabled, requiring her mother's full time care. 
He has been assessed by competent psychologists as being mildly retarded, with an IQ of 67, which puts him in the lowest 1% of the population. 
A psychosexual assessment of him reveals that there is at present a moderate risk of him re-offending. 
During his young and teenage years, he would fly into sudden explosions of anger, damaging furniture and punching walls. His eldest brother told me that he would not seem to comprehend at times what it was that he was doing. 
He was troublesome at school, but the family for reasons which I think were related to poverty, could not take him to recommended medical and psychological resources. 
Although his brother warned him about his associates, he ignored the warnings and in his teenage years began to hang out with undesirable people of his own age. Because of his intellectual difficulties he went to a special school instead of the usual high school and left when he was about 14 years old. He has difficulty in reading and arithmetic and finds learning difficult. However, in the controlled environment of Kariong Juvenile Detention Centre, he has done a number of courses successfully. 
A question has arisen as to whether he is a paranoid schizophrenic. Dr Wade,who saw him in July, considers that he has symptoms suggestive of this and has prescribed treatment. These symptoms include hallucinations involving the hearing of voices. Dr Westmore in earlier reports did not feel he was suffering from any sort of mental illness. At present, according to reports of Kariong staff, he isolates himself from other inmates. 
His family clearly love him and his father and eldest brother attend court. The family have taken steps to bring it to his attention that they disapprove of his conduct, but at the same time, they want to encourage him to rehabilitate. 

Remorse or contrition. 
He has expressed remorse and concern about the effect of his actions on the girls who were his victims. He is apparently quite severely affected by his realisation of the enormity of his offences. So far, he is the only offender to have expressed any concern for these girls and the only one to have clearly expressed any remorse. I am prepared to accept that his feelings of remorse and for the victims are genuine. 

His future life in custody. 
Whilst there are no programmes in Juvenile Detention Centres for the intellectually impaired, there are sex offender programmes and other useful programmes. 
The Department of Corrective Services at present do not have sufficient beds for intellectually disabled prisoners, but will have more in two years time. In my view, his intellectual and mental problems are of such severity that he should not be housed in the main part of an adult prison. I recommend to that Department that he be placed in a unit 
for intellectually disabled prisoners when he is admitted into the prison system. 
In the meantime, I direct that such he serve his sentence in a detention centre until he reaches the age of 21 years. I make this order because I am satisfied there are special circumstances in his case, namely his mental and intellectual disabilities, which cannot be catered for in an adult prison for at least two years.

Victim Impact Statement 
Each of the victims has submitted victim impact statements. I have considered each one carefully. Clearly each victim has suffered greatly and will continue to suffer. The sentences which I impose will take that into account. 
I would like to commend each of the complainants for their courage and strength in these proceedings. The people of this State owe them a great debt. If they had not been prepared to come forward and to persist this offender and other members of this dangerous group of offenders could not have been brought to justice. 

General legal considerations 
I have set out earlier in this judgment my views on the seriousness of the offences and the features that distinguish H from X, Hajeid and Chami. He has pleaded guilty at a very early stage and is entitled to a discount of 25% of each sentence because of this. Early pleas of guilty should always be encouraged as they facilitate the course of justice, they avoid the need for long, harrowing and expensive trials and in some cases at least, this being one, they indicate remorse on the part of the offender. 
He was clearly responsible for his own actions and is liable to punishment accordingly, but it remains true that he is intellectually and possibly mentally disabled. In the circumstances, the principles of general and specific deterrence are of less significance than they would be if he were intellectually and mentally normal. 
He has shown some insight into his problems and has engaged in the programmes offered to him in Kariong. There is a reasonable prospect of rehabilitation if he is given the benefit of programmes designed for the intellectually and mentally disabled. 
Therefore, I intend to ensure that whilst he receives quite a severe sentence, he will have a longer than usual non parole period. 

Sentence 
The prisoner has been in custody since 22nd November 2001. He also spent a further earlier period of custody of 35 days . I propose to take those periods into account. 
4th August 2000 – on the train at Punchbowl 
The maximum sentences for count 1, committing an act of indecency, and count 2, common assault, is 2 years imprisonment. I intend after applying the discount of 25% to sentence him to 6 months imprisonment on each of those counts. 
The offence of aggravated indecent assault carries a maximum sentence of 7 years. The circumstances of this offence make it an offence of the worst type. I therefore intend to give him the maximum sentence less a discount of 25% for the plea of guilty, ie a sentence of 5 years and 3 months. 

