Washington Times: Agents nab <two> w/ terrorist connections crossing U.S. border (in CA)

[BornaSkinsFan83]

That percentage you keep referencing is completely irrelevant. And really you shouldn't fear even when they get a nuke. At least from a math perspective. More people survived the bombing of Hiroshima than were killed by it.

So irrelevant you had to quote it twice. You know what I meant.

[Redskins Diehard]

So irrelevant you had to quote it twice. You know what I meant.

Nah dude, you added an edit about the nukes. If you are worried about just the likelihood that YOU get whacked by a terrorist then the right percentage is "what percent of Americans are killed by a terrorist?". The answer to that is exceedingly low. Also using that approach 9/11 was a non-event. Of course those types of events have far greater impact than just whether or not they kill any particular individual.

If you want to analyze specifically the southern border you could attempt to figure out how many got through based on the fact that 2 got caught. Assuming there is some consistency among groups. Then figure out how many people with terrorism ties would be concerning to you. Would it take 10, 100, 1000?

[grhqofb5]

That percentage you keep referencing is completely irrelevant. And really you shouldn't fear even when they get a nuke. At least from a math perspective. More people survived the bombing of Hiroshima than were killed by it.

 

I know. Its funny when you put thing in perspective using numbers.  When you take a step back and look at things, 6 millions Jews were murdered in the concentration camps during world war II.  But that was only about 0.26% of the global population at the time.  That's why I'm always arguing with people (mostly Jews for some reason) that the holocaust wasn't really all that big a deal for my ancestors, cause they survived it, and the vast, vast majority of the population also survived it. Except for that 0.26%.

[Larry]

The question is "is this a viable tactic for those who wish to do harm?". And yes there are plenty of other ways to gain access.

Well, I think history, so far, says that terrorists trying to infiltrate the US seem to think that the other ways work better.

[bcl05]

Wait, what? You think one out of every 400 people on earth being murdered wasn't a big deal? Seriously?

[Redskins Diehard]

Well, I think history, so far, says that terrorists trying to infiltrate the US seem to think that the other ways work better.

History has no idea what today's terrorists think.

And the question you responded to wasn't "what is the way that works best?" It was whether or not this is a viable tactic.

[Larry]

History has no idea what today's terrorists think.

And the question you responded to wasn't "what is the way that works best?" It was whether or not this is a viable tactic.

Apparently not. Far as we know, terrorists attempting to enter that way are 0-2.

[Redskins Diehard]

Apparently not. Far as we know, terrorists attempting to enter that way are 0-2.

Right. Because we know these are the only 2 who tried to enter that way. Very sound logic. We caught 2. Therefore only has ever been 2 to try.

[tshile]

Right. Because we know these are the only 2 who tried to enter that way. Very sound logic. We caught 2. Therefore only has ever been 2 to try.

This is the way some people think when it comes to policy. Stats and research are only worth your understanding of them. That includes knowing where they fall short or have built in bias.

[grhqofb5]

Wait, what? You think one out of every 400 people on earth being murdered wasn't a big deal? Seriously?

 

Not as a big a deal as 10%. Or 20%.  Or 5%.

[Larry]

Right. Because we know these are the only 2 who tried to enter that way. Very sound logic. We caught 2. Therefore only has ever been 2 to try.

We caught two, and no one else has ever, you know, done anything.

That's what we KNOW.

Now, if you want to talk about MAYBEs, feel free.

[Redskins Diehard]

We caught two, and no one else has ever, you know, done anything.

That's what we KNOW.

Now, if you want to talk about MAYBEs, feel free.

This one article appears to be the breadth and depth of your knowledge of terrorist travel. It is what YOU know. It is ignorant to think these 2 are the only 2.but that is your right to believe that.

[Larry]

This one article appears to be the breadth and depth of your knowledge of terrorist travel. It is what YOU know. It is ignorant to think these 2 are the only 2.but that is your right to believe that.

 

So please inform all of us about all of the things that you know. 

 

Or keep spinning maybes. 

