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

[Ender]

I see typical RPFer's instead of being outraged about the little babies, children, women and men being run over, the outraged is directed at those who want to stop it from coming or happening here.

There should be a moratorium on immigration from terrorist nations (the Rand plan) and I would take it a step further with a temporary ban on all Muslims (the Trump plan). Deportations should begin on all illegal Muslims and then expire all ones here on visa - deport.

We are at war against a religion and ideology diametrically opposed to individual liberty. Where is the outrage against those that believe in Sharia in the US and convert or die? Are we really going to ignore that by allowing those that hold this ideology to grow in numbers here that they will rewrite are laws and attack us for our beliefs until they get their way?

The establishment politicians, MSM and libertarian elites that are against what I am saying are very well off. They would never be in a public place that would risk their lives or that of their families or friends in a terrorist attack. They live behind their walled compound or are in their travels behind the compound of their friends or family or businesses. They do not give a damn and are willing to risk the lives of the average Americans for open borders as long as they profit from the cheap migrant labor. The rest are more than willing to sacrifice their lives as cucks to people that hate us, our beliefs and want to kill us.

We are NOT at war with a religion- we are at WAR because TPTB want ME resources and power over the globe.

Some of this is blowback and some of this is BS- Judge Napolitano told the world that according to the 911 reports, no deaths happened in Orlando until 5:30 AM- after the police showed up. So are we being played? Is it TPTB plan to have everybody hate each other and blame others so that they can take even more control?

Think about that.

[cajuncocoa]

//

[goldenequity]

France ‘Suppressed Reports of Gruesome Torture’ at Bataclan Massacre

According to this testimony, Wahhabist killers reportedly
gouged out eyes,
castrated victims,
and shoved their testicles in their mouths.
They may also have disemboweled some poor souls.
Women were reportedly stabbed in the genitals –
and the torture was, victims told police, filmed for Daesh or Islamic State propaganda.

http://heatst.com/uk/exclusive-franc...clan-massacre/

Never read THAT in the media...... did we? (until now)
I wonder why.

Molyneaux makes the point:

[TheCount]

We have to destroy the Constitution to save the Constitution.

I can't imagine any possible downsides to giving the government the power to decide which people are entitled to rights and due process based upon their beliefs.

[goldenequity]

I can't imagine any possible downsides to giving the government the power to decide which people are entitled to rights and due process based upon their beliefs.

Me neither. I think we need to become more tolerant.
It's not them.... it's US. We're the problem.

[Ender]

Never read THAT in the media...... did we? (until now)
I wonder why.

Same as we don't hear about this stuff:

Prisoners raped by dogs, the ‘modern’ torture techniques of the US

“Afghan prisoners were tied face down on small chairs. Then fighting dogs entered the torture chamber. If the prisoners did not say anything useful, each dog got to take a turn on them. After procedure like these, they confessed everything. They would have even said that they killed Kennedy without even knowing who he was.”

http://www.hambastagi.org/new/englis...of-the-us.html

And more:

The United Nations revealed Wednesday it has "credible and reliable" evidence that people recently detained at U.S. military prisons in Afghanistan have faced torture and abuse.

The UN's Assistance Mission and High Commissioner for Human Rights exposed the findings in a report based on interviews with 790 "conflict-related detainees" between February 2013 and December 2014.

According to the report, prevalent torture methods used by Afghan forces include, "prolonged and severe beating with cables, pipes, hoses or wooden sticks (including on the soles of the feet), punching, hitting and kicking all over the body including jumping on the detainee’s body, twisting of genitals including with a wrench-like device, and threats of execution and/or sexual assault."

http://www.commondreams.org/news/201...re-afghanistan

Taguba's report stated that the following abuses happened in this incident:
- Punching, slapping, and kicking detainees; jumping on their naked feet.
- Videotaping and photographing naked male and female detainees.
- Forcibly arranging detainees in various sexually explicit positions for photographing.
- Forcing detainees to remove their clothing and keeping them naked for several days at a time.
- Forcing naked male detainees to wear women's underwear.
- Forcing groups of male detainees to masturbate themselves while being photographed and videotaped.
- Arranging naked male detainees in a pile and then jumping on them.
- Positioning a naked detainee on a box, with a sandbag on his head, and attaching wires to his fingers, toes, and penis to simulate electric torture.
- Writing "I am a Rapest (sic)" on the leg of a detainee accused of rape, and then photographing him naked.
- Placing a dog chain or strap around a naked detainee's neck and having a female soldier pose for a picture.
- A male MP guard having sex with a female detainee.
- Using military working dogs (without muzzles) to intimidate and frighten detainees, and in at least one case biting and severely injuring a detainee.
- Taking photographs of dead Iraqi detainees.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/10/30/world/...al-fast-facts/

[goldenequity]

Same as we don't hear about this stuff:

Exactly.. wouldn't want anybody getting upset about ANYTHING.

[LibertyEagle]

We have to destroy the Constitution to save the Constitution.

Where have I heard something like this before?

Where in your ethos did you ever hear that the U.S. Constitution applied to people who lived in other countries?

[Ender]

Where in your ethos did you ever hear that the U.S. Constitution applied to people who lived in other countries?

Apparently from the most important document in our history: the Declaration of Independence.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

[LibertyEagle]

Apparently from the most important document in our history: the Declaration of Independence.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Yes, the Declaration of Independence from Great Britain. Which has 0 to do with what we are talking about.

Which doesn't mean that citizens of other countries have any right to come into ours. Sheesh.

