Does the Left think Muslims have a Constitutional right....

[bripat9643]

Ah...but I wasn't referring to civil rights - I was referring to immigration policy. I agree we can have any bias we want - that doesn't of course make it right (look back at some of the cruel and draconian anti-immigration laws we had against different groups, like the Chinese). To discrimminate against religion alone is bigotry.

And hi back at you sweetie!

So is it never right to discriminate based on ethnic culture, especially when that culture has proven destructive in their own nations?

You seem to be applying a principle that should have NOTHING to do with immigration. We shouldn't choose who comes here by political correctness, but by an impassioned evaluation of what benefit they'll bring to this country....like we did with the Russians, Italians, Irish, and Polish immigrants.

And in that impassioned evaluation, we should take into account what's going on in Western countries where Muslims are attaining numerical significance and ask, "Do we want that in OUR country?"

It's a valid question to be asking.

The Russians, Italians, Irish, Polish, East Europeans came during immigrant waves that occurred prior to any real limits on immigration. The first laws prohibiting immigration were the Chinese Exclusion laws in the 1870's based not on "an imapssioned evaluation" but pure racism. The Irish, Italians, East Europeans immigrates were poor, desperate, impoverished and despised. They were considered dirty, diseased, subhuman, drunkard criminals (Irish), overly fertile, untrustworthy (Italians), bred children like litters of puppies (Catholics)..etc etc in fact you get the picture of how immigration was viewed then. And it's not much different than now (with Mexicans for example). There were no real quotes or restrictions beyond disease. We are a nation of many immigrant groups and all of them have managed to make a sucess of themselves: Irish, Russian, Italian, Palestinian, Lebonese, Polish, Cuban, Haitian....

If someone is willing to work hard, does not have a violent criminal record - then I don't care what their religion or ethnic background is - our success stories are not PHD's coming over here, they are the dirt poor people who worked hard and valued education and sent their children on to become PHD's. That's how I view it. Quotas? Sure, I can accept that - but not based on ethnicity or religion.

Those people were allowed into this country legally, not like the Wetbacks who are jumping our border. Stop with the asymmetrical comparisons already.

And the Chinese were allowed as guest workers to build our railroads. When they applied for citizenship we said no. This is the point. It's up to us to decide.

and if people like you don't stfu, we'll ask more of them to come here

Trying to shut me up with threats?

Sounds like you got a little terrorist in you too.

Libturds and Muslim terrorists have a lot in common.

 

[bripat9643]

Civil rights don't apply to foreigners wanting to immigrate to this country. The OP was written with people like you in mind.

BTW, where have you been lately.

Missed ya!

Ah...but I wasn't referring to civil rights - I was referring to immigration policy. I agree we can have any bias we want - that doesn't of course make it right (look back at some of the cruel and draconian anti-immigration laws we had against different groups, like the Chinese). To discrimminate against religion alone is bigotry.

And hi back at you sweetie!

So is it never right to discriminate based on ethnic culture, especially when that culture has proven destructive in their own nations?

You seem to be applying a principle that should have NOTHING to do with immigration. We shouldn't choose who comes here by political correctness, but by an impassioned evaluation of what benefit they'll bring to this country....like we did with the Russians, Italians, Irish, and Polish immigrants.

And in that impassioned evaluation, we should take into account what's going on in Western countries where Muslims are attaining numerical significance and ask, "Do we want that in OUR country?"

It's a valid question to be asking.

The Russians, Italians, Irish, Polish, East Europeans came during immigrant waves that occurred prior to any real limits on immigration. The first laws prohibiting immigration were the Chinese Exclusion laws in the 1870's based not on "an imapssioned evaluation" but pure racism. The Irish, Italians, East Europeans immigrates were poor, desperate, impoverished and despised. They were considered dirty, diseased, subhuman, drunkard criminals (Irish), overly fertile, untrustworthy (Italians), bred children like litters of puppies (Catholics)..etc etc in fact you get the picture of how immigration was viewed then. And it's not much different than now (with Mexicans for example). There were no real quotes or restrictions beyond disease. We are a nation of many immigrant groups and all of them have managed to make a sucess of themselves: Irish, Russian, Italian, Palestinian, Lebonese, Polish, Cuban, Haitian....