 

I'll even make it wimple for you: 

 

Has there even been an act of terrorism, committed within the US, by a middle eastern terrorist who entered the US by sneaking across the Mexican border? 

[Redskins Diehard]

So please inform all of us about all of the things that you know. 

 

Or keep spinning maybes. 

 

I'll even make it wimple for you: 

 

Has there even been an act of terrorism, committed within the US, by a middle eastern terrorist who entered the US by sneaking across the Mexican border? 

It really isn't worth my time.  Perhaps if folks here weren't convinced they knew it all already it would be.

 

You are right...it has NEVER happened.  In fact there was a time when people could have said "has a person with known terrorist connections ever been caught at the southern border?"  to "prove" their point that it nobody has ever tried. That doesn't mean it never will.  New stuff happens all the time. "Has Kirk Cousins ever won a playoff game, at home?"  Hell, cancel the game.  And odds are extremely in favor of it never hurting anyone in this board, or on this message board for that matter.  

[TradeTheBeal!]

Man, FDR really nailed it with that "Fear Itself" deal. The towers came down and nobody was running around talking about building walls and deporting millions. But, let a Muslim shoot up a work party and we're supposed to fundamentally change our country...because Breitbart says so?!?

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills. Grow some stones people and quit acting like ISIS is the damn Iron Curtain. Stop engaging with fear-mongering far-right bull**** media that, quite literally, will say ANYTHING for ratings and clicks.

[Larry]

It really isn't worth my time.

And yet you felt obligated to spend two paragraphs trying to hammer home your imaginary point by spewing it again.

While attempting, for the fourth time, to paint yourself as somehow superior to all those lesser people who are pointing out actual facts.

In short, you're full of ****, and try to mask it by puffing out your chest.

"It isn't worth my time" is BS. You've been pushing this for what, 12 hours? Up to and including claiming that somebody else is ignorant because they don't possess the special facts that you have.

The truth is "I don't actually have any facts".

[Redskins Diehard]

And yet you felt obligated to spend two paragraphs trying to hammer home your imaginary point by spewing it again.

While attempting, for the fourth time, to paint yourself as somehow superior to all those lesser people who are pointing out actual facts.

In short, you're full of ****, and try to mask it by puffing out your chest.

"It isn't worth my time" is BS. You've been pushing this for what, 12 hours? Up to and including claiming that somebody else is ignorant because they don't possess the special facts that you have.

The truth is "I don't actually have any facts".

Your point isn't ignorant because you don't have access to special facts.  Your point is ignorant no matter what the topic.  That somehow equating the fact that something has never happened before is evidence that it shouldn't be something to be concerned about in the future.  That is the extent of your point.  X has not happened before and therefor X is not something that could happen in the future.  That is stupid logic no matter what "X" is.  I'm not superior...but my logic is certainly more sound.  

[Larry]

Your point isn't ignorant because you don't have access to special facts. Your point is ignorant no matter what the topic. That somehow equating the fact that something has never happened before is evidence that it shouldn't be something to be concerned about in the future. That is the extent of your point. X has not happened before and therefor X is not something that could happen in the future. That is stupid logic no matter what "X" is. I'm not superior...but my logic is certainly more sound.

Unfortunately "I'm not concerned with facts, I'm talking about something that MIGHT happen, some time" wasn't your argument.

(I suspect the reason you avoided it was because that would have meant agreeing with what several people, including me, were pointing out: that you, and others, are trying to drum up fears based on a hypothetical which is contrary to the facts. But that's just a theory.).

You chose, instead, to go with "well, of course that's what somebody who's entire knowledge of this subject is this one article would say".

You didn't respond with "I don't care about facts", you responded by claiming I didn't know them.

---

And I'll follow up by pointing out that not one person in this thread has claimed that your imaginary scenario is impossible.

They've pointed out that it hasn't happened, yet.

(And I pointed out that the terrorists seem to think that our country has other weaknesses that are more vulnerable).

[Popeman38]

Man, FDR really nailed it with that "Fear Itself" deal. The towers came down and nobody was running around talking about building walls and deporting millions. But, let a Muslim shoot up a work party and we're supposed to fundamentally change our country...because Breitbart says so?!?

