DEFINING twelve alleged terrorists by what they read and watched verged on McCarthyism, the Supreme Court was told yesterday.
Jurors should be wary of the prosecution’s suggestion that “you are what you read, that you are what you watch”, said defence lawyer Julian McMahon: “It might remind some of you of what used to be called McCarthyism.”
He warned jurors in particular against evidence such as videos of beheadings overseas and other jihadi material that is part of the case.
He accused the prosecution of having used “sleight of hand” in its opening address: “It rolled the idea of what is on a computer, what is on a document, a text, and the reader – you roll them all together and you get a terrorist.”
In a remarkable legal line-up yesterday, 10 defence lawyers stood one after the other and argued the innocence of the Muslim men who are their clients. They all agreed that there was little dispute over what was said or who the speakers were on the 482 covert recordings central to the evidence. But they strongly challenged the prosecution’s take on the meaning of the conversations and the inferences that could be drawn from them.
The jury was also told not to judge the defendants as a “job lot” and to assess carefully the evidence on each of the 27 counts.
Mr McMahon said, “On the Crown presentation over those two weeks, you could be excused for thinking that there are no issues, just a bunch of guilty guys all together, one group, one mind, one body, one living organism, one guilty mass. That is a completely erroneous approach.”
Said lawyer John O’Sullivan: “You have got 27 separate trials to worry about; 27 separate verdicts to consider.”
Lawyers argued that evidence in the case was largely circumstantial, that the accused men’s talk was not action, and that understanding the cultural context of the conversations was crucial.
Greg Barns, for Ezzit Raad, said there was a religious reason for an action by his client that the prosecution had claimed was evidence of being part of an “organisation” rather than a social group.
Raad had borrowed $1000 from the group’s “sandooq”, or fund of money, to pay a legal fine over a conviction for car theft. The prosecution claimed this was because he incurred the fine on behalf of the group, as the car theft was a joint exercise to raise money for jihad.
In fact, said Mr Barns, Raad had planned to go on the Haj (the pilgrimage to Mecca), and pilgrims were not allowed to attend it if they had a debt.
“Which side is right? You make up your mind.”
Lawyer David Brustman told the court that the sandooq existed for cultural and religious reasons only: “It is no more, no less, nothing other than a collection plate.”
Several lawyers argued that the paranoia of the men in covert intercepts – they talked about being followed and feared phones were bugged – had to be viewed against political developments at the time, particularly the passing of terror legislation that many Muslims feared would target them.
Several lawyers mentioned the youth of the defendants, most of whom were in their early 20s at the time of the alleged offences. Said Mark Taft, SC, of Abdullah Merhi: “Listen to the tone of his voice and you can hear a young person trying to understand the world and his place in that world.”
Julian McMahon, for Ahmed Raad, said of his client’s apparent insensitivity while watching a video of American soldiers shot by a sniper, “How much insensitivity is there among your typical Anglo-Saxon young adult male playing M15 and R-rated video games about car crashes – Auto Theft, or whatever it’s called?”
James Montgomery, SC, said the only direct evidence of any explosive was when an undercover agent took Benbrika to Mount Disappointment to “let the penny-bunger off” (showed him how to use fertiliser to create an explosion). Benbrika told no one else in the group of the lesson, Mr Montgomery said – “He is a one-man band.”
Mr Brustman said his client, Shoue Hammoud, had warned Benbrika at one stage: “Sheikh, we’ve done nothing, but just from the talk (inaudible) that’s what’s going to get us in trouble, I swear to Allah it is.”
Asked Mr Brustman, “How’s that for a prophetic statement?”
The trial continues.
GERARD MULLALY FOR MAJED RAAD:
There is still no law against what you think ¿ You have to cross the line of criminality, not the line of morality or decency … Majed Raad didn’t cross the line.”
JOHN O’SULLIVAN FOR SHANE KENT:
“When other people talk about him ¿ it’s gossip, what the law calls hearsay … It is not proof that Mr Kent has said or done anything.”
JAMES MONTGOMERY, SC, FOR HANY TAHA:
“He never has any weapon, never talks about a weapon, he’s never had a bomb, never talks about a bomb. Never part of any planning group that’s planning to blow up anything.”
MARK TAFT, SC, FOR ABDULLAH MERHI:
“The intercepted conversations ¿ show that Abdullah Merhi was fumbling for meaning and identity, not that he was committing to terrorism.”
BENJAMIN LINDNER FOR BASSAM RAAD:
“There are 19 pages of (jihadi) materials in this jury book. Not one of those pages was found in possession of Bassam Raad. Not one of those pages was found on a computer in the possession of Bassam Raad.”
JULIAN McMAHON FOR AHMED RAAD:
He did not belong to a terrorist organisation, did not intend to belong to a terrorist organisation.
Ahmed is not part of some fictitious, contrived, Crown-created ‘consultative committee’.”
DAVID BRUSTMAN FOR SHOUE HAMMOUD:
“No pledge or ‘bayat’ to any terrorist group or any leader of any terrorist group at all is admitted by Mr Hammoud. He completely denies the fact and indeed the entire concept of it.”
GREG BARNS FOR EZZIT RAAD:
In the conversation that led to the charge that he tried to make funds available to the organisation, he was “a reluctant participant and a doubting Thomas”.
TREVOR WRAIGHT FOR AIMEN JOUD:
“You will not hear anyone (on the covert recordings) use the phrase ‘violent jihad’ ¿ This group was not a terrorist organisation.”
ANTONY TROOD FOR AMER HADDARA:
“It would be a bizarre thing that a person could be guilty of an offence of being a member if they didn’t know what it was, your common sense would tell you that.”
NOLA KARAPANAGIOTIDIS FOR FADL SAYADI:
“This case is principally about words and beliefs or thoughts – not actions ¿ You might come to the view that he held some beliefs that you don’t necessarily agree with or you don’t like, but please don’t let that distract you.”

