This new Ron Paul ad is absolutely, outrageously, tragically wrong:
“No visas for students from ‘terrorist nations’”?
Rarely has a more ignorant proposal been advanced – and it is made even worse by the fact that this is Ron Paul we’re talking about.
To begin with, it is odd, indeed, for a libertarian to be invoking the concept of collective guilt: is every citizen of these unnamed “terrorist nations” to be declared persona non grata on account of the actions of a minuscule number of their countrymen?
Secondly, just which nations is Rep. Paul talking about? Fifteen of the 9/11 hijackers came from Saudi Arabia: two were from the United Arab Emirates, one was Egyptian and another one hailed from Lebanon. Is Paul seriously saying that we should deport the thousands from these countries studying in the US? And why stop there? Why allow anyone from these so-called “terrorist nations” entry into the US for any reason whatsoever – just to be on the safe side?
This is pandering to the worst, Tom Tancredo-esque paranoia and outright ignorance (or do I repeat myself?) and is not worthy of Dr. Paul. I have the utmost respect for the candidate, but in using this unfortunate term, “terrorist nations,” the Good Doctor undermines his non-interventionist foreign policy stance. If these are, in truth, “terrorist nations” – which most will take to mean all predominantly Muslim nations — then why not invade them, kill the terrorists, and be done with it? This phraseology gives the War Party carte blanche – and, believe you me, they’ll use it.
As Murray Rothbard explained, the anti-interventionist conservatives of the 1950s made the same mistake when they jumped on Joe McCarthy’s bandwagon. The “red scare” was payback for the “brown scare” of the 1940s in which prominent conservatives were basically run out of public life on a rail for not getting with the program until Pearl Harbor. The original McCarthyite movement was directed against domestic reds, and was a sweet revenge for those conservatives who had been targeted as “subversive” and even “pro-Hitler” for being anti-interventionist during the Roosevelt era. However, it wasn’t long before the domestic witch-hunt spilled over the border and became an international armed crusade that roped us into NATO, lured us into Korea, and got us bogged down in Vietnam.
Thousands of students from the Middle East, North Africa, and the Muslim countries of Indonesia, Malaysia, and elsewhere come to this country and bring home with them the ideas of liberty, tolerance, and fair play that are the predominant themes of our culture. Barring them would be politically foolish, economically counterproductive, and a prelude to much worse.
It saddens me to write this, and yet I cannot be silent in the face of such a brazenly ugly attempt to cash in on barely disguised anti-Muslim sentiment, especially since his proposal would penalize large numbers of perfectly innocent people, young people whose only “crime” is to want to come to America. The Paul campaign should scrap the ad, pronto.
UPDATE: Well, we certainly have gotten our share of comments: this blog entry was posted a mere two hours ago, and we already have 150 comments.
I want to state for the record that I am not: a) accusing Ron Paul of racism, b) arguing with his stand against illegal immigration, or c) arguing in favor of open borders.
What I am saying is that a blanket ban on visas for students from unspecified “terrorist nations” is pandering to the worst, lowest instincts of the American electorate – and, as Tom Tancredo’s pathetic failure of a campaign demonstrated, it isn’t good politics, either.
This is about allowing legal immigration – and, specifically, of a type that benefits us in many ways, economically and in terms of the good will generated throughout the world at a time when we sorely need it. No one objects to vetting each and every visa applicant: a blanket ban, however, is quite a different matter, for all the reasons detailed above.
I whole heartedly agree. This kind of thing males Paul look like a racist. I certainly hope the campaign gets it together quick to pull the ad.
yes..yes…securing our borders, ending the illegal alien welfare state, and offering no amnesty for them is definitely racist…NOT!! Go Ron Paul!
Way to go, Ron Paul! This is absolutely what we need. Don’t let your libertarianism make you a liberal, Justin!
Bearing in mind that the US is the largest perpetrator of terrorism on the globe, perhaps all US citizens should be removed to some other place.
