I was going to title this article as "Why the West should not fear Sharia law in Libya and even if they do it's none of their business". I thought it may be too hefty as a title for a blog that has a tiny (and I'm not entirely consistent) readership. But it certainly summarises my views on this subject quite nicely.
Ever since the declaration of liberation of Libya from that non-Islamic tyrant Gaddafi, and after Mustafa Abdul-Jalil's speech in which he proclaimed the Libyan constitution will be based on Islamic Jurisprudence (often translated into English as Sharia law), that has been an uproar by a significantly large section of the self-righteous, arrogant and self-proclaimed flag bearers of a fair justice system of the Western media and politicians. "This will mean girls can no longer have an education", they bemoan. "Women driving cars in Libya? Don't be silly", they'll tell us. Even
Ever since the declaration of liberation of Libya from that non-Islamic tyrant Gaddafi, and after Mustafa Abdul-Jalil's speech in which he proclaimed the Libyan constitution will be based on Islamic Jurisprudence (often translated into English as Sharia law), that has been an uproar by a significantly large section of the self-righteous, arrogant and self-proclaimed flag bearers of a fair justice system of the Western media and politicians. "This will mean girls can no longer have an education", they bemoan. "Women driving cars in Libya? Don't be silly", they'll tell us. Even
"....it might have been better to have stuck with the devil we knew (Gaddafi) because we don't know what the 'devils we don't know' may end up doing" (have a listen here).This guy would rather see an evil, murderous, tyrannical leader remain in power torturing his people for another 42 years than to see Libya implement Islamic law. How messed up is this guy?