Atheism is as logical as Islam. No Wrong! Islam in Logic is far more advanced. Muslim theologians long ago worked out that if you use logic to prove god then you can use same logic to disapprove god – atheism hasnot even got there yet.

Science has go nothing to do with the debate.

Is that your so called freedom of speech? Direct Personal Insults – grow up yourself.

It's politics.

Institutions, whether it be government, company, organization or a church always build on power gained by exploiting the lower members of their hierarchy. It forms a kind of a pyramid-structure (e.g. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a7/Anti-capitalism_color.jpg ).
The lower members in the hierarchy are supposed to benefit from the higher members actions and if they do or believe they do, they continue to be a part of the institution. Even if they feel it's going worse but they believe they don't have any options, they will remain.

You could think of it as a herd of sheep being controlled by the shepherd. Sheeps are the labour, shepherds dogs are the police and the shepherd is the kingdirectorpresidentreligious leader etc. who decides where the herd will go.

For the institution to remain in existence, it's primary task is to keep the power it possesses. Without the power, it's functionality, existence and force to affect in subjects will vanish. Therefore institutions have to take actions whether immoral or not to keep the power as it equals to it's existence.
The institution's power equals to it's force in executing it's functions to provide end results (whether material or not) which serve it's needs and interests. This means that by gaining greater power, the greater benefit it's possible to obtain. Also by obtaining greater power, the better position the institution has to keep it's power. This will result, from time to time, into a Cold War kind of a situation, where the main focus is in keeping the power to, as explained before, remain in existence.

Now what happens when a sheep goes off from the herd? A shepherd dog is sent to retrieve the sheep.

This is important for two reasons. (1) Any member leaving the institution will weaken the institution. (2) Any member leaving the institution without any negative effects witnessed by the remaining members will encourage the other members, still uncertain of their abandonment, to leave, thus weakening the institution even more.
This is why Kareem is sentenced. It is shown, that abandoning the institution will result in consequences, thus keeping the members together. The same goes from teenage gangs to organizations, corporations, (political) parties, religious groups and in nations. Members who turn to oppose the institution are exaled, humiliated, jailed or even executed. Every nation has political prisoners.

The answer to Karen's question is most likely that they are using Kareem's case as a tool to boost their group's universal goal to gain more liberal form of the freedom of speech established.
It may also be that they fear the fate of Kareem to happen to themselves for maintaining this site. They might also try to universalize the message in this website to reach a larger group of people including those, who feel Kareem's writings are false but yet oppose the sentence he has faced, supporting more liberal form of freedom of speech, thus decreasing the originality of their appearance. Or maybe they simply don't agree with (some of) his comments and “go to such pains to separate themselves from his comments” to evade the negative effects and criticism caused by Kareem's comments.

If they would achieve their goal of more tolerant regulations, they would probably begin to oppose Kareem themselves as they would lose their common interest which unites them.

I personally think that they won't succeed because they would need to gain either one or a mix of all of the following: the public's majority's support, the support of a powerfull enough institution(s) or gain much enough violence otherwise as in weaponry, blackmail, harassment etc. But they most likely won't get the public's support and they sure don't have the resources neither the understanding for the use of the (violent) power so it's most likely never going to happen.

The truth and the justice is always defined by the most powerfull party's subjective way of seeing them as and what the party in the end decides it to be. Usually it's some form of propaganda serving it's creators interests (therefore not reflecting their original view but being a structured view offered to the public to obtain some sort of results).

The real side of matters is often, if not always, something else.

You are ignorant.

Every religion has extremists. Christians as well. If you judge the entire religion on these extremists you are just spreading hate and violence even more. Are you really stupid enough to base an entire group of people on a hand full of people's actions?