Libya New Leader Calls for State Based on Islamic law

[scribblet]

Hmm..... not exactly what I thought Canada was fighting for in Libya. We don't expect a full fledged western style democracy, but not a State based on Sharia law which is usually run by religious hard liners. He says no extremists allowed. Wonder if there will be an election, and is body of law based on Sharia inherently threatening to the west ?

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2011/09/2011912214219388500.html

Abdul-Jalil, who served as Gaddafi's justice minister before joining the rebels at the uprising's start, defined the government he says the NTC hopes to create.

"We strive for a state of the law, for a state of prosperity, for a state that will have Islamic sharia law the basis of legislation," he said.

Younes Abouyoub, research scholar at Columbia University, told Al Jazeera that the speech was "important" and "extremely timely" because schisms have begun to emerge among those who supported the toppling of Gaddafi.

"I think he [Abdul-Jalil] wanted to make sure that people understand that this revolution is not going to steer the state towards either a liberal, western-style state or an extremist-style like some people would like to have - which I believe is a minority."

cont..

[bloodyminded]

Hmm..... not exactly what I thought Canada was fighting for in Libya. We don't expect a full fledged western style democracy, but not a State based on Sharia law which is usually run by religious hard liners. He says no extremists allowed. Wonder if there will be an election, and is body of law based on Sharia inherently threatening to the west ?

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2011/09/2011912214219388500.html

cont..

I don't see how Sharia elsewhere can be "inherently threatening to the West."

[Topaz]

Just wait, the first time the New government tries to do something different with the oil and the prices like Gaddafi threaten to do, NATO will be back in there.

[Sir Bandelot]

Just wait, the first time the New government tries to do something different with the oil and the prices like Gaddafi threaten to do, NATO will be back in there.

Then the US will once again demonstrate its ability to exert power and influence over others. You know, the stuff that some Americans doubt ever happens.

[Bob]

This shouldn't surprise anyone, majority Muslim countries are almost exclusively barbaric religious societies.

[bush_cheney2004]

Then the US will once again demonstrate its ability to exert power and influence over others. You know, the stuff that some Americans doubt ever happens.

Oh..it happens allright...you're just jealous that the Americans can do it better than Canada. US presidents do not have to cajole in a tent like PM Martin did in Libya.

Edited September 15, 2011 by bush_cheney2004

[Sir Bandelot]

Oh..it happens allright...you're just jealous that the Americans can do it better than Canada. US presidents do not have to cajole in a tent like PM Martin did in Libya.

The President won't do that, but will send his emissary, like Rumpsfeld did for Reagan in Iraq. No tent there, but the opportunity for a photo-op with Sadman could not be missed.

Then again, I don't recall seeing any photos of a Canadian PM holding hands and smooching with Saudi Arabians... must be a uniquely American method of cajoling.

[Bob]

The President won't do that, but will send his emissary, like Rumpsfeld did for Reagan in Iraq. No tent there, but the opportunity for a photo-op with Sadman could not be missed.

Then again, I don't recall seeing any photos of a Canadian PM holding hands and smooching with Saudi Arabians... must be a uniquely American method of cajoling.

Here.

Just for fun.

Edited September 15, 2011 by Bob

[scouterjim]

Hmm..... not exactly what I thought Canada was fighting for in Libya. We don't expect a full fledged western style democracy, but not a State based on Sharia law which is usually run by religious hard liners. He says no extremists allowed. Wonder if there will be an election, and is body of law based on Sharia inherently threatening to the west ?

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2011/09/2011912214219388500.html

cont..

Wow. An Islamic country run using Islamic law. Who'da thunk it?

[scribblet]

Shariah law is barbaric and even in a 'moderate' Islamic society women lose, not what we should be helping them establish.

[Bob]

Shariah law is barbaric and even in a 'moderate' Islamic society women lose, not what we should be helping them establish.

My position is, why should we care about what they do to themselves, as long as it doesn't involve us? Unfortunately, of course, it DOES involve us, in several ways...

