The world has another example of justice by extremists using Sharia law. In Mogadishu, Somalia, an Islamic court held a public ceremony where the hands and feet of weeping thieves were cut off in front of hundreds of onlookers.
The Sharia court is part of the dominant Islamic group al-Shabab. Each thief had one foot and one hand cut off with a long knife in keeping with the dictates of the Koran.
They were convicted of such crimes as stealing a cellphone.
The group is trying to replace the more moderate Sufi Islamic tradition with Wahabi Islam from our ally Saudi Arabia, which uses beheadings and amputations.
For the full story, click here.
“What is wrong with this? All cultures are equivalent, none better than any other. Morallity(sic) is what a majority says it is”
IS,
I would make the friendly suggestion that you remove irony from your rhetorical arsenal. For irony to be done right there must be some truth to the satire. Your implication is of course that “liberals” are moral relativists. There are two false premises in your reasoning.
1. That this is a “liberal” per se website
2. That what you would term “liberals” are per se moral relativists.
Both premises are demonstrably false. Do you think that I am a “liberal” in your conception and a moral relativist, for instance? If you do, you have only cursorily read all that I’ve written on this site. Beyond me, do you really believe that Mespo, Buddha, FFLEO, Gyges, Vince Treacy, Patty C, AY, GWLSM, MASkeptic, Seamus, lthuedk, Queen of Sheba, hidflect, & whooliebacon are liberals? If you can then you must be psychic, since I’ve been reading/enjoying all of them for the last almost two years and I’m damned if I know for sure.
Now Mike A., Rafflaw, lottakatz, and Jill might well be classified as “liberals” in my estimation, but I wouldn’t bet anything serious on whether that’s how they see themselves, except for lottakatz who has flat out stated it. Jill probably is more a true progressive than a liberal.
Rather than a political philosophy, what all of those people share is the ability to see beyond dogma and try to approach things with open minds. Beyond that not one of them is what you would call a moral relativist. They all share a common cause with Jonathan Turley and that is a love for our Constitution and the belief that we must have a true rule of law in this country, under the terms/strictures of that Constitution. That is hardly moral relativism.
On the other hand let’s look at the other side of this equation, the faux conservatives. Sanford commits adultery and Rush blames it jokingly (though with certain intent to deceive)on the economy to take the heat off. Newt Gingrich works to impeach Bill Clinton for having an affair, while he is having an affair. Newt told his first wife, while she was in the hospital being treated for cancer that he was leaving her for his soon to be second wife, who he then cheated on.
John McCain,left his scarred first wife, who had waited for him during his captivity, to marry a much younger woman who just happened to be very wealthy and whose father financed his political career. Rudy G. had his first marriage to a cousin annulled, when he met an attractive newswoman who could help his political career and then informed wife 2 that he was leaving her via a televised news conference. Larry Craig pursued gay sex in toilets, while being publicly anti-gay. Rush himself has blown through 3 marriages, has a thing for Nicaraguan prostitutes and is a prescription drug addict.
All of those I’ve just mentioned are proven moral relativists as shown by their actions and their lifestyles. I could go on and on, but if you haven’t gotten the point by now, you never will. Wake up IS. Have any political belief you want, but at least take the time to be informed about it, or prove yourself ignorant as you did with the NAZI
socialism fiasco.
To those regular whose names I might have forgotten my apologies in advance, but what do you expect of an aging old guy who has to run just to keep up with the pace of everyone’s walk?
It’s a good thing no one paying attention takes you seriously then, isn’t it, Mr. Nazis are Leftists?
The issue isn’t Islam in toto, you hammerhead. The culture is Islam. No one is disrespecting Islam. We’re disrespecting zealots. It’s the fact that the SA regime are fundamentalist zealots who, oh by the way, financed and manned the 9/11 attacks which would make them criminals and enemies of the state in addition to tyrannical theocratic dictators. Links to stories illustrating this have already been posted. And they are the best kind of zealots too. The ones who impose their tyranny while hiding behind a book as those at the top get a wink and a nod for “sinning” all they want. Elitist zealots. Just like your hero Bush. The Party of God Loves Only Me No Matter What I Do, But You’re All Screwed. Nothing hypocritical about that now, is there? Nothing greedy or narcissistic or outright evil about that.
Is there?
Yeah, there is a difference between hating zealots of any stripe vs. hating someone for merely being different. It’s the whole difference between an idea and a bad idea. As mespo so deftly illustrated recently, not all ideas are created equal. That’s why no one likes you Neocons. It’s not because you’re different. It’s because you’re evil zealots (and quite a few non-religious ideologues) bent on world domination and the repression of civil and human rights for everyone but your “chosen few” just as much as those scumbags in Riyadh. You’re a bad idea. Just like the Wahhabists. Both bad ideas – just like all the zealots before them, from any and all traditions.
Opposing Wahhabism is a problem for you, IS? What about all those times your kind yelled and screamed about them “Muzlem ExTREMEists”? What about catching “them terrorists what done attacked us”? Well guess what. They have a name. It’s the Saudi Arabian Wahhabists that are the root cause of 90% of the trouble in the region. They don’t just want to wipe out the influence of Christianity, no, they want to wipe out all other forms of Islam as well. They are fundies of the “my way or die” school. Why do you think they were so ready to get their boy Bush to attack Iraq. They were the only secular state in the region and bullwark against the zealots running SA and Iran. Iran isn’t our enemy. What they are remains to be seen at this point – hopefully a better day dawns for the people of Iran by their own doing. But Saudi Arabia (run by the Wahhabists) are our enemies in fact no matter your wishful thinking that because progressives are against them, that automatically makes us bigots. Uh, dream on. That love boat’s done sailed, little buddy. There’s thousands of complied posts that prove that assertion to be simply ridiculous. Just like your Skipper, it’s not the words that gets the Wahhabists in trouble. It’s their actions. And you can find pictures of the Saudi royals all lovey dovey with the Bush family at Google Images all day long. Careful who you defend there, lest ye become associated with evil. Or something fittingly as karmic.
