“Jihad Prevention Act” would deny U.S. visas to advocates of ‘Sharia’ law, expel Islamists already here
WASHINGTON, DC – 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.
“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.”
Tancredo’s bill, dubbed the “Jihad Prevention Act,” would bar the entry of foreign nationals who advocate Sharia law. In addition, the legislation would make the advocacy of Sharia law by radical Muslims already in the United States a deportable offense.
Tancredo pointed to the results of a recent poll conducted by the Centre for Social Cohesion as evidence that the U.S. should act to prevent the situation in Great Britain from replicating itself here in the United States. The poll found that some 40 percent of Muslim students in the United Kingdom support the introduction of Sharia law there, and 33 percent support the imposition of an Islamic Sharia-based government worldwide.
“We need to send a clear message that the only law we recognize here in America is the U.S. Constitution and the laws passed by our democratically elected representatives,” concluded Tancredo. “If you aren’t comfortable with that concept, you aren’t welcome in the United States.”
WASHINGTON, DC – 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.
“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.”
Tancredo’s bill, dubbed the “Jihad Prevention Act,” would bar the entry of foreign nationals who advocate Sharia law. In addition, the legislation would make the advocacy of Sharia law by radical Muslims already in the United States a deportable offense.
Tancredo pointed to the results of a recent poll conducted by the Centre for Social Cohesion as evidence that the U.S. should act to prevent the situation in Great Britain from replicating itself here in the United States. The poll found that some 40 percent of Muslim students in the United Kingdom support the introduction of Sharia law there, and 33 percent support the imposition of an Islamic Sharia-based government worldwide.
“We need to send a clear message that the only law we recognize here in America is the U.S. Constitution and the laws passed by our democratically elected representatives,” concluded Tancredo. “If you aren’t comfortable with that concept, you aren’t welcome in the United States.”
Source: Border Fire Report
H/T: Shariah Finance Watch
Latest recipient of The MASH Award
Muslims Against Sharia praise Congressman Tancredo's initiative. We advocated similar measures in the past and fully support "Gihad Prevention Act"
"Any person from a country where a substantial part of the population is pro-Sharia should not be allowed in the West, not only as an immigrant, but even as a visitor with a few exceptions, i.e., political asylum or as a diplomat etc. ... Every legal immigrant should be allowed to stay only if he/she did not display desire to establish a Sharia state in a host country. Any naturalized citizen who displays a desire to establish a Sharia state in a host country should have his/her citizenship revoked and promptly deported. I think the latter two groups is where the real danger lies." Linda Ahmed, FrontPage Magazine, July 24, 2008
"Anyone who proclaims Islamic extremist views should be tried for sedition, since we are at war with radical Islam, or at the very least, promptly deported." Khalim Massoud, FrontPage Magazine, September 9, 2008
Posts
19 comments:
Yes, Tancredo definitely took a strong initiative here. It may be an unpopular one, but he is doing the right thing.
This is an amazing blog! It is a relief to find others who are tackling this critical issue.
Wonderful job, Muslims Against Sharia!
Day by day, this blog gives me hope. I still have huge questions on how one can be a Muslim and refuse sharia (Allah's laws). That being said, if any one (Especially Muslims) are against Sharia law in the USA, I must stand with them on this topic. Be well and take care.
Jeff
Well, trust Tom Tancredo to send all the firetrucks to put a fire that hasn't been lit...
There are a number of problems with Tancredo's anti-immigrant (first), anti-Muslim (second) proposal and with this article.
The first is the basic premise. Yes, the possibility of limited Shari'a courts being allowed to process domestic and other minor legal issues in England's Muslim communities was raised, and was also shot down pretty quickly. I note no links or references in this article to suggest anything has changed that might support an hysterical proposal akin to the WW II internment of American citizen of Japanese descent. But, no, the tenor of the piece is Chicken Little running around screaming “the Shari’a are coming, the Shari’a are coming”. The thing that’s really stranger than fiction is Tancredo’s fixation on any group or any philosophy that doesn’t pass his “Americanism Test”.
He’s quoted: “When you have an immigration policy that allows for the importation of millions of radical Muslims…”. Millions of radical Muslims?? Whose policy is he describing? Not America’s. Anyone who looks vaguely Muslim can hardly enter the U.S. even as a visitor without risking rendition back to Egypt or some other “U.S.-friendly” regime for “interrogation”. Talk about your ‘straw-man’ arguments! The issue is non-existent.
