As to letting in Saudi students in and our valued strategic relationship with this 'non-state supporter of terrorism'; I know we are trying to be nuanced, but have we seen any progress?
Yes, the Saudis have been killing and rounding up AQ within the country. The Saudi regime is one of the major targets of AQ. They want to take down the Saudi government and have been trying to kill members of the Royal Family. The Saudis have also been working with our intelligence agencies and sharing informtion.
Has anybody in the State Department acknowledged the risk of allowing thousands of people from a state that, in the main, hates us and that appropriate measures have been taken?
There are risks in allowing anyone in, including from countries like the UK. We have terrorist watch lists and other checks before issuing visas. I don't buy your premise that Saudi Arabia, "in the main, hates us." We have 25,000 Americans living and working in the Kingdom. I lived there for five years and just don't share your assessment. We will agree to disagree.
The Federalist Papers clearly allude to the history that Republics fail because of foreign influence.
I think the enemy within is a far greater danger. We live in a global economy. Foreigners own over half of our national debt in the form of T-bills. We import 60% of our oil. We can't wall ourselves off from "foreign influence" whatever that really means.
Yes, the Saudis have been killing and rounding up AQ within the country.
----And yet they still fund Mosques here in the US promoting hatred of Jews and Americans. Is it unreasonable to think that we could have assistance with this as well?
We can't wall ourselves off from "foreign influence" whatever that really means.
Foreign Influence is not a new concept. The first 5 Federalist Papers are entitled with that subject. Our forefathers knew that Republics fail due to the internal conflict sparked by foreign powers. Frankly, your dismissal of the term is the kind of complacency I dread when thinking of the State department.
When I think of "Foreign Influence" I think of Clinton taking Chinese political contributions. And Al Gore at the Temple taking money from that Bhudist nun. This isn't academic.
I'm taking a leisurely stroll through the Sunday thread this week as part of my program to spare my eyes a bit of strain, hopefully to put off my surgery. I think three days to get through what others went through in three hours is a fairly moderate pace.
Anyway, I just got up to this post where you stated the above. On a purely intellectual level I would have to disagree with the conclusion that they are "two very different issues." It would take some intervening logic, but it seems it would be perfectly reasonable to logically connect the Saudi state funding of Wahabi schools and their state funding of Saudi students in the United States. You clearly cannot and should not assume that all Saudi students are, ipso facto, here to aid the spread of Wahabi teachings or interests, but it's reasonable to think that some may be.
A student visa is a time honored mechanism for placing agents of influence in western countires, whatever your goal.