yesterday, kirk posted about the sad case of tariq ramadan, a professor at notre dame whose visa was revoked by the u.s. government citing the patriot act's exclusion of aliens who have "prominently espoused or endorsed terrorist activity."
although professor ramadan has been accused of endorsing terrorism, there is no actual evidence that he ever has. indeed, he has regularly condemned terrorist attacks both against the u.s. and abroad. the reason he seems to be hounded so much is that he is the grandson of hassan al-banna, founder of the muslim brotherhood in 1928. as kirk pointed out, even the notre dame jewish student organization is opposed to the visa revocation.
actually, i could repeat all of the points kirk makes in his posting, by why bother? go read his excellent post yourself.
the only thing i have to add, really, is that today's new york times has an op ed piece by ramadan himself about his exclusion.
i have no idea how anyone could think it is a good idea to exclude from our country a muslim intellectual who's academic writings largely portray a moderate view of islam and preach reconciliation between the east and west. the great injustice of this provision of the patriot act is that ramadan has been deemed a person who espouses or endorses terrorist activity without any evidence in his numerous writings that, in fact, he does. whoever made the decision in the state department will never be questioned why he authorized the revocation or be required to justify the decision. there is no appeal, although ramadan can reapply, there is no way he can get a new visa in time to fulfill his commitments to notre dame this semester. these types of exclusions only feed the paranoia of real anti-american groups and support their claims that the u.s. is targeting islam itself. the damage to our credibility and values far outweighs any danger ramadan could actually pose (assuming he is any danger at all).
