| Submit your comments on this article | |
| Afghanistan | |
| Who will save Abdul Rahman? | |
| 2006-03-22 | |
After reading your post I got off my duff and made a call to the Afghan embassy in Washington: (202) 483-6410. After being put on hold for 3 minutes an embassy staffer got on. I explained to him that I think that the prosecution and threats against Abdul Rahman's life are outrageous and that if he is executed this will have severe consequences for Afghan-U.S. relations. Debbie Schlussel e-mails: After reading the letter from your reader, I, too, called the Afghani Embassy. The man I spoke with said that they got 50 calls about this today, and that they have no authority to save the man. They said there are only two people who can stop this: Mr. Shinwari, the Chief Justice, who is an old man and an intolerant Taliban remnant; or President Karzai, who can--but has not--removed him. Nice to know that all our soldiers' efforts and U.S. funds are being negated by a powerful remnant of the Taliban, not (why not?) replaced by Karzai. | |
| Posted by:Seafarious |
| #70 Off topic: Hey, Creater Crater3500, would you be so kind as to google me, too? I've been trying to find my first post -- just for giggles and sentimentality -- and while I just moments ago discovered that "trailing wife" is actually a term of art (apparently they are all decorative, thick as two short planks, and diplomatic wives with household staff problems... one of whom wrote a book about it. Had I known that, I would've called myself something else, since I merely followed Mr. Wife halfway round the world and back again), I can't find any of my posts the way you did Zenster's. Feel free to send the results to my email address, instead of wasting everyone's precious reading time here. Thanks ever so much! |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2006-03-22 21:52 |
| #69 ...if you're already a follower of Islam, and want to convert to some other religion... |
| Posted by: Rafael 2006-03-22 21:32 |
| #68 Yeah but if you're already a follower of Islam, you're SOL. |
| Posted by: Rafael 2006-03-22 21:31 |
| #67 Article II, section 2 of the Afghani Constitution: "(2) Followers of other religions are free to exercise their faith and perform their religious rites within the limits of the provisions of law." |
| Posted by: eLarson 2006-03-22 20:28 |
| #66 Thanks, cingold. The last paragraph is what I was looking for from them. Rule of Law via the Constitution rather than Sharia is the ticket. |
| Posted by: Creater Crater3500 2006-03-22 17:45 |
#65 The email, fax, phone campaign, may be making an impact. If successful for this man, our efforts could help establish a precedent in Afghanistan for future (and, hopefully, more positive) treatment for those who convert. I received the following response to an email I sent to the embassy:RESPONSE TO PUBLIC INQUIRIES ABOUT MR. ABDUL RAHMAN |
| Posted by: cingold 2006-03-22 17:41 |
| #64 Where have I ever denied that my mode of thought has not evolved? Of course, that would be without the double negative: Where have I ever denied that my mode of thought has evolved? |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-03-22 17:40 |
| #63 Where have I ever denied that my mode of thought has not evolved? Ever notice the public thanks I've given to Rantburg for solid insights as to how the MSM is so biased? Ever notice how I cheerfully gave Bush his due once he won an undisputed election? Ever notice how I said that "the better man" won the 2004 election? Ever notice how, in my interactions with .com I have been obliged to abandon my previous support for any existence of the Mythical Moderate Muslim™? Yes, my position has evolved. My disgust at how both sides of the aisle conduct themselves hasn't nearly as much, but that's another matter. As to throwing my first posts up, nice try, but my repeated expressions of appreciation for Rantburg and Fred's admirable support for freedom of speech should be self-explanatory. If you are so opaque as to remain ignorant of this, the problem may be located at your end of the keyboard. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-03-22 17:37 |
| #62 Do tell. What sort of evolving would that be? Slow process looking this stuff up. Rantburg doesn't help very much in this regard, so I was forced to use Google. There's your first appearance where you referred to President Bush as "shrub". I saw that link posted a short while back and must admit I got a kick out of it. Seems you were pegged the minute you crawled in the door and you eventually revealed your Bush hatred in all its raging glory. Oooh, this one was fun, too. Again about Bush - laden with your peculiar brand of secularist hyperbole and the ever-popular "selected not elected" meme. Lol, I hadn't seen this one before, but it's a classic. All I felt like looking up for you. They suffice. Both of these are far far different than what you post nowadays. I agree with much of what you post now, in fact. Is that evolution? I thought so and was giving you the benefit of the doubt. Why you wouldn't admit to it is beyond me - everyone else I've ever met who sentient evolves as the circumstances change. I did, in this thread, in fact. Hurt like a bitch, too, lol. Low tolerance for pain? |
| Posted by: Creater Crater3500 2006-03-22 17:11 |
