It's a good thing that Islam doesn't call for the daily practice of sacrificing a virgin infidel. Oh wait....
The article comes from Family Security Matters.
Court Rules in Favor of the Taliban
A federal district judge, Jane Magnus-Stinson ruled that the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act applies even to convicted terrorists in prison. John Walker Lindh, also known as "The American Taliban" sued the Federal Bureau of Prisons for the right to congregate with other Islamic terrorists in the Communications Management Unit of the federal prison, in Terre Haute, Indiana. Lindh who was captured in 2001 fighting alongside Taliban members in Afghanistan is serving a twenty year sentence for collaboration with the terrorist organization in fighting against U.S. forces.
At his sentencing he told authorities that he went to Afghanistan to help establish an
Islamic state, in accordance with the Taliban ideology. He has been in the custody of the Bureau of Prisons since 2002 held under strict Administrative Measures (SAMs) that control his movement within the prison.
U.S. Attorney Joe Hogsett who represented the government in the lawsuit and prison security officials
contended that allowing Lindh and other inmates to meet outside their cells five times a day was a serious threat to the security at the prison as well as to the outside world. Prison officials gave testimony that Lindh's group of Muslim inmates were acting more akin to a Gang, issuing intimidation and threats to other inmates, then a bonafide religious group. Furthermore prior cases, such as that of El Sayyid Nosair, demonstrated that terrorists often used their religious privileges in the prison environment to conspire to commit acts of terrorism beyond the prison walls. Nosair was an inmate in Attica state prison in 1993 when he conspired with Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman to bomb the World Trade Center killing six and injuring over one thousand civilians. Nosair used his position as the Chaplain's clerk and the freedom it gave him to be out of his cell to forge the plan for the act of violence.
Judge Mangus-Stinson in the ruling felt that the law, which was passed to protect against undue burdens being placed upon citizens in the free exercise of their religious beliefs by the government, extends to radical ideology such as Lindh and the Taliban hold.
Some examples of that ideology were the public stoning of women who were raped and the execution of non-believers.
If the ruling is allowed to stand it may then be applied to prisoners being held in Guantanamo. That would mean that Kahlid Sheik Mohammed, the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks on the United States, would be able to meet with his fellow terrorists outside his cell five times a day to "pray"
Why is it that the average citizen can see this decision as insanity and yet the ACLU and the other inmate rights advocates do not? We are not talking about abridging or forbidding the exercise of religion. We are talking about preventing the abuse of such rights by jailed terrorists who want destroy this country.
The Judges description of John Walker as "a low security prisoner who wishes to engage in a brief communal activity with other inmates" make him appear to be docile, socially pleasant, and non-threatening. That narrative almost makes you want to invite him over for coffee.
Judge Stinson overlooks the fact that he is a terrorist and that when he was initially held in a military prison near Mazār-e Sharīf in Afghanistan a riot broke out and CIA officer Johnny "Michael" Spann was killed by the inmates. The riot began shortly after Spann had conducted an interview of Lindh.
The Court it seems cannot discern between a genuine rehabilitation and someone who has become "jail-wise" after more than ten years in the system Prison officials and security experts must be given the leeway to administer measures which prevent convicted terrorists from acting again.
Anything less would be an insult to the memory of those who gave their lives in the fight against terrorism.