It will never cease to amaze me how the far left continues to dismiss the reality of the border problem & that most terrorist are Muslim simply to further endorse illiegal immigration. The reality is that an overwhelming majority or illegal aliens are from Mexico & other failed nations from South America. If the country to the south of us were Sweden & there were throngs of blonde haired, blue eyed Swedes were not waiting their turn & pouring over the border, most right thinking people would still take issue with this. Why is it that we don’t have millions of Canadians rushing over the northern border?!? Another harsh reality is that global acts of terror are committed mostly by Muslim fanatics. Khalid Sheik Mohammed attended NC Tech University here in the States. WAKE UP!
Everything that candidate Paul touched upon in his ad is a common sense approach to addressing a problem that impacts all of us. Illegal Iimigration. The blogger Raimondo, La Raza, & CAIR are apologist & enablers.
I definitely agree with Justin, this ad is an absolute disgrace and Ron Paul should pull it immediately. I was extremely disappointed to see Paul, who has heroicly stood up to the Republican Party on privacy issues, Iraq, etc. would succumb to such as simplistic argument on immigration. (Illegal) Immigration to this country is NOT any more serious of a problem than it was in the past, and in fact probably benefits us economically…not to mention, it would be impossible to secure the border as Paul suggests…the Right is totally wrong on immigration, something I only began to realize after William Norman Grigg was sacked as editor over at The New American for pointing out that illegal immigrants just make convenient scapegoats in the ongoing assault on our civil liberties (national ID cards, criminal charges against small businessmen who employee illegals, etc.) that Paul seems to genuinely deplore…
Hmmm, looks like all you nutjobs can’t handle the truth!
End illegal immigration, stop the invasion.
Ron Paul is first and foremost a libertarian, not a conservative, and ran as a Libertarian in 1988. Far from being a “nutjob,” the illegal immigration issue is currently the subject of a huge debate within the libertarian community and unlike you, Debbie, I am very respectful of those who would disagree with me.
My view is that illegal immigration is, like drugs, another government-created (or at least government-exascerbated) “crisis,” the proposed solution for which is, frankly, fascism. The myriad ways in which the US is creating the problem, from disastrous “free-trade agreements” to propping up narco-dictatorships in Latin America are well documented. Equally unsavory is the solution. I’m uncomfortable with the prospect of lining up for my National ID card. This makes me, according to Commissar Chertoff, either a “terrorist” an “illegal immigrant,” though I am neither.
Actually, I agree with you on one point, that we ought to end illegal immigration (my solution is simple: let’s legalize it). What we are experiencing, however, is hardly an invasion. The illegal immigrants I have known almost all return to their home countries after two-to-five year periods in the US. Especially given that the US was responsible for ACTUAL invasions and persistent meddling in the internal affairs of Latin American countries in recent memory (virtually all of Central America was turned into a war zone with Baghdad levels of violence that only ended, in some countries, in the early 1990s), the use of the term invasion seems particularly hypocritical as well.
Is it true that University President Bill Brody is stepping down due to allegations of Johns Hopkins University working with Military Intelligence to spy on Muslim and anti-war students?
Do you want people from terrorist nations coming here to take advantage of our schools only to turn around and use what they learned here against us? Get real people, and think about the point he is trying to make. Jesus Christ!
Dude,
the terrorists already ARE in charge of our schools. ask your kids if they are hearing in school about how MANDATORY public service is a good choice. the Good Doctor will end federal brainwashing of OUR CHILDREN and stop engaging in expensive wars against NOBODY. Maybe our kids won’t have to CHOOSE to be DRAFTED if we make something other than oil our priority. We spend $12,000,000,000 every MONTH in Iraq. Every month??? We could end homelessness, even put every child in america through college for TWELVE BILLION DOLLARS A MONTH.
Mexican kids are taught the SW is theirs? They’re right, IT DOES NOW!! Don’t think so? The treaties are signed and nobody invited you… Take a look the shiny new NORTH AMERICAN UNION coming soon (2010, just google it and see)
Save your kids and your country: VOTE
You liberals are so naive. Don’t you understand that this is an invasion going on? School children are taught in Mexico that the southwest belongs to them. Ron Paul wants to defend the soveriegnity of this great land and you call him a racist. I bet you think Lou Dobbs is a racist too, even though his wife is hispanic. Fools! Good Grief!