First published in The Age.

Jurors warned on portrayal of Muslims
ABDUL Nacer Benbrika was in charge of a group of alleged terrorists “pretty much in the way Peter Costello was in charge of the Liberal Party”, the Supreme Court has been told.
“He is a voice among many, and that’s all he ever is,” Benbrika’s lawyer Remy Van de Wiel, QC, said yesterday. “He is no leader. He is no more and no less than the man who is a resource person in terms of the religious basis of the frustration that the others feel.”
Benbrika is the alleged leader of 11 Muslim men charged with belonging to an organisation fostering or preparing terrorism in pursuit of violent jihad.
Several of the men face other terror-related offences. All have pleaded not guilty to all counts.
Mr Van de Wiel told jurors to take care interpreting comments in covert recordings of the alleged terrorists. He said the defendants were all men: “What do males do when they get together? . . . It’s the great Australian thing that they all do . . . They bullshit to each other. That’s what they do. Bravado, bluster, nonsense.
“They all want to be heroes and they all say things that none of them mean, to make themselves heroes in their own lunchtime.”
He said Australia had already seen the way “things can be blown up ridiculously” in terms of the “excesses of authorities in terms of Dr (Mohamed) Haneef”.
Mr Van de Wiel told the jury that Western culture’s portrayal of Arabs was often negative, and asked how many movies had an Arab hero. “Almost invariably, Arabs and Muslims are portrayed as what we might say in the cowboy movies as the black hats.” He said very little in Western news reports came from Muslim or Arab sources.
Mr Van de Wiel asked the jury to think about the reactions to world events of “people who live in a Muslim ghetto in Melbourne” and who regard other Muslims as their people.
He asked why Australia had sold wheat to Iraq while embargoing medicines needed by sick children, and why Australia had sent troops to Iraq to find weapons of mass destruction “which we all know never existed”.
He said it would be “very, very silly” to say that Osama bin Laden had orchestrated the September 11 attacks in the United States, as bin Laden had never claimed responsibility for them.
“American suffered an enormous blow to its pride. There it was, the world’s policeman . . . It was a shocking thing to do, to kill thousands of innocent people . . . It was a terrible thing to do, evil . . . But don’t forget America has done many evil things too.”
He said it was important to understand such perspectives to appreciate the way Benbrika analysed world events for the purposes of his comments.
Mr Van de Wiel told jurors the Bible on which they had sworn their oaths talked about “fanatical slaughter of whole cities, including innocents; a punitive,vengeful and war-mongering God; favouring of a chosen people to the detriment and sometimes the exclusion of all others; and even . . . books that deal with the killing of people who commit adultery”.
“It demands that women cover their heads and remain silent in certain situations. It objects to heathen judges judging disputes between Christians. It talks of terrible plagues which should be inflicted on unbelievers,” he said. “Not very different, you might think, not very different at all from what it is that these men are looking at in terms of their own literature.”
Earlier in yesterday’s hearing, prosecutor Richard Maidment, SC, told the court that defendant Amer Haddara had told Benbrika that he would rather martyr himself than get married and have children.
Benbrika had told Haddara there was no escape from marriage, and Haddara replied that “I can escape it because I want to escape this world”, Mr Maidment said.
The trial continues before Justice Bongiorno.

