Saudi Justice Minister: Criticism Of Sharia Law Will Be Treated As An Attack On The Kingdom Itself

200px-Coat_of_arms_of_Saudi_Arabia.svg300px-Dira_SquareJustice Minister Mohammed Al-Eissa gave the world a chilling lesson on the blind faith that underlies the medieval Sharia system imposed by Saudi Arabia and other Muslim countries. Al-Eissa warned that questioning the Sharia system was akin to questioning God and “Any attack on the judiciary will be considered an attack on the Kingdom’s sovereignty.” That certainly simplifies things. Most people harbor a notion that they can criticize their legal system and call for reforms but Al-Eissa pointed out that their legal system comes from God and is therefore not subject to change on its most controversial parts. “Justice” will continue to be meted out in “Chop Chop Square” (Deera Square, right) in the name of Islam.

Al-Eissa attacked “rights organizations” like they were akin to pornographers. They certainly seemed akin to blasphemers in his mind. He explained that they misunderstand Sharia law and these “rights organizations [are] making big mistakes in their reports.” The biggest mistake is that they do not recognize that Sharia law comes from the Koran (Qu’ran) and “[t]hese punishments are based on divine religious texts and we cannot change them.”

Al-Eissa has a bachelor of arts degree in sharia law at Imam Muhammad bin Saud University.

So, it is easy. Just accept that Sharia is divine law and all of these concerns melt away. Besides he adds, if you cannot trust my religion, what can you trust? — “Islam is a religion of wisdom that calls for dialogue with other religious faiths and peaceful coexistence with other communities. If it was not a good religion, it would not have lasted for more than 1,400 years and won millions of followers around the world.”

As for flogging and executions, those are just divine judgment as unchangeable as God’s word. Besides, he noted,“Islam sympathizes with the victim, not the criminal.”

It was an interesting pivot. If you do not want to view Sharia as God’s justice, than view Islam as the ultimate “law and order” faith.

So there you have it. If you hate it, you either do not understand Islam or you are a blasphemer. Of course, if you are a blasphemer in criticizing Sharia law, then Sharia law demands your death. Problem solved.

Source:Arab News

136 thoughts on “Saudi Justice Minister: Criticism Of Sharia Law Will Be Treated As An Attack On The Kingdom Itself”

    1. saucy – to make it work you have to read the thread backwards and you will hear Satan.

  1. Like I said Paul,

    Let me know when you figure it out that constitution thing.

    Meanwhile…

    “There was only one road back to L.A., U.S. interstate 15. Just a flat-out high speed burn through Baker, and Barstow, and Berdoo. Then on to the Hollywood freeway straight into frantic oblivion. Safety… obscurity… just another freak in the freak kingdom. We’d gone in search of the American dream, it had been a lame fu(k around. A waste of time. There was no point in looking back. Fu(k no, not today, thank you kindly. My heart was filled with joy. I felt like a monster reincarnation of Horatio Algier, a man on the move, and just sick enough to be totally confident.” — H.S. Thompson

  2. “The Constitution gives me the right to bear arms.”

    Gee Paul,

    So I guess all those folks who had been keeping and bearing arms before 1789 did so when they didn’t have the right.

    And there was no right to free speech before 1789 too?

    Because the constitution confers that right upon you in the first amendment; right?

    Right Paul?

  3. Paul: “but we both know that you are wrong on the facts and wrong on the law about Bush and the Iraq War. You can yell, scream and throw whatever tantrum you want, but it won’t change the truth.”

    Tantrum?

    There is nearly no agreement between your view of the Iraq war and reality; save for the fact that there was a war and the U.S. was a participant. You can’t even accept the findings of the Senate Intelligence Committee.

    When you’re not seeking defense from someone as solipsistic and self-referential as you on the matter, i.e. Eric., you’re alluding to tangential matters that occurred during the war and citing it as your justification for the war.

    Who’s the one having a tantrum?

    1. Bob, Esq – John Brennan on the NIE prior to Iraqi Freedom

      But there was a lot of information in that estimate. You can only pull so many of those threads. And people tried to do the best job they could. Looking back on it, some of that intelligence was faulty, because that estimate was based on a wide body of intelligence that had built up over the years. A lot of the previous intelligence was included in it, but it was not revalidated, so some of that foundation was faulty, unknowingly at the time. Paul was trying to do his level best to make sure that the product that came out was a fair and balanced one.

      http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/darkside/themes/nie.html

  4. Paul,

    Let me know when you figure it out that constitution thing.

    Meanwhile…

    “There was only one road back to L.A., U.S. interstate 15. Just a flat-out high speed burn through Baker, and Barstow, and Berdoo. Then on to the Hollywood freeway straight into frantic oblivion. Safety… obscurity… just another freak in the freak kingdom. We’d gone in search of the American dream, it had been a lame fu(k around. A waste of time. There was no point in looking back. Fu(k no, not today, thank you kindly. My heart was filled with joy. I felt like a monster reincarnation of Horatio Algier, a man on the move, and just sick enough to be totally confident.” — H.S. Thompson

  5. “that is just poor history. The Spanish did not start the Crusades, they just ended them.”

    Paul,

    Where did I say the Spanish started the Crusades?

  6. Hey, Nick!

    Did you see that Bob, Esq. did the same thing to me that I did to you? He quoted something Paul said and attributed it to me. But Bob, Esq. did it twice.

    Clearly, Paul has magical powers that cause people to attribute his words to other people.

    IT’S PAUL! IT’S PAUL! IT’S PAUL! IT’S PAUL! IT’S PAUL!

  7. Paul,

    The constitution confers no rights whatsoever.

    Weren’t you paying attention in grade school?

  8. Paul,

    My only problem with the Kennedy assassination is exhibit 399; a bullet alleged to have made 7 wounds in two bodies without deforming like it was designed to do.

    Not the path of the bullet, because the conspiracy folks moved the seating arrangement to make it confusing. Just the fact that the bullet did not deform.

    Aside from that, I couldn’t care less.

  9. Oh, I see it’s gone, just as well. Worth watching on YouTube though. WMD lies.

  10. Good people on both sides of the discussion. Attention, being it negative or positive, is the lifeblood of a troll. Cut off the response, they wither on the vine..eventually.

  11. Paul: “surely you cannot believe that there was a conspiracy to destroy the emails of 6 people at the IRS. Next they will be calling you a ‘birther.’”

    Really Paul?

    You don’t have enough honor to simply admit when you’re wrong?

    You have to resort to a cheap diversionary tactic like that?

  12. Paul,

    Ansar al-Islam’s alleged possession of ricin was not the reason stated for going to war.

    Cut the post hoc ergo propter hoc crap.

    1. Bob, Esq – you wrote “Cut the post hoc ergo propter hoc crap.” I am just following up on things you have said. I may not have taken the path you wanted to take, but we both know that you are wrong on the facts and wrong on the law about Bush and the Iraq War. You can yell, scream and throw whatever tantrum you want, but it won’t change the truth.

Comments are closed.