Could it be that they are taught the truism that much of the “SW” was basically “taken” by force by the US from Mexico in late 1830’s into the ’40’s? That would be different from what American schoolchildren are taught about, say, Chistopher Columbus “discovering” America, now wouldn’t it? Something to ponder…
You are incorrect….Nothing was stolen from mexico.
Read up on the history Larry.
(Logical proposition)
I am a British citizen who thinks that the United States still belongs to Britain and would seize all US territory as a matter of principle, if only to educate her citizens in the art of logical debate and to remind them of the abiding majesty of the American constitution (that protects freedom of speech and the rights of the individual).
On the basis of my subversive (if somewhat tongue in cheek) opinion do you believe that all UK citizens who want to travel to, work in or study in the USA should be barred lest they too are somewhow tainted with this terrible canker?
Ron Paul’s position appears to be just what it is, religiously and potentially racially motivated. Shame on his campaign for befouling the message from Paul who is normally the most logical and patriotic (in the best sense) of all the candidates.
What next for the USA, thought crimes (you have your Gulags already).
Don’t you folks in GB have a lot of Muslim problems? I think you need to tend to your knitten as the old saying goes. We have helped you out a lot since we kicked your bottoms, be thankful.
Many of the 9/11 hijackers use student visas to enter the country IIRC.
I understood RP’s stance on immigration, I agree with Justin Raimondo that it’s a poor decision to portray this possible policy solution in such negative and almost militant terms, I’m horrified at the tone.
Couldn’t they have shown happy workers receiving their work permits and providing the services that the free market of America wants from them? A friendly, positive outcome? A win/win?
As a green card carrying, legal immigrant who applied and was approved for a living/working visa and ss card, I’ve always resented illegals and amnesty programs. The problem here is that the American government seems to penalize those who play by the rules (you can’t believe the scrutinizing and red tape bureaucracy involved immigrating or obtaining study visas) and rewarding those who are smart enough to just do it the most expedient and illegal way…wrong message to those (suckers?) who take the time to play by the rules.
Maybe there is some good marketing reason for this harsh attitude, we’ll see, but sincere RP supporters like me who have overlooked a few other irrational attitudes, like creationism belief for example, are worried.
I do think RP has every appearance of a man of intellectual brilliance and personal integrity and has wonderful ideas on national operations and he’s the only candidate who may be able to get us out of wars…but really, showing our neighbors being apprehended and patted down, yuk, they are just people, for god’s sake, trying to escape their own desperate circumstances. America seems to want and need the services and labor they provide, the message should have been how to streamline the qualified to a legal status…legal guest worker or whatever. RP, himself says over and over that we should talk to people and trade with them. I heartily endorse that but the ad went way sour, please pull it.
It’s a bad ad. It shows the paranoia state America is still deeply rooted in and punishes the innocent. If the facts are looked at, the United States is sadly & disgustingly the biggest sponsor of terrorism in the World.
So how would Ron Paul honestly define a “terror nation”? Since the US is a terror nation, other countries are to deny Americans entry into their universities?
There are “American” universities in other countries..Cairo, Egypt come to mind. So Ron Paul denies Egyptians entry into this country, it can lead to a tit for tat situation where Americans can be denied entry into other universities around the World.
I agree with RP on the federal income taxes, the Fed and removing US troops from ALL the countries around the World. But I think one must keep in mind too, that the business-world that he promotes (trading with other countries) are not always a bunch of morality angels either when they go into these other countries.
Louise makes a very good point:”but sincere RP supporters like me who have overlooked a few other irrational attitudes, like creationism belief for example, are worried.” Paul get it right on all the big ticket items,foreign policy,budget and gold standard,the Bill of Rights,and illegal wars,but he does have many bats in the belfry.He has proposed legislation to make citizenship from the time of conception.I wonder does this make a major change to the constitution? Can a person run for president at 34? What if his parents were privileged and he was conceived in the US but born on an extended honeymoon in Europe.Is he /she concidered native born? My mother was 10 months in the womb,how would she have proved that she was a citizen 1 month before other with the same nativity?
Obviously this is a ‘how many angels on the head of a pin’
foolishness and shows up Pauls duplicity.He’s not perfect,
just better than the others.
