No more student visas from terrorist nations?
Justin raised some important questions about the latest RP ad.
Regarding the 19 hijackers, while several of them applied for student visas, none of them originated from countries currently defined as a terrorist state by the State Department. The sole hijacker that applied for and actually used a student visa, Hani Hanjour, was from Saudi Arabia. All of the others used B1/B2 visas (tourism, business travel).
As the official GAO report states (pdf):
Of the 19 hijackers, 18 received a total of 21 visas for temporary visits for business and pleasure, and 1 received 2 student visas.
In short, the general concept proposed in the ad would not have prevented these hijackers from receiving visas; this, despite the fact that most of the visa applications raised numerous red flags.
Note: in the past academic year, nearly 600,000 foreign students attended classes at American colleges and universities. I am sure all of them feel comfortable knowing that they could become suspects in the near Tancredian future.
See also:
The International Student Visa Process in the Post-9/11 World
9/11 and Terrorist Travel, by the National Commission (pdf)
Customs agent: Red flags over 9/11 hijacker’s visa
George Kurian, India
December 30th, 2007 at 4:32 am
Don’t be fooled. The screening and weeding mechanisms are already in place. A muslim doctor from India whom I know wanted to study in the US after working for 2 years in the UK. He was accepted at two universities there but his request for a visa was rejected because he was a Muslim. He was advised by the lady at the desk not to re-apply as it would be waste of his time and effort.
Powell
December 30th, 2007 at 5:27 am
Sorry, but while I disagree with the notion of “terrorist nations”, but the US needs some time to reflect on the flood of immigration we’ve experienced over the past 40 years. Can we really preserve our liberty in a highly segregated, multi-national state?
Paraphrasing Hans-Hermann Hoppe, no one has a “right” to immigrate. I don’t see RP’s stance as a problem.
Dean Luckey
December 30th, 2007 at 11:04 am
I agree with Ron Paul’s ad. This nation needs some breathing space from the flood of immigrants both legal and illegal. As Pat Buchanan pointed out, we stand a good chance of losing our Western identity and becomimg a collection of squabbling ethnicities.
peace
December 30th, 2007 at 11:16 am
Does the notion of a terrorist state include Israel?
Kirsten
December 30th, 2007 at 11:17 am
Pray tell, Dean, what exactly is my “Western identity”? I could have sworn I was a unique individual. Where am I wrong on that?
Tim R.
December 30th, 2007 at 11:43 am
So we know Muslim fanatics want to kill us. We also know that, thankfully(although there are some homegrown terrorists here) most of the Muslim fanatics are located outside the country, luckily we have an ocean between us and them. So what is the most logical thing to do? Ah yes! By gosh, I think I’ve got it! Let’s INVITE them in. Let’s give them visas and invite them here so they will have a much easier time killing us. Makes perfect sense to me. After all, to say otherwise and people might call us racists, xenophones, Islamophobes and we can’t have that now can we? Oh no we can’t have that.
Political correctness and pandering to the Muslim apologists is much more important than protecting the lives of Americans and of our families. I’m glad that there are folks like us who are so much smarter than Ron Paul. After all if Ron Paul or Tom Tancredo had their way it might actually be HARDER for Muslim fanatics to come here and kill us, and we would not want that now would we?
bruce
December 30th, 2007 at 12:09 pm
Steady on, guys. This is the first time I’ve disagreed with anything Justin said, and not on the merits, but the Silber-level cry of fire in the night. I’m sure it was a campaign blunder to go after the two dozen tancredo supporters that didn’t swing to romney as directed. I bet Paul’s views are closer to Vijay Boyapati’s, and that Paul will handle this masterfully, if he doesn’t take too much friendly fire. Geez
PissedOffAmerican
December 30th, 2007 at 12:21 pm
One of the strongest defenses against radical terrorism of ANY persuasion is the self determination of the people of the various countries contained within the world community. That self determination can only be achieved by educated citizens, no matter the country, or the predominate religion practiced within that country. Surely, our unfettered and lopsided support of Israel, and our support of oppressive radical Islamic monarchies, such as Saudi Arabia, do far more damage to us, and make us far more hated in the Muslim countries, than our student visa program does. To do away with one of our more favorable interactions with the Muslim community is ignorant and counter productive.
One of GWB’s most detestable and despicable tactics is his use of wide generalizations and streotyping using ignorant cowboy gibberish and taunts to justify his disastrous policies, that have served to make us far more hated, and far less secure, since the occurrences on 9/11/01. It is truly disheartening to see Ron Paul using the same kind of tacit stereotyping and vaque terminolgy by employing phrases like “terrorist nations”. It was a HUGE mistake in campaign strategy, and a troubling glimpse into Ron Paul’s inner thinking. Ron Paul WILL NOT be elected by the hard core Republican voters that this ad will appeal to. Ron Paul needs to be reaching out to the disillusioned Democratic voters and the Independents, that are far less apt to view this ad in a favorable light. He blew it.
Stanley Laham
December 30th, 2007 at 12:24 pm
Tim R
If your body could match the tortuous convolutions of your mind, then you would most assuredly be the world’s greatest contortionist.
Your obsession with Islam is bordering on the insane. May I remind you and all other posters on this blog that no Arab country has soldiers stationed in or occupying any of your respective countries. You want to eliminate terrorism? It takes only one step: Get the hell out of their countries!! Then maybe, they might just begin to like us. All of you erudite libertarians should be aware that modern Political Islamism was created in 1924 in Egypt by British Intelligence who concocted the Muslim Brotherhood to oppose the nationalists who wished to liberate their country.
