This is a very odd post. In the first paragraph, we get this:
[...] during my college years when questioned on the position of Islamic Law (Shari’a), I would get upset and feel hurt and under-attack, but that was mainly because I didn’t have any kind of defense.
He goes on to talk about theocracy and Saudi Arabia and how the Saudi way has become the model for Muslims. Yet -- this is what bugged me -- he never talked about what Sharia is. He made the point that Sharia is perverted but didn't exactly say how.
For if the Saudi way of Islam is false, then what is, in fact, the correct Sharia?
[...] though I believe in Shari’a I don’t think that a theocracy implemented by a static monarchy is the optimum implementation of Shari’a. In fact, I think the Sa’udi model not only restricts Muslim society but Shari’a itself preventing the powerfully dynamic potential which is inherent in the religion of Islam.
I don't think he wrote that for comedic effect.