Tancredo's Jihad prevention Act

Brenda Walker of VDare has written an excellent piece about Tancredo's new bill. the Jihad Prevention Act.

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 ofAmerica'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? Read it all.

I'm honored to say that The List is linked to Walker's article as an example sharia's strict authoritarianism.