| #61 I think you're just pining for the opportunity to say "neener neener" in 35,000 words or more. Ah, yes. The so-called "hidden agenda" theory some of the whiners put forward hereabouts. How novel. This certainly explains how I've cast my support behind Bush to fight any charges of impeachment should he have the wisdom to unilaterally (with or without congressional approval) initiate an attack upon Iran's nuclear facilities. Yup, it all makes sense now. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-03-22 17:04 |
| #60 by declaring him insane. Ever see the inside of an Islamic insane asylum? Probably makes Olde Bedlam of yore look like a four star Hilton. As RC so amply pointed out. This is not a useful solution. Worst of all, I can this poor sap being turned loose from jail and getting stoned to death by an angry mob waiting outside the prison gates. I can just hear the police inspector saying; "How could we know they'd do that?" |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-03-22 17:01 |
| #59 seems as if the good guys are currently winning this round (which is pretty important because, among other things a life is at stake). Michelle Malkin reports that CAIR is on the side of saving Abdul Rahman's life (although I can't find it on CAIR's website). This issue will haunt the next Org of Islamic States conference even though most of the potentates will do their best to avoid the issue. If Abdul R does win it may blowback into the cartoon case because blasphemy and apostacy are so closely related. |
| Posted by: mhw 2006-03-22 16:57 |
| #58 ...by declaring him insane. It seems he will also be spared any punishment whatsoever. Woohoo! I like being wrong in cases like this. I didn't think the pressure would work. |
| Posted by: Rafael 2006-03-22 16:52 |
| #57 I really wonder what the international media are saying about this. Polish newspaper reports that Rahman's life will be saved, be declaring him insane. Whatever works I guess. The pressure came from the US, Canada, Italy, the UK and Germany. It seems German press is all over this, others probably as well. |
| Posted by: Rafael 2006-03-22 16:50 |
| #56 They evolve and you NEVER EVER admit to it Do tell. What sort of evolving would that be? |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-03-22 16:30 |
| #55 Robert, I just want to note that the Heinlein quote and your modification make this thread for me. Well said. This is actually a situation where I'm glad us peepul are taking the lead in expressing outrage over this situation in Afghanistan. The Muslim world needs to understand that their problem with the West is not going to go away when Mr. Bush leaves office, and non-Muslims need to realize the problem is not of Bush's making. I saw stories this morning in the Washington Times, Fox News, and USA Today, all on the front page above the fold (ok, not on the front page of Fox, but still). Also at Instapundit, with a link (as I recall) to CNN. CNN and USA Today mean the story is getting international play. I haven't had a chance to check today, but I really wonder what the international media are saying about this. The threat by some NATO countries to pull out of Afghanistan if this man is executed quite shocks me, considering how indulgent Germany and France, et al, have been with Muslims in general. They may well have been looking for an excuse to disengage, but even so. And it is interesting that this poor Afghani converted to Christianity many years since, but it only became an issue when he sought to regain custody of the two daughters he left behind when he'd gone to find work. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2006-03-22 16:29 |
| #54 Again, point taken. Perhaps they are like me - unhappy with the situation and waiting to see what is actually going on rather than editorializing in a vacuum. Perhaps they know you're often insufferable. I've been reading Rantburg for quite awhile, I've read hundreds of your posts. They evolve and you NEVER EVER admit to it, a trait I cannot abide. I think you're just pining for the opportunity to say "neener neener" in 35,000 words or more. |
| Posted by: Creater Crater3500 2006-03-22 16:10 |
| #53 The only reason I tend to reiterate my point is that very few of the people who routinely bash me for supposedly hating Bush (which I do not) are amazingly silent in the face of his inaction over this issue. If this is not due to his overemphasis upon religiosity, what is it due to? Please know that I have no intention of flogging a particular subject to death. This board is sufficiently intelligent to deserve better. I'm just sort of curious how so few who normally defend Bush at the drop of a hat are conspicuously silent right now. I'll refrain from any further inquiries in this thread. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-03-22 15:57 |
| #52 Gosh, the long-winded guys on cable with the perfect hair have nothing on you, Zenster. Your last 5 or 6 posts are the same - a litanty - originally a religious term. You're rather religious, in that give me a break zealous way, do you realize that? Point, taken, Every time. |
| Posted by: Creater Crater3500 2006-03-22 15:44 |
| #51 I'll not argue too loudly with you, RC. Incidentally, have you grown more cynical of late or is it just that recent events finally tipped the scales for you? I happen to feel that Bush has this vital chance to espouse the value of religious pluralism and his silence is denuding him of moral authority. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-03-22 15:37 |