If someone is willing to work hard, does not have a violent criminal record - then I don't care what their religion or ethnic background is - our success stories are not PHD's coming over here, they are the dirt poor people who worked hard and valued education and sent their children on to become PHD's. That's how I view it. Quotas? Sure, I can accept that - but not based on ethnicity or religion.

I don't care how hard they work or if they succeed, if they try to impose their Sharia crap here. The immigrants who came here previously all had an affect on the culture of this country, some for the better and some for the worse. Muslims will affect it only for the worse. Islam is a bloodthirsty cult with no redeeming social value. I don't see how this country gains by importing people who want to propagate this disease.

It's shame you don't know Islam, but then again, your don't know Christianity or much of anything else either.

Huh?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Civil rights don't apply to foreigners wanting to immigrate to this country. The OP was written with people like you in mind.

BTW, where have you been lately.

Missed ya!

Ah...but I wasn't referring to civil rights - I was referring to immigration policy. I agree we can have any bias we want - that doesn't of course make it right (look back at some of the cruel and draconian anti-immigration laws we had against different groups, like the Chinese). To discrimminate against religion alone is bigotry.

And hi back at you sweetie!

So is it never right to discriminate based on ethnic culture, especially when that culture has proven destructive in their own nations?

You seem to be applying a principle that should have NOTHING to do with immigration. We shouldn't choose who comes here by political correctness, but by an impassioned evaluation of what benefit they'll bring to this country....like we did with the Russians, Italians, Irish, and Polish immigrants.

And in that impassioned evaluation, we should take into account what's going on in Western countries where Muslims are attaining numerical significance and ask, "Do we want that in OUR country?"

It's a valid question to be asking.

The Russians, Italians, Irish, Polish, East Europeans came during immigrant waves that occurred prior to any real limits on immigration. The first laws prohibiting immigration were the Chinese Exclusion laws in the 1870's based not on "an imapssioned evaluation" but pure racism. The Irish, Italians, East Europeans immigrates were poor, desperate, impoverished and despised. They were considered dirty, diseased, subhuman, drunkard criminals (Irish), overly fertile, untrustworthy (Italians), bred children like litters of puppies (Catholics)..etc etc in fact you get the picture of how immigration was viewed then. And it's not much different than now (with Mexicans for example). There were no real quotes or restrictions beyond disease. We are a nation of many immigrant groups and all of them have managed to make a sucess of themselves: Irish, Russian, Italian, Palestinian, Lebonese, Polish, Cuban, Haitian....

If someone is willing to work hard, does not have a violent criminal record - then I don't care what their religion or ethnic background is - our success stories are not PHD's coming over here, they are the dirt poor people who worked hard and valued education and sent their children on to become PHD's. That's how I view it. Quotas? Sure, I can accept that - but not based on ethnicity or religion.

I don't care how hard they work or if they succeed, if they try to impose their Sharia crap here. The immigrants who came here previously all had an affect on the culture of this country, some for the better and some for the worse. Muslims will affect it only for the worse. Islam is a bloodthirsty cult with no redeeming social value. I don't see how this country gains by importing people who want to propagate this disease.

Muslims HAVE immigrated here and have been here for centuries. Your words are the same as those directed at the Irish, Italian, Polish etc.

They said that about his people as well, but he thinks that doesn't matter as they are savages. Seems like I've heard that before somewhere.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Ah...but I wasn't referring to civil rights - I was referring to immigration policy. I agree we can have any bias we want - that doesn't of course make it right (look back at some of the cruel and draconian anti-immigration laws we had against different groups, like the Chinese). To discrimminate against religion alone is bigotry.

And hi back at you sweetie!

So is it never right to discriminate based on ethnic culture, especially when that culture has proven destructive in their own nations?

You seem to be applying a principle that should have NOTHING to do with immigration. We shouldn't choose who comes here by political correctness, but by an impassioned evaluation of what benefit they'll bring to this country....like we did with the Russians, Italians, Irish, and Polish immigrants.

And in that impassioned evaluation, we should take into account what's going on in Western countries where Muslims are attaining numerical significance and ask, "Do we want that in OUR country?"

It's a valid question to be asking.