In relation to count 4, a charge of detention, I consider this is an offence, which when considered with the offences in the Schedule to Form 1, is an offence which is comparable to the offence of detention committed by Chami against Miss C. Therefore, after applying the discount of 25%, I will impose on him a sentence of 5 years and 3 months. Northcote Park – 10th August 2000. 
Hajeid received sentences of 15 years imprisonment on each count of aggravated sexual intercourse without consent, 5 years for each offence of detention for advantage and 2 years for each assault.

Each offence he committed was of a comparable nature to that of Hajeid, but because of the discount of 25 %, he will receive a sentence of 11 years and 3 months for each offence of aggravated sexual assault, 3 years and 9 months for each offence of detention for advantage and 1 year and 6 months for each assault. When imposing sentence for the offence of aggravated sexual assault actually committed by him ( count 8 ) I have taken into account the matters in the Form one schedule, but I consider that the appropriate sentence is still 11 years and 3 months imprisonment. 

Bankstown – 30th August 2000 Chami received 15 years for an offence of aggravated sexual intercourse without consent and 7 years for detention for advantage. However, the detention by Chami was worse than that effected by H, since Chami made threats with a weapon and made it possible for X and another man to carry out a series of sexual assaults against Miss C in his car as he was driving. 

I consider that the sentences for these offences should be the same as for similar offences committed by him against Miss A and Miss B, ie 11 years and 3 months for aggravated sexual assault and 3 years and 9 months for detention for advantage 
I turn then to the particular offences and the particular sentences. I am going to detail the sentence. I make it plain that but for the principle of totality these sentences would in total be much longer. The principle of totality requires that having considered all the individual sentences, I look at the effect of all of them. I try to work out the criminality involved as a total matter and I then impose a sentence which is consonant with that criminality. The principle of totality means that particular individual sentences in a total sentence could receive a lesser sentence than if they were imposed on a sole offender, one for one offence. If that were not so and I just cumulated every sentence,the offender would get a sentence that was utterly unrealistic.

The sentences which I impose are set out hereunder. They result in the offender receiving a head sentence of 25 years and a non parole period of 15 years, reflecting the very special circumstances of his remorse, youth, intellectual and mental state and his real prospects of rehabilitation. To ensure that he receives a non parole period of 15 years, 
the non parole period on his last sentence is very much shortened. I have taken into account the 35 days he served by reducing his final release date by that number of days.

Counts 1 and 2. I sentence the offender to 6 months imprisonment on each count, such sentences to be concurrent with one another and with the sentence for count 3. 
Each sentence will commence on 22nd November 2000 and will conclude on 21 May 2001.

Count 3. I sentence the offender to imprisonment as a fixed term of 5 years and 3 months. The sentence will commence on 22 November 2000 and will conclude on 21 February 2006.

Count 4. I sentence the offender to imprisonment as a fixed term of 5 years and 3 months. That sentence will commence on 21st August 2001 and will conclude on 20th November 2006 

Count 5. I sentence the offender to imprisonment as a fixed term of 3 years and 9 months. This sentence is to be served concurrently with sentences for counts 7 and 8. The sentence will commence on 21st August 2004 and will conclude on 20th May 2008.

Count 6. I sentence the offender to imprisonment for a period of 11 years and 3 months. This sentence is to be served concurrently with the sentence for count 9. The sentence will commence on 21st August 2010 and will conclude on 21st November 2021. There will be a non parole period of 4 years, which will commence on 21st August 2010 and will conclude on 20th August 2014. 

Count 7. I sentence the offender to imprisonment for a period of 11 years and 3 months. This sentence will be served concurrently with sentences for counts 5 and 8. The sentence will commence on 21st August 2004 and will conclude on 20th November 2016. There will be a non parole period of 6 years to commence on 21st August 2004 and to conclude on 20th August 2010. 

Count 8. I sentence the offender to imprisonment for a period of 11 years and 3 months. This sentence will be served concurrently with sentences for counts 5 and 7 and partly cumulatively on count 4. The sentence will commence on 21st August 2004 and will conclude on 20th November 2015. There will be a non parole period of 6 years to commence on 21st August 2004 and to conclude on 20th August 2010.

