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

[erowe1]

It's not a lie at all and you damn well know it. More than a couple of anarchists have admitted it. I'll spend a couple of minutes to see if I can find one, or you might just want to start a poll and ask the forum straight out.

Great, then please provide the quote. I am 100% sure that you're lying.

Of course, LibertyEagle isn't a troll though.

 

[Danke]

Great, then please provide the quote. I am 100% sure that you're lying.

Of course, LibertyEagle isn't a troll though.

Oh many have said it but not in the way I think you're taking it. A lot of people don't think the system/government can be rehabilitated, it is gone too far. So they want it to fail and start over.

 

[Ender]

You still have not explained why if you believe in individual liberty in this country then why do you support importing people that oppose individual liberty?

I am going to go out on a limb here and believe we have a group of RPFers that are Muslim and are opposed to individual liberty. It totally defies logic that there is a group of RPF posters that supposedly believe in individual liberty yet are loudly demanding that as a country we import people that oppose individual liberty, that oppose the bill of rights, the constitution, believe Sharia should be the law of the land and in some cases wishes to kill us as infidels if they achieved power if we do not convert.

I am a Christian Minister under a Vow of Poverty.

My whole life is dedicated to helping others, especially in freedom and liberty, as well as education and culture.

None of us are talking about "importing" anybody; we are talking about laws and regulations that will NOT deter terrorists but WILL eliminate freedoms for Americans. These kinds of unlawful "laws" always have and they always will.

IMHPOV, it totally defies logic that there is a group of RPF posters that supposedly believe in individual liberty yet are loudly demanding that as a country we make laws against the 1st Amendment that will, sooner or later, destroy what little we have left of freedom of religion and free speech.

It defies logic that someone on a RON PAUL forum would advocate such and trust a piece of slime like Newt to save them. The whole WoT has been to grab oil and resources from the ME; it has NEVER been about terrorists, except to get some radicals going so that so-called Americans will jump on the Patriot Act bandwagon and scream: MORE LAWS!!!.

This is definitely an ID.10.t problem.

Sorta like all those "gun-free" zones.

 

[erowe1]

Oh many have said it but not in the way I think you're taking it. A lot of people don't think the system/government can be rehabilitated, it is gone too far. So they want it to fail and start over.

That's not what [MENTION=660]LibertyEagle[/MENTION] said. She said they want the country to fail, not the government. The dissolution of the federal government would mean success for the country, not failure.

 

[phill4paul]

A little over 50% of US Muslims believe are laws should be based on Sharia or a combination of Sharia and US law. The range varies from 50-97% of immigrants depending on nation.

You're going to have to come up with some stats or I am going to call B.S. Even in some Muslim countries the number is as low as 8% so, I hardly think American Muslims would be more divergent.

Here is a Pew survey about Muslims in general and specifically.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...key-findings-in-the-u-s-and-around-the-world/

 

[69360]

We can and we have. The US also has a long Constitutional history of restricting immigration based on race. Here are again is some notable legislation.

The Immigration Act of 1924
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Act_of_1924


Immigration Act of 1917 (also known as the Asiatic Barred Zone Act)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Act_of_1917


Immigration Act of 1903 - Anarchist Exclusion Act


Geary Act
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geary_Act


Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Exclusion_Act


Page Act of 1875 (Sect. 141, 18 Stat. 477, 1873-March 1875)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Page_Act_of_1875




A little over 50% of US Muslims believe are laws should be based on Sharia or a combination of Sharia and US law. The range varies from 50-97% of immigrants depending on nation.



They did not wish to impose Sharia or convert or die.

So you want to go back to being a nation that institutionally discriminates and hates? All of that legislation was struck down.


If you believe this why are you even here posting?


Should we just ethnically cleanse the country Balkans style. Kill them all and dig some mass graves?

Why not bring back slavery? You could enslave all the muslims.

Look, I agree that muslims are going to be more likely to commit terrorism. I'm fine with a temporary ban on immigration from countries that are terror hotbeds until this is sorted. But what you want to do is wrong.

 

[Suzanimal]

Is this one of your betters, Suz?
http://humanevents.com/2007/07/20/founding-fathers-were-immigration-skeptics/

So what? I disagree. And besides, they're not the one's here picking and choosing. ATM, it's Obama's goons but soon it'll be either Trump or Hillary's goons. Do you seriously trust these people?

How on earth is rounding up all the Muslims in this country and quizzing them a small government, pro liberty position?

 

[kahless]

None of us are talking about "importing" anybody; we are talking about laws and regulations that will NOT deter terrorists but WILL eliminate freedoms for Americans. These kinds of unlawful "laws" always have and they always will.

Importing or allowing open borders it does not make much of a difference. The end result will be the same the loss of individual liberty.

IMHPOV, it totally defies logic that there is a group of RPF posters that supposedly believe in individual liberty yet are loudly demanding that as a country we make laws against the 1st Amendment that will, sooner or later, destroy what little we have left of freedom of religion and free speech.

Defending our borders is not in violation of the 1st amendment and you know that. I therefore question whether you are being truthful telling me you are a Christian and support individual liberty when you are so adamant about allowing people to enter our borders that would deny us individual liberty and freedom of religion.

