The hate feeling manifestation

Well, this is a refreshing development:

Pakistan's conservative mullahs question blasphemy law ISLAMABAD � A group of Islamic leaders in Pakistan lent strong support Monday to a mentally disabled Christian girl accused of blasphemy in an unprecedented public move that was the first denunciation by hard-line mullahs of the country's controversial blasphemy law. The All Pakistan Ulema Council, an umbrella group of Muslim clerics and scholars that includes representatives from fundamentalist groups, joined hands with the Pakistan Interfaith League - which includes Christians, Sikhs and practitioners of other religions - to call for understanding for the girl, who's been identified only as Rimsha. They also demanded that those making false allegations of blasphemy be punished. Tahir Ashrafi, the chairman of the Ulema Council, warned that it was the "law of the jungle" when angry mobs routinely pressured police to file blasphemy charges, as happened in the case of Rimsha, who her family says is 11 years old and suffering from Down syndrome.Rimsha was charged earlier this month with desecrating the Quran. ... "We see Rimsha as a test case for Pakistan's Muslims, Pakistan's minorities and for the government," Ashrafi told a news conference in Islamabad. "We don't want to see injustice done with anyone. We will work to end this climate of fear. The accusers should be proceeded against with full force, so that no one would dare make spurious allegations." ... "This is the first time in the history of Pakistan that Muslim community and scholars have stood up for non-Muslims," said Sajid Ishaq, the chairman of the Pakistan Interfaith League. "We are together, demanding justice, demanding an unbiased investigation."

My only question is, where were these guys when Salmaan Taseer was murdered?

"Explaining the context of this verse, Quranic Scholars (Muhammad Asad and Muhammad Ali) explain that the permission to fight and kill is being given regarding specific tribes already at war with the Muslims who have breached their peace agreements and have attacked the Muslims first."
(Read more at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-Tawba_5.)

I have the Yusuf Ali translation, which includes a more detailed commentary.  Ali explains that this Sura is a logical extension of the previous one (Sura 8).  In fact, Muhammad directed that it was to "follow" Sura 8, and whether he meant that it formed part of that Sura or whether it forms a separate Sura was not completely clear.

In any case, they are now generally regarded as separate Suras; but Ali maintains that Sura 9 must be read in the context of Sura 8.  Sura 8 deals (among other things) with the formation of alliances and treaties with other nations.  Sura 9 therefore explains what is to be done when those alliances break down and the other nations refuse to abide by them.

Whatever.  This is not my religion, so "I have no dog in this race", as the saying goes.  What I don't understand is why so many non-Muslims and people like Sultan insist on the more extreme interpretation of such passages when there are plenty of credible Muslim scholars who offer a more benign explanation.  Like I said, whose side are they on?  They should be arguing against the extremists, shouldn't they?

It's not like we (non-Muslims) can say that one interpretation or the other is objectively "true" or that Allah intended it one way or the other, because we don't believe any of it anyway.  Why not support those scholars who are trying to make Islam compatible with modernity?