Tancredo`s Line In The Sand Against Creeping Sharia


We Americans like to think we`re
tougher opponents of jihadist Islam than the

cheese-eating surrender monkeys
of
Europe
.

That may be so in our heartland, but not so much in
the our appeasement-inclined capital.

One indicator of wobbly Washington: the behavior
of
America
`s
defender-in-chief President Bush, who recently attended
an iftaar dinner and called it

"an annual tradition here at the White House."

Iftaar is the
traditional
Muslim meal
that breaks the monthly Ramadan fast.

By comparison, in a less
politically correct
era,

President Roosevelt
did not embrace German

Oktoberfest
during World War II. Instead he remained

loyal to the noble martini
—an

American creation
.

What a great source of amusement it must be for Osama
that his murder of nearly 3,000 Americans has
nevertheless driven Bush into a greater appreciation of
Muslim diversity.

However, away from the White
House—from which Karl Rove

banished him
anyway—Colorado Congressman

Tom Tancredo has different idea
about hostile Islam.
And he has put it into legislation:

HR 6975
—the Jihad Prevention Act.

The

press release
announcing the bill emphasized the
warning signs from Europe:

“Amid disturbing revelations that the
verdicts of Islamic Sharia courts are now legally
binding in civil cases in the United Kingdom, U.S. Representative
Tom Tancredo (R-Littleton) moved quickly today to
introduce legislation designed to protect the
United States
from a
similar fate.  

“According to recent news
reports, a new network of Sharia courts in a half-dozen
major cities in the
U.K.

have been empowered under British law to adjudicate a
wide variety of legal cases ranging from divorces and
financial disputes to those involving

domestic violence.


 

” `This is a case where
truth is truly stranger than fiction,`” said Tancredo.
`Today the British people are learning a hard lesson
about the consequences of massive, unrestricted
immigration.`

“Sharia law, favored by
Muslim extremists around the world, often calls for

brutal punishment
– such as the stoning of women who
are accused of adultery or have children out of wedlock,
cutting off the hands of petty thieves and lashings for
the casual consumption of

alcohol
. Under Sharia law, a woman is often required
to provide numerous witnesses to prove rape allegations
against an assailant—a near impossible task.”

Tancredo, in his announcement, concludes with this
important point:

“`When you have an immigration policy
that allows for the importation of millions of radical

Muslims
, you are also importing their radical
ideology—an ideology that is fundamentally hostile to
the foundations of western democracy—such as

gender equality
, pluralism, and

individual liberty
,`” said Tancredo. “`The best way
to safeguard America against the importation of the

destructive effects of this poisonous ideology
is to
prevent its purveyors from coming here in the first
place.`”  

The bill simply says that advocates of
sharia would be ineligible for U.S. visas. And
it would expel Sharia exponents already residing here.

Who can object?

If anything, the legislation is a too
mild. Since

Rep Tancredo i
s not returning to Congress, he could
have plunked a

landmark bill
into the hopper.

Since

ending all immigration
on environmental grounds
seems too radical for our Congress to cope with, Washington could at least
remove some glaring enemies from the list of immigrant
suppliers.

We could consider a bill stopping all
immigration from countries that are national sponsors of
terrorism, as
named by
the State Department
.

There are only five of those, but they
are a pretty

bad bunch
:
Cuba
,
Iran,

North Korea
,

Sudan
and
Syria.

Our much-touted
diversity
wouldn`t suffer too much without them.

It`s hard to fathom why our arrogant government
continues to welcome many thousands of immigrants from
these hostile countries as if we didn`t have an enemy in
the world.

According to a report prepared last
year by the Government Accountability Office, the

diversity visa program
has been a dangerous open
door:
U.S. admits
nearly 10,000 from "terrorism" states

[Reuters, Sept 22, 2007].

The point is that there are plenty of
things that could be done legislatively to protect America. But
they have been left undone by the same worthless gaggle
of elected officials who have allowed the economy to be
looted by a gang of thieves in suits.

At any rate, it`s good to know that
not everyone in Washington is oblivious to the
catastrophic immigration narrative being played out in
Europe—the

violence
, terrorism, crime

aimed at women
and general social breakdown caused
by the influx of millions of unfriendly Muslims.