The Russians, Italians, Irish, Polish, East Europeans came during immigrant waves that occurred prior to any real limits on immigration. The first laws prohibiting immigration were the Chinese Exclusion laws in the 1870's based not on "an imapssioned evaluation" but pure racism. The Irish, Italians, East Europeans immigrates were poor, desperate, impoverished and despised. They were considered dirty, diseased, subhuman, drunkard criminals (Irish), overly fertile, untrustworthy (Italians), bred children like litters of puppies (Catholics)..etc etc in fact you get the picture of how immigration was viewed then. And it's not much different than now (with Mexicans for example). There were no real quotes or restrictions beyond disease. We are a nation of many immigrant groups and all of them have managed to make a sucess of themselves: Irish, Russian, Italian, Palestinian, Lebonese, Polish, Cuban, Haitian....

If someone is willing to work hard, does not have a violent criminal record - then I don't care what their religion or ethnic background is - our success stories are not PHD's coming over here, they are the dirt poor people who worked hard and valued education and sent their children on to become PHD's. That's how I view it. Quotas? Sure, I can accept that - but not based on ethnicity or religion.

Those people were allowed into this country legally, not like the Wetbacks who are jumping our border. Stop with the asymmetrical comparisons already.

And the Chinese were allowed as guest workers to build our railroads. When they applied for citizenship we said no. This is the point. It's up to us to decide.

and if people like you don't stfu, we'll ask more of them to come here

Trying to shut me up with threats?

Sounds like you got a little terrorist in you too.

threats?

we all have a little terrorist within us. It's as American as apple pie and rebels sniping at Red Coats from behind trees

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Ah...but I wasn't referring to civil rights - I was referring to immigration policy. I agree we can have any bias we want - that doesn't of course make it right (look back at some of the cruel and draconian anti-immigration laws we had against different groups, like the Chinese). To discrimminate against religion alone is bigotry.

And hi back at you sweetie!

So is it never right to discriminate based on ethnic culture, especially when that culture has proven destructive in their own nations?

You seem to be applying a principle that should have NOTHING to do with immigration. We shouldn't choose who comes here by political correctness, but by an impassioned evaluation of what benefit they'll bring to this country....like we did with the Russians, Italians, Irish, and Polish immigrants.

And in that impassioned evaluation, we should take into account what's going on in Western countries where Muslims are attaining numerical significance and ask, "Do we want that in OUR country?"

It's a valid question to be asking.

The Russians, Italians, Irish, Polish, East Europeans came during immigrant waves that occurred prior to any real limits on immigration. The first laws prohibiting immigration were the Chinese Exclusion laws in the 1870's based not on "an imapssioned evaluation" but pure racism. The Irish, Italians, East Europeans immigrates were poor, desperate, impoverished and despised. They were considered dirty, diseased, subhuman, drunkard criminals (Irish), overly fertile, untrustworthy (Italians), bred children like litters of puppies (Catholics)..etc etc in fact you get the picture of how immigration was viewed then. And it's not much different than now (with Mexicans for example). There were no real quotes or restrictions beyond disease. We are a nation of many immigrant groups and all of them have managed to make a sucess of themselves: Irish, Russian, Italian, Palestinian, Lebonese, Polish, Cuban, Haitian....

If someone is willing to work hard, does not have a violent criminal record - then I don't care what their religion or ethnic background is - our success stories are not PHD's coming over here, they are the dirt poor people who worked hard and valued education and sent their children on to become PHD's. That's how I view it. Quotas? Sure, I can accept that - but not based on ethnicity or religion.

I don't care how hard they work or if they succeed, if they try to impose their Sharia crap here. The immigrants who came here previously all had an affect on the culture of this country, some for the better and some for the worse. Muslims will affect it only for the worse. Islam is a bloodthirsty cult with no redeeming social value. I don't see how this country gains by importing people who want to propagate this disease.

It's shame you don't know Islam, but then again, your don't know Christianity or much of anything else either.

Huh?

Exactly.

 

[Contumacious]

to immigrate to this country?

No, they don't.

The ONLY ones with that right are the "chosen" ones........the zionuts.

Next question, please.

.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Civil rights don't apply to foreigners wanting to immigrate to this country. The OP was written with people like you in mind.

BTW, where have you been lately.

Missed ya!

