After Nice, Newt Gingrich wants to ‘test’ every Muslim in the U.S. and deport sharia believers

It would probably be best if you'd stop lying about his position on a website that bears his family name and has a subforum devoted to him.

Change "you'd" to "I" in above quote and it would be more accurate. Here are the details right on Rand's Senate website.

Sen. Rand Paul Introduces “SECURE Act” Amendment to Prevent Terrorists From Entering the U.S. as Refugees
SECURE Act: Stop Extremists Coming Under Refugee Entry Act
https://www.paul.senate.gov/news/pr...-terrorists-from-entering-the-us-as-refugees_
WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Rand Paul today introduced the Stop Extremists Coming Under Refugee Entry Act (SECURE Act) as an amendment to H.R.3761, Restoring American’s Healthcare Freedom Reconciliation Act of 2015. The legislation would suspend visa issuance for countries with a high risk of terrorism and impose a waiting period for background checks on visa issuance from other countries until the American people can be assured terrorists cannot enter the country through our immigration and visa system. This legislation is based off language first proposed by Sen. Paul in 2013. Sen. Paul introduced S.2329, the SECURE Act, as a stand-alone bill earlier this year.

Sen. Paul also introduced today three amendments to H.R.3761 that would restrict funding to resettle refugees in the U.S.

Top-line bullet points and background information for the SECURE Act offered as an amendment can be found below.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

Enhances Screening for High-Risk Refugees

Designates 33 countries as “high-risk” and places an immediate moratorium on refugee and asylum approvals from those countries;
Within 30 days, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) will provide to Congress a comprehensive assessment of the status of refugees and the screening process, including numbers and countries of origin, failed security checks, information on refugees that do not comply with requests related to security screening, or who cannot be located;
The Secretary of Homeland Security shall certify to Congress within 30 days that enhanced background checks and monitoring have been implemented, and that Congress has been supplied with all necessary information on the status of refugee screening;
Once the Secretary of Homeland Security has completed the 3 requirements below, Congress can review whether satisfactory progress has been made and hold a separate vote to resume approvals for refugees from high-risk countries.

Submit the DHS refugee screening assessment;
Certify that an enhanced screening capability has been implemented; and
Certify to the elimination of any existing security screening backlogs.

Improves Security in Non-Immigrant and Visa Waiver Travel

For all non-immigrant visas, the bill specifies that 30 days of security review are required prior to approval for entry to the United States;
For those from “high risk” countries, there is an immediate moratorium on approvals for entry to the United States until the Secretary of State, Secretary of Homeland Security, and Director of National Intelligence jointly certify that a national security screening process is implemented, and that the new process significantly improves our ability to identify potential security risks.
Requires DHS to certify once it has completed and implemented the 1990’s requirement set forth in the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act for full biometric entry and exit tracking of U.S. visitors.
Once the certifications are made, Congress may consider resumption of regular approvals from high-risk countries.

Expands Enrollment Opportunities for Trusted Traveler Programs

Trusted travelers are not subject to additional security reviews once approved for enrollment;
DHS may accept and consider applications, and may approve qualified applicants, to enroll from any country;
DHS will give preference to applications for enrollment filed in order:

U.S. citizens;
U.S. legal permanent residents;
Citizens of Visa Waiver participant countries;
Aliens with significant documented travel history to and from the U.S.;
All remaining applicants.

All application fees collected by DHS for enrollment in a trusted traveler program are specifically designated to pay for the cost of enhanced screening.

List of countries subject to ban. Yep mostly Muslim countries.

6
(A) Afghanistan.
7
(B) Algeria.
8
(C) Bahrain.
9
(D) Bangladesh.
10
(E) Egypt.
11
(F) Eritrea.
12
(G) Indonesia.
13
(H) Iran.
14
(I) Iraq.
15
(J) Jordan.
16
(K) Kazakhstan.
17
(L) Kuwait.
18
(M) Kyrgyzstan.
19
(N) Lebanon.
20
(O) Libya.
21
(P) Mali.
22
(Q) Morocco.
23
(R) Nigeria.
24
(S) North Korea.
25
6
MDM15J02 S.L.C.
(T) Oman.
1
(U) Pakistan.
2
(V) Qatar.
3
(W) Russia.
4
(X) Saudi Arabia.
5
(Y) Somalia.
6
(Z) Sudan.
7
(AA) Syria.
8
(BB) Tajikistan.
9
(CC) Tunisia.
10
(DD) Turkey.
11
(EE) United Arab Emirates.
12
(FF) Uzbekistan.
13
(GG) Yemen.
14
(HH) The Palestinian Territories.
 
Change "you'd" to "I" in above quote and it would be more accurate. Here are the details right on Rand's Senate website.

