Tarek Fatah Sets a Gaggle of "Useful Idiots" Straight Re the Meaning of Sharia

Post-Nice massacre, and post-Newt Gingrich's statement that all Muslims who believe in the primacy of sharia should be deported, a bunch of media smarties--infidels all--did their damndest to downplay the draconian/totalitarian nature of Islamic law. Tarek Fatah mocks their ignorance here:

I can only imagine jihadis and Islamists howling in laughter at the gullibility of Islamism’s liberal apologists in the West. 

For the inexhaustible supply of Western liberals, who Lenin described as “Useful Idiots”, allow me to share a sample of just two sharia laws, from among the tens of thousands that have sustained ruthless, unelected caliphates for centuries. 

“If the husband’s body is covered with pus and blood, and if the wife licks and drinks it, her obligations to her husband will still not be fulfilled.” 

“Wives enter into their husband’s slavery after marriage.” 

Even if one should consider those two examples an internal matter for Muslims, here are two more illustrations of Shariah law as expounded by the founder of 20th century Islamism, the Indian-born Syed Mawdudi, in his book Call to Jihad.

1. “Islamic ‘Jihad’ does not recognize their (non-Muslims’) right to administer State affairs according to a system, which in the view of Islam, is evil.”
2. “If the Muslim Party commands adequate resources it will eliminate un-Islamic governments and establish the power of Islamic governments in their stead.”

Gingrich's idea may be outrageous and unworkable (unworkable, for starters, because "war is deceit," as Islam's founder said, and under threat of deportation people are bound to be less than forthcoming about their allegiance to the law), but Fatah is correct in noting that "shariah is worse."