When a culture hostile to the values
of individual freedom announces that it is using

terror
and

immigration
to capture the homeland of western
civilization, it is prudent to take those threats
seriously.

Polling of Muslims residing in
Britain

indicates a deep unwillingness to assimilate to western
values plus a murderous hostility.

According to a 2006 survey

40 percent of British Muslims
desired sharia law be
instituted there and 20 percent were sympathetic to the
bombers who had murdered 52 in London the previous year. Another poll last
summer discovered nearly one-third of

Britain`s Muslims
believe

killing for religion is justified
and want to see a
worldwide caliphate.

The recent acceptance of

Islamic law
into British society is a disturbing
step toward cultural surrender, as shown here:

Revealed: UK`s first official sharia courts
[Sunday
Time
s,
Sept 14, 2008
].

Yet Islamic law has been officially
adopted in
Britain
, with sharia
courts given powers to rule on Muslim civil cases.

Its government has quietly sanctioned
the powers for
sharia judges
to rule on cases ranging from

divorce
and

financial
disputes to those involving domestic
violence.

Rulings issued by a network of five
sharia courts are enforceable with the full power of the
judicial system, through the county courts or High
Court.

Previously, the rulings of sharia
courts in
Britain

could not be enforced, and depended on voluntary
compliance among Muslims.

What kind of self-respecting
country can toss aside its honored tradition of equality
under law with so little concern?

It`s not like sharia can be considered
superior to British law in any way—quite the opposite.
Islamic jurisprudence is based on

primitive Koranic ideas f
rom the

Arabian desert
in which

brutal corporal punishments
are employed—like

amputation for theft
and

stoning
for various offenses including suspected
homosexuality.


Britain
`s
moral cave in to sharia is most

damaging to women`s rights and safety
.

Islamic law upholds

polygamy
, forced marriage of children and

slavery
. Women have no rights in marriage are exist
as the property of the husband. In a sharia court, a
woman`s testimony is worth only

half that
of a man.


Muslim women
will get it in the neck first of
course, but Islamic authoritarianism will spread further
unless it is restrained. The sons of Allah are

notoriously offended
by everyday freedoms we
consider normal, from

walking a dog
to

taking a swim
.
Liberty

must be snuffed out because Allah hates reason and loves
slavish obedience.

Rep. Tancredo is right to see the
danger of

increasing Muslim immigration
to
America
.

Unlike naive triumphalists who believe
our tradition of assimilation will prevent any jihadist
tendencies like those being suffered in
Europe
, the Colorado legislator has
seen the polling data of Muslims residing in America and is not comforted.

A Pew poll in 2007 found that Muslims
on our side of the pond share the same feelings as their
umma-brothers
in Britain.

An alarming 26 percent — or roughly
100,000 — of younger U.S. Muslims say suicide bombings
against non-Muslim "civilian targets" are cool.

For all intents and purposes, that`s
the same as the 35 percent of young Muslim Brits who
told Pew the same thing after some of them bombed the London subway, killing 52 civilians and
wounding another 700. [What
Muslims Really Think
,
Investor`s
Business Daily,

May 22, 2007
]

With economic difficulty likely to
continue for some time and in addition to the energy
supply problem, prudent prevention of
domestic terrorism
is a highly desirable goal.

Let`s be honest. We don`t need the
extra aggravation.

Rep. Tancredo is doing

yeoman`s service
by continuing to protect America from determined enemies—even
though terrorism has fallen off the public policy
screen.

Tancredo, a

great patriot
, will be sadly missed when he leaves
the House.


Brenda Walker (email
her) lives in Northern California and publishes two websites,

LimitsToGrowth.org
and

ImmigrationsHumanCost.org
. She likes her martinis
with a

twist
, because olives take up too much room. She
appreciates the

observation of the late President Gerald Ford
:
"The three-martini lunch is the epitome of American
efficiency. Where else can you get an earful, a bellyful
and a snootful at the same time?"
Jerry Ford a
martini fan! Who knew?