| #50 Zenster, the jihadis were calling us "Crusaders" before Bush came to office. It's not about how religious he is, it's that we come from a Christian culture. |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2006-03-22 15:29 |
| #49 Â I agree with CC3500, the shame comment is an eye opener. Please remember, all, that this is a culture which views shame or humiliation as something worse than death. Zenster, the moment Bush takes on the Muslims to defend a Christian is when his identity as a Crusader IS ESTABLISHED. I disagree, Ptah. By initially adopting the notion of a "Crusade Against Terrorism", Bush made a blunder of monumental proportions. However speedily he attempted to shed that nomenclature, its negative resonance stuck like epoxy with all of the hostile Arabic cultures. Bush's continuing portrayal of America as a Christian nation and his own propulsion of Christian agendas (i.e., gay marriage prohibition, Intelligent Design) only served to further entrench this admittedly wrong perception. Rahman is getting the attention because he's a Christian. I'm a Christian, but we (and that includes me) should be screaming equally loudly if he was facing the death penalty because he had converted to Bhuddism, Hinduism, Zoroastrianism, or Disconcordianism. I could not agree with you more and continue to admire the exceptionally level-headed views you espouse as a Christian, Ptah. I feel this is a prime opportunity for Bush to discard any stigma of being a Crusader. By touting the importance of religious pluralism and emphasizing its role as a qualifying criteria for all nations wishing to play upon the world stage, Bush could adopt the mantle of one who defends the right to exist of all tolerance-based religions and correctly downplay his own fundamentalist Christian tenets which he has overemphasized for way too long. I do not foresee many other chances like this, coming as it does on the tail of the cartoon jihad. For once, amongst its incessant perfidy, Islam has ripped its own mask off in a starkly public manner over the cartoons. This is just one more button on the It is time to call a spade a spade. Any further dallying or pandering only weakens our moral resolve and basis in fact for action against these cretins. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-03-22 15:14 |
| #48 Zenster, the moment Bush takes on the Muslims to defend a Christian is when his identity as a Crusader IS ESTABLISHED. How the Crusades were conducted was a damn shame and a dishonor, but the original motives and the original call for the Crusades (protect fellow believers in practicing their religion and defending the West) were noble and right: Islam was, AND CONTINUES TO BE, a religious and a political threat to the West because it embodies both religion AND politics. Rahman is getting the attention because he's a Christian. I'm a Christian, but we (and that includes me) should be screaming equally loudly if he was facing the death penalty because he had converted to Bhuddism, Hinduism, Zoroastrianism, or Disconcordianism. |
| Posted by: Ptah 2006-03-22 14:48 |
| #47 What I'm saying is that it is easy to sit here in the cradle of freedom and criticize when we don't know 1% of what W does. Who knows what's in play there at his very minute? With all due respect, it's simply not enough. We've got the perfect examples of everything that is wrong with Islam staring us in the face. World leadership has begun to understand the threat, yet it does eff-all to broadcast this knowledge and begin rallying non-Muslims to the cause of ensuring that Islam must reform itself. This is not acceptable. If harsh measures are not taken now, they will be of little, if any, use further downstream. As with RC's capable argument against the insanity figleaf being given to the Afghans, all camouflage that Islam uses to cloak its barbarous "honor killings", "suicide murders", "female circumcision" and hideous abuse of women in general must be ripped away, now! The cartoons did a splendid job of this and yet many Western leaders merely caved over the issue, even though it was a no-brainer to stand up for our freedom of speech. This must not happen again. "Behind the scenes" diplomacy is nice, but does nothing to educate the public on how to identify the enemy and comprehend the dangerous threat that Islam presents to all non-Muslim people. For how much I rail against Bush's over-emphasis upon religiosity it is simply astonishing that, now that Christianity is appropriately cast as victim in the international spotlight, there is still almost stupifying inaction with respect to condemnation of Islam's complete and total disallowal regarding religious freedom. What gives? This is Bush's singular opportunity to finally shed the mantle of "crusader" that he so idiotically adopted at the outset of this new World War and instead assume a righteous posture as defender of all other world faiths against absurd Muslim intransigence. He is nothing short of stupid not to. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-03-22 13:12 |
