Reaction to celebrity-Muslim Mona Shindy's Taqiyya - and the chilling truth from a Muslim Mullah
Penny Wong wants enquiry into female staffer's photo after minister's night on grog - but has no concerns with what CFMEU did to these women

On the lying Mufti, his henchman the liar and disgraceful person Keysar Trad, Taqiyya and the old Arabic translations ruse

Thanks to reader TJ for pointing out this scholarly paper on the Muslim tactic of Taqiyya.


Taqiyya’: how Islamic extremists deceive the West 

by Andrew Campbell 

National Observer
(Council for the National Interest, Melbourne), 
No. 65, Winter 2005, 
pages 11-23. 


Taqiyya is a traditional Islamic technique of holy deception used by Muslim extremists to conceal their “true” beliefs and to maintain operation security for their jihad/terrorist missions, writes Andrew Campbell


On 19 November 2003, in the United States District Court Eastern District of Michigan Southern Division, Judge Steven Whalen concluded a four-page indictment against Mahmoud Youseff Kourani.

The indictment described Kourani as a dedicated member of Hezbollah who had received specialised training in radical Shiite fundamentalism, weaponry, spy craft and counter-intelligence in Lebanon and Iran and a dedicated member/fighter/recruiter and fundraiser for Hezbollah: 1 

“While in the United States, Kourani employed ‘taqiyya’: a Shia Muslim doctrine of concealment, pretense and fraud. This meant amongst other things that Kourani would, when he thought it necessary, avoid going to mosques, not attend Shiite religious rituals, shave his beard, and otherwise keep his true beliefs secret while inside what he considered to be hostile territory — the United States of America.”

What is taqiyya, as referred to in the indictment? The Islamic tradition of taqiyya stretches back to the sixth-century AD when, following disputes over succession after the Prophet Mohammed’s death, the minority Shiites developed taqiyya, or “holy deception”, to conceal their “true” beliefs from the Sunni majority and to maintain operational security for their jihad/ terrorist missions in the Dar el Haab —The Domain of War. 2

Taqiyya is inspired by the example and sayings of the Prophet Mohammed praised in the Hadiths (the sayings of the Prophet) as “the greatest deceiver”, and praised in the Koran. Muslims have used taqiyya (pronounced tark-e-ya) described variously as “precautionarydissimulation,” “religiously-sanctioned deception,” “lying” or “deception” and “keeping one’s convictions secret” and “tactical dissimulation” or “holy deception”.

Screen Shot 2016-01-05 at 3.12.36 pm

Modes of Taqiyya

There are many modes of taqiyya which has developed as an art form of deception, including


Islamic spokesmen commonly use taqiyya in the form of “outwitting”. The matter under discussion is not to be debated or discussed; the opponent is “outwitted” through taqiyya, by diversion of the subject through the tactical use of honour (feigning “offence”) and disparagement of the speaker and religious obfuscation, aided at times by a mystical reference to God or Allah, which is irrelevant to the topic under discussion. Outwitting is regarded as a skill, worthy of praise, often accompanied by smiles and laughter. 

An Australian Example of “Outwitting”: Sheikh Hilaly’s Lebanon visit, 2004

Screen Shot 2016-01-05 at 3.13.40 pm

In early February 2004, the Australian media reported that the controversial Mufti of Australia, Sheikh Hilaly of the Lakemba Mosque, New South Wales, had met with notorious terrorist Hezbollah leader, Hasaan Nasrallah, the leader of Lebanon’s “Party of God” — the Syrian-Iranian-sponsored terrorist organisation — and on 13 February delivered a “sermon” at the Al Quds mosque in Sidon, Lebanon, calling for jihad and praising the 11 September terror attacks. 

February 2004 sermon[edit]

In February 2004 Hilaly gave a sermon at a mosque in SidonLebanon, whilst overseas the text of which was translated by the Australian Embassy in Beirut. It appeared to show him supporting terrorist attacks. In his sermon, Hilaly said:

Sons of Islam, there is a war of infidels taking place everywhere. The true man is the boy who opposes Israeli tanks with strength and faith. The boy who, despite his mother's objections, goes out to war to become a martyr like his elder brother. The boy who tells his mother: 'Oh mother, don't cry for me if I die. Oh mother, Jihad has been imposed on me and I want to become a martyr'." 11 September is God's work against oppressors. Some of the things that happen in the world cannot be explained; a civilian airplane whose secrets cannot be explained if we ask its pilot who reached his objective without error, who led your steps? Or if we ask the giant that fell, who humiliated you? Or if we ask the President, who made you cry? God is the answer.