Ah...but I wasn't referring to civil rights - I was referring to immigration policy. I agree we can have any bias we want - that doesn't of course make it right (look back at some of the cruel and draconian anti-immigration laws we had against different groups, like the Chinese). To discrimminate against religion alone is bigotry.

And hi back at you sweetie!

So is it never right to discriminate based on ethnic culture, especially when that culture has proven destructive in their own nations?

You seem to be applying a principle that should have NOTHING to do with immigration. We shouldn't choose who comes here by political correctness, but by an impassioned evaluation of what benefit they'll bring to this country....like we did with the Russians, Italians, Irish, and Polish immigrants.

And in that impassioned evaluation, we should take into account what's going on in Western countries where Muslims are attaining numerical significance and ask, "Do we want that in OUR country?"

It's a valid question to be asking.

The Russians, Italians, Irish, Polish, East Europeans came during immigrant waves that occurred prior to any real limits on immigration. The first laws prohibiting immigration were the Chinese Exclusion laws in the 1870's based not on "an imapssioned evaluation" but pure racism. The Irish, Italians, East Europeans immigrates were poor, desperate, impoverished and despised. They were considered dirty, diseased, subhuman, drunkard criminals (Irish), overly fertile, untrustworthy (Italians), bred children like litters of puppies (Catholics)..etc etc in fact you get the picture of how immigration was viewed then. And it's not much different than now (with Mexicans for example). There were no real quotes or restrictions beyond disease. We are a nation of many immigrant groups and all of them have managed to make a sucess of themselves: Irish, Russian, Italian, Palestinian, Lebonese, Polish, Cuban, Haitian....

If someone is willing to work hard, does not have a violent criminal record - then I don't care what their religion or ethnic background is - our success stories are not PHD's coming over here, they are the dirt poor people who worked hard and valued education and sent their children on to become PHD's. That's how I view it. Quotas? Sure, I can accept that - but not based on ethnicity or religion.

I don't care how hard they work or if they succeed, if they try to impose their Sharia crap here. The immigrants who came here previously all had an affect on the culture of this country, some for the better and some for the worse. Muslims will affect it only for the worse. Islam is a bloodthirsty cult with no redeeming social value. I don't see how this country gains by importing people who want to propagate this disease.

Muslims HAVE immigrated here and have been here for centuries. Your words are the same as those directed at the Irish, Italian, Polish etc.

Did Muslims help us win 2 world wars? Did they build our freeways and national infrastructure?

Or how about this...did any Irish saw off the head of a coworker in the name of Catholicism? Did any Russian immigrant shoot up an Army deployment processing center in the name of the Orthodox Church?

You still don't get it, do you?

 

[Syriusly]

to immigrate to this country?

No one has a constitutional right to immigrate to the United States.

Another stupid thread.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Civil rights don't apply to foreigners wanting to immigrate to this country. The OP was written with people like you in mind.

BTW, where have you been lately.

Missed ya!

Ah...but I wasn't referring to civil rights - I was referring to immigration policy. I agree we can have any bias we want - that doesn't of course make it right (look back at some of the cruel and draconian anti-immigration laws we had against different groups, like the Chinese). To discrimminate against religion alone is bigotry.

And hi back at you sweetie!

So is it never right to discriminate based on ethnic culture, especially when that culture has proven destructive in their own nations?

You seem to be applying a principle that should have NOTHING to do with immigration. We shouldn't choose who comes here by political correctness, but by an impassioned evaluation of what benefit they'll bring to this country....like we did with the Russians, Italians, Irish, and Polish immigrants.

And in that impassioned evaluation, we should take into account what's going on in Western countries where Muslims are attaining numerical significance and ask, "Do we want that in OUR country?"

It's a valid question to be asking.

The Russians, Italians, Irish, Polish, East Europeans came during immigrant waves that occurred prior to any real limits on immigration. The first laws prohibiting immigration were the Chinese Exclusion laws in the 1870's based not on "an imapssioned evaluation" but pure racism. The Irish, Italians, East Europeans immigrates were poor, desperate, impoverished and despised. They were considered dirty, diseased, subhuman, drunkard criminals (Irish), overly fertile, untrustworthy (Italians), bred children like litters of puppies (Catholics)..etc etc in fact you get the picture of how immigration was viewed then. And it's not much different than now (with Mexicans for example). There were no real quotes or restrictions beyond disease. We are a nation of many immigrant groups and all of them have managed to make a sucess of themselves: Irish, Russian, Italian, Palestinian, Lebonese, Polish, Cuban, Haitian....