| #46 Understand, RC, and I agree with you all. Today is turning out to be kinda rotten because it's hard to give up on something you really hoped against hope would prove worthwhile. I surrender my hopes for Islam. Two golden opportunities and all we get is shit, death, hate, spew - Islam, in other words. Day after day, story after story, it's endless and defies logic or sympathy. I don't know if I even feel pity when I encounter things like the shame comment. Nation-building is out and breaking bad regimes is in, for me, now. Live and learn. I'm learning. Excellent commentary, BTW. Thanks folks. |
| Posted by: Creater Crater3500 2006-03-22 13:03 |
| #45 I agree with CC3500, the shame comment is an eye opener. I don't know how they beat this lunacy into the people, but Islam is totally illogical, and the end game is only all muslim, but all muslim what ? All muslim pre-historic tribe ? It's almost like 'when there is no other belief, then Islam will be the true belief' WTF ? Where does believing in this lunacy, Islam, get us ? Obviously, all scientific research and development comes to an end. Pottery making may be big. |
| Posted by: wxjames 2006-03-22 12:54 |
| #44 What I'm saying is that it is easy to sit here in the cradle of freedom and criticize when we don't know 1% of what W does. I'll grant there's a lot we don't know, and much we don't need to know, but W's losing his base by not standing up for what he claims to be doing. How can we be bringing freedom to people when we turn around and let them kill someone for changing religions? How can we honestly say we believe in liberty and then issue whining statements like the State Department's on the cartoons? Heinlein wrote, "You can't enslave a free man. Only person can do that to a man is himself. The most you can do to a free man is to kill him." Well, we're learning a corollary: "You can't free a slave. Only person that can do that for a man is himself. The most you can do for a slave is break his chains." Islam means submission; Muslims count themselves as slaves to Allah (when a western-educated, self-described moderate Muslim describes herself thus, I believe her). They're willing slaves. We can't free them; we can only break their chains. As soon as we stop breaking their chains, they'll forge a new set. They have to want to be free, and while there are quite a few who do, there appear to be many, many more who don't. |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2006-03-22 12:53 |
| #43 Yale, in all fairness, should accept this guy as a student. Then they can deport him to Yale, and he can room with the Taliban student. Then they would get a balanced view of Afghanistan |
| Posted by: plainslow 2006-03-22 12:35 |
| #42 All good points, Zenster, OP, and RC. What I'm saying is that it is easy to sit here in the cradle of freedom and criticize when we don't know 1% of what W does. Who knows what's in play there at his very minute? I suspect that this situation actually means that Afghanistan is lost, as far as Freedom is concerned. The non-Taleban Afghans appreciate the help in getting rid of the Taleban, trading one lot of obvious psychopaths for a lesser lot -- but deep down they're all Taleban at heart, just a little squishier about it. The "shame" comment in OP's post is what tipped it for me. I was holding out hope, but that sorta drove a spike through it. |
| Posted by: Creater Crater3500 2006-03-22 12:21 |
| #41 Exactly, RC, which is why I am howling for some sort of substantive position being taken with respect to this subtle sort of genocide. Islamic dominated nations need to be read the riot act and have it known that freedom of religion is the order of the day if they wish to participate on the world stage. The Pope has got it right and Bush, et al, should follow his lead. The Rahman case is made to order for the sequence of events needed in highlighting death sentences for apostasy, the burning of Christian churches overseas and the beheading of Christian schoolgirls. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-03-22 12:21 |
| #40 What RC said. A one time deal to look the other way is useless. |
| Posted by: 6 2006-03-22 12:18 |
| #39 Moayuddin Baluch, a religious adviser to President Hamid Karzai, said Rahman would undergo a psychological examination. "Doctors must examine him," he said. "If he is mentally unfit, definitely Islam has no claim to punish him. He must be forgiven. The case must be dropped." I would be very interested in the Afghani's DSM. Must be one hell of a document. Aside from that, the Afghans learned from the Soviets about taking so-called troublemakers out of circulation by declaring them insane. A democratic government requires a relatively sophistocated populace. The majority rules, but respects the rights of the minority. Heck, we in the US have had a great deal of difficulty making it work for these last 200+ years. These backward places, like Pakistan, Afghanistan, etc are ideal breeding grounds and safe bases for the likes of Al Q because they are easily manipulated by Islam, tribalism and some money thrown in to get one's way. Transforming them into something better for all is a major major social project. And there are very few helping us. Our main goal is to make us more secure from the likes of these terrorists. It keeps coming back to resources, and the main resource is money. And that leads us back to Iran and Saudi Arabia, who are spreading it around. We are using all our treasure to fight those who receive much of our treasure from oil. The case of Abdul Rahman is similar to one I posted somewhere on RB near the beginning. There was a newspaper editor in the NWFP who spoke his mind and pointed out the errors of the ways of the jihadis. For this deed he was murdered. Mr. Rahman's plight is a wake-up call for all of us, esp. in Europe. You will not get anywhere using reason with these Islamic nutcases, but they do understand power. Sorry for the rambling rant. People who are given the gift of freedom and use it as a tool to destroy who they consider infidels really upset me. |