— Taj El-Din Hilaly[22]

In his speech, he also predicted that Muslims would control the White House and appeared to support Hezbollah.[22][23] The Australian Federal Police declined to investigate his activities overseas.

The controversy raged. The Sheik was the Mufti of Australia’s Muslims, and a mufti by definition can issue fatwas, that is, a considered opinion ranging from an issue of community interest or religious law to peace, war and jihad. 

On 18 February, Keysar Trad, the Sheikh’s translator, told A.B.C. radio: 10 

“I believe these people have been far too selective in taking information somewhat out of context. The Mufti is a proponent of peace and peaceful solutions to any conflict and his message was in a completely and entirely different context. I spoke to him yesterday and he assured me that the context in which he made his message was not in the way that it was reported by these people”.

On 19 February, Keysar Trad affirmed that the remarks about Israel and Hezbollah had been taken out of context. He said he spoken to the Sheikh and his remark about jihad was a rhetorical question. 

On 29 February, Keysar Trad also resorted to the Arabic poetic defence, reportedly claiming that the Sheikh had taken “bits from poems which he had incorporated into his sermons.” On 1 March Trad used the “lost in translation” defence: 

“I believe the context has been lost in the translation. … He’s not praising it by any means, he’s really condemning these atrocities.”

In Australia, the Sheikh’s speech was widely reported and criticised by the Prime Minister in Parliament. On 3 March 2004, in an unusually frank interview, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Alexander Downer commented: 11

“He talks out of both sides of his mouth. When there was initially a suggestion in the media that he had said — at least he had called for a jihad, a spokesman for Al-Hilaly said that his words had been taken out of context.”

The journalist responded to Downer: “That’s not true.” Downer replied: “Exactly. That did not turn out to be true. We got a copy of the speech, we translated the copy … and it’s pretty obvious that he’s been calling for jihad and suicide bombers … He’s been praising September the 11th as God’s work.” 


The “Arabic is Poetry” Defence 

Featured on the ABC’s Religion Report on 3 March, Dr Amir Ali, President of the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils stated: 12 

“Therefore unless I can see this transcript and unless I get it cleared by Sheikh Hilaly [an infidel cannot judge a Muslim] whether he has said the same thing, I will not be able to comment on what he has said. This sermon was not given in English, it was in Arabic. Now who made the transcript? What’s the whole source of this transcript? So unless I see the transcript and I see what he has — listen to this man what he has said, I will not be able to make any comment.” 

The obviously frustrated interviewer asked: 

“Hasn’t the time come when the Muslim community has to stop saying that his comments have been misinterpreted or taken out of context?” 

Dr Ali replied frankly: “Yes, it is definitely happening all the time”, but disingenuously continued that “this was started by the Middle Eastern Institute from Washington, which is known for twisting and turning what the Muslims say in order to create a bad image.” 

On 6 March 2004 the chief executive officer of the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils, Amjad Merhoud, warned he would be seeking an urgent meeting with the Sheikh to clarify his views, and the Federation could discuss stripping his title and claimed: “He could have in hindsight probably used different words to describe what he was trying to say or not used some of the poetry that he was trying to recite”. Interviewed on ABC radio on 7 March, Sheikh Hilaly replied to the criticism that he was “saying one thing in English in Australia and something else in Arabic in Lebanon”. The Sheikh replied: “Of course, you are talking about two different environments. … I agree with you I am addressing two different environments I’m addressing them differently, it’s be (sic) two different environments.” 13 

On 8 March 2004, the Sheik reiterated his themes and insisted the terrorist group Hezbollah was misunderstood and that his speech contained poetry that was misinterpreted. Previously he had condemned the Federal Government for proscribing Hezbollah as a terrorist organisation: 14 

“What is truth? Actually it was a poetry and in poetry we go a little bit into the imagination of presentation.” 

However Sheikh Fehmi Naji al Imam, interviewed on 10 March 2004, placed the Sheikh’s translation problems in context. The interviewer pointed out: 15 

“Sheikh Hilaly only really speaks Arabic. We hear this talk about flowery, poetic language and him being misunderstood. Do you accept that?” 