Louise, I agree with you for the most part. Where i differ most is on the impact of foreign workers on this country, i have traveled the southwest and have seen job after job after job that our people(mainly young people) would gladly take if they werent passed over for someone willing to work much cheaper. We do have higher standards of living and cannot compete with illegal aliens whom live a much simpler and meager lifestyle just to send their hard earned money home to their family… Its really unfair in both directions.. Immigration and especially ILLEGAL Immigration in this country needs to be taken seriously.. Its no longer the false impression that ” they are taking jobs we dont want ” . Dont fall for that propaganda because that is what it is.. propaganda..
There is one big difference between the “legal” immigrants patiently waiting for their paperwork to be processed and paying the thousands of dollars required for the immigration process and the illegal ones crossing the border: the former are almost universally college educated and in the middle class, and the latter are filling a vacuum in the lowest rungs of the work force, willing to work for sub-minimum wages at jobs that go begging at twice minimum wage. Any evaluation of the ethics of immigration that doesn’t take this raw economic fact into account is blinkered at best.
Ron Paul is a faithful Rand-style “Objectivist,” i.e. laissez-faire capitalist. He hates the working class in all countries, with the blind hatred of the true plutocrat (wanting overt rule by the rich).
Paul only opposes foreign military adventures so he can use the US military at home, to mow down unions, “illegal aliens,” and other types of working class people. Ron’s fangs and claws are starting to show. ’bout time.
You are wrong on 2 counts.
The Ayn Rand Objectivists have been taken over by Zionists recently although I’m sure although she was Jewish Ayn Rand never would have stood for that. If you don’t believe me check it out on the web.
Second, Ron Paul is for a weak and constitutional central government, so we would have to rely on Governors to mow down those people. Ron Paul won’t do it.
Actually, the Ayn Rand Institute officially believes in collective guilt, especially that of Muslims. This is a position Rand herself strenuously rejected, above all in her essay “Racism” in her book “The Virtue of Selfishness”. The ARI actually calls for the total extermination, nuclear if possible, of all Muslims. I say that is un-Objectivist. It is certainly un-Randian. And those ARI clowns call themselves the protectors of their philosophy? Give me a break…
Dr. Paul may not be an Objectivist himself — he is a devout Baptist, after all — but he is certainly pro-capitalist. The problem with the American economy is that it is *state* capitalist: it is far too dependent on the government. Remember that he wants to abolish the Department of Commerce.
I agree. I’m still a Pauli, but the position on immigration, especially student visas, offends my libertarian sensibilities, and I’d be happier if he toned it down, even if it wins him a few more votes. The position on monetary policy doesn’t appeal to me either. Criticize the deficit spending and explain how it’s really printing money to spend and imposing a hidden inflation tax. That’s fine. Don’t end every discussion of the subject with talk of a gold standard. Paul’s Rothbardian understanding and advocacy of a gold standard doesn’t win many votes and seems positively flaky to economists with a better understanding of money and credit.
Conceding that the tone of that recording was unseamly and crude and should be pulled, I think it does make some good points.
My state is poor and has limited college opportunity, Why do illegal alien’s kids get subsidized to neighboring state colleges and my kids have to pay 3 times the tuition? I just want equality. And have you been to the graduate schools of our universities lately? especially in science & engineering. Americans are a minority and a small minority at that. Of the 60 graduate students at LSU in electrical engineering 3 are american!!!!! We subsidize their education and send them back to China and India to compete with us.
Eighty percent of Chinese students who study abroad never return to China. Most of those who study in America, stay in America. Why? They love the freedom and opportunity that life in the USA can give them. I have lived in China for a number of years and am not just spouting random numbers. I empathize with your situation and believe in equality as well, but let’s not go blaming the foreign students who so often make a positive contribution to our country. (I can only assume someone will follow this comment with something about terrorists posing as students….well, you’re right….but the world isn’t perfect. Sad but true.)
Interesting fact… 2 of the presidents assasinated in america were assisinated within 2 weeks of making a push to the gold standard….
