Still Beating The Patriot Act Drum

They couldn’t shut it down while it was being debated in Congress, now the ACLU is taking another approach at the Patriot Act. Their latest scare tactic is that certain provisions of the Patriot Act silences certain political speech at the border.

ACLU Condemns Government Censorship at the Borders, Says Freedom of Speech and Association Must Be Protected
WASHINGTON- The American Civil Liberties Union today told a House panel that a section of the Patriot Act is being misused to exclude people from the U.S. based on their political beliefs constitutes “censorship at the borders” and infringes on Americans’ freedom of speech and association.

“This country and our Constitution guarantee freedom of speech and association,” said Caroline Fredrickson, Director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office. “Censorship at our borders is directly contrary to fundamental American values. Attempts to suppress freedom of speech and association are beneath our country – not to mention a waste of government resources intended to keep Americans safe.”

Fredrickson spoke before the Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats, and International Relations of the House Committee on Government Reform regarding the Department of Homeland Security’s Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). In her testimony on the ideological exclusion provision of the Patriot Act, Fredrickson discussed its inappropriate use in the exclusion of Dr. Tariq Ramadan, a Swiss citizen and arguably the most prominent and respected European scholar of the Muslim world.

The ACLU has filed a lawsuit challenging the ideological exclusion provision on behalf of national organizations that have invited Ramadan to speak to their members. Ramadan’s visa was revoked in August of 2004 and, as a result, he was forced to give up a tenured position the University of Notre Dame had offered him. ICE used the ideological exclusion provision in the Patriot Act to revoke Ramadan’s visa but failed to point to any evidence that he approves of terrorism. In fact, he has strongly condemned the attacks of September 11.

Fredrickson noted that by regulating, stigmatizing, and suppressing lawful speech, the ideological exclusion provision skews and impoverishes academic and political debate inside the United States. Censorship at the borders creates an artificial barrier for Americans and others; this misguided policy deprives Americans of information and debates they need to make responsible and informed decisions about matters of political importance.

“The idea that immigration law is being used as a tool of censorship is unacceptable,” added Fredrickson. “By regulating speech at our borders, we are sending the wrong message to the world. We must not have a double standard regarding the freedom of speech and dissent. That is one of the strengths of our democracy.”

They are still crying about Tariq Ramadan’s Visa being revoked? And they are still trying to make people think that is because of his differing political views? And they make his views sound so moderate! We have reported before, but we will report again, the many reasons why we should be thanking the government for revoking Ramadan’s Visa.

He has praised the brutal Islamist policies of the Sudanese politician Hassan Al-Turabi. Mr. Turabi in turn called Mr. Ramadan the “future of Islam.”
Mr. Ramadan was banned from entering France in 1996 on suspicion of having links with an Algerian Islamist who had recently initiated a terrorist campaign in Paris.
Ahmed Brahim, an Algerian indicted for Al-Qaeda activities, had “routine contacts” with Mr. Ramadan, according to a Spanish judge (Baltasar Garzón) in 1999.
Djamel Beghal, leader of a group accused of planning to attack the American embassy in Paris, stated in his 2001 trial that he had studied with Mr. Ramadan.
Along with nearly all Islamists, Mr. Ramadan has denied that there is “any certain proof” that Bin Laden was behind 9/11.
He publicly refers to the Islamist atrocities of 9/11, Bali, and Madrid as “interventions,” minimizing them to the point of near-endorsement.
And here are other reasons, dug up by Jean-Charles Brisard, a former French intelligence officer doing work for some of the 9/11 families, as reported in Le Parisien:

Intelligence agencies suspect that Mr. Ramadan (along with his brother Hani) coordinated a meeting at the Hôtel Penta in Geneva for Ayman al-Zawahiri, deputy head of Al-Qaeda, and Omar Abdel Rahman, the blind sheikh, now in a Minnesota prison.
Mr. Ramadan’s address appears in a register of Al Taqwa Bank, an organization the State Department accuses of supporting Islamist terrorism.

One thing you can’t say about the ACLU, they don’t give up easily even when they are shooting blanks.