Count 9. I sentence the offender to imprisonment for a period of 11 years and 3 months. This sentence is to be served concurrently with the sentence for count 6 and partly cumulatively on the sentence for count 8. . The sentence will commence on 21st August 2010 and will conclude on 21st November 2021. There will be a non parole period of 4 years, which will commence on 21st August 2010 and will conclude on 20th August 2014. 

Count 10. I sentence the offender to imprisonment for a period of 3 years and 9 months as a fixed term. The sentence is to be served concurrently with the sentence for count 11. The sentence is commence on 21st August 2014 and is to conclude on 20th May 2018. 

Count 11. 
I sentence the offender to imprisonment for a period of 11 years and 3 months. This sentence is to be served concurrently with the sentence for count 10 and partly cumulatively on the sentence for count 9. The sentence is to commence on 21st August 2014 and is to conclude, having regard to an additional 35 days already served, on 15th October 2025. Because of the very special circumstances of the case and to ensure that the offender may be released to parole 15 years after commencing his sentence, I specify a non parole period that is to commence on 21st August 2014 and is to conclude on 15th October 2015 on which date the prisoner is to be released on parole. He is then to submit to supervision by the Probation and Parole Service for the remainder of his term of imprisonment or until that Service releases him from further parole obligations. He is to be released from imprisonment finally on 15th October 2025. 

I recommend that the Department of Corrective Services permit him to serve his sentence in a Unit for Developmentally delayed prisoners. I direct that he serve his sentence until the age of 21 years in a Juvenile institution.

Other Matters – suppression of his name. 

I have given very special consideration to the lifting of the suppression order on the name of the offender and in particular to the provisions of section 11 of the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987. 
Subsection 4B of that Section permits me to lift the suppression order at this point as I have sentenced the offender. 

However, I am prohibited by subsection 4C from taking this step unless I am satisfied that to do so is in the interests of justice and that the prejudice to the person, ie the offender himself, arising from the publication or broadcasting of his name does not outweigh those interests. The burden of establishing the matters referred to under subsection 4 C lies on the Crown. 

The Crown has submitted that it is in the interests of justice that the suppression order be lifted, but it cannot point to any particular matter to justify this submission other than the fact that it is generally considered to be in the public interest that all proceedings in a criminal court be conducted in public. 

Whilst I agree that in general that is the position, I am of the opinion that in this case, where the offender is a person who has intellectual and mental disabilities, it is not in the interests of justice that the suppression order be lifted. Further, I consider that his special problems are such that the broadcasting or publishing of his name would cause him such prejudice that I could not be satisfied that this prejudice did not outweigh the interests of maintaining the suppression order. 

The suppression order will remain. 

The offender may be removed. 



Gang rapist's tears


By CINDY WOCKNER

24 Aug 02 

THE young man bowed his head and cried as he was sentenced to a maximum 25 years for his role in two gang rapes and a third indecent assault of a schoolgirl on a train. 

Two of his four victims sat just metres away, their faces contorted in disgust as they learned, for the first time, the full details of the attack upon the 14-year-old schoolgirl known as Miss E. 

The young girl managed to escape her four attackers and was spared the indignities other victims suffered at the hands of the gang rapists who terrorised western Sydney in August 2000. 

Yesterday, in sentencing 19-year-old H, Judge Michael Finnane said he was satisfied the group planned to rape Miss E. 
"H and the others were prepared to attack a 14-year-old innocent on a public train, assault her, insult her, sexually molest her and kidnap her, obviously intending to do worse after they got off the train. 

"H and the others were bullies, cowards and acted in a contemptible and mean way. 
"These crimes warrant stern punishment. A message must go out that all persons are entitled to travel in public transport with the protection of their safety guaranteed by law. 
"If anyone should take it on himself to harm a fellow traveller, he should expect to receive a heavy sentence for doing so. Those doing this as a prelude to gang rape should expect very severe sentences." 

H, who is in the lowest 1 per cent of the population in terms of IQ, had pleaded guilty to his role in three different attacks. 

The court heard on August 4 that he took a "leading role" in the attack upon the 14-year-old girl and six days later on August 10 he was one of eight males who lured two teenagers from Chatswood to a Greenacre park where they were forced to repeatedly perform oral sex. 

He was also one of 14 males who on August 30 were involved in the six-hour gang rape of an 18-year-old at three locations.