If someone is willing to work hard, does not have a violent criminal record - then I don't care what their religion or ethnic background is - our success stories are not PHD's coming over here, they are the dirt poor people who worked hard and valued education and sent their children on to become PHD's. That's how I view it. Quotas? Sure, I can accept that - but not based on ethnicity or religion.

I don't care how hard they work or if they succeed, if they try to impose their Sharia crap here. The immigrants who came here previously all had an affect on the culture of this country, some for the better and some for the worse. Muslims will affect it only for the worse. Islam is a bloodthirsty cult with no redeeming social value. I don't see how this country gains by importing people who want to propagate this disease.

Muslims HAVE immigrated here and have been here for centuries. Your words are the same as those directed at the Irish, Italian, Polish etc.

Muslims have been America's friends since -- uhm -- err -- ahh -- it's inception:

US- Morocco Diplomatic Relationship During the American Revolution, so many American ships used to call at the port of Tangiers that the Continental Congress sought recognition from the “Emperor” of Morocco to establish good relations between the two countries.

This recognition was granted in 1777, making Morocco the first country to recognize the United States of America. Negotiations on a formal treaty to establish ties between the two countries began in 1783.

The Moroccan-American Treaty of Friendship was signed in 1786. John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, both future U.S. Presidents were the signatories for the United States. Renegotiated in 1836, the treaty is still in force, constituting the longest unbroken treaty in U.S. history.

As testament to the special nature of the U.S.-Moroccan relationship, Tangier is home to the oldest U.S. diplomatic property in the world, and the only building on foreign soil that is listed in the U.S. National Register of Historic Places, the American Legation in Tangier (now a museum).

Embassy of the kingdom of morocco in the USA

​

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

to immigrate to this country?

No, they don't.

The ONLY ones with that right are the "chosen" ones........the zionuts.

Next question, please.

.

We should start exporting Nazis like you.

 

[percysunshine]

Huh? I have no plans to have any citizen of the United States leave the country. All others can get the hell out.

Keeping Muslims out is controlling the border, numskull.

So you're okay with Muslim American citizens.

Baby steps ....

Not really, but the Constitution doesn't allow us to deport citizens. It does allow us to prevent Muslims from immigrating here.

Oh but we do deport people, once we remove their citizenship that is, like the fine fellow:


NY Judge Orders Ex-Nazi Deported
V I E N N A, Aug. 15
By Sue Masterman


Austria is preparing to receive yet another relic of its Nazi past.

A New York immigration court ordered self-confessed ex-Nazi Michael Gruber, 84, deported. Gruber, of New City, NY, has admitted to his role as a Waffen SS guard in Oranienburg, Germany.

Gruber denies that he served in the SS Death’s Head Guard Battalion at the Sachsenhausen concentration camp there.

But the Nazi regime’s obsession with control, carefully documenting every move of every person in Hitler’s Third Reich, indicated otherwise.

Immigration Judge Robert Weisel said captured Nazi documents found by the U.S. Justice Department’s Office of Special Investigations — which hunts Nazis — proved the court’s satisfaction that Gruner served at the Sachsenhausen death camp from January 1943 to September 1944
NY Judge Orders Ex-Nazi Deported - ABC News

So you have one example, and that person is guilty of horrendous crimes and of filing false information on his visa application.

There are many examples. I took the very first one just to inform you that we can and do deport American citizens.

.

That looks more like a determination of fraud on the original application for citizenship. I mean, if you lie on the application, you would never be a genuine citizen in the first place.

.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

to immigrate to this country?

No one has a constitutional right to immigrate to the United States.

Another stupid thread.

the idiot fell back and claimed the thread is rhetorical.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

to immigrate to this country?

No one has a constitutional right to immigrate to the United States.

Another stupid thread.

Oh, good. Then you agree we can exclude Muslims from immigration if we feel it's in our best interest. That's the concurrence I was looking for.

 

[bripat9643]

Civil rights don't apply to foreigners wanting to immigrate to this country. The OP was written with people like you in mind.