It defies logic that someone on a RON PAUL forum would advocate such and trust a piece of slime like Newt to save them.

I said I started to like him. I have always hated Newt and have railed against him and his "Contract on America" in these forums. I also take issue with his comments about the internet as it relates to this but that issue is for another thread and have not had time to vet it yet.

The whole WoT has been to grab oil and resources from the ME; it has NEVER been about terrorists, except to get some radicals going so that so-called Americans will jump on the Patriot Act bandwagon and scream: MORE LAWS!!!.

We agree on some aspects of foreign intervention and NSA collection but that is again irrelevant to this topic. Despite any mistakes you do not punish yourself by allowing in the people you pissed off.

This is definitely an ID.10.t problem.

You accuse me of insults when none were given and now you stoop to this.

 

[cajuncocoa]

//

 

[LibertyEagle]

Are you really going to find something from 5 years ago, posted by a member who is long gone? Find me something posted recently by someone who is here now.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...fan-Molyneux&p=6256595&viewfull=1#post6256595

 

[Ender]

Importing or allowing open borders it does not make much of a difference. The end result will be the same the loss of individual liberty.



Defending our borders is not in violation of the 1st amendment and you know that. I therefore question whether you are being truthful telling me you are a Christian and support individual liberty when you are so adamant about allowing people to enter our borders that would deny us individual liberty and freedom of religion.



I said I started to like him. I have always hated Newt and have railed against him and his "Contract on America" in these forums. I also take issue with his comments about the internet as it relates to this but that issue is for another thread and have not had time to vet it yet.



We agree on some aspects of foreign intervention and NSA collection but that is again irrelevant to this topic. Despite any mistakes you do not punish yourself by allowing in the people you pissed off.



You accuse me of insults when none were given and now you stoop to this.

ID.10.t is a technical term........ and didn't you accuse me of being a Muslim?

 

[Smitty]

I agree that muslims are going to be more likely to commit terrorism.

That's the end of the discussion about allowing them into America.

 

[kahless]

So you want to go back to being a nation that institutionally discriminates and hates? All of that legislation was struck down.

These laws were about rather national security and homogeneity. The feelings of hate or discrimination are irrelevant.

If you believe this why are you even here posting?

I believe we can achieve individual liberty within our borders. An impossibility due to people with your open border ideology.

Should we just ethnically cleanse the country Balkans style. Kill them all and dig some mass graves?

Why not bring back slavery? You could enslave all the muslims.

Hyperbole. Newt nor anyone here is proposing or promoting that. This is just your typical Progressive talking point to shutdown any discussion or opposition concerning border controls.

 

[cajuncocoa]

//

 

[LibertyEagle]

So what? I disagree. And besides, they're not the one's here picking and choosing. ATM, it's Obama's goons but soon it'll be either Trump or Hillary's goons. Do you seriously trust these people?

Absolutely not. Most of those are who caused the problem. But, just like if someone had started your house on fire, you first would put out the fire and then go after those who started it.

How on earth is rounding up all the Muslims in this country and quizzing them a small government, pro liberty position?

I never suggested rounding all Muslims up. Certainly not Americans. What I said was I would revoke any temporary visas, etc. and send them home. At least until we get our government out of the Middle East. I would also not allow Muslims to enter our borders until that time, either. Rand had what would have been a good solution for that, IF our government hadn't encouraged them to relocate to EVERYWHERE. Now, it's not as easy to just delineate by country.

But, absolutely, I would do this. It is the pro-liberty position for Americans, so that we keep our liberty.

 

[LibertyEagle]

This is the quote, he's talking about the state:

Sorry, but I am not wanting either my Constitution or my country destroyed.

 

[Ender]

Absolutely not. Most of those are who caused the problem. But, just like if someone had started your house on fire, you first would put out the fire and then go after those who started it.


I never suggested rounding all Muslims up. Certainly not Americans. What I said was I would revoke any temporary visas, etc. and send them home. At least until we get our government out of the Middle East. I would also not allow Muslims to enter our borders until that time, either. Rand what would have been a good solution for that, IF our government hadn't encouraged them to relocate to EVERYWHERE. Now, it's not as easy to just delineate by country.

But, absolutely, I would do this. It is the pro-liberty position for Americans, so that they keep their liberty.

But Newt has and you are supporting his position.

 

[erowe1]

Sorry, but I am not wanting either my Constitution or my country destroyed.

In other words, you're blatantly advocating statism over against freedom, and then twisting words around to make it look like the very people who support this website's mission are in the wrong.

But don't worry, LibertyEagle still isn't a troll.

 

[kahless]

More than a couple of anarchists have straight out admitted it. One, not too long ago. Others, are a bit more coy, but support the very activities that the globalists are using to finish destroying our country. I'll spend a couple of minutes to see if I can find one, or you might just want to start a poll and ask the forum straight out.

I can attest to this and really cannot believe anyone here would be surprised or behave as if it did not exist.

ID.10.t is a technical term........ and didn't you accuse me of being a Muslim?

It is an insult and I did not accuse of being Muslim. I asked if you were.

 

[Ender]

Sorry, but I am not wanting either my Constitution or my country destroyed.

Making the 1st Amendment void is destroying the Constitution.