World News

Tuesday, August 23, 2011

Libyan Draft Constitution: Sharia is ‘Principal Source of Legislation’

William Grigg ...
Libya will be the third "liberated" country -- following Afghanistan and Iraq -- to have a Sharia-compliant constitution imposed on it courtesy of the U.S. military:

Libyan Draft Constitution: Sharia is 'Principal Source of Legislation'
Lachlan Markay
August 22, 2011 at 1:23 pm

The dust has not yet settled over the Libyan capital of Tripoli since rebels took control over the weekend. But already, a draft constitutional charter for the transitional state has appeared online (embedded below). It is just a draft, mind you, and gauging its authenticity at this point is difficult. There is also no way to know whether this draft or something similar will emerge as the final governing document for a new Libyan regime.

As both the Morning Bell and Washington in a Flash noted today, Heritage Fellow Jim Phillips recently pointed out that Islamist forces "appear to make up a small but not insignificant part of the opposition coalition," and must be prevented "from hijacking Libya's future." Parts of the draft Constitution allay those fears, while others exacerbate them.

Much of the document describes political institutions that will sound familiar to citizens of Western liberal democracies, including rule of law, freedom of speech and religious practice, and a multi-party electoral system.

But despite the Lockean tenor of much of the constitution, the inescapable clause lies right in Part 1, Article 1: "Islam is the Religion of the State, and the principal source of legislation is Islamic Jurisprudence (Sharia)." Under this constitution, in other words, Islam is law. That makes other phrases such as "there shall be no crime or penalty except by virtue of the law" and "Judges shall be independent, subject to no other authority but law and conscience" a bit more ominous.

Libya Draft Constitutional Charter for the Transitional Stage

http://blog.heritage.org/2011/08/22/libyan-draft-constitution-sharia-is-principal-source-of-legislation/

Re: Who Schooled Whom?

The United States has not only a duty, but an inherent right to
"intervene"
when its interests or citizens are threatened
---
the US intervention policy in the middle east is a failure, regardless
of what you think is an inherent right

it's a waste of our tax dollars and soldiers for oil profits and
israel

its not as
if the United States is known for sticking its nose in other Nations'
business or affairs
---
hogwash
and every time the US sticks it's nose in another nations business it
gets dirtier and bloody

but go ahead ... send your children over there to kill and die in the
name of nat'l security ... I won't

On Aug 19, 8:50 am, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The United States has not only a duty, but an inherent right to "intervene"
> when its interests or citizens are threatened or somehow placed in
> jeopardy. Collectively, our Nation has used great restraint, and its not as
> if the United States is known for sticking its nose in other Nations'
> business or affairs, unless our liberty interests are somehow affected.
>
> The support of the Shah and his family was a prudent political move and kept
> stability in that Nation for almost thirty years. A Nation that America had
> an abundance of interests in, (as did Great Britain) as Iran supplied the
> bulk of crude oil to the West in the 1950s, and we had a ton of money
> invested in that oil, its exploration, the technology to retrieve it, and
> the supply chain to get the product to market. Just as important,
> geopolitically, Iran sits at the Straights of Hormuz, and it was critical
> especially during the 1950s and 1960s that the Persian Gulf and the
> Straights of Hormuz remain a viable shipping lane.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Who Schooled Whom?

if you are referencing our Nation's
support for a coup, that toppled a corrupt government in Iran back in
1953.
If we had the opportunity to do so again, I and every other American
should
support such an action.
----
the interventionist policy you promote is illegal, promotes anti-
American sentiments and does not make the USA more safe

Warmongers Beware!
Those who live by the sword shall die by the sword.