BTW, where have you been lately.

Missed ya!

Ah...but I wasn't referring to civil rights - I was referring to immigration policy. I agree we can have any bias we want - that doesn't of course make it right (look back at some of the cruel and draconian anti-immigration laws we had against different groups, like the Chinese). To discrimminate against religion alone is bigotry.

And hi back at you sweetie!

So is it never right to discriminate based on ethnic culture, especially when that culture has proven destructive in their own nations?

You seem to be applying a principle that should have NOTHING to do with immigration. We shouldn't choose who comes here by political correctness, but by an impassioned evaluation of what benefit they'll bring to this country....like we did with the Russians, Italians, Irish, and Polish immigrants.

And in that impassioned evaluation, we should take into account what's going on in Western countries where Muslims are attaining numerical significance and ask, "Do we want that in OUR country?"

It's a valid question to be asking.

The Russians, Italians, Irish, Polish, East Europeans came during immigrant waves that occurred prior to any real limits on immigration. The first laws prohibiting immigration were the Chinese Exclusion laws in the 1870's based not on "an imapssioned evaluation" but pure racism. The Irish, Italians, East Europeans immigrates were poor, desperate, impoverished and despised. They were considered dirty, diseased, subhuman, drunkard criminals (Irish), overly fertile, untrustworthy (Italians), bred children like litters of puppies (Catholics)..etc etc in fact you get the picture of how immigration was viewed then. And it's not much different than now (with Mexicans for example). There were no real quotes or restrictions beyond disease. We are a nation of many immigrant groups and all of them have managed to make a sucess of themselves: Irish, Russian, Italian, Palestinian, Lebonese, Polish, Cuban, Haitian....

If someone is willing to work hard, does not have a violent criminal record - then I don't care what their religion or ethnic background is - our success stories are not PHD's coming over here, they are the dirt poor people who worked hard and valued education and sent their children on to become PHD's. That's how I view it. Quotas? Sure, I can accept that - but not based on ethnicity or religion.

I don't care how hard they work or if they succeed, if they try to impose their Sharia crap here. The immigrants who came here previously all had an affect on the culture of this country, some for the better and some for the worse. Muslims will affect it only for the worse. Islam is a bloodthirsty cult with no redeeming social value. I don't see how this country gains by importing people who want to propagate this disease.

Muslims HAVE immigrated here and have been here for centuries. Your words are the same as those directed at the Irish, Italian, Polish etc.

Oh puleeze. There probably weren't more than a handful of Muslims in this country prior to WW II.

I am of Irish ancestry, and what was said of the Irish is 100% true. They were drunks and they were brawlers. However, one thing they had no intention of doing is imposing the Ecclesiastical rule on the United States.

 

[bripat9643]

Civil rights don't apply to foreigners wanting to immigrate to this country. The OP was written with people like you in mind.

BTW, where have you been lately.

Missed ya!

Ah...but I wasn't referring to civil rights - I was referring to immigration policy. I agree we can have any bias we want - that doesn't of course make it right (look back at some of the cruel and draconian anti-immigration laws we had against different groups, like the Chinese). To discrimminate against religion alone is bigotry.

And hi back at you sweetie!

So is it never right to discriminate based on ethnic culture, especially when that culture has proven destructive in their own nations?

You seem to be applying a principle that should have NOTHING to do with immigration. We shouldn't choose who comes here by political correctness, but by an impassioned evaluation of what benefit they'll bring to this country....like we did with the Russians, Italians, Irish, and Polish immigrants.

And in that impassioned evaluation, we should take into account what's going on in Western countries where Muslims are attaining numerical significance and ask, "Do we want that in OUR country?"

It's a valid question to be asking.

The Russians, Italians, Irish, Polish, East Europeans came during immigrant waves that occurred prior to any real limits on immigration. The first laws prohibiting immigration were the Chinese Exclusion laws in the 1870's based not on "an imapssioned evaluation" but pure racism. The Irish, Italians, East Europeans immigrates were poor, desperate, impoverished and despised. They were considered dirty, diseased, subhuman, drunkard criminals (Irish), overly fertile, untrustworthy (Italians), bred children like litters of puppies (Catholics)..etc etc in fact you get the picture of how immigration was viewed then. And it's not much different than now (with Mexicans for example). There were no real quotes or restrictions beyond disease. We are a nation of many immigrant groups and all of them have managed to make a sucess of themselves: Irish, Russian, Italian, Palestinian, Lebonese, Polish, Cuban, Haitian....