One more point:
I would suggest you ask the various universities who cater to Arab foreign students if they would wish to eliminate student visas. They will unhesitatingly send you to hell since they make millions charging incredibly exorbitant tuition to decadently rich students from the ruling elites. These are for the most part the sons and daughters of the very people we keep in power to promote American interests in their countries.
So you see gentlemen, Paul’ s threats are utter bullshit. As a matter of fact, it would be most beneficial to these “Islamic” countries that could thereby prevent such a money drain from their economy and force their youth to assist in the building of their nation instead of squandering their papa’s money and enriching more Americans!
Butros Dahu
December 30th, 2007 at 12:33 pm
Ron Paul stereotypes entire nations as terrorists. However whites committed the majority of terrorist attacks in the U.S. since its inception to 2001. The possibility of a white American committing the next terrorist attack is quite high.
Ron Paul is a good man who understands not to stereotype on such issues. If he is oppose to immigration in general then I accept that but defining what people are a terrorist nation is ridiculous and will lead to racism and stereotypes as well as denying a portion of people who can benefit this country.
If Ron Paul is just trying to appeal to Iowa voters then he loses my respect and make me reevaluate my support for him. Afterall, Ron Paul is respected for straight with his constituents and this ad make him look dishonest.
Bill Woolsey
December 30th, 2007 at 12:53 pm
I thought Justin heard “Terrorist Nations,” as nations that the State Department designates as state sponsors terrorism. I suspect that the reference was rather to nations where there exist anti-U.S. terrorist movements, (frequently, allies of the U.S.) like Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan. I think there is plenty of evidence that young people who come to the West from states where the U.S. is sponsors a repressive government are a threat. And it isn’t only that some terrorists might use student visas to enter the U.S. It is also that foreign students in the U.S. might become terrorists or at least provide passive assistance. There are also disadvantages to the policy. And I think it would become unnecessary if the U.S stopped supporting despotic foriegn states. But I don’t think foreign students hae a right to come study in the U.S. It is U.S. universities and colleges that whose rights are being restricted by such a prohibition.
PissedOffAmerican
December 30th, 2007 at 12:53 pm
“Agonizing Over the Candidates and Who They Really Are”
Over at Steve Clemons blog, well worth reading.
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/
PissedOffAmerican
December 30th, 2007 at 1:08 pm
What about Iran? I can think of no other country that has contributed such a wide range of positive and successful Muslim immigrants to our nation. Yet surely, when one invokes the term “terrorist nation” it would be reasonable to think that Iran would jump to the head of the list, thanks to the efforts of this monster Dick Cheney, and his like minded following of neocon and zionist zealots like Bolton, Wolfowitz, Perle, etc..
Do we punish the whole of the Iranian people for the largely exagerrated “transgressions” of the Iranian leadership? Hell, we’ve already murdered well over a million Iraqis since 1991 when we gave Saddam a wink and a nod to go into Kuwait. Perhaps if we had aspired to help educate these people, rather than working to exterminate them, radical Islamic terrorism wouldn’t be the issue it is today.
Nope. Ron Paul blew it here. This ad is a disturbing extension of the “crusades” mentality that contributes to the very “blowback” that Ron Paul has told us he wishes to put an end to.
notthewayiwoulddoit
December 30th, 2007 at 1:21 pm
Michael Scheuer said: “Osama bin Laden is not an aberrant personality in Saudi society. He is the poster boy for their educational system.”
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/front/interviews/scheuer.html
brad smith
December 30th, 2007 at 1:27 pm
HI, the point that Ron Paul should not just single out student visas from a few countries is a good one. However, student visas are abused it’s a fact.
The elite colleges and universities lobby aggressively against clamping down on student visas because the foreign students are so profitable. They swell the numbers of graduate students who then bolster the universities’ applications for federal handouts for “research.” For example, Boston University now has 5,240 foreign students, researchers or professors.
It’s a well-kept secret how much money the elite colleges receive outright from the federal government, in addition to billions of dollars in all sorts of student financial aid. Here is a sampling of the latest available annual figures: Johns Hopkins $793 million, Stanford $391 million, Harvard $349 million, Washington University (St. Louis) $347 million, MIT $301 million, Yale $300 million, Emory $248 million, Cornell $247 million, Duke $218 million, and Northwestern $204 million.
At least 40 percent of foreign students in the United States currently receive financial aid, and major colleges recently announced that they will substantially increase aid to foreign students. Think about that when the students in your family are going into debt because of exorbitant tuition rates.
Foreign students on untracked visas fit right in with the prevailing college ideologies of multiculturalism and diversity. As enforced by the campus thought police, multiculturalism means that all cultures (except our Western Judeo-Christian civilization) are equally good, and diversity means preferring immigrants from non-Western countries.
Having read this I think an arguement could be made that Ron Paul’s problem isn’t that he bans some applicans but that he isn’t banning all of them. I for one don’t believe that my money should be used to further this scam.
Ron Paul for President 2008!
brad smith
December 30th, 2007 at 1:34 pm
This is NOT a new position for Paul. it is NOT pandering in any way. Just check out the house bill.
