Libyan draft Constitution: "Islam is the Religion of the State, and the principal source of legislation is Islamic Jurisprudence (Sharia)"

folks: this should not come as a surprise. most if not all muslims countries have little or no expirience with democracy. they have to taste this sh.. system they call Islamic rule. once they taste it, they then realize what a piece of sh... it si and then they will try to get rid of it. like they are doing in Iran, it took 33 years. this is a process. islamists are very organized as they were in Iran.
M

Exactly, and hope miram r is right, sooner than later. Throwing the yoke of izlam slavery off their backs is a heroic call, beyond them, so far.

Our Western academic institutions are now legitimizing Islamist thought as a source of understanding and a conduit of information originating from the Creator. A travesty. The Qur'an transmits neither the will, the intentions, nor the purpose of our created human existence from the Creator. Few voices state this dilemna.

Jamadagnii wrote:

Professor Azizah Y. al-Hibri...discusses the influences of the Quran and early Muslim history on Thomas Jefferson and the Founding Fathers. Listen as Dr. al-Hibri explains the implications of the Quran on U.S. Constitutional principles from freedom of religion to the separation of church and state.
.................................

What utter crap. Thomas Jefferson read the Qur'an so that he could better understand the Muslims who were pirating our ships and kidnapping and enslaving their crews off the Mediterranean coast of Africa.

The *only* important influence Islam had on the young republic was forcing our hand early to fund and build a navy in order to defend our citizens from the Barbary Pirates.

U.S. Constitutional elements were derived from Judeo-Christian principles, English common law, and Enlightenment philosophy—most certainly *not* Islam.

Thanks for the link, Jamadagnii. Watched it all. What a deluded woman. She reminded me of an Irshad Manji in middle age making arguments for Islam, which are really nothing but excuses for Mo's warped system of belief. Pathetic.

Kurt, the fate of Aztec religion and culture--along with ALL the indigenous cultures of most of the Western Hemisphere--was sealed when an African slave in Cortez' entourage, a man name Esteban, fell ill in the city of Tenochtitlan. Shortly afterwards, Bernal Diaz del Castillo, the crhonicler of the conquest, noted that the Indians in Tenochtitlan started sickening and dying right and left. It was smallpox, to which the indigenous peoples of the Americas had none of the immunities which peoples of the Old World had developed.

The end of Islam is going to require a major rejuvenation of the Western world, and an undoing of the pall which the Marxist myth has cast over it. Only then will Westerners have the heart to fight back.

Hello Wellington,

I have to object to your characterization of Irshad Manji, a person I admire very much for her humanity and courage:

She reminded me of an Irshad Manji in middle age making arguments for Islam, which are really nothing but excuses for Mo's warped system of belief. Pathetic.

Let me cite one Islamic website which despises Manji, perhaps for different reasons than you do:

Irshad Manji’s polemics have all but been declared the *true* version of Islam by the West, and is now being shoved down the throats of one billion Muslims. But, if you think that the Western media will give equal time for qualified Muslims to present a counter view or to at least defend their religion from Irshad Manji’s smears, you can forget it. Only like minded or “progressive”, “Uncle Tom” Muslims are allowed by the media to represent Islam, even though these people are condemned and loathed by the overwhelming majority of Muslims around the world.

But, we at ExamineTheTruth.com have a few tricks up our sleeves as we decided to meet Irshad’s mighty propaganda machine head on and expose the lies and deception of her “project Ijtihad”

http://www.examinethetruth.com/manjism/Irshad_Manji_propaganda.htm

In point of fact, one might disagree with Manji's hopefulness with respect to the redeemability of Islam, and still admire her as a person. A posting by Fjordman quotes an Islamic authority who questions the basis of Manji's claims regarding the flexibility of Ijtihad, but still admires Manji as a person.

"Manji is correct that ijtihad is an established principle in traditional Islamic theology, and it is also correct that the emphasis on and freedom to exercise ijtihad among Islamic jurists has varied throughout the ages. Especially during phases when Islam expanded and conquered other highly developed societies, the need for ijtihad, re-thinking of traditional views, to solve legal problems that the Koran and the hadith didn't prescribe unambiguous solutions to, increased. However, there are strict rules for the use of ijtihad, and even a superficial knowledge of what it is about will reveal that ijtihad cannot possibly be what Manji claims it to be. If Manji were right, any Muslim could rationalize almost anything and then present the result as Islamic jurisprudence. Simple logic indicates that this cannot be true."

http://www.siotw.org/modules/AMS/article.php?storyid=59

Irshad Manji is as big a taqiyya slinger as moustafa zayed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzpwTvAmi7U

Her modus operandi may be different but her motives are the same.

Sorry RonaldB, again we disagree. Irshad Manji, for me, is a classic example of someone trying to put lipstick on a pig and proceeding henceforth to call it Miss America. And while I respect Fjordman, I can't even admire Manji as a person as he does. She's ultimately an apologist for a spiritual totalitarian system, Islam, which is inimical to liberty. Nope, I have nothing for Manji. I would also add that I think she's an intellectual lightweight, though I don't hold this against her, just her defending the indefensible----Islam.

