Paul Ryan Continues to Show His True Colors: Won’t Support Cuts to Muslim Immigration
Are any of you conservatives paying attention? This is the same guy I warned you about in 2012 along with liberal Mitt Romney and many of you did not listen. Are you listening now? The reason I ask is that not only did Ryan give away the farm to Obama in a ridiculous and illegal Omnibus bill, but now he’s saying he will not cut funds for Muslim immigration into the US from the Middle East.
Fox News show host Sean Hannity, someone who pushed for Romney/Ryan in 2012, interviewed the House Speaker and asked Ryan about Senator Jeff Sessions’ assessment of Muslim immigration into the US.
Sessions, who chairs the Senate Immigration Subcommittee, has not only pointed out that we have taken in 2 million immigrants from Muslim nations, but has also called on Congress and an op-ed to cut back on green cards issued.
- How To Protect Yourself From 5G, EMF & RF Radiation
- Grab This Bucket Of Heirloom Seeds & Get Free Shipping With Promo Code TIM
- Build Your Own Food Forest & Save 5% With Promo Code TIMBROWN
- Here’s A Way You Can Stockpile Food For The Future
- Stockpile Your Ammo & Save $15 On Your First Order
- Preparing Also Means Detoxifying – Here’s One Simple Way To Detoxify
- Save Up To 66% Off MyPillow with Promo Code TIMBROWN
- Grab guns, accessories, gear and optics at the lowest prices
“Eighty-three percent of voters want to see projected immigration growth reduced — which means Congress must take up and pass a bill to reduce the number of visas handed out each year,” Sessions wrote. “Congress should immediately begin to move popular immigration reforms that would be backed by overwhelming majorities of voters, including… blocking the president from using federal funds to unilaterally expand the costly refugee resettlement program.”
Hannity then asked Ryan, “We have resettled 1.5 million Muslim migrants in the United States. Senator Sessions had put out a piece where all these people that we took in to the country then come here and then get involved in terror activity. I put it up on my website, I urge you to take a look at it. And we take in 100,000 Muslim immigrants into the United States every year. Do we have to think about somebody who grows up under Sharia— believes that women can’t drive, can’t be seen in public without a male relative, four eyewitnesses for rape— do we have a clash of cultures we’ve got to consider? How do we know if they want to assimilate? How do we know if they want to bring terror into the United States? How will we ascertain that?”
“Well, first of all, I don’t think a religious test is appropriate,” said Ryan. “That’s not who we are. We believe in the first amendment of religious freedom. And I don’t think it’s the appropriate test because anybody can come under the guise of something else. It’s not hard for a person to claim that they are something that they’re not— like a Christian or something like that to get into the country. That is why we are calling for a security test. I think the test that matters is a security test because anybody can try and infiltrate this country by posing as something that they are not, so I don’t think that’s the proper test. I think a security test is the proper test.”
Ryan is obviously twisting the First Amendment. He would never defend the religion of Molech nor the religion of the Mayans in the US. At least on this issue, Donald Trump gets some part of this right when he referenced Islamic Shariah law as “incompatible with the Constitution.” However, I’m not quite sure he would be able to articulate the foundational reasons for making that claim since the First Amendment was written to protect the Christian religion in its various denominations, never every religion under the sun.
Since Islam is not only a religion, but a political authoritarian ideology that seeks to dominate wherever it breeds its venomous vipers, anyone who holds to its tenets should be considered an enemy of freedom.
Ryan seemed to want to use smoke and mirrors in talking about “pausing” the immigration program, but Hannity called him out on it.
“Why don’t we just cancel it?” he asked. “Why don’t we just say, ‘You cannot come here, it’s too big a risk to the American people.’ I don’t think we can fully ascertain what’s in people’s hearts. I don’t think anybody can assure us that ISIS wouldn’t lie and create documents and the document trail, I think they would do anything to get here. Why don’t we just end the program and that might mean defunding the program. Wouldn’t that be a better idea? […] We have two polls— two polls that are out that show two-to-one the American people are against Obama bringing in Syrian refugees altogether. I would prefer— I don’t know if we can really fully vet anybody like this. Nor do we have the resources. I personally am of the belief that we shouldn’t taking them in. I think it’s too big a risk.”
“We’re a compassionate country,” said Ryan, claiming the program couldn’t just be cancelled. “The refugees laws are important laws and we don’t want terrorists to dictate how we run—whether we have a law or not.”
Now listen to that blather. We don’t want terrorists to dictate how we run- whether we have a law or not? Seriously? Then why did you support the unPATRIOT Act Mr. Ryan? Why support indefinite detention in the NDAA? Why support bringing people here on the American taxpayer’s dime who hold the very ideology that you claim is behind terrorism, Islam?
America is compassionate, but we should not be stupid. Was it compassionate for us to engage in illegal weapons trafficking in the Middle East? How about illegal and unconstitutional wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, along with putting our nose in Syria? You see, none of that was compassionate. It’s what has created these “refugees.” Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia and Qatar continue to be befriended by the US, though they are, in large part, sponsors of Islamic terror.
Paul Ryan is selling America out once again. I told you so.