HR 488 IH
108th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 488
To limit the issuance of student and diversity immigrant visas to aliens who are nationals of Saudi Arabia, countries that support terrorism, or countries not cooperating fully with United States antiterrorism efforts.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
January 29, 2003
Mr. PAUL (for himself, Mr. GOODE, Mrs. MUSGRAVE, and Mr. DUNCAN) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
——————————————————————————–
A BILL
To limit the issuance of student and diversity immigrant visas to aliens who are nationals of Saudi Arabia, countries that support terrorism, or countries not cooperating fully with United States antiterrorism efforts.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Terror Immigration Elimination Act of 2003′.
SEC. 2. LIMITATION ON ISSUANCE OF STUDENT AND DIVERSITY IMMIGRANT VISAS TO ALIENS WHO ARE NATIONALS OF SAUDI ARABIA OR COUNTRIES THAT SUPPORT TERRORISM OR ARE NOT COOPERATING FULLY WITH UNITED STATES ANTITERRORISM EFFORTS.
(a) LIMITATION ON ISSUANCE OF STUDENT VISAS- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, an alien may not be granted a visa for study in the United States under subparagraphs (F), (J), or (M) of section 101(a)(15) of the Immigration and Nationality Act without review by the President if the alien is a national of Saudi Arabia, a country designated under section 620A of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2371) as a country that has repeatedly provided support for acts of international terrorism, section 6(j) of the Export Administration Act (50 U.S.C. app. 2405(j)) as a country that supports acts of international terrorism, or section 40A of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2781) as a country not cooperating fully with United States antiterrorism efforts.
(d) LIMITATION ON ISSUANCE OF DIVERSITY IMMIGRANT VISAS- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, an alien may not be granted an immigrant visa under section 203(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1153(c)) relating to diversity immigrants without review by the President if the alien is a national of Saudi Arabia, a country designated under section 620A of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2371) as a country that has repeatedly provided support for acts of international terrorism, section 6(j) of the Export Administration Act (50 U.S.C. app. 2405(j)) as a country that supports acts of international terrorism, or section 40A of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2781) as a country not fully cooperating with United States antiterrorism efforts.
END
Ron Paul President 2008!
Michael
December 30th, 2007 at 1:50 pm
The fact that this ad appeals to Tim R speaks volumes. Using words like “terrorist nations” only strengthens the neocon meme. I understand why Paul’s campaign did it, and that only makes me more upset about it. I agree on immigration and border policy, but not on this. Punishing people for the actions of their government or others from their country is anathema to me.
brad smith
December 30th, 2007 at 2:07 pm
Protecting your own country is not a “crusade”. Bringing war and occuption to their countries is. Being “over there” is different than saying we should reward them by giving them free reign to use our Universities. Should we allow another 9/11 and the inevitable US retribution? How would that possibly lead to a more peacfull planet? Limiting the states role to only protecting itself is the best way to go. As Murray N. Rothbard stated
“No purpose can be served when additional people are caused to lose their lives anywhere because of war. The fact is, the quarrel in modern large-scale war is not actually between the subject people, but between their States. The interest of the subjects is always in peace – since it is only in peace that full freedom for self-development can be attained. War decidedly increases the dangers of losing further individual freedom – to the “domestic” enemy, if not to the “foreign” enemy.
In short, the individual subject will want the State to limit its objectives, to defend the country’s territory rather than to attack, to abstain from a drive to victory and unconditional surrender, and to negotiate peace at the earliest possible moment. Moreover, if full terms of peace cannot be immediately decided upon, the most important thing becomes negotiation of a truce to stop the mutual slaughter.
Ron Paul for President 2008!
Josh
December 30th, 2007 at 2:18 pm
Ron Paul being too tough on student visas is about no. 9874 on my list of concerns at the moment. Seriously, get some perspective for a few mins before ripping into the best candidate by far. I know the news isn’t THAT slow that we have to go deconstructing new Ron Paul ads that are miracles of existence in their own right. Right?
Brent
December 30th, 2007 at 2:48 pm
Looks like they’d be under much more scrutiny, but it doesn’t say blanket-denial.
Dana Garrett
December 30th, 2007 at 3:35 pm
“Regarding the 19 hijackers, while several of them applied for student visas, none of them originated from countries currently defined as a terrorist state by the State Department.”
No surprise here and no one should think for one second that Ron Paul wasn’t aware the student visas bugbear was little more than a propaganda false flag, one deliberately flown a few days before the Iowa Caucus to signal to Republican wingnuts that, his (laudable) views on the war and decriminalizing drugs notwithstanding, he too is a craven xenophobe.
CMC
December 30th, 2007 at 3:51 pm
In short, the general concept proposed in the ad would not have prevented these hijackers from receiving visas…
True. Such a ban apparently would not have stopped 911. What’s you’re point? That unless the proposal is carefully tailored to address how those 19 guys committed their crime, we shouldn’t do it? Are morally wrong to do it? That we can only close those barn doors that those 19 got out from?
I note that one of the hijackers had a student visa. So, by your own cite, the student visa entry path is not completely outside the realm of possibilities.
As for your cite on 600,000, please, tell me, what percentage come from the Middle East as opposed to oh, say, that other hotbed of radical suicidal terrorism, China? Feels good to throw out a big number, but what are we really talking about, 4, 6 % of the total might come from terrorist countries. Waive in the girls –like any good frat boy would, and we’re talking what, 3%, or 18,000? Yeah, that’s up there with 911, the mortgage crisis, the bio-tech industry, in terms of relative value. I mean, if we don’t get those 20,000 guys and their tuition, damn, it’ll be all over. We’ll starve.
CMC
December 30th, 2007 at 4:19 pm
PS, while you’re banging out the research on those numbers and how, as Justin said, such a ban would “kill” our computer industry, riddle me this: How many Nobel prizes in science have gone to muslims? Six? Four?