Problems I guess is that there likely isnt enough gold in existance to back up all the money the US uses/ claims. We could literally wake up tomorrow and have our US dollars equal nothing, with nothing to back it up Its already headed that way. In alaska where I live, it is much closer and conveniant to drive to Canada to shop, but the dollar has gone down so much that the cost of living here has gone through the roof. The people that run the nation and the people of this nation seem to be a reflection of eachother. We are a nation of rampant obesity, disease, disorders, syndromes and ignorance. And it seems that we just keep making support groups to justify whatever our issues are.. rather than tackling the source of the problems.
The problem with a gold standard is that too many people don’t understand it, and Ron Paul really isn’t an exception. A gold standard does not replace every dollar in circulation with a fixed quantity of gold. A gold standard simply fixes the price of gold and requires monetary authorities (bankers) to trade gold at the fixed price. The problem with a gold standard is not the quantity of gold but the difficulty of fixing the price of this particular commodity and thus establishing the value of everything else relative to the value of gold. Extending credit always creates money, whether or not gold is the standard of value. The ease of Federal “borrowing” is a problem with our monetary system, but a gold standard is not a realistic solution. A monetary system regulating the price of a commodity index, rather than a price of credit, is worth considering.
Probably the best way to understand Dr. Paul’s position on commodity money is to read his book “The Case for Gold”,written with Lewis E. Lehrman,which is published by the Mises Institute. It started life as the Minority Report of the Gold Commission in 1982. It can be downloaded free of charge at http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/books.php.
Dr. Paul is already on record as stating that he wants gold and silver to be designated legal tender and used as private currencies in competition with FR notes. Gold is presently trading at about $830 per ounce and is expected to rise to at least $2000. If it is monetized this could go much higher. At the very least it will offer competition to FR debt money. In time it could so outpace debt money that the national debt could be retired with a few ounces of gold! Dr. Paul is one very smart man. Those who fearmonger on the line that there is not enough gold to finance the world economy simply do not understand the situation or they have another agenda.
Since he is a fan of the Austrian School it is likely that Dr. Paul does not favour any government involvement in money creation. Austrians believe that money is created by people quite naturally and there is no need for government to get involved.
I expect gold to rise to $2000/ounce ultimately, because U.S. monetary policy is deliberately inflationary. The question is when? I don’t expect gold to reach this price soon, but if you do, you’re free to buy and hold gold, as you should be of course. Gold is already a legal tender if you want it to be. Nothing prevents you from bargaining with gold now if that’s what you want to do. I suppose a little inflation is not a bad thing, but Federal spending is not sufficiently constrained.
People create money through free economic transactions, but gold is not created this way. If I extend you credit and your credit is good, then your obligation to repay me is valuable, and I may bargain with it. Requiring me to possess gold before extending credit is economic nonsense. A free economy doesn’t work this way and shouldn’t work this way.
If I’m a woodsman and you’re carpenter, a banker may extend credit to both of us and to himself, so that I may harvest lumber for all three of us while you build houses for the three of us and the banker accounts for our exchange of services. I then pay you for carpentry services and pay the banker interest (for his accounting services), while you pay me for lumber and pay the banker interest, and the banker pays both of us and himself.
This extension of credit begins with nothing but our expected productivity and ends with nothing but our produce, three houses. Money is both created and withdrawn from circulation in this process. Gold does not enter and leave existence this way, but real a economy creates and then withdraws money this way continuously. Money is an accounting device, a token of entitlement to purchase. A decentralized monetary authority is conceivable, but confusing money with a commodity is folly.
Ron Paul is a REPUBLICAN.
For me, I believe ( based on what Ron Paul has actually said), that he is all about wealth. He wants Americans to be able to create it without Federal regulations, use it without Federal regulations and enjoy it without Federal regulations and to not let the Federal government tax it.
He seems to be concerned about the wealth of the United States ( printing fiat money and obsessive government spending ) and the wealth of the American citizens. Wealth seems to be his theme along with free market capitalism. This will not lead to equalities for everyone whether they be in the United States or in other countries that may be trading with the United States.
Im not endorsing socialism, communism nor am I endorsing capitalism..they all have their owns sets of structure that lead to World sufferings. But if I do vote, it will be for RP because of this….that he says he wants the United States military out from all the other countries that they are in. They have absolutley no right to be in these places other than to try to guarantee that the trade routes with America remain open.