| Posted by: Alaska Paul 2006-03-22 12:17 |
| #38 OK, folks, let's say the "court" declares Abdul Rahman insane and allows him to live. What happens next time someone declares their apostasy in Afghanistan? Are we going to have to raise a furor everytime? When the West stops paying attention, what happens? The killing will start right back up, that's what. OK, this fellow's life may have been saved. That's good. But it's still a death-penalty offense to leave Islam, and sooner than we like to think, that sentence will be imposed. |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2006-03-22 12:05 |
| #37 I get an Afghanistan Newsletter every morning through a Yahoo group. I didn't subscribe, but there have been a couple of interesting things in it, so I haven't unsubscribed, either. Here's one of today's articles: Afghan Convert May Be Unfit for Trial By DANIEL COONEY, Associated Press Writer KABUL, Afghanistan - An Afghan man facing a possible death penalty for converting from Islam to Christianity may be mentally unfit to stand trial, a state prosecutor said Wednesday. Abdul Rahman, 41, has been charged with rejecting Islam, a crime under this country's Islamic laws. His trial started last week and he confessed to becoming a Christian 16 years ago. If convicted, he could be executed. But prosecutor Sarinwal Zamari said questions have been raised about his mental fitness. "We think he could be mad. He is not a normal person. He doesn't talk like a normal person," he told The Associated Press. Moayuddin Baluch, a religious adviser to President Hamid Karzai, said Rahman would undergo a psychological examination. "Doctors must examine him," he said. "If he is mentally unfit, definitely Islam has no claim to punish him. He must be forgiven. The case must be dropped." It was not immediately clear when he would be examined or when the trial would resume. Authorities have barred attempts by the AP to see Rahman and he is not believed to have a lawyer. A Western diplomat in Kabul and a human rights advocate — both of whom spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter — said the government was desperately searching for a way to drop the case because of the reaction it has caused. The United States, Britain and other countries that have troops in Afghanistan have voiced concern about Rahman's fate. The Bush administration Tuesday issued a subdued appeal to Kabul to let Rahman practice his faith in safety. German Roman Catholic Cardinal Karl Lehmann said the trial sent an "alarming signal" about freedom of worship in Afghanistan. The case is believed to be the first of its kind in Afghanistan and highlights a struggle between religious conservatives and reformists over what shape Islam should take there four years after the ouster of the fundamentalist Taliban regime. Afghanistan's constitution is based on Shariah law, which is interpreted by many Muslims to require that any Muslim who rejects Islam be sentenced to death. The state-sponsored Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission has called for Rahman to be punished, arguing he clearly violated Islamic law. The case has received widespread attention in Afghanistan where many people are demanding Rahman be severely punished. "For 30 years, we have fought religious wars in this country and there is no way we are going to allow an Afghan to insult us by becoming Christian," said Mohammed Jan, 38, who lives opposite Rahman's father, Abdul Manan, in Kabul. "This has brought so much shame." Rahman is believed to have converted from Islam to Christianity while working as a medical aid worker for an international Christian group helping Afghan refugees in the Pakistani city of Peshawar. He then moved to Germany for nine years before returning to Kabul in 2002, after the ouster of the hard-line Taliban regime. Police arrested him last month after discovering him in possession of a Bible during questioning over a dispute for custody of his two daughters. Prosecutors have offered to drop the charges if Rahman converts back to Islam, but he has refused. ___ Associated Press correspondent Amir Shah contributed to this report. I also wrote to the Afghani Ambassador. I offered the suggestion that Mr. Rahman be expelled from Afghanistan and never allowed to return, and that his family, if willing, leave with him. I would encourag the US and any other nation with religious freedom to open their doors to this obviously good man. |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2006-03-22 12:04 |
