What is the Evidence Against Tariq Ramadan?
Scott Mertens has just noted that Tariq Ramadan, who was slated to teach at the University of Notre Dame this year, has had his visa revoked under the Immigration and Nationality Act as modified by the provisions of the PATRIOT Act. My first inclination was to be suspicious of the claim that Ramadan's visa revocation was worth getting upset about, but the problem is that as much as I've looked for evidence to indicate that the man's been guilty of what is described below
The US Department of Homeland Security claims that Ramadan’s visa was revoked because of a section of US law affecting people who use a “position of prominence within any country to endorse or espouse terrorist activity” as well as “public safety or national security interests.”I've yet to find any real evidence that Ramadan is guilty of any such thing, only insinuations from the likes of Daniel Pipes and the usual "Islam is a disease" types that he must be guilty of something, seeing as he's the grandson of the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood; by that measure, one could bar entire nations from entry into the US simply for the misdeeds of their ancestors.
If anyone can point me to some meaningful evidence that Ramadan's been guilty of supporting terrorism, rather than simply of espousing an interpretation of Islam that isn't sufficiently emollient to assuage the delicate sensibilities of a few loudmouths, I'll be glad to have it, as so far I haven't really seen any forthcoming.