First published in The Age.

Terror leader wanted to ‘die for jihad’
ALLEGED terrorist leader Abdul Nacer Benbrika told two Sydney associates “we want to die for jihad” and “do maximum damage” to lives and to buildings, the Supreme Court was told yesterday.
Benbrika is alleged to have said, “everyone has to prepare himself. Or to die or be jailed. Allah know best. I don’t want this kind of life. Give that to them. But we have to be careful.
“We want to die for jihad. We do maximum damage, maximum damage. Damage their buildings with everything, and damage their lives just to show them. That’s what we are waiting for.”
He warned the men: “You be careful . . . Trust no one.”
His alleged conversation on 23 February, 2005 with the Sydney contacts – named only as “Khaled One” and “Abdul” – was covertly recorded by investigators.
Prosecutor Richard Maidment, SC, told the court that Khaled One and Abdul had previously attended a camp at Louth in NSW with several of the 12 Melbourne men, including leader Benbrika, who are being tried for terror offences. The men have pleaded not guilty to all charges.
Mr Maidment said Benbrika also told the Sydney men that he had refused to talk to ASIO agents who visited his home several days earlier. The prosecutor quoted Benbrika as saying: “They are dogs. Shouldn’t talk to them, even for normal questions, for, ‘How are you?’ I don’t answer you. Just get lost.”
Mr Maidment said several conversations recorded Benbrika talking about a 1600-page book on jihad that he wanted to print. Mr Maidment said he talked about it as “a good and dangerous book”.
Benbrika was asked by an unidentified male, “about dogma or something like that?”
Benbrika allegedly replied, “No, no, it’s about killing.”
Mr Maidment said Benbrika had also been recorded as telling several of his fellow accused it was important that the “brothers” (members of the group) not get scared.
Benbrika said that if anyone got caught, they could argue they were “young” and “naive”, Mr Maidment said.
“So instead of getting 10 years imprisonment, they get two years. That’s what he’s saying,” Mr Maidment said.
He also accused two of the men of colluding to lie to police who were investigating an outing the group had made to King Lake on 11 December 2004.
The trial continues before Justice Bernard Bongiorno.

First published in The Age.