[nikcers]

That doesn't mean that citizens of other countries have any right to come into ours.

Since when have we banned non citizens from visiting the country?

[LibertyEagle]

Since when have we banned non citizens from visiting the country?

Oh, I don't know, during wars with those peoples? lol

[tod evans]

Government is banking too much power on having a villain, she's not going to cede either power or the villain to the people without a fight.

[Ender]

Yes, the Declaration of Independence from Great Britain. Which has 0 to do with what we are talking about.

Which doesn't mean that citizens of other countries have any right to come into ours. Sheesh.

WTF are you talking about? Jefferson meant ALL PEOPLE.

It is THE most important document in American history and one, that if the people would follow it, would sustain real freedom.

[Ender]

Oh, I don't know, during wars with those peoples? lol

The ones WE helped create?

[Ender]

Government is banking too much power on having a villain, she's not going to cede either power or the villain to the people without a fight.

'Zactly.

[LibertyEagle]

WTF are you talking about? Jefferson meant ALL PEOPLE.

It is THE most important document in American history and one, that if the people would follow it, would sustain real freedom.

Yes, but it had absolutely zero to do with whether anyone who $#@!ing wants to can enter our country.

Hell, Jefferson didn't even want legal immigrants unless we were in need of a particular skill.

What was likely to happen, according to Jefferson, was that immigrants would come to America from countries that would have given them no experience living in a free society. They would bring with them the ideas and principles of the governments they left behind –ideas and principles that were often at odds with American liberty.

“Suppose 20 millions of republican Americans thrown all of a sudden into France, what would be the condition of that kingdom?” Jefferson asked. “If it would be more turbulent, less happy, less strong, we may believe that the addition of half a million of foreigners to our present numbers would produce a similar effect here.”

http://humanevents.com/2007/07/20/fo...tion-skeptics/

[69360]

I see typical RPFer's instead of being outraged about the little babies, children, women and men being run over, the outraged is directed at those who want to stop it from coming or happening here.

There should be a moratorium on immigration from terrorist nations (the Rand plan) and I would take it a step further with a temporary ban on all Muslims (the Trump plan). Deportations should begin on all illegal Muslims and then expire all ones here on visa - deport.

We are at war against a religion and ideology diametrically opposed to individual liberty. Where is the outrage against those that believe in Sharia in the US and convert or die? Are we really going to ignore that by allowing those that hold this ideology to grow in numbers here that they will rewrite are laws and attack us for our beliefs until they get their way?

The establishment politicians, MSM and libertarian elites that are against what I am saying are very well off. They would never be in a public place that would risk their lives or that of their families or friends in a terrorist attack. They live behind their walled compound or are in their travels behind the compound of their friends or family or businesses. They do not give a damn and are willing to risk the lives of the average Americans for open borders as long as they profit from the cheap migrant labor. The rest are more than willing to sacrifice their lives as cucks to people that hate us, our beliefs and want to kill us.

How do you determine who is a Muslim? See if they will eat pork? If Al.Baghdadi shows up clutching a bible and finds Jesus, do we let him in?

The ban on countries is enforceable and probably pragmatic at this point. The ban on all Muslim is discriminatory and unconstitutional.

[cajuncocoa]

//

[cajuncocoa]

//

[CPUd]

They could add Muslim detection capabilities to this:

[TheCount]

Oh, I don't know, during wars with those peoples? lol

If we were at war with every Muslim person and country in the world the death toll would be just a teensy bit higher than it is right now.

[RandallFan]

All the Trump Derangement people actually suggsted Newt (be one of the people) alone( who should steal the nom) who wants to go door-to-door on Gingrich; and Amash endorsed Cruz who wants to go door to door on 12 million illegals.

Trump is apparently the lunatic.

[bunklocoempire]

Government caused this problem, government isn't going to fix it.

Looks like we have another non-believer.

I'm pretty sure that non-belief in government, isn't compatible with western civilization. Maybe you should leave.

TheTexan will back me on this.

[tod evans]

Looks like we have another non-believer.

I'm pretty sure that non-belief in government, isn't compatible with western civilization. Maybe you should leave.

TheTexan will back me on this.

I already did.

The Ozarks is a nation unto itself.........

[FindLiberty]

TIMES HAVE CHANGED

Imagine Gingrich in the ring 1:1 facing the greatest American Muslim
of this modern age (who even refused to fight for the US military).



(BTW, looks like Gingrich might be too saucy even for Trump)

Trump Trump Trump

lol

[LibertyEagle]

That's a question the Trump supporters can never seem to answer. That's why Rand's plan makes so much more sense, and we really CAN'T go any further than what's he's proposed. You can determine what country someone is coming from. You cannot determine whether someone belongs to a certain religion just by looking at them or asking them. I guess Trump and his supporters haven't thought that through very well.

Rand's suggestion was good and would have worked well, until our government attacked the hell out of the Middle East. Now, not so much.

I could be wrong, but I'm thinking the vetting process, while not foolproof, would show whether they are Muslims or not. Should be pretty easy.

[LibertyEagle]

@LibertyEagle The question you originally posed to me has been sufficiently answered by @Ender and @nikcers while I was away from the board. I'm not ducking it, I just can't add anything better to what they've had to say at this point; they've covered it perfectly.

Hardly. You made a claim about the Constitution and then think others' talking about a totally different document is covering it perfectly? Okey dokey.

[cajuncocoa]

//

[cajuncocoa]

//