Sharia Alert from Brave New Democratic Iraq: "Vigilantes wage war against Basra women: Extremists beat, kill females seen as not sufficiently Muslim, police chief says," by Jay Price and Ali Omar Al Basri for McClatchy Newspapers (thanks to all who sent this in):
BASRA, Iraq — Women in Basra have become the targets of a violent campaign by religious extremists, who leave more than 15 female bodies scattered around the city each month, police officers say.Maj. Gen. Abdel Jalil Khalaf, the commander of Basra’s police, said Thursday that self-styled enforcers of religious law threatened, beat and sometimes shot women who they believed weren’t sufficiently Muslim.
“This is a new type of terror that Basra is not familiar with,” he said. “These gangs represent only themselves, and they are far outside religious, forgiving instructions of Islam.”
Often, he said, the “crime” is no more than wearing Western clothes or not wearing a head scarf.
Before the U.S.-led invasion in 2003, Iraqi women had had rights enshrined in the country’s constitution since 1959 that were among the broadest of any Arab or Islamic nation. However, while the new constitution says that women are equal under the law, critics have condemned a provision that says no law can contradict the “established rulings” of Islam as weakening women’s rights.
The New Dark Ages are today spreading to more and more corners of the Earth. The question is, will we be able to find a political Edison who can hit reinvent the switch and shed some light on this most pressing matter? Or will we see a one world UN Caliphate? There are times I just feel an overwhelming sense of impending doom. As I and others have commented, I now fully understand how Hitler was appeased and allowed to increase his power, instead of having it taken away early in the game. While the bill with islam is due now, it's a question of: Do we pay now, or do we pay more later? All I see from so many leaders throughout the West is a determined desire to pass the buck, shortchanging our future, while maintaining the fiction of islam as worshipping the same god and being a 'great religion of peace'. This current political mindset will force us regular Joes and Janes to pay more dearly later as a result of such uneducated horsesh*t and its ignorance of the lessons of history.
Maj. Gen. Abdel Jalil Khalaf must be reading his "islam" from another Qur'an.
This falls squarely on Zalmay Khalilizad, now US Ambassador to the UN.
First he stood idly by (as did the State Department) while repugnancy clauses were inserted into the consitution of Afghanistan, his country of birth, absolutely knowing that they usher in complete control of the judiciary by shari'a courts—and result in the loss of all rights of women. Then, while ambassador to Iraq, he let another constitution go through with repugnancy clauses, over American objections which were not stated that strongly. If they had been, it wouldn't have happened that way, because the Iraqis wouldn't have been able to stand up to a threat of American withdrawal if they didn't act more honorably. Now he's our Ambassador to the UN.
The bottom line is that any repugnancy clause—"no law shall be made that is repugnant to Islam"—instantly threatens free speech, minority and women's rights, and rights of non-Muslims.
Just one of many good notes on this from a book called "Radical Islam's Rules: The Worldwide Spread of Extreme Shari'a Law", this one by Nina Shea in the concluding chapter, p. 207:
"With U.S. support, the Supreme Court of Afghanistan was given over to proponents of extreme shari'a, who have lost no time in applying blasphemy laws and issuing broad edits against various forms of expression, including movies and female singing."
And (also Shea) ...
"...the State Department argued to me taht Afghanistan's bill of rights need not assert the right to individual religious freedom becase '99.9 percent of the population is Muslim.' This implies that Muslims neither want nor need religious freedom. In fact, if a government like Afghanistan's ties religion to politics, there cannot be political freedom without religious freedom."
Nina Shea wrote this in 2005. Things are much worse now and the mistakes have been duplicated in Iraq, to even worse effect.
Going into Iraq half-heartedly has led to this Administration brainlessly agreeing to set up am "Islamic state" which, by its nature, will be anti-American.
Good plan.
Really worth the effort, treasure and blood.
Ditto, Afghanistan.
Great plan.
Why did we get rid of Saddam? I forgot.
The bravest Iraqi Blogger of them all lives in
Basra, and her pseudonym is Queen Amidala. She's a Chaldean Christian, who along with her brothers, takes care of her elderly parents, who unfortunately waited too long to leave. One of these days I am going to do a profile on her; sometimes I wonder if it will be a memorial. The fear, fear, fear is very palatable in her writings...
Actually they could have made the headline shorter and still kept the meaning:
Women in Basra beaten, killed if seen
You might be an islamophobe if you think beating women is a terrible thing.