Sheikh Fehmi responded, laughing: “I don’t buy that.” 

On 10 March 2004 Sheikh Fehmi Naji, one of Melbourne’s most senior clerics, claimed Sheikh Hilaly’s comments were not misinterpreted and called on AFIC to withdraw Sheikh Hilaly as the Mufti. However, Trad claimed AFIC had already met with the Sheikh and they believed his version of events and “they understand that they believe the Mufti, and they will not make any judgment until they see something different in the Arabic tapes themselves”. 16

On 19 March, the Sheikh cleverly criticised Al Qaeda as “a bunch of crazy people” and insisted in a declaration that he did not support the action of terrorists, and in the same context he claimed: 17 

“I can understand why some people would mistranslate my comments because to them they cannot understand my high level of expression and they might feel my words have some ambiguity to them.” 

Asked if he would choose his words more selectively in the future, the Sheikh, in a humorous example of outwitting, replied: “Of course, mate.” 

Two of the Sheikh’s daughters blamed the complexities of the Arabic language for the controversy. “You cannot just interpret it, just word by word”, they said. 

An anonymous associate of the Sheikh also pointed out in The Australian: 18 

“We know he [the Sheikh] speaks English quite well, but a translator gives him time to think about his responses and gives him that ‘out’ if what he says provokes an angry response. And he thinks that if he gives a sermon in his native tongue no one’s going to bother to translate anyway.” 

On 21 April 2004, the AFIC, at its 40th Annual Congress, voted for the Sheikh to retain his position as Grand Mufti of Australia. On ABC Radio, the President, Amir Ali, was asked if the issue of the Sheikh’s dismissal had been put to a vote but he assured the interviewer that Sheikh Hilaly was not the main issue: 19

“Ali: ‘In fact we said that the government did not submit the tape, the original tape that was taken. Still we are waiting for the tape to come, so they didn’t send the tape.’ 

Interviewer: ‘Oh … When you told me on this programme that you intended to investigate the matter and get to the bottom of it. …’

Amir Ali: ‘Yes, we investigated it and then we saw the translation was wrong.’ 

Interviewer: ‘You never actually got the tape from the government?’

Amir Ali: ‘No, not the tape, we only got the transcript. … It just died down. Why (would) you want to bring it back?’”

The Muslim worldly and religious community leaders (with the notable exception of the courageous Sheikh Iman of Melbourne) must have known that no government would have exposed its information sources. Significantly, the government transcript of the Sheikh’s speech in Lebanon was never accepted by Sheikh Hilaly or his spokesmen, a position which implied that the government was deceitful. The various tactical claims that the Sheikh’s sermon was “taken out of context”, was a “faulty translation”, was “a sermon that could not be translated from Arabic to English”, and involved the use of “poetry”, raise the inevitable question: Did taqiyya prevail in this controversy?

Read more about Taqiyya and why you can't trust a Muslim who uses Mohammed's techniques of deception here.

And we'll leave you with the lying former Mufti Taj El-Din Hamid Hilaly who excused the randy Bilal Skaf gang rapists. It wasn't their fault, it was the filthy girls, the boys were jus like randy tom cats purveying the selection of blonde haired blue eyed uncovered meat on offer in Sydney,. 

Screen Shot 2016-01-05 at 3.11.17 pm

In October 2006, Hilaly delivered a Ramadan sermon in Arabic in which he made statements concerning female clothing which proved highly controversial. The key part of these was:

If you take out uncovered meat and place it outside on the street, or in the garden or in the park, or in the backyard without a cover, and the cats come and eat it ... whose fault is it, the cats' or the uncovered meat? The uncovered meat is the problem. If she was in her room, in her home, in her hijab, no problem would have occurred."

— Taj El-Din Hilaly[25][26]

He also said, "in the state of zina, the responsibility falls 90 per cent of the time on the woman. Why? Because she possesses the weapon of enticement (igraa)."[27]Hilaly later claimed that he had intended to suggest that "if a woman who shows herself off, she is to blame...but a man should be able to control himself." He also contended that his references to the prison sentence of Bilal Skaf, the leader of a group of Lebanese Australians who committed gang rapes in Sydney in 2000, in which he said that women would "sway suggestively" before men "and then you get a judge without mercy (rahma) and gives you 65 years", were aimed at illustrating the need for harsh sanctions for rape.[27]