If someone is willing to work hard, does not have a violent criminal record - then I don't care what their religion or ethnic background is - our success stories are not PHD's coming over here, they are the dirt poor people who worked hard and valued education and sent their children on to become PHD's. That's how I view it. Quotas? Sure, I can accept that - but not based on ethnicity or religion.

I don't care how hard they work or if they succeed, if they try to impose their Sharia crap here. The immigrants who came here previously all had an affect on the culture of this country, some for the better and some for the worse. Muslims will affect it only for the worse. Islam is a bloodthirsty cult with no redeeming social value. I don't see how this country gains by importing people who want to propagate this disease.

It's shame you don't know Islam, but then again, your don't know Christianity or much of anything else either.

What don't I know about Islam that would change my mind?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

So is it never right to discriminate based on ethnic culture, especially when that culture has proven destructive in their own nations?

You seem to be applying a principle that should have NOTHING to do with immigration. We shouldn't choose who comes here by political correctness, but by an impassioned evaluation of what benefit they'll bring to this country....like we did with the Russians, Italians, Irish, and Polish immigrants.

And in that impassioned evaluation, we should take into account what's going on in Western countries where Muslims are attaining numerical significance and ask, "Do we want that in OUR country?"

It's a valid question to be asking.

The Russians, Italians, Irish, Polish, East Europeans came during immigrant waves that occurred prior to any real limits on immigration. The first laws prohibiting immigration were the Chinese Exclusion laws in the 1870's based not on "an imapssioned evaluation" but pure racism. The Irish, Italians, East Europeans immigrates were poor, desperate, impoverished and despised. They were considered dirty, diseased, subhuman, drunkard criminals (Irish), overly fertile, untrustworthy (Italians), bred children like litters of puppies (Catholics)..etc etc in fact you get the picture of how immigration was viewed then. And it's not much different than now (with Mexicans for example). There were no real quotes or restrictions beyond disease. We are a nation of many immigrant groups and all of them have managed to make a sucess of themselves: Irish, Russian, Italian, Palestinian, Lebonese, Polish, Cuban, Haitian....

If someone is willing to work hard, does not have a violent criminal record - then I don't care what their religion or ethnic background is - our success stories are not PHD's coming over here, they are the dirt poor people who worked hard and valued education and sent their children on to become PHD's. That's how I view it. Quotas? Sure, I can accept that - but not based on ethnicity or religion.

Those people were allowed into this country legally, not like the Wetbacks who are jumping our border. Stop with the asymmetrical comparisons already.

And the Chinese were allowed as guest workers to build our railroads. When they applied for citizenship we said no. This is the point. It's up to us to decide.

and if people like you don't stfu, we'll ask more of them to come here

Trying to shut me up with threats?

Sounds like you got a little terrorist in you too.

Libturds and Muslim terrorists have a lot in common.

they do -- they take up way too much of your short life on this Earth

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Did Muslims help us win 2 world wars?

Yep: The American Muslim TAM

"All too often the Muslim and Arab soldiers who fought with the Allies are the forgotten heroes. In the U.S. alone, over 15,000 Arab Americans served in WWII. You can see some photographs of Muslim soldiers buried in military cemeteries in Europe here. "

And those were just the American ones.

 

[bripat9643]

to immigrate to this country?

No one has a constitutional right to immigrate to the United States.

Another stupid thread.

Oh, good. Then you agree we can exclude Muslims from immigration if we feel it's in our best interest. That's the concurrence I was looking for.

I'm waiting for him to retract those words.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

So is it never right to discriminate based on ethnic culture, especially when that culture has proven destructive in their own nations?

You seem to be applying a principle that should have NOTHING to do with immigration. We shouldn't choose who comes here by political correctness, but by an impassioned evaluation of what benefit they'll bring to this country....like we did with the Russians, Italians, Irish, and Polish immigrants.

And in that impassioned evaluation, we should take into account what's going on in Western countries where Muslims are attaining numerical significance and ask, "Do we want that in OUR country?"