"...self-styled enforcers of religious law threatened, beat and sometimes shot women who they believed weren’t sufficiently Muslim...."
....and just why would any woman want to become Muslim?......Islam has nothing to offer them.....really, Islam has nothing to offer....
Yes, and remember recently when Britain was twitting the US, claiming that things were so much more civilized in Basra than they were in the rest of Iraq?
I don't believe that our staying in Iraq is any sort of answer, but this is surely a foretaste of the horror Iraq is likely to become when there are no brakes on Muslim behavior.
Hey, stuff happens. Saddam is gone; that's the important thing.
So let's do a quick round up shall we?
a) US soldiers dying so that Iraq has a Koran based constitution
b) US soldiers protecting islamist politicians in the Green Zone
c) Christians and other Infidels left about to be wiped out
d) Basra, Iraq's second city, is the world's number one place for misogynists.
A trillion bucks well spent.
Iraq and Afghanistan, two lovely islamic states created by none other than Mr. Democracy, GWB, with the help of his illustrious and esteemed advisors. I hope he is proud of his great accomplishments, and I especially hope that his brand of democracy does not spread beyond these two bastions of mob rule backed up by sharia.
But what is "democracy", really? Democracy and freedom are not synonomous, but most people think they are.
"But what is "democracy", really?
Posted by: Susanp"
Mob rule......THe United States of America is not a democracy, it is a republic....something most people do not even know....most people (including the elected politicians) cannot tell you the difference....
Republic vs. Democracy- Our Survival Depends On Knowing The Difference
Thu, 2006-06-01 22:22 — Andrew Nappi
I submit to you that the word Republic is becoming just as offensive to even religious people as God is to non believers.
When was the last time you heard this President,or any politician refer to this nation as a Republic?
Fifty years ago even a school boy would have known the difference. Today,the establishment would have you believe that there is no difference.
In the Pledge of Allegiance we all pledge allegiance to our Republic, not to a democracy. "Republic" is the proper description of our government, not "democracy."
The reason for this disinformation is that the difference is so great,ignorance of it assures the eventual elimination of our inalienable rights. By dumbing down the public as to the significant legal differences between the two,that same public is more easily fleeced of its rights.
The Constitution guarantees to every state a Republican form of government (Art. 4, Sec. 4). No state may join the United States unless it is a Republic. Our Republic is one dedicated to "liberty and justice for all."
Minority individual rights are the priority.
The people have natural rights instead of civil rights.
The great advances by socialism into our education and political system has minimized the concept of natural rights and put so called civil rights into the fore. World socialist organizations such as the United Nations also support "civil rights" or "human rights" in place of natural rights.
In our Republic,the people are protected by the Bill of Rights from the majority. One vote in a jury can stop all of the majority from depriving any one of the people of his rights; this would not be so if the United States were a democracy.
In a pure democracy 51 beats 49[%]. In a democracy there is no such thing as a significant minority: there are no minority rights except civil rights (privileges) granted by a condescending majority.
Simply stated, a democracy is a dictatorship of the majority. Socrates was executed by a democracy: though he harmed no one, the majority found him intolerable.
Republican government is one which the powers of sovereignty are vested in the people and are exercised by the people, either directly, or through representatives chosen by the people, to whom those powers are specially delegated.
Democracy is a form of government in which the sovereign power resides in and is exercised by the whole body of free citizens directly or indirectly through a system of representation, as distinguished from a monarchy, aristocracy, or oligarchy.
Notice that in a Democracy, the sovereignty is in the whole body of the free citizens. The sovereignty is not divided to smaller units such as individual citizens. To solve a problem, only the whole body politic is authorized to act. Also, being citizens, individuals have duties and obligations to the government. The government's only obligations to the citizens are those legislatively pre-defined for it by the whole body politic.
In a Republic, the sovereignty resides in the people themselves, whether one or many. In a Republic, one may act on his own or through his representatives as he chooses to solve a problem. Further, the people have no obligation to the government; instead, the government being hired by the people, is obliged to its owner, the people. (My how the tail has come round to wag the dog!)
The people own the government agencies. The people did "ordain and establish this Constitution," not for themselves, but "for the United States of America."
In delegating powers to the government agencies the people gave up none of their own. (See Preamble of U.S. Constitution). This adoption of this concept is why the U.S. has been called the "Great Experiment in self government."