| #36 Zenster - Lol, what makes you think the President didn't have a heart to heart with Karzai? Mebbe he did, but this is a glorious opportunity to rip the mask off of Islam. Bush has a thousand different mouthpieces that could do this. Instead, all we've been treated to was a mealy-mouthed State Department condemnation of the cartoons instead of flaying alive the cartoon jihad and its intention of eliminating free speech. Rahman is a golden chance for Bush to promote his own Christianity in a more proper light than he has in the past. He can do it without all the "crusader" trappings he mistakenly donned at the outset of this mess. This is the exact time to push for religious freedom in all Islamic countries. The Pope has summoned forth the moral courage to do so and Bush should find it within himself as well. There is no better avenue towards justifiably banning Islam than to show its genocidal and mono-cultural intentions for all to see. That is not what is happening. I do not believe that I am being too impatient, either. As with Iran, numerous crises are hitting a tipping point and to ignore the impact value, as these critical levers are thrown, simply wastes vital moments of clarity much needed by the average public regarding their own ability to understand what they are confronted with. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-03-22 12:02 |
| #35 Let's review-why did 9/11 happen? Why did the Cole bombing happen? etc Straight from the horse's mouth-the "corrupt" West is not living under Mohammed's laws. All non-believers must be eliminated/removed. |
| Posted by: Jules 2006-03-22 11:59 |
| #34 Zenster - Lol, what makes you think the President didn't have a heart to heart with Karzai? Nimble Spemble in #25 probably hit the mark. Afghanistan is part of the experiment. It is a work in progress. Pronouncements may make you happy, but they are nothing compared to deeds. You seem to seek confrontation, while W seeks problem resolution. Here's a bone for you - be happy he has done the right thing with Musharraf. The splashy bits are of their own making, W was rather subtle there, too. Slowly the rhetoric and public pronouncements will evolve. It's already underway in bilateral arrangements (i.e. Pakistan) and at the UN (think Bolton) and in "Palestine" (funding to Hamas). I don't doubt for a second that W knows all we know, and much much more, and would like nothing better than to be plain spoken at all times. That is his natural style. But... |
| Posted by: Creater Crater3500 2006-03-22 11:38 |
| #33 The wrong question. The real question is: Who will save Afganistan? |
| Posted by: Captain America 2006-03-22 11:35 |
| #32 The ONLY way to address this is to successfully influence removal of the medieval judicial authority - prosecute him for GENOCIDE (it seems to me that genocide laws would apply - even if it is a population of just one individual - "last of the Mohicans"). Great starting point, Lone Ranger, irrespective of RC's (albeit justifiable) cynicism. I have railed long and hard about the coming Global Cultural Genocide™ awaiting us if Islam is not contained or vanquished. It is a short jump between executing apostates and executing non-believers in Islam. Muslims are advocating polygamy, and various other Sharia practices. The west needs to PROSECUTE such barbaric practices RUTHLESSLY. Yup, just like the British suppressed suttee in India. Sir Charles Napier had it about right when he said: "You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours." To He|| with moral relativism. I'm still curious as to why nobody here has a single good explanation for why the White House is so thunderously silent on this matter. As I mentioned before, this is a golden opportunity to begin connecting up all of dots with respect to Islam's violent behavior. Were it not for the GWoT it would seem as though our government is, literally, giving tacit approval to all of these barbaric practices. I'd sure as he|| like to know why. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-03-22 11:23 |
| #31 "By attacking Karzai, it's quite possible you are playing into the Taliban's hands." That doesn't mean we lighten up; it means that other, "inhuman" tactics on our part are now to be considered. Let's not imitate our more nuanced cousins and sacrifice what we value for fear of offending. This is a part of what we have been fighting for-destruction of the idea that you can kill a man for not being a Muslim. We all know that what you say is a possibility, but let's not get distracted. |
| Posted by: Jules 2006-03-22 10:12 |
| #30 "The idea of treating sharia's penalty for apostasy as a crime against humanity is a non-starter." No, the ancient Islamic "death for apostacy" and the related "submit or die" policies are more like the ideas of "Ubermenschen" and the "Greater East Asia Co-prosperity Sphere", something that world wars are fought over. |
| Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418 2006-03-22 10:12 |
| #29 The ability to think or to believe something is a normal human function, and therefore, what we would consider a 'God given right'. Therefore, I move that we banish Islam from the face of the earth if it kills this man for practicing his God given right to choose a belief. We can start by Faster please. |
| Posted by: wxjames 2006-03-22 09:22 |
| #28 However, being right doesn't mean you win Something to remember. |
| Posted by: 6 2006-03-22 08:48 |
| #27 I said "We suffer the delusion that installing a fragile democracy is the alchemy necessary to turn semi-literate 7th century barbarians into pseudo 21st century Judeo-Christian-values Americans." I did not mean to imply that we should not have installed the fragile democracy -- only that cultures are extremely slow to change and that we are expecting miracles. In the grand scheme of things, it is not all that long ago that Western religions were putting people to death for their beliefs. |
