Earlier signs of Iraqi Shi’ites’ true radicalism (i.e., their belief in true Islam)

Almost a year ago Daniel Pipes (speaking in his useful and realistic mode of underscoring the totalitarian nature of Islam instead of his useless and confusing mode of imagining it away) noted a development in Iraq that pre-figured this week’s statement by major Shi’ite leaders that they want all laws in the new Iraq to conform to sharia. The event was a vote on March 1, 2004 by the Iraqi Governing Council on the wording of the interim constitution. In a move touted as a compromise, the council decided that the constitution should name sharia as “a source” rather than “the source” for Iraq’s laws. But, as Pipes added,

[T]he interim constitution appears to be only a way station. Islamists will surely try to gut its liberal provisions, thereby making Sharia effectively “the source” of Iraqi law. Those who want this change—including Mr. al-Sistani and the Governing Council’s current president—will presumably continue to press for their vision… When the interim constitution does take force, militant Islam will have blossomed in Iraq.

For their part, the occupying powers now face a monumental challenge: Making sure this totalitarian ideology does not dominate Iraq and become the springboard for a new round of repression and aggression from Baghdad. How they fare has major implications for Iraqis, their neighbors, and far beyond.

In another prefiguring of today’s developments, Andrew Bostom argued a year ago at FrontPage Magazine that the Grand Ayatollah Sistani’s refusal to meet personally with Coalition Administrator Paul Bremer stemmed from Sistani’s fear of “pollution,” or najas, which devout Muslisms believe results from any physical contact with infidels. A “free and democratic” Iraq, anyone?

Posted by Lawrence Auster at February 07, 2005 01:06 PM | Send