Scratch an Iraqi Protestor and you will find a Terrorist inside!
Protests and rallies are the hallmark of democracy. Iraq has graduated to being a democracy, as we can see anti-government rallies in Baghdad. Something that was unheard of in the days of Saddam Hussien. Today the protestors have got their right to create this rumpus on the streets, due to democracy ushered in by us, but are the protestors really democratic?
Supporters of radical Shiite Muslim cleric Moqtada Sadr burn the American while holding up a poster of assassinated Grand Ayatollah Mohammed Sadeq al-Sadr. Shiite cleric Moqtada Sadr demanded US troops leave Iraq and called on God to cut off their necks in a fiery speech to tens of thousands in Baghdad on the two-year anniversary of the city's fall to the Americans.
So these protestors are solidly on the side of Muqtada al-Sadr and his Army of the Mahdi: Photos from todays rally to stop the US occupation in Baghdad clearly speak for their terroristic motivations. We do not remember Americans burning Muslim flags after 9/11, or anythime after that till today.(Photo credit : US News/AFP/Ali Al-Saadi)
Supporters of radical Shiite Muslim cleric Moqtada Sadr demanded US troops leave Iraq and called on God to cut off their necks in a fiery speech to tens of thousands in Baghdad on the two-year anniversary of the city's fall to the Americans.
That brings us to the question: To what extent are Islam and Democracy compatible?
What if a majority of the people who vote, want the establishment of Islamic Khilafah under the rule of Shariah, as interpreted by the Mullahs. Then you end up legitimizing religious fanaticism by using democracy as a tool. Remember mass support for a wrong cause does not make that cause right. Hitler was also elected on a popular mandate!
Yes we had elections in Iraq and that is being touted as a victory for democracy, but it looks like we are on the way to having an Islamic (Shia) fanatic dominated parliament there.
Yes we had elections in the Gaza, Judea and Samaria too, but Abu Mazen calls for a “Greater Jihad” against the “Zionist Enemy” and in the municipal elections there it was the terrorist Hamas which was elected to power.
Yes we had an election in Saudi Arabia, of all places, too. But they just gave legitimacy to a farce in which only males could vote for candidates selected by the Saudi monarchy. This only served to legitimize the hold of the Wahabi monarchy over what will masquerade as democracy.
Yes the global pressure on Lebanon, would see the back of Syrian troops there, but if it means that Hezbollah becomes stronger through the ballot box, as was evident through their massive rally addressed by their terrorist leader Sheikh Hasan Nasrallah, then the ballot box would only legitimize the evil of Islamic fanaticism.
The point is that democracy is only a method, which would be a noble method, only if the people who vote are nobly intentioned. If the people who vote are evil intentioned and support terrorism, then giving them the right to vote leads to evil leaders being elected and legitimized in the name of universal franchise that was exercised thru the one person, one vote principle. Thus the issue to be addressed is not whether people have the right to vote in a free and fair election, but if they have the right temperament and cultural ethos that supports a civilized peace-loving way of life.
The Middle East under Islam does not have this prerequisite for a civilized peace-loving way of life, so whether Muslims are ruled by dictators like Bashar Assad or Hosni Mubarak, or by despotic kings like Fahd or Abdullah, or by Military dictators like Pervez Musharraf, of by elected leaders like the leaders of Hamas or the Shias in Iraq or in Khatami’s Iran, does not make the system civilized just because the leaders have been elected by the people who have exercised universal franchise. Is this point being missed at the White House?
Story Credits Little green Footballs