Newt Gingrich Says We Should ‘Test Every Person’ Of Muslim Descent

a reply to: Sremmos80

Well you are a using a false equivalency, sorry can't help you there.

Just because it didn't happen then, doesn't change now.

What's so false about it? You said the US went to war in the middle east, therefor the US created the conditions for terrorism. How many Iraqi or Afghani terrorists have been attacking Western countries?

Interestingly enough, the most current Islamic terrorist was from Tunisia, which is on the Mediterranean in northern Africa. How many campaigns has the US spent there?

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: neo96
Well since people accept regulation of the second.

Why don't you support regulation of the first ?

Can't have it both ways.

The first is regulated.

Not to the extent the second.

IE TESTING which by any other name is a background check.

It's actually more regulated than the second; being that it applies to religion, speech and the media all at once and the 2nd only applies to guns (well actually guns and militia but pro 2nders like to ignore that part of the Amendment).

Nah some of just actually can read.

The second explicitly talked about TWO separate, but equal things.

Militia, and the PEOPLE.

Neways.

.Theft is punishable by amputation of the right hand (above).

• Criticizing or denying any part of the Quran is punishable by death.
• Criticizing Muhammad or denying that he is a prophet is punishable by death.
• Criticizing or denying Allah, the god of Islam is punishable by death.
• A Muslim who becomes a non-Muslim is punishable by death.
• A non-Muslim who leads a Muslim away from Islam is punishable by death.
• A non-Muslim man who marries a Muslim woman is punishable by death.
• A man can marry an infant girl and consummate the marriage when she is 9 years old.
• Girls' clitoris should be cut (Muhammad's words, Book 41, Kitab Al-Adab, Hadith 5251).
• A woman can have 1 husband, who can have up to 4 wives; Muhammad can have more.
• A man can beat his wife for insubordination.
• A man can unilaterally divorce his wife; a woman needs her husband's consent to divorce.
• A divorced wife loses custody of all children over 6 years of age or when they exceed it.
• Testimonies of four male witnesses are required to prove rape against a woman.
• A woman who has been raped cannot testify in court against her rapist(s).
• A woman's testimony in court, allowed in property cases, carries ½ the weight of a man's.
• A female heir inherits half of what a male heir inherits.
• A woman cannot drive a car, as it leads to fitnah (upheaval).
• A woman cannot speak alone to a man who is not her husband or relative.
• Meat to eat must come from animals that have been sacrificed to Allah - i.e., be "Halal".
• Muslims should engage in Taqiyya and lie to non-Muslims to advance Islam.

That last one says soooo much.

Let those that want sharia law go elsewhere. Their laws are crimes waiting to happen.

322 million Muslims in the US. Testing them all might take some time, plus create a new industry of testers, truck drivers driving them to the airport to be deported, more planes, guards to make sure they don't run off, growth industry bringing American jobs back. No unions though!!!!



www.pewresearch.org...

a reply to: olaru12

Your maths off O.

Total us population is 330 million.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

This a thread about religious tests. You're the one insisting that the majority of terrorism comes from Muslims. I disagree. The Gulf War, and its Christian justification is my evidence.

originally posted by: queenofswords

.Theft is punishable by amputation of the right hand (above).

• Criticizing or denying any part of the Quran is punishable by death.
• Criticizing Muhammad or denying that he is a prophet is punishable by death.
• Criticizing or denying Allah, the god of Islam is punishable by death.
• A Muslim who becomes a non-Muslim is punishable by death.
• A non-Muslim who leads a Muslim away from Islam is punishable by death.
• A non-Muslim man who marries a Muslim woman is punishable by death.
• A man can marry an infant girl and consummate the marriage when she is 9 years old.
• Girls' clitoris should be cut (Muhammad's words, Book 41, Kitab Al-Adab, Hadith 5251).
• A woman can have 1 husband, who can have up to 4 wives; Muhammad can have more.
• A man can beat his wife for insubordination.
• A man can unilaterally divorce his wife; a woman needs her husband's consent to divorce.
• A divorced wife loses custody of all children over 6 years of age or when they exceed it.
• Testimonies of four male witnesses are required to prove rape against a woman.
• A woman who has been raped cannot testify in court against her rapist(s).
• A woman's testimony in court, allowed in property cases, carries ½ the weight of a man's.
• A female heir inherits half of what a male heir inherits.
• A woman cannot drive a car, as it leads to fitnah (upheaval).
• A woman cannot speak alone to a man who is not her husband or relative.
• Meat to eat must come from animals that have been sacrificed to Allah - i.e., be "Halal".
• Muslims should engage in Taqiyya and lie to non-Muslims to advance Islam.

That last one says soooo much.

Let those that want sharia law go elsewhere. Their laws are crimes waiting to happen.

Sure but you can't test for that. It's the testing and targeting part that is the issue.

Again just to put this in perspective 90 percent of these attacks are against other Muslims in Muslim countries especially since toppling foreign dictators.

You can't test people for faith and the last law as you stated was to lie. So now what? The head of one of the largest Muslim groups was a red haired dude who looked like he could have been from Portland or Brooklyn.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: InTheLight

I don't know what you are trying to tell me here. Looks like you just posted some ignorant and biased rant about Sharia to me, but I'm not sure what you are trying to tell me by posting it.

