Bush betrays Christian in Afghanistan

WHAT'S GOING ON HERE? President Bush can speak very passionately when he is defending illegal immigration, but the fact that a Christian is facing execution in Afghanistan doesn't seem to interest him much. I invite you to read Allan Wall's article below on the Abdul Rahman case.

*********************************
Allan Wall: Abdul Rahman and the 'New' Afghanistan
Friday, March 24, 2006

"Before September 11th, 2001, Afghanistan was ruled by a cruel regime that oppressed its people ... The Afghan people are building a vibrant young democracy ... America will stand with the Afghan people as they build a free society ..." - President George W. Bush

Afghanistan now holds as prisoner its citizen Abdul Rahman, who faces the death penalty. Rahman's crime? He converted from Islam to Christianity, a capital offense in "free" Afghanistan.

So what did President Bush have to say about that?

"I'm troubled when I hear, deeply troubled when I hear, the fact that a person who converted away from Islam may be held to account. That's not the universal application of the values that I talked about. I look forward to working with the government of that country to make sure that people are protected in their capacity to worship."

Excuse me, but that sounds rather tepid to me. Halfhearted. Lukewarm.

We know Bush can speak passionately on subjects he's really interested in, like defending illegal immigration, for example. But defending a Christian in the Middle East? Apparently, that's not a big priority.

The State Department's responses were even worse. Questioned by a reporter, spokesman Sean McCormack refused to say that Rahman shouldn't be executed, instead babbling on about how the judicial process should be "transparent."

So it's ok to kill a Christian as long as the "process" is "transparent?"

Well, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice finally called Afghanistan's PM and suggested a "favorable resolution" to the case. Favorable to whom?

Thank God for the Europeans and Canadians! If the Bush administration is AWOL in defense of religious freedom, at least we have allies who aren't.

Canada and Germany, both of whom have troops in Afghanistan, are publicly defending Rahman. A German official promised to do "everything possible" to save Rahman.

Italy has troops helping us in both Afghanistan and Iraq (I know, having served for four months as a liaison officer with the Italian Army in Iraq). Italian President Francesco Cossiga has called on his country to withdraw its troops from Afghanistan if Rahman is executed. In the words of the Italian president: "It is not acceptable that our soldiers should put themselves at risk or even sacrifice their lives for a fundamentalist, illiberal regime."

I've done my part in the Middle East. I recently returned from a tour of duty in Iraq with my National Guard unit. The troops are doing a great job. But it's disheartening to read of an Afghan Christian facing the death penalty, and persecution of Iraq's indigenous Christian minority.

As British Labour MP Alan Simpson asks of the Rahman case, "What sort of democracy are we defending?"

Our president, portrayed by some opponents as a Christian fanatic, will not speak out in behalf of persecuted Christians in the Middle East.

In Bush's eagerness to reform the Middle East, has he failed to take into account the realities of Islam?

Referring to the Rahman case, Bush said, "We expect them to honor the universal principle of freedom."

Aye, there's the rub.

It's quite questionable that Islam has the same concept of freedom we do. After all, Islamic law mandates death for any Muslim who leaves Islam. That doctrine goes all the way back to Muhammed himself, who said "If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him."

In Afghanistan, Rahman's own father defends the government's right to execute his son, with the statement that "This is an Islamic country." A neighbor of the family said, "There is no way we are going to allow an Afghan to insult us by becoming Christian ..." The state prosecutor calls Rahman a "microbe" that must be eliminated.

Thanks to the international attention given the case, the Afghan government, to save face, may just declare Rahman "insane" for leaving Islam, and release him.

Rahman would still be in danger, though. Several Afghan clerics have already called for his death, regardless of the judicial outcome, including "moderate" Abdul Raoul, who commanded, "Cut off his head."

Afghanistan and Iraq have Islamic constitutions, which forbid any laws that contradict the principles of Islam.

I shudder to ask, but will the dictatorships of the Taliban and Saddam Hussein be replaced by Islamic states that will also suppress human rights?

After all the sacrifices our troops have made and the good works we have accomplished, that would be a disaster.

Will our president really defend religious freedom, or would that be too offensive to Islamic doctrine?

We need to decide - what kind of freedom are we fighting for?

Allan Wall recently returned from a tour of duty in Iraq with his Texas Army National Guard unit. He now lives in Mexico and may be reached via e-mail at allan39@prodigy.net.mx.
**********************************

Allan Wall's thought-provoking article about Abdul Rahman in Afghanistan with its disturbing implications about George Bush brings this Scripture to my mind:

Matthew 25:31-46:

31 “When the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then He will sit on the throne of His glory. 32 All the nations will be gathered before Him, and He will separate them one from another, as a shepherd divides his sheep from the goats. 33 And He will set the sheep on His right hand, but the goats on the left. 34 Then the King will say to those on His right hand, ‘Come, you blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: 35 for I was hungry and you gave Me food; I was thirsty and you gave Me drink; I was a stranger and you took Me in; 36 I was naked and you clothed Me; I was sick and you visited Me; I was in prison and you came to Me.’
37 “Then the righteous will answer Him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry and feed You, or thirsty and give You drink? 38 When did we see You a stranger and take You in, or naked and clothe You? 39 Or when did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?’ 40 And the King will answer and say to them, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me.’
41 “Then He will also say to those on the left hand, ‘Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels: 42 for I was hungry and you gave Me no food; I was thirsty and you gave Me no drink; 43 I was a stranger and you did not take Me in, naked and you did not clothe Me, sick and in prison and you did not visit Me.’
44 “Then they also will answer Him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to You?’ 45 Then He will answer them, saying, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.’ 46 And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”