As far as the women, who cares? Maybe a lot of them like the subjugation. Take a moment to ask yourself how many hijabs/burkas/niqabs you see in any given day in your ordinary life. If you live in an urban area in Canada, chances are you're seeing a lot of wrapped up female Muslims. Their numbers are continually growing, and of course all we hear is the deafening silence of the "conservatives" of Canada.

[dre]

...you're just jealous that the Americans can do it better than Canada

[eyeball]

Shariah law is barbaric and even in a 'moderate' Islamic society women lose, not what we should be helping them establish.

Too bad democracy was strangled in the Muslim world when Mossadegh was overthrown. The rest of it has pretty much been falling all over itself ever since.

Oh well, you know what they say about the best laid schemes of mice and men.

[guyser]

If you live in an urban area in Canada, chances are you're seeing a lot of wrapped up female Muslims.

Is 'a lot" two or three or none?

[dre]

More "Blowback".

When we pick sides in a civil war and start raining down bombs theres usually unintended consquences.

In this case we might end up replacing a relatively managable toady and stooge with a theocratic regime. Thats how we ended up with religious hardliners in Iran.

[Sir Bandelot]

Here.

Just for fun.

No tongues! No tongues!

Someone tell George...

[GostHacked]

Is 'a lot" two or three or none?

With the number of Muslims I see in Ottawa, I am surprised this place has not been rendered 3rd-world-like by now ...... /sarcasm

I got one gal in my building who has only that slit open on the eyes, everything else covered.

But in the case of Egypt and Libya, the western powers have taken down Mubarek and Gadaffi, (both western backed leaders at one point in the past) and the void that is there will be filled by Muslim Brotherhood organization. Now if we look at it, this entity that is the Muslim Brotherhood (previously lead by Al-Zawarhi who mentored Bin Laden) is not the better option. Its the same as saying that Iraq is better off now (daily bombings and attacks within Iraq) than under Saddam.

[Bob]

Is 'a lot" two or three or none?

It's a lot more than that. It shouldn't take longer than about fifteen minutes of driving, in say, Ottawa, and maybe a couple of stops in grocery stores to see many, many more than one or two hijabs. Is there an upper limit in your mind of what percentage of women wearing hijabs you're willing to tolerate? 5%? 15%? 50%?

Edited September 15, 2011 by Bob

[dre]

It's a lot more than that. It shouldn't take longer than about fifteen minutes of driving, in say, Ottawa, and maybe a couple of stops in grocery stores to see many, many more. Is there an upper limit in your mind of what percentage of women wearing hijabs you're willing to tolerate? 5%? 15%? 50%?

Who cares?

[Bob]

Who cares?

So you're fine living in a city or country where five, fifteen, fifty, or one-hundred percent of women are wearing hijabs?

[GostHacked]

So you're fine living in a city or country where five, fifteen, fifty, or one-hundred percent of women are wearing hijabs?

I already live in a country where the number of women wearing hijabs falls within one of your defined percentages. I suspect even Israel falls into your defined percentages.

[bud]

Shariah law is barbaric and even in a 'moderate' Islamic society women lose, not what we should be helping them establish.

curious to know what it is about sharia law that is barbaric towards women. the first source i looked at was from wikipedia and the only difference i see as far as the rules it he amount of inheritance a woman would receive as opposed to her brothers. otherwise, women can do pretty much anything men can do.

so tell me what it is about sharia law and its relation to women that disturbs you.

Edited September 16, 2011 by bud

[Bob]

I already live in a country where the number of women wearing hijabs falls within one of your defined percentages. I suspect even Israel falls into your defined percentages.

What's the threshold of what you're willing to tolerate? That's the question.

[GostHacked]

What's the threshold of what you're willing to tolerate? That's the question.

They can wear whatever they want. Does not bother me one bit actually.

[dre]

So you're fine living in a city or country where five, fifteen, fifty, or one-hundred percent of women are wearing hijabs?

Im fine living in a city where 100% of women wear what they want. Im not as hung up on fassion as you me thinks.