| Posted by: Darrell 2006-03-22 08:34 |
| #26 Probably the govt will use the insanity defense to put off the death penalty. The insanity defense has been used in a few other cases to prevent death sentences from being carried out where the west was watching. However, I think at some point the Salafist elements will not buy into this defense. The fact that there are multiple 'death to apostate' verses in the koran and if there are no insanity defense for apostates in the hadiths or sunna, it will make them really seeth. |
| Posted by: mhw 2006-03-22 08:30 |
| #25 If that's the fig leaf he needs, then let Karzai call him crazy. That should qualify him for Yale. Maybe he and the Taliban can swap stories at Skull and Bones. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2006-03-22 08:28 |
| #24 He must be crazy to convert from Islam to Christianity. That's not me, that's an Afghan State Prosecutor. See the story. The trial has been "suspended" and he is to be examined. No dates or anything, just this sudden announcement as the rats scurry for cover. Moayuddin Baluch, a religious adviser to President Hamid Karzai, said Rahman would undergo a psychological examination. "Doctors must examine him," he said. "If he is mentally unfit, definitely Islam has no claim to punish him. He must be forgiven. The case must be dropped." Perfect exit for Karzai & Co: He's crazy. Seems to me that he definitely must insane. I mean, just ask yourself, "Who would actually choose to leave glorious Islam?" |
| Posted by: Creater Crater3500 2006-03-22 08:15 |
| #23 maybe Karzai's government has been doing this all along and we didn't get outraged because the apostate didn't have a name, an identity Or maybe this is part of a renewed push by the Taliban to undermine and bring down the Karzai elected government. By attacking Karzai, it's quite possible you are playing into the Taliban's hands. I'm not convinced of this, but it's plausible and worth keeping in mind as a possibility. |
| Posted by: lotp 2006-03-22 08:07 |
| #22 it's probably not enough. eh? |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2006-03-22 07:55 |
| #21 "...it's probably not enough..." Let's not give up yet on Mr. Rahman, Rafael. I understand, I think, where you're coming from, but the fight for his life isn't over yet. |
| Posted by: Jules 2006-03-22 02:07 |
| #20 From the above link: One German official promised to intervene if necessary. Another, Development Minister Heide Wieczorek-Zeul, said, "We will do everything possible to save the life of Abdul Rahman," according to Reuters. |
| Posted by: Rafael 2006-03-22 01:48 |
| #19 I expect trials -- either in European courts or in some transnational forum -- for blasphemy in the next five to ten years. The Euros backed themselves into a corner on this because they have laws against blasphemy and certain nuts, on both sides, will be screaming that these laws should be enforced. Don't forget that the Church in Europe is as much under attack as is Islam here. It's unfortunate, but such are the times. As for Mr. Rahman, some took notice, but it's probably not enough. |
| Posted by: Rafael 2006-03-22 01:46 |
| #18 AS 2266 nails it. We had to try - it's who we are and what we believe. However, being right doesn't mean you win. In regards to Iraq, we will most likely have to take solice in that we tried, and in so doing demonstrated that Islamic principles and democracy are completely incompatible. The truth will be laid bare, and the enemy finally disrobed....only the willfully blind will be unaware. Unfortunately, much of our govt. is so afflicted. |
| Posted by: Rex Mundi 2006-03-22 01:12 |
| #17 Sad truth. No constitution, no democracy. |
| Posted by: Master of Obvious 2006-03-22 00:25 |
| #16 It's no delusion, it's the American Way. It had to be tried. I know, hindsight is nigh unto perfect, but we had to try. They may even figure it out, someday, but in many respects that is immaterial, here and now. Regardless, we had to do what we believe is right, to be who we are, and we have. |
| Posted by: Angack Sperong2266 2006-03-21 22:38 |
| #15 Compare Islam's place in Afghanistan to the Emperor's place in Japan. The Constitution of Japan, Article 1: "The Emperor shall be the symbol of the State and of the unity of the people, deriving his position from the will of the people with whom resides sovereign power." |
| Posted by: Darrell 2006-03-21 22:25 |
| #14 We suffer the delusion that installing a fragile democracy is the alchemy necessary to turn semi-literate 7th century barbarians into pseudo 21st century Judeo-Christian-values Americans. I would love to see the man spared, but that will not change the culture that would kill him. "Islam" is "submission" and he refuses to submit. We should not be tolerating Islam working its way into these governments and constitutions -- it is a major blunder. |
| Posted by: Darrell 2006-03-21 22:18 |
