FREE ABDUL RAHMAN

By Michelle Malkin

The latest...

The Washington Times weighs in.

Tony Perkins has an open letter to President Bush, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, and to Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) and Rep. Henry Hyde (R-Ill.), the respective foreign affairs committee chairmen, over at Human Events:

On behalf of Family Research Council and the families we represent, thank you for your work in helping Afghanistan establish a genuine democracy. We also want to express our deep concern about reports that an Afghanistan citizen, Abdul Rahman, faces the prospect of the death penalty for converting to Christianity. According to press reports, Abdul became a Christian years ago, and during a custody dispute over his children was charged with converting to Christianity from Islam. Reports claim he is on trial and the prosecutor is seeking a death sentence. This trial belies any idea that Afghanistan, under its constitution, is committed to fundamental human rights. Such a trial is a flagrant violation of Article 18 of the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights—to which Article 7 of the Afghan Constitution mandates state adherence.

We believe that efforts to guarantee fundamental rights cannot be separated from freedom of religion. The action taken by Judge Ansarullah Mawlavizada has been condemned by numerous groups, and not just by Christian organizations. Prosecuting Adbul for converting to Christianity is wrong per se. In addition, allowing this trial to continue, and potentially to sentence Adbul to death, will confirm in the minds of radicals in that country that religious minorities are not protected by the Afghan Constitution. The potential devastation for religious freedom and other fundamental rights is staggering, not only in Afghanistan but in the broader Middle East as well.

The decision to topple the Taliban from power was just, and American and allied forces have died to achieve that goal. We are fighting now to defeat state-sponsored terrorism and surely that must mean we oppose state-practiced terrorism against its own citizens. The most recent reports that Abdul Rahman may be found unfit for trial due to mental illness do not alleviate our concern. The substitution of Soviet-style psychiatric repression for a more lethal form may be only death by slow-motion.

We ask you to redouble your efforts to ensure that Afghanistan guarantees fundamental rights and freedoms for every one of its citizens. We ask that you do everything in your power to protect the life of Abdul and all who choose to follow their own conscience.

Concerned Women for America:

Concerned Women for America (CWA) urges the Primary Court in Afghanistan to free Abdul Rahman, a man who has been charged with the death penalty for converting to Christianity.

“Americans have another opportunity to ensure that freedom is secure for Afghans,” said Wendy Wright, CWA’s President. “We pray that Afghanistan’s leaders will recognize that religious freedom is fundamental to a stable society.

“Abdul Rahman, along with every other Afghan citizen, deserves freedom of religion. The Bush administration issued an appeal yesterday requesting that Afghanistan allow this man to practice his faith in his country. Hopefully Afghanistan’s leaders will heed this appeal and recognize that democracy must be based on freedom if it is to succeed.

“The ruling of this case is pivotal in that it will set a precedent for all that follow. Abdul Rahman’s life is on trial and religious freedom for Afghanistan hangs in the balance. We offer our respect and admiration to Mr. Rahman for his courage. His unwavering conviction to take a stand for Christ is an example to us all. We call on Afghanistan to spare this man’s life and ensure all Afghans can enjoy religious liberty.

The United States Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe (Helsinki Commission) “expressed grave concern about the situation facing Abdul Rahman.” Commission Chairman Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kansas) stated, “I urge the Government of Afghanistan to abide by the international principles enshrined in its constitution and for the prosecutor to drop the charges against Mr. Rahman.”

Don't forget the rally for Abdul Rahman tomorrow in D.C. E-mail or track back if you're planning an event in your neighborhood.

Friday March 24
Noon to 1pm
Outside the Afghan Embassy
2341 Wyoming Ave NW.
Washington DC

More action items at Freedom's Zone.

Reader L.F. e-mails:

You should know that I just called the Afghan Embassy to register my disapproval (to put it mildly) about the Abdul Rahman case. I told the operator that I wanted to speak to someone about the case, and they put me through to a phone which, after ringing for a bit, brought me a recorded message that began: "This is Joshua Gross, the Public Relations Officer" of the Afghanistan Embassy. (An American accent.) Mr. Gross went on to say that if I was calling about Abdul Rahman, I should know that the embassy had received many phone calls about this case, and that they were working to resolve the situation, that there were currently investigations into Rahman's mental health that might resolve the situation, that they would see to it that the Afghan Constitution was followed, etc etc. It provided an email address, gross@theafghanistanembassy.org, for press inquiries, and the general embassy email address for all others. No ability to get through to an actual person.

***

On the prospect of Rahman being diagnosed as mentally ill, John S. Ford, M.D., M.P.H., Assistant Professor of Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, has a must-read post:

To me this is a very disturbing story. It seems that the provisional Afghan government is trying to find a manageable way out of a terrible public relations nightmare.

Apparently, their decision to prosecute a muslim for the crime of converting to Christianity has provoked worldwide revulsion. There is an obvious perception that their catastrophic disregard for religious freedom exposes the Afghani government as primitive and backwards.

Psychiatry to the rescue. As during many dark times in world history, a government is seeking respite through the misapplication and manipulation of science.

Rather than upset their constituency, the Afghani prosecution has engaged in the age-old deception of diagnosing mental illness when it serves the state's purposes. They have raised the possibility that the accused, Abdul Rahman, is insane and can therefore not be prosecuted under Islamic law.

How convenient.

Afghanistan avoids the global firestorm they've caused by executing someone for creating an affront to Islam. At the same time they evidence a facade of civility by refusing to prosecute this "poor" mentally impaired man.

