The BBC reported this afternoon that Zahid and Parveen Sharif, who were accused of knowing about their brother Omar's involvement in the Tel Aviv pizza-parlour bombings in 2003 and not saying anything, were acquitted of all charges today. The sister of Asif M Hanif was acquitted earlier this year. Reading the published extracts, I agree that no jury could conclude beyond reasonable doubt that Omar Sharif's words convey impending involvement in terrorism or other criminal activity, or that someone is bound to gather such a conclusion (why? because the author is a Muslim?). They speak, at the most specific, of impending danger. Nothing more.
Let's see how the jihad watchers deal with this story, as pieces they've written in the past give the impression that, as usual, they considered the accused in this case guilty until proven otherwise.
Is this a good thing or bad thing, and remember when answerig that I hate hate hate hizbis?
Surely it's a good thing that the innocent are acquitted? That's all that needs to be said. This is British justice, as opposed to, say Saudi justice, Iranian justice or Cuban justice.
Is Saudi justice the same as Sharia justice as prescribed by the Quran, as practiced by Prophet Muhammed (sallalahu alaihi wa salam) as understood by his Sahabah and the Tabieen? Just asking, dont bother answering OP, I already know that you dont know.
Ciao, or chow!
Old Pickler, what's your beef with Cuban justice? I would be interested in hearing about it because I am totally ignorant about politics in cuba.