It's a valid question to be asking.

The Russians, Italians, Irish, Polish, East Europeans came during immigrant waves that occurred prior to any real limits on immigration. The first laws prohibiting immigration were the Chinese Exclusion laws in the 1870's based not on "an imapssioned evaluation" but pure racism. The Irish, Italians, East Europeans immigrates were poor, desperate, impoverished and despised. They were considered dirty, diseased, subhuman, drunkard criminals (Irish), overly fertile, untrustworthy (Italians), bred children like litters of puppies (Catholics)..etc etc in fact you get the picture of how immigration was viewed then. And it's not much different than now (with Mexicans for example). There were no real quotes or restrictions beyond disease. We are a nation of many immigrant groups and all of them have managed to make a sucess of themselves: Irish, Russian, Italian, Palestinian, Lebonese, Polish, Cuban, Haitian....

If someone is willing to work hard, does not have a violent criminal record - then I don't care what their religion or ethnic background is - our success stories are not PHD's coming over here, they are the dirt poor people who worked hard and valued education and sent their children on to become PHD's. That's how I view it. Quotas? Sure, I can accept that - but not based on ethnicity or religion.

Those people were allowed into this country legally, not like the Wetbacks who are jumping our border. Stop with the asymmetrical comparisons already.

And the Chinese were allowed as guest workers to build our railroads. When they applied for citizenship we said no. This is the point. It's up to us to decide.

and if people like you don't stfu, we'll ask more of them to come here

Trying to shut me up with threats?

Sounds like you got a little terrorist in you too.

threats?

we all have a little terrorist within us. It's as American as apple pie and rebels sniping at Red Coats from behind trees

You think that guerrilla warfare is terrorism?

 

[bripat9643]

Civil rights don't apply to foreigners wanting to immigrate to this country. The OP was written with people like you in mind.

BTW, where have you been lately.

Missed ya!

Ah...but I wasn't referring to civil rights - I was referring to immigration policy. I agree we can have any bias we want - that doesn't of course make it right (look back at some of the cruel and draconian anti-immigration laws we had against different groups, like the Chinese). To discrimminate against religion alone is bigotry.

And hi back at you sweetie!

So is it never right to discriminate based on ethnic culture, especially when that culture has proven destructive in their own nations?

You seem to be applying a principle that should have NOTHING to do with immigration. We shouldn't choose who comes here by political correctness, but by an impassioned evaluation of what benefit they'll bring to this country....like we did with the Russians, Italians, Irish, and Polish immigrants.

And in that impassioned evaluation, we should take into account what's going on in Western countries where Muslims are attaining numerical significance and ask, "Do we want that in OUR country?"

It's a valid question to be asking.

The Russians, Italians, Irish, Polish, East Europeans came during immigrant waves that occurred prior to any real limits on immigration. The first laws prohibiting immigration were the Chinese Exclusion laws in the 1870's based not on "an imapssioned evaluation" but pure racism. The Irish, Italians, East Europeans immigrates were poor, desperate, impoverished and despised. They were considered dirty, diseased, subhuman, drunkard criminals (Irish), overly fertile, untrustworthy (Italians), bred children like litters of puppies (Catholics)..etc etc in fact you get the picture of how immigration was viewed then. And it's not much different than now (with Mexicans for example). There were no real quotes or restrictions beyond disease. We are a nation of many immigrant groups and all of them have managed to make a sucess of themselves: Irish, Russian, Italian, Palestinian, Lebonese, Polish, Cuban, Haitian....

If someone is willing to work hard, does not have a violent criminal record - then I don't care what their religion or ethnic background is - our success stories are not PHD's coming over here, they are the dirt poor people who worked hard and valued education and sent their children on to become PHD's. That's how I view it. Quotas? Sure, I can accept that - but not based on ethnicity or religion.

Those people were allowed into this country legally, not like the Wetbacks who are jumping our border. Stop with the asymmetrical comparisons already.

And the Chinese were allowed as guest workers to build our railroads. When they applied for citizenship we said no. This is the point. It's up to us to decide.

and if people like you don't stfu, we'll ask more of them to come here

I'll bet you would put a revolver in your mouth and pull the trigger if you thought it would piss off a right-winger.