Oh, that’s right.
You’re only following orders.
And before you get all defensive, there are plenty of threads here where zealots of ALL flavors have been tasted while getting a thorough chewing on about the ruinous results of their actions. But if your concern is with the worst of the worst of Islamic fundamentalist extremists – kind that attacked us . . . they are called Wahhabists and members of the Saudi royal family.
Also you shouldn’t talk about Buddha either because it’s clear you don’t know what you’re talking about. Yes, Buddhism encourages respect for other religions. As a philosophical Buddhist myself, I respect the traditions of all religions that don’t advocate human sacrifice (blood cults are never acceptable ethically). Even Islam. You of all people should know that I have defended all of Islam from generalizations and gross slander on the whole. It’s not like you yourself haven’t been slapped around for that impropriety. Or did you forget this thread? http://jonathanturley.org/2009/06/18/pakistani-muslims-beat-reportedly-beat-christian-to-death-for-buying-tea-at-muslim-only-stand/
What I don’t respect and in fact think is one of the greatest dangers facing the species today are zealots willing to kill to enforce their oppressive worldview no matter what tradition they profess. Being a pacifist does not mean you’ll peacefully let an enemy slaughter you. It means you try every path to mutually beneficial peace before resorting to violence and then only in defense. Pacifist doesn’t mean doormat. One would think the repeated trouncings by multiple pacifists would have taught the Trollkind that bare minimum by now.
Rain:
please very judgemental, the sky is the color of blue you preceive it to be and white well thats in the eye of the beholder.
Indentured Servant,
What’s wrong with judgment? BTW, aren’t you judging me here?! Oh yeah, there are no absolutes in values, and the sky is blue, and the snow is white too! A value that is dictatorial, oppressive and unjust needs to be addressed as such. No reason to whitewash it under one’s religious tolerance.
Also Kudos for Sarkozy for banning Burqa in France. I hope he goes further, and the entire Europe gets wise. Islamic fascists use democracy, to undermine it. I will judge and won’t be tolerant.
Rain:
there you go making value judgements, not cool. All values are the same, there are no absolutes only shades of gray.
Indentured Servant,
I don’t follow Jesus, Budda or anyone, and if their doctrines dictate to be tolerant or silent in face of oppression, then I wonder about their wisdom. You say all cultures are equivalent, so why don’t you pack and move to Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan and live there and practice your tolerance?! (I am pretty sure you don’t live there)
What is wrong with this? All cultures are equivalent, none better than any other. Morallity is what a majority says it is.
How can we castigate them, our society is no better than theirs.
We learn from the teachings of Jesus and Buddha to love our neighbors and from Jesus to cast no stone unless you are without sin. Your imposing your western values on a small backward country, shame, shame on you all.
I think all that are denouncing this are nothing but intolerant racist and bigots.
Mike,
My question was rhetorical.
I don’t who’s sicker, those who perpetrated this barbaric act or those who stood by and watched it happen.
Fundamentalism is the enemy of liberalism, modernism and human rights.
“I didn’t understand why Bush was so friendly with those Saudis”
rain,
The whole Bush family is in business with them. GW Bush’s first two businesses were partnered and financed with the Saudi royal family.
Saudi Arabia has been spreading the worse version of Islam, to Afghanistan and Pakistan already, and now it is further spreading it like plague to other areas. If the west does not understand and prevent, and hopefully reverse this movement, it will eventually spread to Europe. Part of their barbaric laws are already practiced in Europe, such as giving the option of Shari law for divorce. Islamist should never be given an inch. When they are in minority, they cry discrimination, and when they are a majority anywhere, they do not reciprocate the same rights to others.
I didn’t understand why Bush was so friendly with those Saudis, and now I am appalled at how Obama bowed at the Saudi king. Those dictators need to be treated with disrespect that they deserve. Neither left, nor right is getting it right.
Well let us hope it was not the hand that they wipe with.
If the fox kills my chickens, do I go and hunt down the badger?
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/24/world/middleeast/24saudi.html?_r=1
From the article:
Documents Back Saudi Link to Extremists
By ERIC LICHTBLAU
Published: June 23, 2009
WASHINGTON — Documents gathered by lawyers for the families of Sept. 11 victims provide new evidence of extensive financial support for Al Qaeda and other extremist groups by members of the Saudi royal family, but the material may never find its way into court because of legal and diplomatic obstacles.
—-
Yet Saudi Arabis is our “ally”.
Why is that?
The Saudis and their influence are such a positive force in the world.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/66665
They are the ones who not only spread the violence of Sharia as they see it, they financed and manned the 9/11 attacks.
Why isn’t Riyadh in flames and filled with Marines right now instead of Baghdad – a city in a country that DIDN’T attack us on 9/11?
Why is the government still protecting our true enemy?
Why is that?
This illustrates why the introduction of Sharia law in this country would be devastating. Half of the Senate would wind up neutered.
Jericho,
The pirates who were shot took humans captive, in addition to taking goods into captivity, and were a danger to innocent lives.
These thieves in this story only took goods into captivity, and thus the two cases are not on par.
Furthermore, a religion claiming to represent higher intelligence is not convincing with these types of activities as examples of their having been enlightened by higher intelligence are they?
Ahh, the influence of Wahabist Islam. Is their nothing it can’t make more brutal, violent and senseless?
This really puts meaning to complaining about having “no shoes and meeting the man with no feet”
Yeah, you don’t want to be cutting off the hands and feet of thieves…
On the other hand, Somali pirates should be executed on sight, right?