There are famous principles for almost everything. Philosophical principles, ethical principles, moral principles, and so on have been with us for centuries. Now the Traitor’s Principle can be added to the list. This guy is the face of the Traitor’s Principle in that nest of the traitors known as the U.S. Senate:
Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vermonthttp://www.wnd.com/files/2015/03/PatrickLeahy.png
NOTE: Leahy has a history of helping America’s enemies.
Briefly, betraying the country is the Traitor’s Principle, but exactly what is the foundation principle traitors are citing to justify the United Nations dictating this country’s immigration policy? I am fairly certain those principles did not include open-borders, or welcoming violent enemies. I am absolutely certain that Leahy and his fellow Democrats will claim The New Colossus is a foundation principle:
So how about this. Every United Nations Muslim that comes here can only live in Vermont. Should they leave Vermont they either get deported immediately, or they do a nickel in a state prison at the expense of Vermont taxpayers. After all, they are responsible for Leahy. They are also responsible for any killing United Nations refugees do in every state.
Sadly, loyal Americans never seem able to prevent traitors from carrying the day.
Finally, let’s give the traitors what they want “The United States must not bar individuals from entering into the United States based on their religion, . . .”. Let’s only bar everyone engaged in a political movement sworn to destroy this country. Hell, such a ban would nail Socialists/Communists, too.
Long after the war is over, legally defining Islam as a political movement must remain in place —— at least until Muslims the world over eliminate theocracy from Islam’s teachings. (Don’t hold your breath until that happens.)
p.s. It will take a minimum of one century to verify that American Muslims who renounced theocracy were not engaging in Taqiyya & Kitman in order to hold onto Islam’s First Amendment protection.
Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont
Sen. Patrick Leahy is ironically one step closer to using a nuclear safety bill to make it easier for nuclear weapons-seeking terrorists to enter the country.
NOTE: Leahy has a history of helping America’s enemies.
IRAN-CONTRA HEARINGS; SENATOR LEAHY SAYS HE LEAKED REPORT OF PANEL
By STEPHEN ENGELBERG, Special to the New York Times
Published: July 29, 1987
IRAN-CONTRA HEARINGS; SENATOR LEAHY SAYS HE LEAKED REPORT OF PANEL
By STEPHEN ENGELBERG, Special to the New York Times
Published: July 29, 1987
IRAN-CONTRA HEARINGS; SENATOR LEAHY SAYS HE LEAKED REPORT OF PANEL
Briefly, betraying the country is the Traitor’s Principle, but exactly what is the foundation principle traitors are citing to justify the United Nations dictating this country’s immigration policy? I am fairly certain those principles did not include open-borders, or welcoming violent enemies. I am absolutely certain that Leahy and his fellow Democrats will claim The New Colossus is a foundation principle:
The Senate Judiciary Committee succeeded Thursday in passing a resolution saying, “The United States must not bar individuals from entering into the United States based on their religion, as such action would be contrary to the fundamental principles on which this Nation was founded.”
So how about this. Every United Nations Muslim that comes here can only live in Vermont. Should they leave Vermont they either get deported immediately, or they do a nickel in a state prison at the expense of Vermont taxpayers. After all, they are responsible for Leahy. They are also responsible for any killing United Nations refugees do in every state.
Sadly, loyal Americans never seem able to prevent traitors from carrying the day.
Critics of Leahy’s amendment said the wording was “unprecedented,” given that law enforcement personnel must look into all aspects of an immigrant’s beliefs when conducting background checks, the Washington Free Beacon reported Thursday.
Committee member Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama criticized those who voted in favor of the resolution and offered his own.
“It is the sense of the Senate that the individual right of the American people to keep and bear arms, as recognized by the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States [...] is among those fundamental rights necessary to our system of ordered liberty and deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition, such that any violation of this precious right would be contrary to the fundamental principles upon which this Nation was founded,” the amendment reads.
Sens. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, David Vitter of Louisiana, and Ted Cruz of Texas were the only other members who joined Sessions in rejecting Leahy’s resolution.
“The adoption of Leahy Amendment would constitute a transformation of our immigration system,” Sessions said in his opposing statement. “In effect, it is a move toward the ratification of the idea that global migration is a ‘human right,’ and a civil right, and that these so-called ‘immigrants’ rights’ must be supreme to the rights of sovereign nations to determine who can and cannot enter their borders.”
Committee member Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama criticized those who voted in favor of the resolution and offered his own.
“It is the sense of the Senate that the individual right of the American people to keep and bear arms, as recognized by the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States [...] is among those fundamental rights necessary to our system of ordered liberty and deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition, such that any violation of this precious right would be contrary to the fundamental principles upon which this Nation was founded,” the amendment reads.
Sens. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, David Vitter of Louisiana, and Ted Cruz of Texas were the only other members who joined Sessions in rejecting Leahy’s resolution.
“The adoption of Leahy Amendment would constitute a transformation of our immigration system,” Sessions said in his opposing statement. “In effect, it is a move toward the ratification of the idea that global migration is a ‘human right,’ and a civil right, and that these so-called ‘immigrants’ rights’ must be supreme to the rights of sovereign nations to determine who can and cannot enter their borders.”
Senate rushes to thwart Trump-inspired Muslim bans
Posted By Douglas Ernst On 12/10/2015 @ 4:59 pm
Senate rushes to thwart Trump-inspired Muslim bans
Posted By Douglas Ernst On 12/10/2015 @ 4:59 pm
Senate rushes to thwart Trump-inspired Muslim bans
Finally, let’s give the traitors what they want “The United States must not bar individuals from entering into the United States based on their religion, . . .”. Let’s only bar everyone engaged in a political movement sworn to destroy this country. Hell, such a ban would nail Socialists/Communists, too.
Ever since 9-11-2001 I’ve been saying that Islam should be legally defined as a political movement which it is, while Socialism/Communism should be defined as a religion which it is. In that way both are denied First Amendment protection. In short: Socialists would lose access to the public purse because it is a religion, while the war against Islam could be fought as a political movement.
Tweaking Trump | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
Tweaking Trump | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
Long after the war is over, legally defining Islam as a political movement must remain in place —— at least until Muslims the world over eliminate theocracy from Islam’s teachings. (Don’t hold your breath until that happens.)
p.s. It will take a minimum of one century to verify that American Muslims who renounced theocracy were not engaging in Taqiyya & Kitman in order to hold onto Islam’s First Amendment protection.