BTW, Ron Paul never said this would be permanent. I have great faith in the the good women of Islam. You think those mothers are going to put up with this Osama nonsense much longer if it starts costing their bright sons better futures in the West?
Chip Larson
December 30th, 2007 at 4:38 pm
Why even ask such a comment since the answer is obvious. By now you should now that USreal is held to a different standard.
To the US government, there are bad terrorists and good terrorists.
A good terrorist is one who advances the interests of the US.
So, since the official US policy is to advance the interests of USreal whatever they may be, even if they involve:
a. Stealing Palestine from the Palestinians.
b. Taking land from Syria because they needed the water.
c. Indiscriminately bombing and killing Arabs because it shows who’s boss.
etc, etc
notthewayiwoulddoit
December 30th, 2007 at 5:12 pm
Heaven forbid the computer industry starts hiring Americans. Rolls eyes. The worker shortage is another pack of lies spun by the War Party:
http://www.cis.org/articles/1999/back999.html
Jason Ditz
December 30th, 2007 at 5:28 pm
Did they dramatically change the way student visas work in the past decade? When I was in college people in the country on a student visa weren’t allowed to hold jobs off campus, and even on-campus they could only make minimum wage.
peace
December 30th, 2007 at 5:35 pm
Thank you, Chip.
peace
December 30th, 2007 at 5:38 pm
Thank you, Stanley, and you too, Michael.
peace
December 30th, 2007 at 5:47 pm
Thank you for this truth-telling article. American students are constantly being lied to about employment and wage possibilities, as well as ripped off, by their own schools and governments.
richard vajs
December 30th, 2007 at 6:07 pm
While interning for my paramedic license, I worked at an emergency room in a small rural hospital. If it wasn’t for the Iranian or Pakistani doctors on staff there might not be any doctors around after 5 PM. When you get in a wreck at 11 PM and fracture your pelvis and rupture your bladder, you may not want to wait until DR. Katz or Dr. Thornton comes in at 8 AM. I don’t know if the Phillipines Islands is considered a terrorist country but it is significantly Muslim. Cut off visas for Filipina nurses and you probably have to shut down a lot of nursing homes and some big city hospitals.
Of all of the self-destructive things this country could do, shutting off immigration would be the most bone-headed stunt we could pull. I know it is “illegal immigration” that you are after but do you have any idea of how few “legal immigrants” would be allowed in after every nationalist war monger and trade unionist was heard from?
What about the unskilled, the Mexican and Central American workers? Get rid of them and construction costs will increase; fresh fruits and vegetables will have to be imported; and Lord knows who the swells will be able to hire as domestics.
9/11 has somehow managed to turn the land of the free and the brave into the land of the cruel and the cowardly.
Michael Collins
December 30th, 2007 at 7:24 pm
Thanks Brad,
This is what I thought Dr. Paul had done back then but I wasn’t sure. And I think the thrust of the bill makes perfectly good sense. The majority of the terrorists of 9/11 were from Saudi Arabia and members of the wahabist sect. Ron Paul has correctly stated that they are over here because we are over there. The corollary of that statement is that we are in Iraq because we let the 9/11 terrorists over here. Sure, the neocons wanted the war but it probably never would have happened if 9/11 had not happened.
Chris
December 30th, 2007 at 8:03 pm
That you are able to see yourself as an individual is a big part of your Western Identity.
Stanley Laham
December 30th, 2007 at 8:22 pm
Thanks for that informative article. Ah the bottomless turpitude of Corporate America never ceases to amaze me. From the chemical warfare profiteerings of Dow and Dupont during the Vienam war to the indecent and grotesque shenanigans of silicon valley. They are creating such havoc in order to minimize cost and increase profits that they will finally kill the golden goose. By constantly reducing the American middle class, they will have no one left to buy their products. What is that symbol of a snake eating itself…?
the Lion
December 30th, 2007 at 10:38 pm
A more meaningful act than stopping students would be to stop OIL imports from nations supporting Terrorism. How would the Saudi’s like that
Stanley Laham
December 30th, 2007 at 11:24 pm
That would suit the Chinese just fine. Exxon-Mobil, Chevron, Occidental, BP and all their stock holders on the other hand would be sweating bricks.
Tim R.
December 31st, 2007 at 1:11 am
Mr. Laham: What countries did we “occupy” prior to 9/11? Saudi Arabia? Fearing Saddam, didnt they ASK us to come in?
Second: Sorry about what you call my “obsession” with Islam but I was in lower manhattan on 9/11 and watched buildings being incinerated and smelled the burning odor in the air and feared for my life and I think I have a right to be just a tad bit concerned since the attack was carried out by Muslim fanatics.
Also, I can’t understand your obsession with refusing to acknowledge a link between militant Islam and terrorism. It is probably a product of willful blindness. You want to view all people, and religions, as inherenlty good. I understand and admire that; but it is an erroneous, not to mention dangerous, proposition.
Tim R.
December 31st, 2007 at 1:24 am
Just some statistics that might give you a better picture of immigration: In the 1950’s Eisenhower launched Operation Wetback, which deported almost a million illegal immigrants back to Mexico. In the early 1960’s the United States only took in less than 250,000 LEGAL immigrants per year. I am not aware of any major doctor or nurse shortages during the Kennedy administration, and somehow the produce got to market and I’m not aware of any food shortages because there was no one around to do “jobs Americans don’t want.”
