and under threat of execution if he does not recant. Yeah, we sure did bring democracy to the Afghans! But then, free speech and separation of church and state are not concepts that the neocons or their RW nutcase followers support anyway. Ali Mohaqeq Nasab published articles raising questions about womens' rights and the new justice system, which is run by religious totalitarians. So they are saying he has sinned against his religion, though he points out that what he said is not against Islam at all.
The article says that the execution threat against the jailed publisher has chilled journalism in Afghanistan. No wonder! And of course, that's what the extremists want: unquestioned power to impose their biased interpretation of the religion. Like the US RW fundamentalists, they say they speak for God, so anyone who disagrees is a sinner. Extremist fundamentalism looks pretty much the same the world over.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/10/AR2005121001138.htmlPost-Taliban Free Speech Blocked by Courts, Clerics
Jailed Afghan Publisher Faces Possible ExecutionBy Griff Witte
Washington Post Foreign Service
Sunday, December 11, 2005; Page A24
(snip)
"According to sharia law, if he does not repent and if he does not return to his religion, he should be executed," Abdul Jamil, who heads the public security division of the attorney general's office, said, referring to Islamic law.
In an interview last week in his cell, Nasab, a short, soft-spoken man with a graying beard, said he had no intention of repenting and that he could not return to a religion he never left.
"I haven't committed any sin to repent for. If I'm not a sinner, then why should I repent?" he said. "I'm a Muslim, and what I mentioned in my magazine doesn't have a single conflict with my religion. I'm more of a religious person than they are."
(snip)
It has also put President Hamid Karzai, who heads a fledgling, Western-backed democratic government, in an uncomfortable position. Karzai has repeatedly expressed support for a free press, but the constitution prevents him from interfering in the decisions of the judiciary, which is dominated by religious hard-liners
(snip)
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
