Tuesday, March 21, 2006

Infidel impotence invigorates institutionalized Islamic intolerance

Destroying one of the governments that aided OBL was not "interfering"? Was not decisive, overwhelming military action a bit more intrusive than "voicing concern"? Why the restraint now? And like the West's etiolated response to the recent Cartoon Jihad, what will be the result of this indifference in the Muslim mind but the strengthened conviction that the West is weak and unwilling to resist Jihad?

For what have Americans bled and died, freedom for men like Rahman or Shari'a and the tyranny of Allah? Why is not the President as outraged at this injustice as he is at Helen Thomas's inanity?

More on a fellow Christian facing execution in Afghanistan for the crime of...becoming a Christian:
"Abdul Rahman is charged with rejecting Islam and could be executed under Sharia law unless he reconverts.

The US made a subdued appeal for him to be allowed to practise his faith - but stressed it did not want to interfere.

Germany, Italy and Canada, which all have troops in Afghanistan, also voiced concern over Mr Rahman's plight.

Mr Rahman, 41, converted 16 years ago as an aid worker helping refugees in Pakistan. His estranged family denounced him in a custody dispute over his two children."
His family denounced him for rejecting Islam, and his country wants him dead all because Mohammed said, "Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him" (Bukhari Volume 9, Book 84, Number 57).