Today we take in over a Million legal immigrants a year ( not to mention the millions of illegals) And look around, are we better off? In New York City the schools are bursting at the seams, kids have to learn in closets. And why? Because of simple math: Too many immigrants, too fast. No one is saying that we should end immigration but it sure needs to be slowed down substantially. Also, go to the local welfare office in New York or LA and you will see it overflowing with people who can’t speak English.
sam
December 31st, 2007 at 1:51 am
How do you define Muslim fanatic? How different is he from the rest of Muslims or humans? Muslims account for one fifth of the world population and scattered all over , including America, they come in all shapes and colors. So how do you propose to protect yourself from them? And what about the millions of Americans who live in the Muslim countries (which they live in peace among the fanatics with no problems!), who will protect them and how? It is easy to live in fear and blame your problems on others. Get real, we are all human, and respond to aggression the same way. American government needs to stop its aggression against Muslims and others if we ever going to have peace.
Zhu Bajie
December 31st, 2007 at 3:43 am
For most of the last 200 years, the US has depended heavily on immigrant labor, especially immigrant scientists and engineers. (Think of Einstein, Tesla, etc.) Until recently, 40% of the graduates of Tsinghua, China’s leading engineering and science university, went on to further study in the US. Perhaps 80% became immigrants, and contributed their talents and ambition to the US. Now, they stay home and contribute to China, while the US caters to people who think the world is 5000 years old and tell their kids “don’t study too much or you won’t believe the Bible!”
Think about that, next time you wonder why China is progressing and you are not.
Zhu Bajie
Zhu Bajie
December 31st, 2007 at 3:52 am
One of my friends has made quite a bit of money in the artificial insemination business, making chemical buffer to keep the bull, boar, turkey, etc., sperms alive longer. Guess how the semen is extracted? Someone must put on a plastic glove and masturbate a farm animal! Guess how many white anglo-saxon protestants are willing to do this?
If the Great Wall of N. America really works, your hamburger and turkey bologna is going to cost a lot more! I severely doubt the average immigrant hater is going to take up the career of hog wanker.
Zhu Bajie
Zhu Bajie
December 31st, 2007 at 3:53 am
They’d sell it to someone else.
Zhu Bajie
Jebadia
December 31st, 2007 at 4:52 am
Even as a liberal with socialist tenancies, I have given money to antiwar.com, and yes, even Ron Paul. I appreciate the hard work Justin has done in the name of libertarnism and peace, and I am sorry to see Ron Paul put out an add such as this. Frankly, Paul just shot any lefty support he would of got in this election in the head, and all for the cracker vote. I was willing to believe he could win, and act accordingly, even if he could not. Not so anymore.
Dennis Jernberg
December 31st, 2007 at 5:00 am
Like China. The Stalinist neocons who rule that *other* empire just loooooove authoritarian governments, even theocratic ones. They buy the Iranian oil the US government won’t let American companies touch, for example.
salem s
December 31st, 2007 at 8:33 am
Tim,
Did you seek a psychiatric help with that or not,you really need it!
Suadi Arabia was forced to accepet American forces ,they were shown fake satellite of Iraqi troops massed on Suadi borders ,in fact there none,like the big non-existent WMD in Iraq.The Majority of Suadies were aginst it from the begging ,that is when the present problems started.
Saddam did ask the US if he could invade Kuwait.The US showed no obejection.
How many Islam are there?
MetaCynic
December 31st, 2007 at 9:19 am
Tim R.: It’s been more than 6 years since 9/11 when “they” struck us, allegedly, because “they” hate our freedoms. Since, according to you, Muslims loathe us so, why have the millions of Muslims residing in America been so quiet since 9/11? There are endless opportunities and targets for at least a few motivated martyrs to mount terrorist attacks on American soil to bloody the Great Satan. Yet, six years and nothing.
In Iraq, car bombs are a daily occurrence, almost a way of life. On the American Front in the War On Terror all is quiet. Why? Are the jihadists awaiting a secret order from some grand imam to converge in the thousands on our subdivisions, malls, stadiums and airports to put a fiery end to the American Way Of Life in one big bang? Does the laughable Homeland Security have things under control confiscating shampoo bottles and nail clippers? Maybe the Muslim fanatics’ hatred has ebbed along with our liberties under Bush, and there’s not much freedom left to hate any more.
Or, most likely, perhaps you watch way too much TV and are easily frightened.
Scriven
December 31st, 2007 at 10:23 am
This is not a new position for Ron Paul. He has upheld that we have the right to limit immigration and visas from nations that we are in conflict with.
Who is the target audience for the ad? I can tell you exactly! I met some of them while canvassing for Ron Paul. They are conservative leaning old people who are SCARED TO DEATH of the media boogey-men. So scared that TURRURISM is the SOLE ISSUE for them. So much so that they will sacrifice all other principles to vote for Guiliani! I want Ron Paul to WIN, so I am not in the least concerned with his targeting.
He is not lying, although he would explain it differently to his ‘regular’ crowd.
These countries in question are CIA playgrounds. The CIA has admitted to setting up Al Quieda fronts to control potential terrorists. Any place where this is going on is a direct threat to the US. Remember the Bay of Tonkin?
We have hand crafted a very dangerous world, like it or not. Worse still when our opinions are viewed as programmable viariables that can be influenced by external factors.
Yes, Saudi is not on the current list, but if you have listened to Ron Paul in the past, you know that he views Saudi Arabia as a FIRST TIER threat to our safety. Moreso than Iran or Afghanistan.
