Monitoring refugees?

[georgiaboy]

I have not heard Rand specifically state a plan for monitoring, but there are any number of existing processes we use to monitor specific individuals in this country for any number of reasons. I expect Rand does not plan to reinvent any wheels here.

And regarding moving support away from Rand because of this issue, that is of course your decision. We all have our red lines I guess.

 

[Yieu]

//

 

[givemeliberty2010]

Syria is not America. We are inviting a known threat onto our land. WE shouldn't be having them at all. But if we are, we need to know that they won't be a risk to Americans.

Homegrown terrorism is more of a "known" threat.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Has Rand mentioned anything about monitoring them? I haven't really read anything about Rand mentioning a means of monitoring refugees. Of course, I don't come here much these days so I could have missed it if he did.

 

[notsure]

Okay, but I think you would have a very hard time arguing that American citizens should not be monitored, which I don't think you have done in the quoted post.

Syria is not America, that is correct but irrelevant. However, we could say, "This is America! We don't violate people's rights by monitoring them like that!", which wouldn't be entirely true in practice, but it should be true at least in theory.

It's fine to say you don't want to take in refugees, but it is anti-liberty and unamerican to want to monitor them, the same arguments you use to monitor refugees can be used to monitor American citizens, and it is illogical from a rights-based perspective to argue that refugees should be monitored while citizens should not.



Why?

If they don't want to be monitored, then they shouldn't come here. Like myself, Rand is not opposed to monitoring, spying, or wiretapping, we are just against these actions that take place without warrant. Being a refugee, from an area we have been involved with conflict in and when isis say they want to export terrorism through the refugee process; I think is a good reason to warrant their "monitoring".

 

[notsure]

Homegrown terrorism is more of a "known" threat.

That's your opinion.

 

[specsaregood]

Has Rand mentioned anything about monitoring them? I haven't really read anything about Rand mentioning a means of monitoring refugees. Of course, I don't come here much these days so I could have missed it if he did.

I would assume that his vision of monitoring would entail following all 4th amendment protections that he regular stands up for.
I don't get where people think he has ever been "absolutely no spying." He has never been that, he has instead railed against indiscriminate spying without specific warrants, oversight and probable cause.

 

[Yieu]

//

 

[Crashland]

Rand is being deliberately ambiguous when he says we should "monitor" aliens. Stop freaking out. Libertarians are living up to their reputation of being the most paranoid group, getting spooked over one vague thing when it is plainly obvious that Rand is miles ahead of all the other candidates when it comes to libertarian principles and is the only chance we have of electing a libertarian-leaning president.

 

[Yieu]

//

 

[notsure]

These are not arguments based on rights. These are reactionary appeals to emotion.

I think that if you think refugees in our country should be monitored, then you should also argue that citizens should be monitored too.

Why should I argue that? That may fit your narrative more easily; but that is not what I said or believe. I've told you already the differences between American citizens and Syrian refugees. Do you think we should allow Syrian refugees into the US without any precautions whatsoever?

 

[nikcers]

That's your opinion.

WINNER!!!

This guy has it right, he has to gain the support of the American public who have been brainwashed to have an Islamophobic reaction and to give up privacy after terror attacks and to support more wars they want to elect someone who will protect them from terrorists. Anyone here that is honest knows that Rand's purposal to make people feel safer is the lesser of two evils and doesn't give away American's freedoms to do it. Anyone here who is arguing against the fact that the American public has this opinion and emotional reaction aren't having an honest discussion or are framing the argument out of the context of the American politics.

 

[specsaregood]

Rand is being deliberately ambiguous when he says we should "monitor" aliens. Stop freaking out. Libertarians are living up to their reputation of being the most paranoid group, getting spooked over one vague thing when it is plainly obvious that Rand is miles ahead of all the other candidates when it comes to libertarian principles and is the only chance we have of electing a libertarian-leaning president.

Time and time again the naysayers have come here and spread FUD about Randal, and time and time again he has proven that he is worth our trust.

 

[nikcers]

Ok well I may have insinuated that Aliens don't have rights, they do. They have the right to leave me alone. If they want to come here there might be some extra scrutiny most of our citizens are paranoid and think every sound coming from a bush is a lion just because it was one time a lion and it came out of the bush and attacked their pride.

 

[Yieu]

//

 

[notsure]

LEt's be logically consistent, and look at what's been going on in Syria. Our gov't has aided and supplied these terrorist groups in Syria, and now they want to mass migrate them to the US? Eventhough isis admit they want to export terror through the refugee process, you guys don't think Syrian refugees deserve extra scrutiny?

 

[notsure]

The reason for you to argue for the monitoring of citizens is in order to be logically consistent.

Any precaution we take should be a precaution. Screen them if you want (but not based on their religion) because we normally do that anyway, but once they're in, if you monitor them, then you're going to have to monitor American citizens in order to be logically consistent, because the Bill of Rights does not only apply to citizens, it applies to everyone within our borders.

Are you saying we should take in Syrian refugees without any precautions?

 

[Yieu]

//

 

[notsure]

If you read the post you quoted, you would see my position on that point.

So is that a yes or no for extra scrutiny for Syrian refugees?

 

[liberty_nc]

The idea of no borders/open immigration and libertarianism applies to when we have reached the final stage of libertarianism, complete privatisation. Here it is quite ok to have "open borders" because a government doesn't have any property or doesn't exist at all. People determine their own "immigration" policy on their land. As long as we have a welfare state and mass public property, open immigration/no borders is a ridiculous idea.