WHEN Mohammed Hammoud called his son, Shoue, his son’s first question was: “What’s up at the mosque?”
Mr Hammoud said: “I heard about rumours, son. Are you involved in the police at all?”
He said someone had told him that “you are going to make a bomb, and you are going to blow Australia up, and the police are watching you”.
The father-son exchange was read to the Supreme Court yesterday by prosecutor Richard Maidment, SC, in the trial of 12 Melbourne men, including Shoue Hammoud, charged with terrorism offences.
In two reported conversations with his father that day, Shoue Hammoud repeatedly denied the bomb claims – “No, no, no, don’t worry . . . I swear to Allah that there’s nothing at all” – and promised to visit his father, who said: “God bless you, son. I was worried all morning.”
The call, on December 31, 2004, was followed later that day by a call to Shoue from his uncle, Ahmed Abboud, who told Shoue he had heard that two men had gone to Preston mosque and reported suspicions that someone was “making a bomb”.
Mr Abboud said that Sheikh Fehmi, of Preston, mosque had then called the police to report the concerns.
Mr Abboud asked his nephew: “What I hear, is it true, or is it wrong?”
Shoue Hammoud said: “It’s not true, mate.”
Mr Abboud demanded to know whether Hammoud was with “Abu Bakr” (Abdul Nacer Benbrika) or not. When Hammoud said he saw Benbrika often, Mr Abboud warned: “Well, my advice is to keep away of him . . . Just keep away of him because I hear he is a very dangerous thing, you know.”
Benbrika is the leader of the group alleged to have been fostering or preparing a terrorist act. Hammoud, Benbrika and the other 10 accused have pleaded not guilty to all charges.
Earlier that month, Mr Maidment said, accused Abdullah Merhi had gone to Benbrika’s house with two computer disks containing recipes for making bombs. Mr Maidment said that on another covert recording, Merhi said it was difficult to make “these type things . . . for example, close all phone lines around the whole area . . . make a big smokescreen”.
Mr Maidment said Benbrika warned Merhi: “Watch yourself . . . They will get you with this one.” To which, Merhi replied: “This is big, yeah . . . behind bars, for sure, this.”
The accused are Abdul Nacer Benbrika, 47, of Dallas; Shane Kent, 31, Meadow Heights; Majed Raad, 23, Coburg; Abdullah Merhi, 22, Fawkner; Aimen Joud, 23, Hoppers Crossing; Ahmed Raad, 24, Fawkner; Fadl Sayadi, 28, Coburg; Ezzit Raad, 26, Preston; Hany Taha, 33, Hadfield; Shoue Hammoud, 28, Hadfield; Bassam Raad, 26, Brunswick; and Amer Haddara, 28, Yarraville.
The trial continues.

First published in The Age.

