DDG, given what the women have said in their post-release interviews, it sounds like they were taking the opportunity to spread the “word” when asked. The punishment may not have fit the crime, but since they knew what the punishment was before they went there, I have to conclude they were foolish at best, arrogant at worst.
For the women’s own thoughts of the subjeact, check out:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A43780-2001Nov16.html
Based on the women’s words in loolia’s link, I have to say my sympathy for their plight has taken a dent. I still feel bad for what they went through, but they really should have known better.
Yes, the Taliban’s anti-preaching law is bullshit, but a bullshit law is still a law and you break it at your peril. The U.S. has its fair share of bullshit laws, but you don’t see us giving a break to anybody who comes here and uses that as a defense. If somebody from Amsterdam were to come here to Seattle and fire up a fattie at a corner Starbuck’s, I doubt he’d get much mileage out of the “but it’s legal where I come from and it’s a stupid law anyway” excuse.
Yeah, I respect the Christian group’s desire to help people, and yeah, the Taliban is (or, shortly, was) an indefensibly repressive and backward regime, but if you’re going to go wading in piranha-infested waters, it would be best to leave the pork-chop trousers at home, methinks.
So was Bush’s relabeling of them as “hostages” mere ignorance or shameless, jingoistic pandering? Gee, I wonder.