On Aug 17, 2:02 pm, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Why prey tell, do the Iranians have a reason to hate us? Because we seized
> their assets when their government invaded a sovereign embassy, and because
> they held fifty-three Americans hostage?
>
> Again, Dr. Paul is wrong in his history if you are referencing our Nation's
> support for a coup, that toppled a corrupt government in Iran back in 1953.
> If we had the opportunity to do so again, I and every other American should
> support such an action.
>
> The Iranians have no reason to hate America, we have been one of their most
> benevolent benefactors!
>
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 2:54 PM, plainolamerican
> <plainolameri...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Iran is not the Soviet Union, it is a bunch of fanatics who hate
> > Western Civilization, and especially America
> > ---
> > they have a damn good reason to hate the US
>
> > treating them any differently from other muslim nations and attempting
> > to stop them from developing nukes is folly
>
> > RP's foreign policy is pro-American, not pro-Israel
> > choose sides carefully
>
> > On Aug 17, 1:41 pm, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hello PlainOl!
>
> > > How about from the horse's mouth, on August 12th, at the Ames Iowa
> > debate,
> > > with regard to Iran, and a question from Chris Wallace, who asked:
>
> > > *"Congressman Paul -- Congressman Paul, you say that President Obama is
> > not
> > > too soft on Iran, you say that he is too tough on Iran. I want to put up
> > > some of your statements. "Sanctions are not diplomacy," you say. "They
> > are a
> > > precursor to war and an embarrassment to a country that pays lip service
> > to
> > > free trade." As for Iran's nuclear ambitions, you wrote this: "One can
> > > understand why they might want to become nuclear capable, if only to
> > defend
> > > themselves and to be treated more respectfull"*
>
> > > *"Is that your policy towards Iran?"*
>
> > > **
> > > **
> > > Congressman Paul responded in part:
> > > * *
> > > **
>
> > > *"....Just think of the agitation and the worrying of a country that
> > might
> > > get a nuclear weapon some day. And just think of how many nuclear weapons
> > > surround Iran. The Chinese are there. The Indians are there. The
> > Pakistanis
> > > are there. The Israelis are there. The United States is there. All these
> > > countries -- China has nuclear weapons. "*
> > > *
>
> > > "Why wouldn't it be natural that they might want a weapon? There'd be --
> > > internationally, they'd be given more respect. Why should we write people
> > > off? There was -- you know, in the '50s, we at least talked to them. At
> > > least our leaders and Reagan talked to the Soviets.
> > > *
>
> > > *What's so terribly bad about this?"*
>
> > > Wallace followed up:
>
> > > *"Congressman Paul -- Congressman Paul, I want to just give you 15
> > seconds.
> > > I want to just make sure I understand. So your policy towards Iran is, if
> > > they want to develop a nuclear weapon, that's their right, no sanctions,
> > no
> > > effort to stop them?"*
>
> > > *PAUL: "No, I think that -- I think that thing -- that makes it much
> > worse.
> > > Why would that be so strange, if the Soviets and the Chinese have nuclear
> > > weapons? We tolerated the Soviets; we didn't attack them.
> > > And they were a much greater danger -- they were the greatest danger to
> > us
> > > in -- our whole history. You don't go to war against them."*
> > > **
> > > *========
> > > *
> > > **
> > > As stated, I have the utmost respect for Dr. Paul, and I think he is a
> > > brilliant individual, who has sound economic and fiscal polices that the
> > > Republican Party are now adopting. Kudos to Paul, and the Tea Party for
> > > finally seeing the light!
>
> > > I do not agree with Dr. Paul's foreign policy, and I find it just
> > outright
> > > naive! Iran is not the Soviet Union, it is a bunch of fanatics who hate
> > > Western Civilization, and especially America. Dr. Paul doesn't see this
> > or
> > > realize this.
>
> > > On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 1:34 PM, plainolamerican
> > > <plainolameri...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > > > For Dr. Paul to advocate
> > > > Iran's nuclear capabilities is just flat out scary
>
> > > > ---
> > > > cite source
>
> > > > On Aug 17, 9:11 am, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > I would agree that our foreign policy of, "Nation Building" was
> > > > misguided
> > > > > and not in the best interests of the United States. I would also
> > call
> > > > > "Nation Building" a form of "Intervention".
>
> > > > > There is a distinction however, between "Intervention" and
> > "Isolation".
> > > > > Dr. Paul espouses the latter, and that is just as misplaced as Nation
> > > > > Building. In fact, It's far more dangerous. For Dr. Paul to
> > advocate
> > > > > Iran's nuclear capabilities is just flat out scary. A clear
> > indication
> > > > that
> > > > > Paul denies the reality of the world today. Dr. Paul is a brilliant
> > guy,
> > > > > he is just flat out misplaced on what constitutes a danger to our
> > Nation.
>
> > > > > On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 4:22 AM, raymorphic <raymorp...@yahoo.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > "It didn't make Dr. Paul any more correct with regard to history,
> > or
> > > > > > his
> > > > > > foreign policy."
>
> > > > > > I'm not sure about the history part; what I refer to as sensible
> > was
> > > > > > the foreign policy solution.
>
> > > > > > America do not like interventionists foreign policies.
>
> > > > > > We couldn't run our country well, let alone running other people's
> > > > > > countries.
>
> > > > > > In addition, we're in no financial position to intervene.
>
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
>
> > > > > > For options & help seehttp://
> > groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > > > > > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
>
> > > > > > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > > > > > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
> > > > --
>
> > > > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > > > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > > > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > > > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > > > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
> > --
> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Impeach Obama & McCain For Permanent War Policy