The information is not biased nor ignorant...and just replying to your 'rights' comment.

a reply to: windword

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's my understanding that American Muslims in favor of Sharia law want it for the purpose of self governing within their own community

Thank you. I will correct you. Self-governing within their own community? You're spun-out by the propaganda & Islamist apologists. Sharia is a brutal, barbaric, unethical, inhumane set of 'laws', which was designed by a brutal, sadistic warlord paedophile & his rabid followers. There is no place for Sharia anywhere in the Western world. ANYWHERE. We have areas in the UK which are almost at the sharia level of self-governance, and they are literally no-go areas for anyone but those who submit to sharia. Plus, if you understood Islam at all, you would know that it was designed to be expansionist & to give its followers a sense of being ideologically superior - when in actual fact, everything about Islam (including its founder) is based in an utterly perverse, inverted set of moral statutes. As in "I can rape this girl repeatedly, and if she refuses to submit I will kill her without mercy. Because I 'own her with my right hand', and that means she has to do whatever I tell her, or expect death..."

You want to pander to these people, to Sharia, any more? You should be ashamed of yourself.

a reply to: queenofswords

I know what sharia law means, although, have to say, depending on which muslim group you are talking about, it might not mean what you think it does. it can be anything from a group allowing itself to be ruled under the laws as determined by their leaders, still acknowledging the laws of the country they are in as binding. or it could mean something more like the taliban enforced sharia law.

so, let's see how this would work??

first let's identify "muslim background"... how do we identify those of "muslim backgrounds". do we raid the mosques and seize their records in search for these people? how many generations should we go back before we can say that they no longer have that muslim background? what about we go through the immigration records and search according to countries?

and once we identify them, just how do we test them? do we simply ask them and believe their answer? search their internet histories? assign people to tail them and watch them? I bet alot of those who aren't christian but like to bash christians spend some time on christian websites. alot of conservatives probably spend time on liberal websites. and alot of liberals spend time on conservative websites. and some of us like to keep an eye on everyone just trying to figure out what the group will be doing next. to sit there and say we should round up everyone who has been visiting websites that they believe to used by terrorist groups is kind of incorrect since our intelligence agencies probably have people starting at those websites constantly, as well as the news media. and they probably have many working for them "of muslim backgrounds" since they can provide a deeper insight than most of us can.

most of the japanese that were interned were loyal american citizens, most of the german americns were loyal. and I kind of thing that most of the ones that they would round up now would be innocent also.

it would be just another one of those stupid things countries do out of fear and ignorance that our children's children's children will look back on as being injust.

but, if they happened to target the right people of muslim background, could provide the funding for many more wars and a nice lifestyle for those who remained...
so I would put it past them to try to do something like this...

I have a question: how many of you arguing against Sharia law knows what it actually is?

Who will be honest?

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Different philosophies. Christians can be just as violent as Muslims when provoked. Just look at the IRA.

85 innocents were just killed and we have people pulling out the usual "Turn the Middle East into glass," rants. Now think about what it must be like to live in one of those countries whose destruction people are calling for. That stress has been in near constant attack by the West for decades. The number of innocents killed over there far surpasses the number of innocents killed by terrorist attacks in the West. These countries don't have the capability to turn the West into glass. Hell, they don't have the capability to attack anyone that isn't a neighbor. So their people have to resort to a form of guerilla war.

While what these people do is terrible the West needs to take responsibility for creating them in the first place. Ultimately these people aren't doing this for religion. They're doing it for vengeance. Just as Bush tried to justify Iraq with religion they're trying to justify their own expression of rage with religion.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
I have a question: how many of you arguing against Sharia law knows what it actually is?

Who will be honest?

We should be testing for whahabis but they are usually at prestigious universities or the white house so I guess we know where they are. Strange though they end up funding these terrorists or masterminding it.

Hmmmm I wonder if there is a correlation to this.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
I have a question: how many of you arguing against Sharia law knows what it actually is?

Who will be honest?

Yeah it's a bunch of people that 'hate' :

Women.

Abortion.

LGBT'S.

I always find the defense of Islam to be entertaining.

Every other day of the week that are disparaging that ideology from the locals.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Saudi Arabia about 175 beheadings a year thats about all you need to know,Id take the Islamic banking system however

a reply to: windword

What we need is a REAL WAR ON ISIS

Obama is the culprit here and the other Western leaders of NATO

Obama’s lack of doing anything is enflaming the issue

The Western leaders don’t care about civilians, their playing the geopolitical game in Syria to the detriment of their citizens

NEVER DO ANY SUPERCLASS PEOPLE GET KILLED IN THESE ATTACKS
THAT’S WHY NOTHING WILL BE DONE OR IS EVER DONE

a reply to: windword

This a thread about religious tests. You're the one insisting that the majority of terrorism comes from Muslims. I disagree. The Gulf War, and its Christian justification is my evidence.

That's fair. All I ask is if you hold the standards you hold to Christians to Muslims as well? Because I have yet to see it.

a reply to: neo96

So ... you know what you've read in right-wing media.

Check.

originally posted by: khnum
a reply to: Gryphon66

Saudi Arabia about 175 beheadings a year thats about all you need to know,Id take the Islamic banking system however

No, that's not "all anyone needs to know" but that point-of-view is typical.

So, another "no, I don't know anything at all" response. Check.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

While what these people do is terrible the West needs to take responsibility for creating them in the first place. Ultimately these people aren't doing this for religion. They're doing it for vengeance. Just as Bush tried to justify Iraq with religion they're trying to justify their own expression of rage with religion.

How is the West responsible for terrorists who come from Saudi Arabia or Pakistan for example?