The “Jihad Prevention Act,” would bar the entry of foreign nationals who advocate Sharia law…”. Wonderful. How do you test that? A simple question at the customs desk?
Q: “Do you now, or have you ever, advocated Shari’a Law”
A: (thinking… “Uhh… let me see now, how do I answer that and still get by this desk?”) “No.”
Q. Okay, move along.
What idiot dreamed this up? Is this satire? Does he plan to fund telepaths at customs to read immigrant's minds?
Further the article states, “the legislation would make the advocacy of Sharia law by radical Muslims already in the United States a deportable offense”. Knowing Tancredo’s lack of intimacy with the Constitution, it’ll probably come as a surprise to him that recently (December 15, 1791) a change in the U.S. Constitution was adopted by Congress, known as the 1st Amendment, in which an individual’s right to free speech and freedom of religion were guaranteed, not just to U.S. citizens, but as an unalienable human right.
Last, and most importantly, who in the world does he think would actually advocate for such a law? My gestalt is that the overwhelming majority of America’s Muslims are here in order to not be under Shari’a Law. I suspect that any attempt to instigate legislation to promote Shari’a would be met, first & foremost, by an overwhelming rejection by America’s Muslims.
No, just as with Tancredo’s racist smears against Latino immigrants, his latest attempt to “defend America” has more to do with defending White European, male, Christian privilege than with any real concern over what’s truly good for America. His attempt to translate what may be (or is probably not) going on across the 'pond' into an American 'crisis' requiring drastic legislative action is demagoguery.
I can promise you, legislating bigotry into our legal system is not good for America or Americans - whatever their national-ethnic heritage or religion (or lack thereof).
"What idiot dreamed this up?"
Sharia proponents in the United States do not hide their desire to install Sharia. They are very open about it. So, the proper question would be:
What idiot would comment on the subject that he is absolutely clueless about?
Marshalldoc...
Are you sure you're not one of those radical muslim extremist who is intolerant of ALL religious beliefs other than your own, just as those you are trying to cover for!
Our AMERICAN constitution respects and accepts ALL PEACEFUL religious beliefs (whichever one we choose) regardless of what our original "mixed heritage" is.. can you say that about Jihad? Hell no!
Wake up and smell the danger specifically aimed at the USA...most Americans have been apathetic and in denial for too long about the real dangers of those specific groups of radical muslim extremists that HATE US Americans (but live here freely anyway--secretly hiding their utter disgust for us).
Americans have surely prospered for many years WITHOUT killing those who DO NOT believe as they do! That's what Tancredo is proposing for this most wonderful nation....that PEACE (albeit differences in PEACEFUL religion) will prevail...if you (YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE) and/or your beliefs in any way (religious or otherwise) threaten the USA's peace and national security GET OUT and STAY OUT!!!
Tancredo has addressed a real issue and your blog does not convince me otherwise...you need more than a prayer...you need a Savior if you think this is all fabricated....
I am a devoted AMERICAN who practices a PEACEFUL religion with a back bone....just as I'm sure Tancredo does..
First, I praise Hon. Tom Tancredo for his truthful and couragous stand against the enemy.
Second, I don't understand the differrence between what is so-called "radical" Islam and Islam.
Muslims against sharia' are either do not understand their religion or they are excercising 'taqya'.
The Koran is the law of Islam. Anyone who read the Koran cannot avoid the extreme violence in it.
Nabil, first you admit to your ignorance (or cluelessness about the subject), but in the very next sentence you accuse us of the same. Stop projecting.
THANK GOD FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE BRAVELY FIGHTING AGAINST THIS TYPE OF RADICAL BULLYING BY THESE EXTREMISTS WHO WISH TO FORCE THEIR WAYS ON US--WE ARE AMERICANS...LAND OF THE FREE!!!! BY GOD'S GRACE WE WILL STAY THAT WAY!
THANK GOD FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE BRAVELY FIGHTING AGAINST THIS TYPE OF RADICAL BULLYING BY THESE EXTREMISTS WHO WISH TO FORCE THEIR WAYS ON US--WE ARE AMERICANS...LAND OF THE FREE!!!! BY GOD'S GRACE WE WILL STAY THAT WAY!