THIS is not serving the people of these countries in a “liberty endorsing” method. If the People do now want the American government nor American business there, then they need to have the power to be able to do business with Iran, China, Russia, Europe and anybody they desire.
They should NOT have American products and services shoved down their throats by any means, whether it be militarily or thru trade negotiations.
Ridiculous!…How does wanting to secure the borders, stopping illegal aliens from accessing welfare, and ending the idiotic birthright law make him look like a racist!
That’s the first think you kooks do is scream racism!.
Ron Paul is right on, we must end this anchor baby nonsense…there is no other country in the world that does this..it’s idiotic.
WAKE UP U.S.A !!!
so what’s wrong w. racism, u presumptuous moron?
Yea this is pretty stupid…I can only guess that its to play towards the social conservatives now controlling the Republican party, but to me, Ron does not need to play to those people as they will be pried apart from one boring candidate to another. I can only hope the Paul campaign sees how stupid this sort of tactic is. I sincerely hope he is our next president, but please keep these sort of ideas our of any presidency. I read that Huckabee considers keeping tabs on Pakistani’s in this country is a good thing, which is stupid. If that goes through then where do you stop? That black guy on the street corner could be evil, lets spy on him, or that indonesian who jogs every day looks suspicious…some years later its everyone who opposes the leader that is a culprit and must be watched…its all on the same line and its dangerous and NOT what this country is about.
I hope he scratches this ad immediately.
Nice. Bring on all that free publicity. Better than being ignored.
This phraseology gives the War Party carte blanche – and, believe you me, they’ll use it.
++++++++
Don’t you mean “we’ll use it.”?!? You are in league with Ron Ernest Paul. Take some responsibility for the people YOU support, or you’ll be devastated in time for his incumbency.
yea…that no visa’s from terrorist nations thing gets me…I have a friend from Pakistan from college…hes a really good guy…know know 100’s of Americans personally that are a 1000 times worse than him and 1000 times more of a threat to anyone…that part of the ad bugs me the most. Its ignorant.
yea me too, and it will be fun to watch her and her whole family be deported by this libertarian™ that we have been blessed with in our time of need.
If they are here legally then they won’t be deported…geow up.
Not true!
Check this!
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-04-04-1930s-deportees-cover_x.htm
Fine! You should go back with him to his country,the one he loves.
America has become weaker because of so many “Two Flag Carriers”.
You can help your friend carry his “TWO FLAGS” if you want.But! if I were you,I`d keep one of them here…Do you know the one I`m speaking of?
I don’t think we should allow people into our country from terrorist nations, but I actually think that Paul is playing a game here. What is a terrorist nation?
* Cuba
* Iran
* Iraq
* Libya
* North Korea
* Sudan
* Syria
These are terrorist nations, but even denying student visas will not mean that the US couldn’t accept other types of visas or political refugees.
If by “terrorist nation” we mean a nation whose people loudly and wholeheartedly support the killing of innocent and helpless civilians in other countries for political advantage, then the United States needs to be pretty high on that list, if not at the top.
Good point ,everyone should check this out,
http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0223/p09s01-coop.html
Large number of Americans favor violent attacks against civilians:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/05/23/polls/index.html
http://lark.phoblacht.net/dialecticsofterror.html
cuba what you kiding , what cuba did to you
You forgot the CIA
Cuba is a terrorist nation? Give me an example.
Isn’t Iraq an American colony now?!
I agree as well, but we must move on. Trust me this will appeal to many well uh many people in Iowa so it must be done. Trust me I know I’ve called and talked to many of them personally.
This is just the type of ad a lot of them, uh need or something like that. Just imagine Brittany Spears and then imagine appealing to her family. Ok then you got it.
I agree. I am a big Paul supporter and agree with him on 95% of his platform, but his immigration stance is the one issue I do not support and this commercial is pretty awful.
I was surprised as well, but its for Iowa republicans, its a bit of pandering so I am not really mad about it.
Good catch. The good guys should be scrutinized at least as closely as the bad guys.
What’s racist about screening students more carefully when they are from nations that sponsor terrorists?
I don’t get this logic. So you’d have a 90 year old caucasion lady strip searched in an airport just so you can do the same to a suspicious looking young arab male just to be politically correct?