Sen. Rand Paul Introduces “SECURE Act” Amendment to Prevent Terrorists From Entering the U.S. as Refugees
SECURE Act: Stop Extremists Coming Under Refugee Entry Act
https://www.paul.senate.gov/news/pr...-terrorists-from-entering-the-us-as-refugees_


List of countries subject to ban. Yep mostly Muslim countries.

This is Rand's bill to suspend visa issuance for countries with a high risk of terrorism and impose a waiting period for background checks on visa issuance from other countries until the American people can be assured terrorists cannot enter the country through our immigration and visa system. We all know about this bill.

Nothing in there says anything about continuous surveillance on Americans because of their religion.

That is what Newt is proposing and THAT is completely unconstitutional.
 
Your posting more articles about Gingrich's comments are irrelevant. We already know what he said.

You said it was unconstitutional because of what WAPO told you. If they are publicly advocating violent aspects of Sharia and for overthrowing our government, then questioning them is within bounds of the Constitution regardless of what they say or any other Muslim advocacy organization.

I am very familiar with the 1st Amendment. Don't need WAPO to tell me anything.
 
Change "you'd" to "I" in above quote and it would be more accurate. Here are the details right on Rand's Senate website.

Sen. Rand Paul Introduces “SECURE Act” Amendment to Prevent Terrorists From Entering the U.S. as Refugees
SECURE Act: Stop Extremists Coming Under Refugee Entry Act
https://www.paul.senate.gov/news/pr...-terrorists-from-entering-the-us-as-refugees_


List of countries subject to ban. Yep mostly Muslim countries.

Rands bill and it's intent was something entirely different, you even posted it, thanks. This is Trumps idea in a nutshell.
MGG-2012-09-17.gif


Enhances Screening for High-Risk Refugees

The Secretary of Homeland Security shall certify to Congress within 30 days that enhanced background checks and monitoring have been implemented, and that Congress has been supplied with all necessary information on the status of refugee screening;
Once the Secretary of Homeland Security has completed the 3 requirements below, Congress can review whether satisfactory progress has been made and hold a separate vote to resume approvals for refugees from high-risk countries.
 
What are you willing to do to any american citizen who is Muslim, but refuses to submit to this exam?
 
Maybe we should make them wear stars? Build some camps...

False equivalency. Do you know what the founding fathers would have called a bunch of immigrants who want Sharia law instead of the US Constitution? An invasion. If they want Sharia they are welcome to it in their own countries.
 
False equivalency. Do you know what the founding fathers would have called a bunch of immigrants who want Sharia law instead of the US Constitution? An invasion. If they want Sharia they are welcome to it in their own countries.

Again- this is about surveillance of American Muslims who have lived here for years and have caused no problems. If we allow this to happen to Muslims, who's next? We have basically lost freedom of religion.
 
Again- this is about surveillance of American Muslims who have lived here for years and have caused no problems. If we allow this to happen to Muslims, who's next? We have basically lost freedom of religion.

If that happened, could it be promoting more terrorism.:eek:
 
Again- this is about surveillance of American Muslims who have lived here for years and have caused no problems. If we allow this to happen to Muslims, who's next? We have basically lost freedom of religion.

This sounds like something a Soros-funded PC SJW would say.
 
False equivalency. Do you know what the founding fathers would have called a bunch of immigrants who want Sharia law instead of the US Constitution? An invasion. If they want Sharia they are welcome to it in their own countries.

I haven't noticed a single post here in favor of sharia. In fact most seem to be fairly skeptical of islam.

What you are advocating is institutionalized religious persecution and racism. That can't happen, you can't have our government persecuting because of religion. Can't some of you see why? What if your race or religion is next. You can't ban an entire race or religion for the actions of some.

I don't expect to see some drivel here about how I am a leftist etc. I would tend to agree that muslims are more likely to commit terrorism. Doesn't mean that all of them are and I'm sure there are decent upstanding ones. I'm also fine with halting immigration from terror hotbed countries until this is all sorted out.
 
Again- this is about surveillance of American Muslims who have lived here for years and have caused no problems. If we allow this to happen to Muslims, who's next? We have basically lost freedom of religion.

More hyperbole. We have not lost freedom of religion. Again you and several others are giving aid and comfort to those here and those that wish to come here that desire to eliminate individual liberty.

If you have a group of people publicly demanding violent overthrow of our government to replace it with a more repressive ideology, the right thing to do is surveillance and if here on visa round them up and send them back.
 
I haven't noticed a single post here in favor of sharia.

You and others are consistently opposing surveillance of those publicly demanding violent overthrow of our government to replace it with a more repressive ideology. There are posts in this thread basically demanding that we allow those same types to come here.

That is not only favoring Sharia it is giving aid and comfort to terrorists.
 
Back
Top