Read between the lines- It is election time. You know who you support, so spend your efforts promoting Ron Paul rather than questioning one ad that targets frightened old people.
You know who the REAL terrorists are. So does Ron Paul.
willie
December 31st, 2007 at 10:27 am
Exactly.
willie
December 31st, 2007 at 10:27 am
maybe… if we stop funding them.
Tim R.
December 31st, 2007 at 12:02 pm
How do I define Muslim fanatic? A Muslim who believes that the Quran is the direct word of God and that it gives him the right, and the obligation, to kill innocent people, to chop off body parts, to subjugate woman and hang gay people. A Muslim terrorist, on the other hand, is just a Muslim fanatic who puts his thoughts into action.
Robert Brager
December 31st, 2007 at 12:08 pm
That’s exactly it. Ron Paul owes whatever chances he has – whether the denizens of Rockwell’s site are willing to acknowledge it or not – to reaching out to a disaffected left. Now, in one fell, ill-advised swoop, he’s gone and alienated that support – as if the abortion plank wasn’t an iffy proposition for those on the left who supported Paul to begin with.
This week, so far, Ron Paul has provided grist for the distortionate left’s mill in the form of a) appearing to “deny evolution”, and b) this ad. Both of which compound the image problems of a candidacy plagued by reports of a Ron Paul Newsletter from a decade and a half back that cite spurious statistics in order to lend foundation to a nakedly racist argument.
He was stellar in standing up to the people who sought to bring him down by concentrating their efforts on attacking him for the beliefs of isolated individuals who donate to his campaign and to compel him to return the donation. But…
I don’t think Ron Paul is exercising any common sense here. This ad promotes a series of policies of collective punishment, expanding government, xenophobia, and lends tacit support to this whole notion of a war on terror. In the last quarter, we raised Ron Paul $19 million and that candidate pledged to use this money wisely, purchasing advertising space in print, radio, and TV. And this is what he does with it? “Wisely” doesn’t even enter into it. This is imbecilic in the extreme. Forget Stormfront, anyone who got suckered into this deserves their money back. Ron Paul is going nowhere in 2008.
Stanley Laham
December 31st, 2007 at 1:59 pm
A majority of Kucinich supporters will vote for Ron Paul in the general election if their candidate does make it to the final round and Paul does. I am curious, does the reverse also hold true?
If not, why not? He is against the imperialist designs of the neocons, has the same general foreign policy outlook as Paul, opposes WTO- NAFTA- CAFTA, regularly denounces the World Bank and IMF as tools of neo-colonialism and accepts no money from the corporate fascist establishment. Is that not a substancial part of Paul’s platform?
I would appreciate some elucidation on the matter.
Stanley Laham
December 31st, 2007 at 2:02 pm
There is an obvious typo in my post. Correction:
If Kucinich does NOT make it to the final round.
brad smith
December 31st, 2007 at 2:12 pm
I live and work in Northern Michigan. My family has farms as well as my friends. I can absolutely say I have never seen or heard of anyone around here doing this job that is NOT a white anglo-saxon protestant. Oh I take that back, I have heard of a few Catholics. Your comment is typical of the common ignorance of how free market economics works. NO job will go unfulfilled because wages will go up to the point that someone will accept the job. All your argument does is prove that Illegal immigration drives down the cost of labor. Which is in and of itself not a bad thing. However, the market will work out the work delema.
salem s
December 31st, 2007 at 2:21 pm
Tim R ,
you are an ignorant idiot who can’t stop finding things in the quran that are not there.so the majority of Muslims are fantics as you define it!
brad smith
December 31st, 2007 at 2:26 pm
Who exactly are you calling a “cracker”? Is it everyone who doesn’t agree with you, or just the white ones? I think you would be shocked to realize just how many of us “crackers” are out there. We also vote and most of us have a level of intelligence suficient enough to get the message. We can make up our own minds about the issues. No need for a liberal/socialist to go calling names.
A. G. Phillbin
December 31st, 2007 at 2:30 pm
Well, if it paid enough, many Americans would take the job of “hog wanker.” They’d even wear t-shirts with suggestive slogans, advertising their occupation with mock pride. You see, people who advance the argument that “illegal immigrants are only taking jobs Americans don’t want…” never finish the sentence, which should end with “…at the wages being offered.” And, yes, if more expensive hamburger is the price involved, I will pay it. I won’t die if I consume less meat, even though I like it. McDonalds and Burger King are not the be all and end all of human existence or even commerce — and neither is f**king WalMart!
salem s
December 31st, 2007 at 2:42 pm
stopping oil imports from “nations suppurting terrorism” should start with the individual like yourself Lions stop filling up your car and get other to follow your example.If the Suadi people,not the government, had their way ,they might not want to sell their oil to you!
Mars
December 31st, 2007 at 2:53 pm
I don’t think restricting student visas is going to stop infiltration of Muslim terrorists. However, I would legislate a requirement to have the sponsoring university to purchase terror liability insurance. It would be something similar to having homeowner’s or car insurance. For example, if Georgetown recruited or accepted an application of a non-US citizen student, then the Georgetown administration would have to take out an insurance policy on that student to cover the possibility of that student committing a terrorist act. Just like some age groups are a high liability, some students, depending where they’re from, will be a high liability. Of course this have to be done in accordance to the constitutional process in the US congress.
