Good Morning Afghanistan

Viva, Da Nang. Oh, viva, Da Nang. Da Nang me, Da Nang me. Why don't they get a rope and hang me?

Afghan journalist sentenced to death for blasphemy

An Afghan court on Tuesday sentenced a 23-year-old journalism student to death for distributing a paper he printed off the Internet that three judges said violated the tenets of Islam, an official said.

The three-judge panel sentenced Sayad Parwez Kambaksh to death for distributing a paper that humiliated Islam ...

Kambaksh had been sentenced to death under Article 130 of the Afghan constitution. That article says that if no law exists regarding an issue than a court's decision should be in accord with Hanafi jurisprudence.

Hanafi is an orthodox school of Sunni Muslim jurisprudence followed in southern and central Asia ...

Clerics in Balkh and Kunduz province arranged a demonstration in the city of Mazar-i-Sharif last week against Kambaksh, calling on the government not to release him....

We're talking out in the field today. Hi, what's your name? "My name's Bob Fliber!" Bob, what do you do? "I'm in the artillery!" Thank you, Bob. Listen, can we play anything for you? "Anything! Just play it loud! Okay?"

Death penalty call for man who spread Koran translation

An Afghan journalist accused of distributing an unacceptable translation of the Koran should be put to death, says former Prime Minister Ahmad Shah Ahmadzai. Former journalist Ghows Zalmay, who was also the spokesman for Afghanistan's Attorney-General, was arrested in November last year for distributing a translation of the Koran into Dari, one of Afghanistan's two official languages. Ahmadzai, who ran in the 2004 presidential election against current President Hamid Karzai, told Adnkronos International (AKI) he supported the death penalty for Zalmay. "Today Afghanistan is full of vices. Several Afghan restaurants serve liquor, despite it being illegal and on top of it, such material is distributed," Ahmadzai told AKI. "I am in favour of his death."

The Afghan Christian: Freed but Not Free

Abdul Rahman and others like him still face the possibility of being charged with apostasy for converting out of Islam, an offense that carries a penalty of death unless they renounce their new faith. While Afghanistan's constitution embraces international human rights conventions that guarantee freedom of worship, it also codifies the role of Islamic Sharia law — under which Abdul Rahman was charged. And even while Washington ... urged Kabul to drop the charges, public opinion on the streets of Afghanistan ... showed strong support for legal action against the convert ...

But it was not in recognition of "universal values" that Abdul Rahman was released. Instead, authorities cited insufficient evidence, insinuations about his mental state and even questions raised by the authorities over his citizenship. The legal basis for charging someone for converting from Islam to Christianity has not, thus far, been altered — the political conflict that from having U.S. troops trying to protect a government that can't guarantee the right of its citizens to choose the same faith as the President of the United States has simply been kicked down the road ... Not surprisingly, there is speculation that Abdul Rahman may leave Afghanistan once he's out of jail.

Teacher shot dead after speech condemning suicide bombings

A teacher was shot to death in northern Afghanistan after he gave a speech condemning suicide bombings, officials said Wednesday.

Abdul Hadi criticized such attacks as un-Islamic and un-Afghan during a speech Tuesday in the Archi district of Kunduz province, said Khair Mohammad Subat, the provincial education department director.

Hadi spoke at a gathering of about 700 people, including the Kunduz governor, and was on his way home when he was killed, Subat said....

British troops could be in Afghanistan for decades

British troops could be in Afghanistan for decades, the country's Defence Secretary Des Browne said in comments published Sunday.

... Browne said: "We cannot risk it again becoming an ungoverned training haven for terrorists who threaten the UK.

"But there is only so much our forces can achieve. The job can only be completed by the international community working with the Afghan government and its army.

"It is a commitment which could last decades, although it will reduce over time."

Browne's comments echo those of the head of the army, senior figures in the security services and former prime minister Tony Blair that the battle against Islamist extremism could last a generation.

Our moral dilemma in Afghanistan that we never discuss

Should we be helping sustain a society and government the fundamental laws and customs of which require the execution of people for distributing a negative opinion about Muhammad? Obviously not, since to do so is not only wrong in itself but means supporting a religious system that seeks to subdue us to the same law. What then should we do? Obviously we do not have the ability to modernize or democratize a society ruled by a religion that executes people for expressing opinions. Nor do we have the ability to destroy that religion, short of destroying the country and killing most of its people. Nor do we have the ability to assimilate the followers of such a tyrannical religion into our society and into any international order that recognizes basic human rights and liberties. What then can we do? We should withdraw our forces from that country, and end our connection with that country, while promising that if a regime, such as the Taliban, comes to power there that threatens us, we will return and destroy it. (Or alternatively we should wage a standalone war of extermination against the Taliban, without connecting that war with support for the existing sharia government.) As I've said over and over, a three week war once every ten years will be infinitely less costly to us than permanent occupation. Other than that, we have no interest in the internal affairs of Afghanistan. We cannot, in the name of democracy, be propping up an Islamic sharia regime which executes people for questioning Islam.

This fundamental contradiction in our present policy is never discussed, and so we continue in our absurd and self-debasing course of "defending democracy" in a sharia country.

What President Bush should say to us

It ... must become a part of our national will, to ensure that Islamic law does not come to our own shores, whether by means of violent jihad terrorism ... or through peaceful patterns of migration, such as those that have already Islamized large parts of Europe ...

Rather than continuing to emphasize the democratization of the Muslim Middle East as our key tool in the war on terror, I will henceforth emphasize the prevention of sharia from reaching the West as our key tool in the war on terror ...

... unregulated immigration of peoples from "sharia states" ... If such an influx continues, Islamic law will be accommodated, adopted and even legislated, at least in some jurisdictions, according to majority will. We know this to be true because such a "sharia shift" is already transforming what sociologists call post-Christian Europe into an increasingly Islamic sphere. If we do not want to see such changes here, we must act. Accordingly, I am asking Congress to amend our laws to bar further Islamic immigration, beginning with immigration from sharia states.

A commitment which could last decades, or an absurd and self-debasing course?

References

Afghan journalist sentenced to death for blasphemy - January, 2008
Death penalty call for man who spread Koran translation - June, 2008
Teacher shot dead after speech condemning suicide bombings - May, 2008
The Afghan Christian: Freed but Not Free - March, 2006
Our moral dilemma in Afghanistan that we never discuss - Lawrence Auster
What President Bush should say to us - Diana West (part 2)
British troops could be in Afghanistan for decades - January, 2008

See Also

What we should have done in Afghanistan - Lawrence Auster