The federal governemnt is obligated by the constitution to (a) defend it’s citizens against foreign invaders, (b) protect the sovereignty of the nation and secure the borders.
This should never be used as an excuse to invade other sovereign nations, provoke terrorists, or engage in endless wars in offense, but a strong defense is something every president should be in favor of, including anti-war candidates.
I did not say the ad is “racist.” You’ll note that this term appears nowhere in my blog post. What I am saying is that the entire concept of a “terrorist nation” is completely bogus. And Paul does not say we should screen students more carefully: he is saying we have to exclude an entire category of them based on nationality. Yes, the President has an obligation to defend the country: but kicking everyone out who is from, say, Morocco, is not going to make us safer.
When are you going to recommend a pro-U.S. foreign policy PAC? Oh, you’re all confused when he becomes President he will help to define those nations that truly support terrorism. Ie Saudi Arabia, Israel etc.
I posted this somewhere else, but I can’t see it.
Terrorist nations is a legal description and is voted on by Congress. It is only as arbitrary as their votes.
* Cuba
* Iran
* Iraq
* Libya
* North Korea
* Sudan
* Syria
These are terrorist nations, but even denying student visas will not mean that the US couldn’t accept other types of visas or political refugees.
What is terrorism?!Which nation is a terrorist nation which is not?!Who is a terrorist ,and who is not?!Who is the victim of terrorism ,who is not?!What actions constitute terrorism ,which not?!
Is causing the death of hunderd of thousands innocent people by sanctions is terrorism?!,or is it worth it?How about invading a weak ,no threat country?!or how about sending missiles and bombs rainning down on villages from 50,000 feet.May if we do not see it,or hear it ,it doesn’t exist!
Agreed, Justin. There is no such thing as a “terrorist nation,” only a “terrorist government,” and as it stands, few if any of the latter were ever fairly elected. There is no reason to punish completely innocent people for the wrongdoings of their (usually unelected) governments. I am a big supporter of Ron, but he has really dropped the ball here. I hope this ad gets pulled soon.
strictly speaking RP is not suggesting kicking anyone out but rather not letting in any more STUDENTS from a nation designated as terrorist. I agree that the label “terorist nation” is non-sensical and shows that RP is either not that bright or not that honest. However, if you do believe in terrorist nations it makes sense to keep out their students.
Justin,
There’s more to this than meets the eye.
If Ron Paul declares Israel a terrorist state, it would automatically ban those 911 Israeli “art students” that you’ve been so concerned about.
The ad didn’t say “more careful screening,” it said “no more student visas.” As long as you hold everyone to the same standard, there’s no harm in a bureaucrat double-checking his work and screening people carefully for whatever reason. But there is harm if you cut off cultural and economic ties with students, who are most likely to support American values and to contribute to the American economy once they graduate. That’s just dumb.
Will you let in the occasional fraud, loser, or even killer? Yeah, possibly. Catching sloppy paperwork will reduce risk somewhat, and may even have stopped the 9/11 hijackers (http://www.nationalreview.com/mowbray/mowbray100902.asp). But you will never have 100% security in a free country, and you need to get used to an acceptable level of risk in order to live freely, as a person and as a nation.
To address your tangential airport question: No one should be strip-searched just for being “suspicious looking.” That’s not political correctness, that’s the 4th Amendment.
The bizarre thing about this ad is the grammatical error — it said “No More Student VISAs from Terrorist Nations”, with VISA capitalized like the credit card. That part looks like it was thrown in at the last minute somehow. Or maybe he just wants to protect these foreign students from junk mail?
I have to agree with this Terrorist Nations are not valid. I do not believe the Student Visa Program should be completely halted, but I can understand if more careful screening is implemented seeing as the majority of the people who were here to (allegedly) cause harm were here on student visa’s. We don’t need 100% security, risk is part of living and even if you spent your entire life hiding out in a single room of your home, many things could go wrong a tree could fall on your house, or a fire could burn it down. Life is never without risk, so we must live life and not hide from what might be.
Agreed. Could it be a misplaced attempt to appeal to the Tancredo voter - if there is such an animal?
I don’t like it from an aesthetic level either.
It won’t change my vote, but hopefully they reconsider.