I do not favor extreme restrictions on immigration. I do favor ordered immigration. However, I don’t see how other less develop nations will ever become developed when their best and brightest are becoming citizens of the developed nations. I believe American Universities and Colleges would do the less developed nations a great service if they establish satellite schools in the countries that send a large number of students to the US to study.
A. G. Phillbin
December 31st, 2007 at 3:11 pm
I agree. I switched parties (and gave RP $) from Peace and Freedom to Republican, and it wasn’t to vote for Giuliani or Romney! I felt (and still do) that any significant vote totals for RP, never mind primary wins, is the most effective *electoral* way to force the political establishment to reconsider it’s endless Mideast war and associated anti-civil liberties policies. I still plan to vote for RP in the California primary (2/5/08), and have encouraged people to do what I have done. This “no visas to students from terrorist nations” was cheap pandering to the worst instincts of the Republican base, and has probably made my task a lot harder. I probably disagree with RP about 65 – 70% overall, and about 50% on the question of illegal immigration (& about 50% disagree with P&FP). Even if I agreed with the POLICY (I don’t), the phrasing alone rubs the “war on terror” in my face, and in the faces of many libertarians as well.
And for what? The Iowa primary? Well, the California primary dwarfs the Iowa primary by several orders of magnitude, and a win here would be earth-shattering, and it would take significant crossover votes to do it. I understand that the atypical state of Iowa is first on the playlist, but why sacrifice the main event in Hollywood for a rehearsal in Keokuk? I know the RP campaign is desperate for electoral momentum to match their phenomenal financial momentum, but is this really necessary?
The whole thing reminds me of Democrats doing “smart politics” by trying to appear more war-mongering or more draconian than their Republican opponents — don’t want to appear “soft!” on crime, terror, welfare, etc. Most of the time, it backfires. Why vote for the phony tough guy, when you’ve got a real one?
This kind of short-sightedness is built into our electoral system. The whole idea of holding FEDERAL primaries on several different days is arcane and ridiculous. All FEDERAL primaries should be held on the same day in late June, so that the candidates have enough time to debate and flesh out their positions for the nation as a whole.
richard vajs
December 31st, 2007 at 3:49 pm
Tim R,
This country deported Mexican farm workers back during the Great Depression and then promptly exploited the Okies. The Mexican workers came back during WWII because the Okies joined the Army or went to work in the aircraft plants. Yeah then we deported the Mexicans again and exploited the blacks (Do you remember Edward R Murrow’s “Harvest of Shame”?) for migratory farm work. Occasionally we showed some sense and had programs like the “Braseros Program” but generally we followed racist logic. Whenever this country allowed free immigration like from 1870 to 1920, we prospered.
In New York, schools may be crowded but in rural white America (e.g. the Great Plains States, Appalachia, etc.) school districts are consolidading because of low enrollment. America, like much of Europe, is losing white population because whites no longer seem to care to reproduce. I don’t know if this is a tragedy or not, but it is reality. So complain all you want, the reality is that this old world turns around every 24 hours and things evolve. Trying to stop the flow of reality is buying into a culture of death.
brad smith
December 31st, 2007 at 4:48 pm
Stanley, I am a Ron Paul supporter. I believe that he has the best ideas. However, I would vote for Kucinich if Ron Paul was not in the running. I don’t agree with the Socialist/liberalist ideas. But in regards to Kucinich, I feel that the positives of his position outway the negatives. As a two time combat vet, I believe that war is the ulitmate failure of humanity. I would NEVER vote for anyone who believes that it’s the answer to anything. I don’t see a Kucinich/Paul ticket anytime soon. They are just too vastly different on the role that the Federal government should play in our lives.
Robert Brager
December 31st, 2007 at 5:43 pm
Why is Lew Rockwell’s site still silent about this controversy? Anti-War’s got over 500 comments on it now. It’s also been a slow blogging day over at Rockwell since yesterday. Ron Paul fucked up and all of James Ostrowski’s bloviating about Ron Paul’s chances are particularly galling on a day like today. Ron Paul is done. The left element of his support will take flight and with them they’ll snatch away the common perception that he’s a man of principle. In the place of principle will remain the “kook” and “racist” perceptions.
There are no decent anti-war candidates. We’re still going to be in there. All the sabre-waving at Pakistan now, oh, my God. Way to go, Ron Paul, as if your worst and most insistent supporters out there weren’t sinking you enough as it was. It’s over.
Willow
December 31st, 2007 at 6:38 pm
Could it be a doctor shortage due to HEAVY RESTRICTIONS or barriers to entry imposed by the A.M.A. on American doctors? I am sure my siblings/in laws (five doctors) would gladly work nights on victims at po-dunk junction if they were being paid appropriately.
By the way, studies done on what produce would cost if there were no illeg. immig. but only American workers and foreign workers with the current visa programs, vegetabele would cost a few cents more per pound.
Austin Hook
December 31st, 2007 at 7:31 pm
As enforced by the campus thought police, multiculturalism means that all cultures (except our Western Judeo-Christian civilization) are equally good, and diversity means preferring immigrants from non-Western countries.(Brad Smith)
Come on, don’t you think that a French student isn’t as eagerly sought as one from India?
Austin Hook
December 31st, 2007 at 7:40 pm
No one is saying that we should end immigration but it sure needs to be slowed down substantially. [Tom R.]
Well then let me say it. We should end immigration. There are too many people in the USA for the resources to support them. All immigration should only be by exchange to that the net increase is zero.
Austin Hook
December 31st, 2007 at 7:48 pm
I’ll take Ron Paul with a few faults over any dozen Democrats, except maybe Mike Gravel. Give him some feedback, he’ll probably listen.