| #13 Well, we're not shocked, Darrell-more like disgusted, and tired of providing blood, muscle and money to free a country run by Islamic murderers, only to have the new government prepared to execute a man for being a Christian. We hoped there was such a thing possible as a moderate Muslim country. My hope was apparently misplaced. I suppose you have a point-maybe Karzai's government has been doing this all along and we didn't get outraged because the apostate didn't have a name, an identity. But now our imagination gap has been filled-we are introduced to a real, live, breathing apostate, and we want to fight to stop his execution. |
| Posted by: Jules 2006-03-21 22:02 |
| #12 Oh, and: Execution for apostacy needs to be declared an international crime - 'stuff the goddamn Muslim extremists back into their slime pits. Never happen. I expect trials -- either in European courts or in some transnational forum -- for blasphemy in the next five to ten years. The idea of treating sharia's penalty for apostasy as a crime against humanity is a non-starter. |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2006-03-21 21:51 |
| #11 So why is everyone here so shocked that Muslims in Afghanistan are following the Koran? |
| Posted by: Darrell 2006-03-21 21:51 |
| #10 The problem is - the Afghan elements who want to execute this guy DO NOT CARE if the west cuts off aid - or pulls out completely. Those "Afghan elements" apparently are acting with approval of their president. |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2006-03-21 21:48 |
| #9 Lone Ranger-what you say is the logical next step. A piece at a time. |
| Posted by: Jules 2006-03-21 21:37 |
| #8 The problem is - the Afghan elements who want to execute this guy DO NOT CARE if the west cuts off aid - or pulls out completely. That is EXACTLY what they want. They couldn't care less about outraged infidels. The ONLY way to address this is to successfully influence removal of the medieval judicial authority - prosecute him for GENOCIDE (it seems to me that genocide laws would apply - even if it is a population of just one individual - "last of the Mohicans"). Execution for apostacy needs to be declared an international crime - 'stuff the goddamn Muslim extremists back into their slime pits. It is a short jump between executing apostates and executing non-believers in Islam. Muslims are advocating polygamy, and various other Sharia practices. The west needs to PROSECUTE such barbaric practices RUTHLESSLY. |
| Posted by: Lone Ranger 2006-03-21 20:41 |
| #7 sent an email to the ambassador - to my surprise, no reply |
| Posted by: Frank G 2006-03-21 20:06 |
| #6 I wrote the ambassador, too, and let him know in no uncertain terms that Americans are outraged and are going to be putting heavy pressure on our government to stop all aid to Afghanistan if they execute a man for changing from Muslim to Christian. Email chains are already starting. And I'm not even a card-carrying Christian. No aid to radical muslim governments-if our fight is to make any sense, this must be at the foundation. |
| Posted by: Jules 2006-03-21 20:00 |
| #5 I fail to see why this case isn't being used as an international bellwether for showing how Islam is incompatible with all other religions. The White House should be letting Americans know that this is why we are fighting theocratic regimes like the Taliban. If Karzai allows Rahman to be executed it will certainly be biting the hand that freed his country. Again, I am forced to wonder just why it is that Bush finds himself so incapable of challenging another fundamentalist religion when it is clearly off of the rails. This reeks of moral relativism. I'd welcome any other rationalizations for this conspicuous inaction. The cartoon jihad made it plenty clear that we are being confronted with an irrational and extremely violent religion in the form of Islam. Yet one more button could be stitched on the coat by connecting the dots between the cartoonists' death fatwahs and this death sentence for apostasy. What will it take for our government to finally begin painting Islamism with the tar brush it so richly deserves? |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-03-21 19:59 |
| #4 In an attempt to inform citizens of this man's plight I've written to several local and regional newspapers advising them of the Rahman trial. To date nothing has been published or reported on Rahman's case in these papers, though it is still early. I've written to several congressmen and both senators from my state (Ohio). I've written to the Afghan Ambassador, Said T. Jawad. I've written to my president, the Commander in Chief. I've asked for this man's unconditional freedom. In the event this man is executed a line will have been crossed from which there will be no turning back. Believe me when I say the cartoon jihad of a few weeks ago pales in comparison to the importance of the outcome of the trial of Abdul Rahman. I await the response of so called moderate Muslims within the USA on the fate of Mr. Rahman. I say this with all sincerity: the fate of all Muslims in the USA is directly tied to the fate of Abdul Rahman. |
| Posted by: Mark Z 2006-03-21 19:05 |
| #3 Mr. Shinwari, the Chief Justice, who is an old man and an intolerant Taliban remnant; or President Karzai, who can--but has not--removed him. This is not good. |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2006-03-21 18:54 |
| #2 thanks Sea. |
| Posted by: RD 2006-03-21 18:38 |
| #1 I will move this post to tomorrow at midnight so the info is available during biz hours tomorrow. |
| Posted by: Seafarious 2006-03-21 17:54 |