To even imagine that this highly dubious notion will be adequately examined and that an accurate picture of his true psychological profile will be brought to light is laughable. Whether it's Afghanistan trying to defuse a political liability or the Soviet Union or China claiming that dissident political views constitute mental illness worthy of commitment, this perversion of science is wrong.

Everyone within the healing professions should decry this blatantly transparent abuse of the mental health discipline.

YALE'S SHAME

By Michelle Malkin

John Fund and Clinton Watson Taylor continue to break new ground on the blood-boiling story of the former Taliban spokesman at Yale.

Taylor digs up damning quotes from Sayed Rahmatullah Hashemi and a telling photo:

Leave Islam, go to the gallows. That’s still the rule in Afghanistan, as we see in the sad case of Christian convert Abdul Rahman, on trial for his life there. (Michelle Malkin laid out his awful predicament in her column yesterday.) How is this still possible? Debbie Schlussel called the Afghani Embassy to ask that question and they laid the blame at the feet of “Mr. Shinwari, the Chief Justice, who is an old man and an intolerant Taliban remnant.”

It’s not the first time the Taliban has threatened Afghan Christians—or Americans—with execution. In late summer of 2001, as Al-Qaeda was planning their murderous venture, the Taliban was spinning their “trial” of eight foreign aid workers, including two Americans, and sixteen Afghan Christians whom they accused of secretly proselytizing—and who, it emerged, faced the death penalty.

How could the Taliban possibly justify such a barbaric practice? They didn’t really even try. According to Canadian Channel CTV, "Their priority was to propagate Christianity which they were not supposed to do here," as Sayed Rehmatullah Hashmi, an aide to the Taleban's foreign minister, told reporters.

Whoa, whoa, whoa! That name sounds familiar. Because the name of Yale’s prized “freshman” and former Taliban ambassador, Sayed Rahmatullah Hashemi, is a pretty close match.

But it couldn’t be the same guy. No, Yale’s tame Talib is a “moderate”, a man who regrets the harsh things he’s said in his past (if not the ideology he embraced), a poor little lamb who “escaped the wreckage of Afghanistan”, an earnest family man starting his life over. Yale’s Hashemi was no blustering theocrat, but according to Yale’s then-Dean of Admissions, “a person to be reckoned with and who could educate us about the world.'' Besides, the spelling is a little different, right? It could some other Taliban fellow, right?

After all, the spokesman who was justifying the trial and likely execution of the missionaries wasn’t a sweet, thoughtful fellow like Yale’s prize catch. That guy at the press conference was one sick puppy, holding up “evidence” of bloodguiltiness like—gasp—a child’s Bible! That guy even joked about the prisoners’ crimes as he played a videotape seized from an NGO that had employed the captives:

"O.K., turn it on," said Rehmatullah Hashmi, a foreign ministry official. A television set—itself a forbidden thing—brightened into life. A movie called Jesus appeared, its narrator extolling "the good news of the Virgin Mother and the Savior's birth." Soon, a young Jesus was on screen asking precocious questions of startled rabbis. "That's enough," said Mr. Hashmi, who tried some levity to accompany the grave accusations. "We have to put it off. Otherwise, we will also be proselytizing."

Ha, Ha. You might be proselytizing. And then you’d have to be executed, too! Hilarious.

Fund reports:

In justifying its grant of a place to Mr. Hashemi, Yale has cited his approval by the State Department. And Yale's sole official statement says it hopes "his courses help him understand the broader context for the conflicts that led to the creation of the Taliban and to its fall. . . . Universities are places that must strive to increase understanding." That justification is unsettling to two women who will join voices at Yale tonight. Natalie Healy lost her Navy SEAL son Dan in Afghanistan last year when a Taliban rocket hit his helicopter. Ms. Healy, who notes that her son had four children of his own, is appalled at Yale's new student. "Lots of people could benefit from a Yale education, so why reward this man who was part of the group that killed Dan?" she told me. "I want to tell [Yale President] Richard Levin that his not allowing ROTC on campus is one thing, but welcoming a former member of the Taliban is deeply insulting to families who have children fighting them right now."

Ten days ago Ms. Healy met Malalai Joya, a member of Afghanistan's parliament, when she spoke near her home in Exeter, N.H. Tonight, Ms. Joya will speak at Yale on behalf of the Afghan Women's Mission. She is appalled that many people have forgotten the crimes of the Taliban, and was surprised to hear that Mr. Hashemi, who, like her, is 27 years old, is attending Yale. "He should apologize to my people and expose what he and others did under the Taliban," she told me. "He knew very well what criminal acts they committed; he was not too young to know. It would be better if he faced a court of justice than be a student at Yale University."

Mr. Hashemi probably won't be attending Ms. Joya's lecture tonight. He has dodged reporters for three weeks, ever since his presence at Yale was revealed in a cover story in the New York Times Magazine. Some claim he has fully repented his Taliban past, but in his sole recent interview--with the Times of London--he acknowledged he'd done poorly in his class "Terrorism: Past, Present and Future," attributing that to his disgust with the textbooks: "They would say the Taliban were the same as al Qaeda." At the same time, Mr. Hashemi won't explain an essay he wrote late last year in which he called Israel "an American al Qaeda" aimed at the Arab world. When asked about the Taliban's public executions in Kabul's soccer stadium, he quipped: "There were also executions happening in Texas."

Question: Does the NYTimes plan on running a follow-up or will it just pretend the firestorm doesn't exist?

***

Previous:

Nail Yale
The Three T's
Give Yale the finger
A Taliban mouthpiece goes to Yale