The People govern themselves, while their agents (government agencies) perform tasks listed in the Preamble for the benefit of the People.
The citizens of the United States are totally subject to the laws of the United States
In a democracy, the Citizens enjoy only government granted privileges (also known as civil rights). The United Nations Declaration of Human Rights and the Iraqi Constitution are both examples of civil rights and not natural rights.
In both documents,the government reserves the right to withdraw any rights granted to the people.
In our Republican form of government,these rights being natural and inalienable, cannot be withdrawn by government.
However, by not teaching this in school civics classes; and by politicians who want absolute power always using the word democracy,it is doubtful that many people under fifty know there is a difference any longer.
This ignorance makes the transition from natural or inalienable rights to granted civil rights easier.In turn the withdrawal of granted rights becomes easier and inevitable.
The civics text promoted by NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND is called "We The People" and it is awash in the term democracy. We The People clubs have spun off to promote and support democratic-not Republican government.The culmination of this three series text book is that the student,after being indoctrinated in elementary,middle and high school by this pro democracy,human and civil rights text,is left with the impression that our nation may be better served by adopting the UN Declaration of Human Rights and scrapping the US constitution.
This change has also been expressed by William Jefferson Clinton,former US president and potential UN Secretary General.When today's elementary students are adults,they will likely see no value in inalienable rights and be content to accept whatever rights government grants to them. The nanny state,or statist society will be complete.
President Bush has used the excuse for his imperialism abroad and the diluting of our founding political heritage at home as spreading democracy. He is without concept of our Republican heritage. Adherence to it would mean stumbling blocks for his handlers at the Council on Foreign Relations and those in Congress who are complicit with them.
While he is sacrificing our military for democracy,our own Army once made the difference between a democracy and a republic part of a soldiers civic awareness. The army's old guide reads as follows:
"Prepared under the direction of the Chief of Staff.
CITIZENSHIP
This manual supersedes Manual of Citizenship Training The use of the publication "The Constitution of the United States," by Harry Atwood, is by permission and courtesy of the author.
CITIZENSHIP Democracy:
A government of the masses. Authority derived through mass meeting or any other form of "direct" expression. Results in mobocracy. Attitude toward property is communistic--negating property rights. Attitude toward law is that the will of the majority shall regulate, whether is be based upon deliberation or governed by passion, prejudice, and impulse, without restraint or regard to consequences. Results in demogogism, license, agitation, discontent, anarchy
CITIZENSHIP Republic:
Authority is derived through the election by the people of public officials best fitted to represent them. Attitude toward law is the administration of justice in accord with fixed principles and established evidence, with a strict regard to consequences. A greater number of citizens and extent of territory may be brought within its compass. Avoids the dangerous extreme of either tyranny or mobocracy. Results in statesmanship, liberty, reason, justice, contentment, and progress. Is the "standard form" of government throughout the world. A republic is a form of government under a constitution which provides for the election of
(1) an executive and (2) a legislative body, who working together in a representative capacity, have all the power of appointment, all power of legislation, all power to raise revenue and appropriate expenditures, and are required to create (3) a judiciary to pass upon the justice and legality of their government acts and to recognize (4) certain inherent individual rights.
Take away any one or more of those four elements and you are drifting into autocracy. Add one or more to those four elements and you are drifting into democracy.
Atwood: Superior to all others.--Autocracy declares the divine right of kings; its authority can not be questioned; its powers are arbitrarily or unjustly administered. Democracy is the "direct" rule of the people and has been repeatedly tried without success. Our Constitutional fathers, familiar with the strength and weakness of both autocracy and democracy, with fixed principles definitely in mind, defined a representative republican form of government. They "made a very marked distinction between a republic and a democracy * * * and said repeatedly and emphatically that they had founded a republic."
"By order of the Secretary of War: C.P. Summerall, Major General, Chief of Staff. Official: Lutz Wahl, Major General, The Adjutant General."
I know that the war on the middle class has made economic and immigration issues much more top of mind awareness. I suggest to you though,that the restoration of the Republic,and with it the middle class, cannot occur until each of us understands that we are in fact, a republic. If we give up that distinction, we give up our rights. After that we are no more than sheeple to be herded,sheared and slaughtered.
Yours in God and Liberty,
Andrew Nappi,Americanist
You've gotta laugh. Under Saddam, women had many rights. Now they're well and truly f*&^&d.
Operation "Iraqi Freedom". Every Dhimmi's dream.