When ex-Muslim Ayaan Hirsi Ali appeared at the University of Pittsburgh at Johnstown, Muslim groups tried to have her speech shut down. And they made it clear that if they had the power, and US law were written according to shari’a, Hirsi Ali would not simply be prohibited from speaking.

According to the president of the Johnstown Islamic Center, Imam Fouad ElBayly, she’d be dead.

And in a perfect example of the bizarre disconnect between reality and the shiny happy multicultural world of the media, the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review calls this a “debate on religious freedom.”

This isn’t in Afghanistan. It’s in Pittsburgh.

Islamic leaders tried to block the lecture, which was sponsored through an endowment from the Frank J. and Sylvia T. Pasquerilla Lecture Series. They argued that Hirsi Ali’s attacks against the Muslim faith in her book, “Infidel,” and movie, “Submission,” are “poisonous and unjustified” and create dissension in their community.

Although university officials listened to Islamic leaders’ concerns, the lecture planned last year took place Tuesday evening under tight security, with no incidents.

Imam Fouad ElBayly, president of the Johnstown Islamic Center, was among those who objected to Hirsi Ali’s appearance.

“She has been identified as one who has defamed the faith. If you come into the faith, you must abide by the laws, and when you decide to defame it deliberately, the sentence is death,” said ElBayly, who came to the U.S. from Egypt in 1976. …

Although ElBayly believes a death sentence is warranted for Hirsi Ali, he stressed that America is not the jurisdiction where such a crime should be punished. Instead, Hirsi Ali should be judged in a Muslim country after being given a trial, he added.

“If it is found that a person is mentally unstable, or a child or disabled, there should be no punishment,” he said. “It’s a very merciful religion if you try to understand it.”

(Hat tip: LGF readers.)