GM
December 31st, 2007 at 8:07 pm
Ron Paul well knows that right now the odds of getting a student visa from the “terrorist nations” (i.e., Arab, Muslim countries) is about same as winning the lottery. It wouldn’t have stopped 9/11 or any terrorist attack in a Western country that I can think of, but it would have stopped the late Benazir Bhutto from studying at Harvard. Why is Ron Paul lowering himself to this anti-immigrant/anti-foreigner pandering?
notthewayiwoulddoit
December 31st, 2007 at 9:19 pm
I don’t understand why socialist are in bed with the corporatist? The arguments about how exploiting people helps the economy, gives them a better life, and is instrumental to the economy are direct descendants of pro-slavery arguments.
Robert E. Lee said: “The blacks are immeasurably better off here than in Africa, morally, physically, and socially.”
I prefer Patrick Henry. “Give me liberty or give me Death!”
We shouldn’t give the War Party not one thing it desires in it’s evil heart. The only thing it deserves is a bloody nose.
Ron Paul should have explained the root cause of illegal immigration like the free trade agreements supported by the War Party. The War Party’s meddling in other countries has caused problems across the board.
Ali
December 31st, 2007 at 11:55 pm
I am Muslim and see myself as an individual. Many Muslim and Muslim immigrants actually decide as individuals to come to this country purely for the respect of the rugged American individualism. Accusing them of not thinking as individuals as an act of collectivism. Apply the standard to all, not to collective groups lest you yourself be “non-Western”.
R. Nelson
January 1st, 2008 at 4:04 am
Dang, Tim R., if I don’t actually agree with you here. Good point! Funny how we used to do all sorts of things in America without having to import a subclass.
richard vajs
January 1st, 2008 at 6:33 am
This “anti-immigrant/anti-foreigner” sentiment which has become so broad in this country is (to me) a malaise similiar to the kind that hits a group of people in a bar about 20 minutes before closing time. It is a sour feeling that one has stayed too long, too many rounds have been ordered, and the bill will soon appear. The lucky ones drank and threw a few bucks on the table and left early. The money in the pot won’t cover one-tenth of the tab and it is too late to duck out now. This is America 2008. Our drunken spree of easy money and cheap imports is coming to an end and we all feel it in our bones. Someone must get blamed (besides us).
salem s
January 1st, 2008 at 10:45 am
But are westerners able,or willing to see and treat others as individuals?!
Doug
January 1st, 2008 at 4:59 pm
I was working in downtown OKC when a radical so called Christian blew up the federal building. Do I hate all Christians because of that no but I am more afraid of Christian radicals than Muslim (so called) radicals.
The Christian (so called radicals are trying to start Armageddon just to suit there bulls**t stories! And in the meantime with Jrs. help are demolishing the Constitution of the United States outlawing free speech and allowing unwarranted searches at will while suspending habeas corpus. He has done more to destroy the USA than any Muslim (so called) fanatic could dream of.
He has in a way given them exactly what they wanted, a surrender of sorts!
Scott Frost
January 1st, 2008 at 7:13 pm
Please don’t let this issue keep you from supporting Ron Paul. He remains the only noninterventionist candidate. He is the only serious anti-war candidate. He is the only one even talking about sound money. He is the only candidate who is openly against the insane war on drugs, which is really a war on the Bill of Rights which only makes our streets and borders less safe and disporportionatley affects black Americans.
It is Ron Paul or more of the same.
peace
January 1st, 2008 at 8:12 pm
Scott Frost is correct.
Chris
January 2nd, 2008 at 6:35 am
I accused no one of anything. As a general rule, individualism is a Western trait.
Rio Knussmann
January 2nd, 2008 at 4:09 pm
The whole point of the Ron Paul campaign is that it is driven by outstanding principles unlike any politician’s. If these principles are rejected for any reason including that of victory, then the purpose of the Ron Paul campaign is lost. We need to explain and reexplain the true merits of Paul’s principles in ways that people can understand so that change can actually occur.
Bonnie
January 5th, 2008 at 9:02 am
Give Ron Paul a chance and maybe there will be no more terrorist nations.
MB
July 20th, 2008 at 10:36 am
Labeling counties as “terrorist nations” is just plain stupid!
I agree with GM’s statement too.
geral
November 19th, 2008 at 5:11 pm
http://www.sosbeevfbi.com/part4-worldinabo.html
http://sosbeevfbi.ning.com/forum/topics/former-fbi-agent-geral-sosbee
We the people of the world hereby prevent the fbi, the cia, the militia, or any other government agency (or person) of the United States (or any other country) from dictating the terms of our surrender unto their authority, custom, culture, power now and for all times; in furtherance of this recognition, the world’s population forthwith seeks to expose such dictatorial intent (and the techniques employed in support of same) by public investigation which serves on a continuing basis to protect and to defend the people of the world (now and in the future) from any form of inhumane governance. EVERY MAN/WOMAN.
——————————————————–
“America has put on a new face, but its heart full of hate, mind drowning in greed, and spirit which spreads evil, murder, repression and despotism continue to be the same as always,” the deputy of al-Qaida chief Osama bin Laden said. AP
Immigrationti
September 13th, 2009 at 9:52 am
Great article – thanks! It is so important for people to do their homework when choosing Immigration related topics. If you're interested to know more in details about immigration process and laws , here is another great site to consider http://immigrationprofessionals.info
Regards,
Immigration