THE youngest of 12 alleged terrorists asked his religious leader whether Muslims should kill John Howard and his family to pay the then prime minister back if his policies killed innocent Muslim families, a court was told yesterday.
Self-appointed sheikh Abdul Nacer Benbrika told Abdullah Merhi that Muslims were allowed to pay back “kuffr” – unbelievers – for wrongs they committed against Islam. “If they kill our kids, we kill . . .” he said.
But Merhi later told Benbrika he still had doubts about whether what they were discussing would please Allah: “I have to get stronger in the belief that it’s pleasing him.”
Benbrika: How can you get this doubt?
Merhi: . . . I am not perfect, sheikh.
Benbrika told him that “these kind of things” required people who were not scared and who did not care about “the terrestrial world”.
The men’s alleged exchanges were covertly taped by investigators and the conversation was played to the Victorian Supreme Court yesterday by prosecutor Richard Maidment, SC. Mr Maidment has previously told the court that Merhi had told Benbrika he was willing to take part in a terrorist act.
In the conversation, no specific act was mentioned, but Mr Maidment said that when any of the defendants talked about “doing something”, it was code for “commit a terrorist act”.
Benbrika warned Merhi to be patient and careful: “It has to be secretly. Watch yourself, because if you show them what you want” – (slapping noise) – “they gonna put them in – put us in jail.”
Merhi told Benbrika he did not want to wait 20 years, or even two years. He wanted to know whether, if he was sincere, Allah would “open the door” tonight, or in a month.
Benbrika told him to trust in Allah, who knew best, and not to act alone because such a person needed a “jemaah” (group) and a leader. He should not just kill “one, two or three”, Benbrika said, but should “do a big thing”.
Merhi: Like Spain?
Benbrika: That’s it.
Mr Maidment said this was a reference to bomb attacks on train travellers in Spain in 2004 that killed 191 and injured more than 1800.
Merhi asked whether Benbrika had seen pictures of what American soldiers were doing to women in Iraq.
These things needed to be exposed, he said.
Benbrika told him: “Here in Australia, when you do something, they stop to send the troop . . . If you kill – we kill here a thousand, the government is going to think.”
Merhi had complained that the group was taking too long to organise something, Mr Maidment said. He told the court that defendant Aimen Joud had told Benbrika: “Bring the tools, sheikh . . . If you don’t want us to run away, then prepare something.”
The 12 men are charged with intentionally being members of a terrorist organisation involved in the fostering or preparation of a terrorist act in pursuit of violent jihad.
Ten also face other terror-related charges. All have pleaded not guilty.
They are Abdul Nacer Benbrika, 47, from Dallas; Shane Kent, 31, of Meadow Heights; Majed Raad, 23, of Coburg; Abdullah Merhi, 22, of Fawkner; Aimen Joud, 23, of Hoppers Crossing; Ahmed Raad, 24, of Fawkner; Fadl Sayadi, 28, of Coburg; Ezzit Raad, 26, of Preston; Hany Taha, 33, of Hadfield; Shoue Hammoud, 28, of Hadfield; Bassam Raad, 26, of Brunswick; and Amer Haddara, 28, of Yarraville.
Mr Maidment said Bassam Raad had been covertly recorded trying to buy a gun. He said Raad’s contact had texted him saying, “9mm $4000”, and Raad texted back, “Too much.”
Discussions continued, Mr Maidment said, with the contact at one point remarking, “Now you want a .22 like Chopper Read?” and asking Raad whether he really knew what a .22 was.
Mr Maidment said an intelligence officer who infiltrated the group spoke at length to Benbrika about how he had experience of using fertiliser ingredients to make explosives.
He said Benbrika had asked to be taught all about it: “Bring me everything and show how to do it.”
Mr Maidment said members of the group had threatened to harm people they suspected of betraying them to authorities. Several conversations contained exchanges about how the alleged terrorists suspected they were being followed, or that their phones were bugged.
The prosecutor said they took precautions to avoid detection, including speaking only guardedly about their alleged plans for violent jihad.
The trial continues before Justice Bernard Bongiorno.
Transcript of covertly recorded conversation
Merhi (above): If, for example, John – John Howard kills innocent family Muslim, yeah?
Benbrika (right): Yeah.
Merhi: Do we, we will make transgress back to him, do we have to kill him and his family, or can we just (kill/tell) his people like, like ¿ (The Crown says this is inaudible; the defence says “meeting” is mentioned) people at the football?
Benbrika: If they kill our kids, we kill ¿ (Crown: inaudible/ defence: “our”) little kids.
Merhi: The innocent ones?
Benbrika: The innocent ones.
Merhi: Because –
Benbrika: Because he kills our innocent one (inaudible) ¿
Merhi: And we send the message back to ’em.
Benbrika: That’s it.
Merhi: Eye for an eye.

First published in The Age.

THE youngest of 12 alleged terrorists asked his religious leader whether Muslims should kill John Howard and his family to pay back the former prime minister if his policies killed innocent Muslim families.
The self-appointed sheik, Abdul Nacer Benbrika, told Abdullah Merhi that Muslims were allowed to pay back kuffr (unbelievers) for wrongs they commit against Islam. “If they kill our kids, we kill,” he said.
Merhi later told Benbrika he still had doubts about whether what they were discussing would please Allah: “I have to get stronger in the belief that it’s pleasing him.”
Benbrika: How can you get this doubt?
Merhi: I am not perfect, sheik.
Benbrika told him that “these kind of things” require people who are not scared and who do not care about “the terrestrial world”.
The men’s alleged exchanges were covertly taped by investigators and the conversation was played to the Victorian Supreme Court yesterday by the prosecutor Richard Maidment, SC.
Mr Maidment has previously told the court that Merhi had told Benbrika he was willing to take part in a terrorist act. In the conversation, no specific act was mentioned, but Mr Maidment claimed that when any of the defendants talked about “doing something” it was code for “commit[ting] a terrorist act”.
Benbrika warned Merhi to be patient and careful: “It has to be secretly. Watch yourself, because if you show them what you want” (slapping noise) “they gonna put them in .., put us in jail.”
Merhi told Benbrika he did not want to wait 20 years, or even two years. He wanted to know whether, if he was sincere, Allah would “open the door” tonight, or in a month. Benbrika told him to trust in Allah, who knew best, and not to act alone because such a person needed a jemaah (group) and a leader. He should not just kill “one, two or three”, Benbrika said, but should “do a big thing”.
Merhi: Like Spain?
Benbrika: That’s it.
Mr Maidment said this was a reference to bomb attacks on train passengers in Spain in 2004 that killed 191 people and injured more than 1800.
Merhi asked if Benbrika had seen pictures of what American soldiers were doing to women in Iraq; these things needed to be exposed, he said.
Benbrika: Here in Australia, when you do something, they stop to send the troop … If you kill – we kill here a thousand, the government is going to think.
Merhi had complained that the group was taking too long to organise something, Mr Maidment said. He told the court that another defendant, Aimen Joud, had told Benbrika: “Bring the tools, sheik … If you don’t want us to run away, then prepare something … prepare something and no one will run.”
All 12 Melbourne men are charged with intentionally being members of a terrorist organisation involved in the fostering or preparation of a terrorist act in pursuit of violent jihad. All have pleaded not guilty.
They are Abdul Nacer Benbrika, 47, from Dallas; Shane Kent, 31, Meadow Heights; Majed Raad, 23, Coburg; Abdullah Merhi, 22, Fawkner; Aimen Joud, 23, Hoppers Crossing; Ahmed Raad, 24, Fawkner; Fadl Sayadi, 28, Coburg; Ezzit Raad, 26, Preston; Hany Taha, 33, Hadfield; Shoue Hammoud, 28, Hadfield; Bassam Raad, 26, Brunswick; and Amer Haddara, 28, Yarraville.
The trial continues before Justice Bernard Bongiorno.