I hope you're not being overly optimistic about Iran, Miriam. How many Iranians don't really mind Islamic rule per se, they just want more freedom than they have right now? I don't know what to think where Iran is concerned.
As for Libya, why would ANYONE be surprised that a tribal, (primarily) Arabic, Islamic people want sharia as part of their constitution? Islam is more than religious law. It's a form of government. What OIC member would actually promote freedom of religion for non-Muslim people? Some of them don't even promote freedom of religion for different Muslim sects, let alone non-Muslims.
These may be democracies but that doesn't mean they'll protect minorities in their midst. The majority are Muslims. Their view of democracy is that the majority rules.

I agree completely with what you have said. I was shocked to see how this "authority" not only is teaching these untruths to unsuspecting students which is unfortunate enough, but because she is also a recent Obama appointee to US Commission on International Religious Freedom. I shutter to think how she will obfuscate Qur'anic teachings to defend the"misunderstanders" of Islam around the world.

Well, remember, I didn't say she was right or even terribly smart. I just said she was admirable. She does not whitewash the evils of Islam. Read her book. I admit she is sidestepping the question of whether terror and oppression are part and parcel of the basic theology of Islam. But, she doesn't deny it either.

I think if you're going to characterize someone as evil, like Dr. Azizah al-Hibri, who really IS a shill for Islam, and who really believes that Sharia law is divine, an analogy with Irshad Manji just doesn't work.

I don't believe it is necessary to demonize everyone with whom one disagrees, even if the disagreement is profound.

What Manji does is to proclaim that there is specifically an interpretation of Islam that motivates terrorists and oppressors. She says the terrorists derive their world view from Islam. She doesn't deny the connection of Islam with terrorism. She thinks that it is possible for Islam to exist without terrorism and without oppression. One need not agree with her on these points to concede that her expressed views are what she genuinely believes.

So beautifully said Wellington! And oh so factually true.

On or off topic, what is revealed here on Mobama, just sucks (pardon my disgust and my inelegent terms):

http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/p18796.xml

This so badly turns me off, on such a pathetic, dumb, ignorant, hopeless, traitor, all he does is play, as a creton zombie kid, and lie. 20 years with Wright, how he loves America, sarc/off, now this c***. And to think Michelle just finally got proud of America, how sweet! sarc/off

And Perry playing huggy huggy, is no better. And Christie, also, simian saying, he see and hear no evil. Romney no better. What a mess. And why the Fox is saying perry is so whoopedeedo, I can't see, at all. I'm worried Fox is going mainstream media, now that they lost Beck!

Sure looks like too many suckers in America, so far. I'm proud of America, deeply, but concerned.

My God, I nearly accidentally killed a liberal the other day, I mentioned something apalling about Obummer to an old man at an event, and his eyes got big, his face flushed, he didn't speak for a moment, I thought he was about to blow, or implode or something, or have a heart attack, wow! Good thing he didn't have a hat on, or it would have blown off his head with the head of steam he built up right quick. He finally actually spoke, some unbelievable drivel, sounding much like he was quoting Obummer about it's all Bush's fault, and the quake, tsunami, etc. When he actually finally asked me what I thought needed to be done, or could be done, he cut me off just like an interviewer. And I had my talking points in a row, too. We couldn't talk. Like I said, what a mess.

"Is there a way to render Islam the religion to a fate similar to the Incan, Mayan, and Aztec religions? To render the thoughts and beliefs in mind irrelevant to the daily lives of so many people? I believe so."

Kurt;

Thinking about this, one way would be to try to phoenix, to rebuild one, say, the Astec "faith". Make a request to build a Astec temple, right in N.Y. Even request to take prison killers off the hands of the state, to use as a offering to the Sun god, all under the banner of religion.

It may put the trouble of a rogue faith like islam in a better framework for rejection.

Professor Azizah Y. al-Hibri does not explain WHY Mohammed had to wage wars to spread Islam. Don't tell me they were all defensive wars because that is simply not true. Raiding, looting, pillaging and living off the wealth of the conquered dhimmis if they were tolerated was their way of life and that is the example Mohammed set for his followers.

Jamadagnii wrote:

I shutter to think how she will obfuscate Qur'anic teachings to defend the"misunderstanders" of Islam around the world.
.......................

As do I, Jamadagnii. How anyone can swallow this idiocy, even if they know nothing about the history or texts of Islam, can only be explained through a desperate desire to be lied to.

Anyone who pays the slightest attention to current events, and the violent and baleful influence of Islam, cannot but realize that there is something *very* troubling about this creed.

I posit the urge to believe this blatant whitewashing is mostly about fear.

"Please, Mommy, tell me there's nothing scary out there".

And all too many Muslim apologists and Taqiyya artists are more than happy to oblige...