What's truly funny is you quoting FDR and complaining about "fundamentally changing our country" is ironic as hell. The Japanese attacked us and he built internment camps an rounded up the Japanese in this country (including US citizens).

[mistertim]

Your point isn't ignorant because you don't have access to special facts.  Your point is ignorant no matter what the topic.  That somehow equating the fact that something has never happened before is evidence that it shouldn't be something to be concerned about in the future.  That is the extent of your point.  X has not happened before and therefor X is not something that could happen in the future.  That is stupid logic no matter what "X" is.  I'm not superior...but my logic is certainly more sound.  

Sure, your logic is technically sound because anything COULD happen. Question is...is it such a likelihood that we should all live in fear of it? Or overreact to it? Or somehow try to link it with a terrorist act that has absolutely nothing to do with it? The pushing of fear and paranoia by some of these rags is amazing, but wholly predictable.

[Redskins Diehard]

Unfortunately "I'm not concerned with facts, I'm talking about something that MIGHT happen, some time" wasn't your argument.

(I suspect the reason you avoided it was because that would have meant agreeing with what several people, including me, were pointing out: that you, and others, are trying to drum up fears based on a hypothetical which is contrary to the facts. But that's just a theory.).

You chose, instead, to go with "well, of course that's what somebody who's entire knowledge of this subject is this one article would say".

You didn't respond with "I don't care about facts", you responded by claiming I didn't know them.

---

And I'll follow up by pointing out that not one person in this thread has claimed that your imaginary scenario is impossible.

They've pointed out that it hasn't happened, yet.

(And I pointed out that the terrorists seem to think that our country has other weaknesses that are more vulnerable).

Dude, you are talking out of your ass.

 

Here is my comment regarding terrorists gaining access from the Southern border.  See, stated right there that there are plenty of other ways for someone to gain access-

The question is "is this a viable tactic for those who wish to do harm?". And yes there are plenty of other ways to gain access. 

 

And I'll say again...whether or not they haven't happened yet is irrelevant.  Do you propose we wait until after it happens to talk about the viability of that tactic?  

Sure, your logic is technically sound because anything COULD happen. Question is...is it such a likelihood that we should all live in fear of it? Or overreact to it? Or somehow try to link it with a terrorist act that has absolutely nothing to do with it? The pushing of fear and paranoia by some of these rags is amazing, but wholly predictable.

I never suggested anyone live in fear.  In fact I'll say it again...nobody should live in fear of terrorism here in America. Even if the terrorists got nukes...I would tell Mr. Tim, and Larry, and the 83...don't worry about it, odds are WAY in your favor that you survive it.

[TradeTheBeal!]

What's truly funny is you quoting FDR and complaining about "fundamentally changing our country" is ironic as hell. The Japanese attacked us and he built internment camps an rounded up the Japanese in this country (including US citizens).

Good point. Of course, an action taken in the fog of war then later repealed and apologized for such to the degree that it's considered one of more shameful moments in recent U.S. history has nothing in common with gleefully racist political rhetoric offered at a time of peace.

[tshile]

The towers came down and nobody was running around talking about building walls and deporting millions.

 

No, instead over the following 14 years we invaded two countries sparking a decade+ war and supported multiple attempts to overthrow various governments and brought instability in the middle east to a level that makes it hard to believe will reverse course in the foreseeable future. We also created the homeland security apparatus, complete with the now ridiculous situation with TSA, passed (multiple times, and even beefed up) domestic spying and data collection of US citizens, and made it legal to detain US citizens indefinitely without trial and order the execution of US citizens overseas without any real oversight.

 

Oh, and I think they're more pissed at us than ever but I'm not entirely sure.

 

In hindsight building a wall and deporting people might have been cheaper and cost less lives and rights, but that's probably hard to really measure.

[TradeTheBeal!]

Uh....pretty sure this thread is trying to be about our immigration policies as it relates to potential threats from Islamic extremism. and the invasion of Iraq had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11. It would have happened under any circumstance in the Bush Administration.

Stay focused.

[tshile]

my bad