First published in The Age.

Car-stripping scheme alleged
ALLEGED terrorist Ezzit Raad was anxious about a stolen car being in his garage in case it was not “halal” – permitted under Islamic law – the Supreme Court heard yesterday.
When he expressed doubts that it was right for him to store the car, he was allegedly asked by another man, Ahmed Raad, “You will point a gun at (an unbeliever’s) head and shoot him but you will not put the stolen car here? . . . What’s wrong? What’s the difference?”
Prosecutor Richard Maidment, SC, yesterday read parts of the men’s alleged conversation to the court. He said Ezzit Raad did not respond to the gun-pointing remark with outrage but replied, “This is different, all right? Don’t put that with this.”
It was alleged that, as Ezzit Raad continued to protest about the car, a third man, Aimen Joud, told him that the mujahideen “brothers in Chechnya” also stole to support Allah’s cause: “You just see all those macho videos where they are all holding AKs and all shooting, you don’t see what they do behind . . . They don’t do it every single day, man, they do this.”
Mr Maidment said the men were involved in a car-stripping scheme to raise funds for an alleged terror organisation to which they belonged.
The three are among 12 Melbourne men charged with intentionally being members of a terrorist organisation involved in the fostering or preparation of a terrorist act. It is claimed the act or threat involved the use of a bomb or weapons in pursuit of violent jihad with the intention of coercing or intimidating the Government or the public. Ten of the men also face other terror-related charges.
The accused have all pleaded not guilty.
The court has previously been told that the group’s alleged leader, Abdul Nacer Benbrika, had wanted to kill 1000 people to try to force the Australian Government to stop sending troops to Iraq.
Mr Maidment yesterday said that in another covert recording in 2004, defendant Fadl Sayadi rang Lebanon from Melbourne and was told by a contact that his name had been given to Lebanese intelligence. “I heard they thought you belonged to a certain society, I don’t know which,” said the contact.
Mr Maidment said Sayadi replied, “F g hell!” He said Sayadi then called another member of the alleged terror group who was travelling overseas, telling him to get money together and “make up a story for your reason going there”.
Mr Maidment said Benbrika had told the men they were part of a “jemaah”, a word that he said meant “one who has truth”.
Mr Maidment said Benbrika left the Preston mosque because of disagreement over his views and was recorded saying, “‘Nobody told me to leave. They want me to talk as they want. They want to think the same. I go, forget it.”
Mr Maidment said that the group discussed suspicions that members of the mosque had reported them to authorities.
Mr Maidment told the jury, “This is not a social group. This is not the Preston light-reading club or prayer group. This is a group with plans for more expansive activities and aspirations that go well beyond any kind of ordinary social interaction between people who might have a common interest in model airplanes or golf.”
Accused are Abdul Nacer Benbrika, 47, from Dallas; Shane Kent, 31, Meadow Heights; Majed Raad, 23, Coburg; Abdullah Merhi, 22, Fawkner; Aimen Joud, 23, Hoppers Crossing; Ahmed Raad, 24, Fawkner; Fadl Sayadi, 28, Coburg; Ezzit Raad, 26, Preston; Hany Taha, 33, Hadfield; Shoue Hammoud, 28, Hadfield; Bassam Raad, 26, Brunswick; and Amer Haddara, 28, Yarraville.
The trial will continue on Monday before Justice Bernard Bongiorno and a jury of 15.