Volubrjotr | August 22, 2011 at 16:57 | Tags: Bashar al Assad, Dennis Kucinich, european union, impeach, Lyndon LaRouche, Rangin Dadfar Spanta, united states, United States Department of Justice, War Powers Resolution | Categories: bailout, barack obama, government, mccain, obama, political, politics, soetoro, subversion, treason, video, yes we can | URL: http://wp.me/psXSG-bGW

Congress must impeach Obama for his permanent, spreading war policy. That was the plain meaning of the Department of Justice's answer yesterday to the lawsuit filed by Representative Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) and several other members of Congress, which charges the administration with violating the War Powers Resolution with its war against of Libya, which Congress [...]

Scientists Trace Heat Wave To Massive Star At Center Of Solar System

http://www.theonion.com/articles/scientists-trace-heat-wave-to-massive-star-at-cent,21088/

According to scientists, the large star could be described as a tremendous ball of energy.

·
03.26.11

· Cryptozoologist Falls For It Again
06.16.04

PASADENA, CA—Groundbreaking new findings announced Monday suggest the record-setting heat wave plaguing much of the United States may be due to radiation emitted from an enormous star located in the center of the solar system.

Scientists believe the star, which they have named G2V65, may in fact be the same bright yellow orb seen arcing over the sky day after day, and given its extreme heat and proximity to Earth, it is likely not only to have caused the heat wave, but to be responsible for every warm day in human history.

"Our measurements indicate the massive amount of energy this thing gives off is able to travel 93 million miles and reach our planet is as little as eight and a half minutes," said Professor Mitch Kivens, an astronomer at the California Institute of Technology. "While we can't see them, we're fairly certain these infrared rays strike Earth's surface, become trapped by the atmosphere, and just heat everything up like a great big oven."

Enlarge Image Description: http://o.onionstatic.com/images/articles/article/21/21088/Scientists_Trace_JUMP_R_jpg_250x1000_q85.jpg

"We originally thought that if this star was producing temperatures of 100-plus in the South and Midwest, it must be at least 100 degrees itself," Kivens added. "But it turns out it's far, far hotter than that, with a surface temperature of nearly 10,900 degrees Fahrenheit."

Kivens and his CalTech colleagues said this intense radiation, which results from constant nuclear reactions converting hydrogen to helium in the star's core, could also account for why the orb in the sky is extremely bright and difficult to stare at directly.

While scientists initially assumed the heat and luminescence of the star must make it the largest in the universe—a theory lent credence by the star appearing much bigger than other objects in the sky—they said the data actually appear to refute such a notion.

"Apparently it's gigantic simply because it's closer to us than any other star," Kivens said. "Which would also account for why we feel this particular star's heat during the day but are not warmed by the tiny blinking stars we see at night."

"It's interesting stuff," he added.

According to Kivens, the discovery has prompted researchers to explore the possibility that a variety of phenomena accompanying the heat wave could also be linked to the star, including taller grass, hot car seats, red skin burns, and sweating "even when one has just been standing there and hasn't been running around or anything."

An additional study is reportedly being conducted to determine if the unexplained shrinking of puddles until they disappear may be caused by star-hotness soaking up all the loose water. Moreover, scientists reportedly believe the heat emitted from the glowing orb could potentially be the reason why it is uncomfortable to walk on asphalt barefoot.

When asked if anything could be done to prevent or counteract the star's heat production, Kivens expressed skepticism.

"No, for the foreseeable future, I think we're locked into orbit with this thing," he said. "Although the star seems to disappear every night, 24-hour reports from around the world seem to indicate the star never leaves Earth entirely."

Residents of heat- and drought-stricken regions welcomed the findings, thankful to finally have an explanation for the high temperatures, if no relief from them.

"That makes sense, because it's usually hotter when that [star] is up in the air," said Stillwater, OK resident Asher Arps, 31, speaking to reporters as temperature rose to 110 degrees over the weekend. "I knew it lit things up, of course, but I didn't realize it could make things hot."

"The big star heats the earth, and the moon cools it—I get it," he added.

As to potential applications of the new discovery, experts acknowledge the possibilities could be limitless.

"This is a watershed moment," renewable energy specialist Dr. Martin Flint said. "Who knows where this could lead? Perhaps we could develop a method of harnessing these big star rays and transforming them into some sort of ecologically friendly power source."

"Wait, what am I saying?" he said, laughing. "I'm getting ahead of myself. We still don't understand how it's possible for that thing to be up in the sky in January when it's freezing outside."

,_._,___