To the Shores of Tripoli
Name a single Arab or Islamic state, which, after a revolution that has overthrown a dictator, came to embrace political pluralism, religious tolerance and equal rights for women.
You can't, can you?
The U.S. State Department publishes an annual report on human rights practices in Arab states (http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/). It consistently finds all are ruled by variations of dictatorial regimes that oppress their people, deny basic freedoms of press, speech, due process and are intolerant of any faith other than Islam, punishing converts to other faiths (a capital offense in some Islamic nations) and anyone who shares other faiths with their people.
The Arab Human Development Report, sponsored by the United Nations Development Programme and authored by Arab scholars, examined the world's seven regions. It ranks Arab countries lowest according to their "freedom score."
What is the popular definition of insanity? Isn't it repeating the same mistakes and expecting different results?
After months of uprisings in Arab nations from Egypt to Yemen, we are now faced with one in Libya, which appears to have ousted Moammar Gadhafi. As with the other nations engaged in revolution, what follows is yet to be determined. So is a judgment on whether the replacements will be any better than their predecessors.
In Libya, the National Transition Council (NTC) has published online what purports to be a draft constitution for the new state. It contains much that sounds good and at least one section that ought to be cause for serious concern. The good stuff includes "guarantees," such as, "The state shall guarantee for woman all opportunities which shall allow her to participate entirely and actively in political, economic and social spheres." (Article 6) And "The State shall guarantee for non-Muslims the freedom of practicing religious rights and shall guarantee respect for their systems of personal status." (Article 1)
There is much else to commend in the draft constitution, but then there is this: "Islam is the religion of the State and the principal source of legislation is Islamic Jurisprudence (Sharia)." (Article 1)
The legal system in Saudi Arabia is based on Sharia law. More than two-dozen other countries operate according to at least some aspects of Sharia law. None of them is known for any of the principles stated in the pluralistic-sounding Libyan draft constitution. By their fruits you shall know them and the fruit in countries where Sharia law is the legal standard is rotten when it comes to tolerance, religious pluralism, a free and independent press and equal rights for women.
It is no jump to an unwarranted conclusion to say if Sharia law is the objective of the TNC, as expressed in its draft constitution, none of the other high-sounding principles are likely to be achieved, much less guaranteed.
None of the nations now experiencing revolutions or unrest have a history of democracy, freedom or human rights. That's because they believe in a God who wants his followers to violently impose their religious beliefs on those who believe differently.
Former Libyan justice minister Mustafa Mohammed Abdul Jalil, who now heads the NTC, said after resigning his post in protest over Gadhafi's shooting of civilian demonstrators, "We are the same as people in other countries, and are looking for the same things."
That remains to be seen. Based on the direction of revolutions in other Arab states and their history -- not to mention the presence of the Muslim Brotherhood and other radical groups that could well hijack whatever yearning for real freedom might be in these movements -- I'm not persuaded.
By the way, since nations are unfreezing Libyan assets and the country is awash in oil, can we please send the NTC a bill for the help we've given them, directly and through NATO? That would help lower our national debt. This is a practice we should also apply to other countries seeking our assistance.
- Cal Thomas's blog
- Login to post comments
















Comments
So, Mr. President, how's
Submitted by motherbelt on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 8:24am.
So, Mr. President, how's that Arab Spring thing working out?
More proof that this guy and his crew have no idea what they are doing.
Islamic extremism is OK; it's those Christian extremists here we have to worry about!!
If this turns sour I expect a news blackout...
Submitted by Red Jeep on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 8:56am.
...How's Egypt doing? Yemen?
Islamic extremists make Christian extremists look like liberals.
(Note to Liberals: You can only exist in Christian/Judeo based countries. You cease to exist in Islamic countries.)
He does sort of know
Submitted by jon_torlin on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 9:20am.
I think in his own twisted way, he knows full well what he's doing, he thinks he's advancing the Islamic cause, but the Islamists aren't taking him that seriously and are blowing him off.
Kinda like the kid who used to get bullied and then when he thinks he's on their side, they are really just using him as a means to an end and will probably discard him like yesterday's trash when they get what they are attempting to achieve. After all, even bin Laden considered him a target and also said Joe Biden wasn't worth much as a target. take away the equation of being the (bogus) potus and the VP, it's a very personal religious thing.
He's a Muslim, what's happening is what he wants. They just don't take HIM seriously.
-Jon
Name one country run by a Muslim ...
Submitted by Newsbubba on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 9:54am.
... that isn't mired in the 12th Century, or headed that way.
If you were about to say the USA, nah! Think again.
Name one major American city or state run by liberals for the last 20 or 30 years that isn't beginning to look like a failed socialist or communist country.
Just one.
Just can't do it
Submitted by jon_torlin on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 10:06am.
It's easier to name them that are looking that way.
Dearborn, Michigan; Detroit, Michigan and Tulsa, OK come to mind. Chicago too. But Dearborn and Tulsa are getting fast overrun by Muslims.
As for states, California and Illinois, those are the top two that are tied.
-Jon
I can name one:
Submitted by CobraMan on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 10:37am.
I can name one: Iraq, so far. Of course, that wasn't a "revolution" per say, but nether is what is happening in Libya, for without our help, our equipment, our training, our logistic support, the "rebels" in Libya wouldn't prevail. As was recently revealed by the Obama administration, we've had "contractors" there training the rebels (supposedly in WMD "security") since April. Since the "revolution " first started, we've been supplying them with money, arms, training, and, most importantly, air support. This is no more a "revolution" that what happened in the Balkan wars in the 90's. This is yet another US-led overthrow of a foreign government.
The only difference between Libya and Iraq is that we don't have any ground troops in Libya, yet, to maintain stability during the transition and after. That will change in the next 12 to 18 months, most likely following the 2012 Presidential elections no matter who wins. We will have to send troops to Libya to fight the sudden "insurgency" and "ethnic strife" which the Obama administration knows is coming but won't admit will require the use of large numbers of US troops. After all, Obama can't politically afford another US troop deployment this close to the election. He'll wait until just after the election, and then order a "surge" of 30 to 40 thousand troops, for "humanitarian" reasons, of course. It's inevitable. It's also poor planning on his part. Obama's following the Clinton Overthrow Playbook that was used in the Balkan wars, remember? The title of that book is "How to overthrow a government and not take the blame."
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.