First published in The Age.

THE youngest member of an alleged terror group hand-wrote a will at the age of 19 and asked his “Muslim brothers” to fight jihad if the government tried to interfere with it, the Supreme Court was told yesterday.
Prosecutor Richard Maidment, SC, said Abdullah Merhi’s making a will in 2005 was “consistent with a person . . . pursuing violent jihad in a committed way and prepared to die as a martyr in the cause of Allah”.
Merhi is one of a group of 12 Melbourne men, allegedly led by Abdul Nacer Benbrika, accused of being members of an organisation that was fostering or preparing a terrorist act or threat that involved use of a bomb or weapons. Ten also face other terror charges. All have pleaded not guilty to all charges.
The court has previously heard that Benbrika had said he wanted the group to kill 1000 people to force the Australian government to stop sending troops to Iraq.
Mr Maidment yesterday took the jury through large folders that he said contained information about terrorist-related material found in several defendants’ possession, including:
· Videos of beheadings by terrorists.
· Handbooks on how to make bombs.
· Strategies for setting up an active terror cell.
· Lists of the joys awaiting Islamic martyrs in paradise.
He also showed the jury photographs of a training camp in NSW that some of the men allegedly attended in 2004.
Mr Maidment said phone intercepts recorded Shoue Hammoud calling his wife in October 2004 to ask her to pack him a bag. Their exchange continued:
“Where are you going?” – Going to Eden.
“What are you going to do there?” – Going terrorist training.
“What?” – Terrorist training.
“She presses him: ‘Don’t be stupid’,” said Mr Maidment.
Mr Maidment said police found an alleged training camp on a remote property in NSW where trees had bullet holes, and police dug up batteries and spark plugs that they believed made up an ignition device.
Mr Maidment said some of the group’s Islamic-library material argued that while suicide was not permitted in Islam, martyrdom was. It was promised that martyrs would have all their sins forgiven from the moment the first drop of their blood was spilled, would speed across the bridge over hell-fire to heaven and would be wed to 72 virgins in paradise.
Mr Maidment said some of the material argued that the only true meaning of jihad was physical fight. He said the alleged terror group often discussed what was and was not legal under Islam, and that Benbrika told them it was OK to steal or use credit card fraud to obtain money for jihad from infidels.
Mr Maidment said recordings would show that Benbrika had derided as stupid a journalist who had interviewed him on the ABC in 2005. Asked what he thought about killing innocent people, Benbrika had essentially replied that it was forbidden, Mr Maidment said.
A week later, he said, Benbrika told another accused that the reporter was “a dumbhead, because he didn’t ask the next question, ‘What do you really mean by innocent?’ And, of course, if he had asked that, then my answer might have been different or more revealing.”
Mr Maidment said, “What he meant was, of course, ‘I had my fingers crossed. What I really meant was that the Australian people who voted for John Howard couldn’t be regarded as innocent people, and therefore pursuit of violent jihad within Australia is permitted’.”
Abdullah Merhi, 22, is from Fawkner and Shoue Hammoud, 28, from Hadfield. The other accused are Benbrika, 47, Dallas; Shane Kent, 31, Meadow Heights; Majed Raad, 23, Coburg; Aimen Joud, 23, Hoppers Crossing; Ahmed Raad, 24, Fawkner; Fadl Sayadi, 28, Coburg; Ezzit Raad, 26, Preston; Hany Taha, 33, Hadfield; Bassam Raad, 26, Brunswick; and Amer Haddara, 28, of Yarraville.
Mr Maidment continues his opening today before Justice Bongiorno and a jury of 15.