After reading your comment on Mangdiddles.com, I have to admit that I had no idea that there were Muslims who were against Sheriah Law.
Though I do not agree with your theology, I must say that I am impressed and encouraged by your drive against Sharia.
Thank you, Rep Tancredo for having the backbone and sense to support what is likely the best legislative proposal I've seen to stop radical Islam and the Muslim Brotherhoods' strategic plan to topple the US. While most Americans are ignorant of the current events transpiring within the US, a cursory read through worldwide media leaves little doubt that anything short of this legislation is less than sufficient. To those who oppose this legislation, a cursury look at Americancongressfortruth.com will provide some helpful insight as to why this legislation is necessary. BTW--I don't hate Muslims, but I despise their cult and their terrorist behaviors.
"While most Americans are ignorant"
"I don't hate Muslims, but I despise their cult and their terrorist behaviors"
You seem to fit right into the ignorant category.
First off all, this is not a site by mustlims...in all honesty it was probably started by an Israeli or Evangelical Christian. With that in mind, do any of you ignorant people know what sharia law really means? NO, all you hear is it from the news or whatever ignorant means of communication.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=56883
This is going to be a very important legislature It will help save and protect lives of women and children in this country .
Enough already with the creeping sharia.
>"You seem to fit right into the ignorant category." -Muslims Against Sharia
To diminish and negate navact's beliefs by labeling him what you consider to be ignorant is not productive. An informed anti-Islamist* stance is quite legitimate in my opinion. However, an anti-Islam stance is dangerous, and does no good for this particular "Muslims Against Sharia" concept.
I fully support any effort to inject moderation into something as fundamentally immoderate as what the Qur'an and Hadith render. I hope the attempt makes great headway.
*(Islamists strive and to implement Sharia over all. The only two choices for those who resist it are subjugation and death)
"To diminish and negate navact's beliefs by labeling him what you consider to be ignorant is not productive. An informed anti-Islamist* stance is quite legitimate in my opinion. However, an anti-Islam stance is dangerous, and does no good for this particular "Muslims Against Sharia" concept."
It is quite obvious that Navact does not know the difference between Islam and Islamism, which makes him ignorant. Calling things by their names is always productive.
As I do not know navact, I can only check his link to gain insight into what he may believe or know. A cursory look at Americancongressfortruth.com reveals their *Mission* and *Vision* to be, in my mind, worthy and rational. (they also distinguish between the before mentioned)
---
Additionally:
One train of logic is that it is an impossibility for Islam itself to be moderate (Simply put: Islam will forever spawn Islamism) To many, this deduction reveals Islam to be the sole problem.
---
Moreover:
I would determine someone to be ignorant if they were prejudice. (Which means they formed judgment or opinion without examining the facts)
Ignorance of knowledge is not permanent unless you are determined to not learn. Ignorance of *truth* is only permanent if you are determined to not change ideas for the better. (The problem is that what people believe *better* to be is subjective)
Also in the Netherlands your 'movement' has been noticed. We are going to follow this site.
So, you're asking for a muslim opinion against shariah law courts?
here's one:
Sharia is God's law. It is created and enforced by the Almighty. We can follow his laws and get rewards from them, or disobey them and receive punishment.
Putting the power to enforce it in the hands of human "qasi-judges" (yes that's what they're called) is hubris at best, and shirk* at worst, putting God's power in the hands of humans, who are then easily corrupted.
Furthermore, if we look in the Quran, there very little to suggest that it advocates the setting up of shariah courts to enforce islamic law. There's about 1 line which I could find:
If you fear a breach between them (man and wife), then appoint an arbitrator from his people and an arbitrator from her people. If they desire reconciliation, God will make them of one mind. God is all knowing, all aware. (Quran, C4, V35).
The other arguments for human-run shariah courts are all in the hadith, which may or may not relate something that occurred in Mohammed's lifetime, which may or may not have been derived from hearsay about messages from God.
imho, the only truly "islamic" society would be some kind of enlightened anarchy, but you'll never see the political Islamists admit to that. it would topple their attempts at power.
*shirk = associating partners with Allah, which is the only unforgivable sin in Islam.
Post a Comment