First published in The Age.

‘If you kill a thousand, the Government . . . will listen’
Karen Kissane, Law and Justice Editor   ALLEGED Islamic terrorists in Melbourne talked of blowing up a football ground or a train station to inflict maximum damage and loss of life, the Supreme Court was told yesterday.
The alleged leader, Abdul Nacer Benbrika, told his followers that if they killed a thousand people, the Government would pay attention and stop sending troops to Iraq, prosecutor Richard Maidment, SC, told the jury.
“If you kill here a thousand, the Government is going to think, because if you get large numbers here, the Government will listen,” Benbrika allegedly said in a recorded conversation.
Mr Maidment was opening the Crown case against 12 men, including Benbrika, who are charged with intentionally being members of a terrorist organisation involved in the fostering or preparation of a terrorist act. It is alleged that the act or threat involved the use of a bomb or weapons in pursuit of violent jihad with the intention of coercing or intimidating the Government or the public. Ten of the men also face other terror-related charges.
The accused have all pleaded not guilty.
Mr Maidment said the group was infiltrated by an undercover officer known as SIO 39, who told the men he was a Muslim of Turkish background who wanted to pursue violent jihad.
The agent allegedly told Benbrika he knew how to make explosives from fertiliser and went with Benbrika to Mt Disappointment to demonstrate his skills using 500 grams of ammonium nitrate. Benbrika had asked how much it would take to blow up a large building and was told about 200 kilograms; then he asked the agent whether he could obtain up to 500 kilograms, Mr Maidment alleged.
Mr Maidment said Benbrika believed Australia to be a land at war, which meant Australians were fair game in pursuit of jihad. Asked by one of the accused whether terrorist activity pleased Allah, he allegedly replied: “You are pleasing him. Why? Because they are killing our brothers.”
Mr Maidment said: “Ben-brika taught it was permissible . . . to kill innocent people including women, children and the aged.” He said Benbrika believed “jihad” had only one meaning: fighting infidels, or those who did not believe in Allah.
Mr Maidment said his alleged followers made Ben-brika a pledge or “bay’at” and some of them contributed from their wages to a “sandooq”, a box or a common fund of money. The prosecutor claimed that credit card fraud and stealing cars that were stripped for parts were among other ways the group tried to raise funds to further its goals.
More than once, he said, members of the group expressed “violent intent” towards people they suspected were informing the authorities about them.
Mr Maidment said Benbrika was largely self-taught and, while he purported to be a Muslim sheikh able to teach Islamic law, “the Crown doesn’t suggest for a moment that the views expressed by Mr Benbrika properly reflect any aspect of the true Islamic religion”.
Mr Maidment said Benbrika many times urged his followers to secrecy, warning one: “If you show them what we want they are going to put us in jail.”
But he also told them that the work of the group could continue in jail, the prosecutor claimed.
Mr Maidment told jurors they would hear 482 conversations between the alleged terrorists that were covertly recorded by investigators.
He said defendant Abdullah Merhi offered himself to Benbrika as a participant in a terrorist act, and sought Benbrika’s advice as to whether he should offer himself overseas instead because the Melbourne group’s alleged plans were moving slowly.
Benbrika, 47, is from Dallas. The other accused are Shane Kent, 31, of Meadow Heights; Majed Raad, 23, of Coburg; Abdullah Merhi, 22, of Fawkner; Aimen Joud, 23, of Hoppers Crossing; Ahmed Raad, 24, of Fawkner; Fadl Sayadi, 28, of Coburg; Ezzit Raad, 26, of Preston; Hany Taha, 33, of Hadfield; Shoue Hammoud, 28, of Hadfield; Bassam Raad, 26, of Brunswick; and Amer Haddara, 28, of Yarraville.
Mr Maidment continues his opening today before Justice Bongiorno and a jury of 15.

First published in The Age.