Connect with us

Opinions

Horrible argument against the wall: ‘Only’ six migrants in terrorism database stopped by CPB

Published

on

Horrible argument against the wall Only six migrants in terrorism database stopped by CPB

How many terrorists does it take to cause massive destruction in America? 10? 100? 1000? If we look at history, less than two dozen executed 9/11. But what about the “lone wolf” attacks? A quick look on Wikipedia demonstrates in the last decade, the vast majority of terrorist attacks in America were attempted by single terrorists.

The reality of potential future terrorism in the United States is very different from what both sides of the political aisle are painting. The White House is using creative numbers to make their case for the border wall, while Democrats seem to think the problem is nonexistent. The truth lies somewhere in the middle, but that’s not even the point.

NBC tried to throw cold water on the idea that our borders aren’t safe from terrorists, but it’s an extremely misguided argument. Even their headline attempts to ease concerns.

Only six immigrants in terrorism database stopped by CBP at southern border in first half of 2018

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/only-six-immigrants-terrorism-database-stopped-cbp-southern-border-first-n955861U.S. Customs and Border Protection encountered only six immigrants at ports of entry on the U.S-Mexico border in the first half of fiscal year 2018 whose names were on a federal government list of known or suspected terrorists, according to CBP data provided to Congress in May 2018 and obtained by NBC News.

The low number contradicts statements by Trump administration officials, including White House press secretary Sarah Sanders, who said Friday that CBP stopped nearly 4,000 known or suspected terrorists from crossing the southern border in fiscal year 2018.

Their argument suffers from four flaws, any of which are enough individually to make Americans concerned about the border situation.

Unlike migrants, terrorists don’t let themselves get caught

It’s easy to track a large portion of the illegal immigrants crossing into the country because many of them seek out border patrol to take them into custody once they cross. The idea is that they can apply for asylum or find other excuses to be either allowed to stay or at least released for long enough to establish their lives in the United States.

Terrorists crossing over aren’t seeking border patrol agents. They’re evading them. This is common sense that seems to have eluded NBC.

Indoctrination starts with a single conversation

Let’s talk about the “only six” argument. Yes, they were invoking the numbers in an effort to counter the White House’s inappropriate argument about the massive number of terrorists they believe are coming across the southern border. But it’s irresponsible to dismiss the number just because an isolated segment of the statistics offer a low total.

One terrorist is capable of doing great damage, as we’ve seen in the last decade. But it’s the risk of indoctrination into a radical mindset that truly makes these terrorists dangerous. They aren’t coming over here to do a quick suicide bombing before rushing off to their perceived version of heaven. They’re coming here to recruit, to meet with those who have espoused radical tendencies on social media, and to plan with others who are already here.

Six terrorists shouldn’t be dismissed

As with the indoctrination argument, the potential damage of a single terrorist or small group cannot be ignored. These aren’t law abiding migrants seeking work. They’re not drug smugglers doing harm to Americans. They’re not even gang members helping to build criminal organizations. These are terrorists with the sole purpose of rendering as much damage and death in America as possible.

They say “only six” terrorists. What we should be saying is, “Holy crap, there are six terrorists who were detained at the border. How many didn’t get caught?”

Most terrorists don’t come in through ports of entry

This is the fact that blows the NBC report out of the water. Their focus is on the terrorists who were foolish enough to try to cross the border at a port of entry. Of course they were caught. Unfortunately, they represent the tiny minority of terrorists who weren’t sophisticated enough to find a spot along our border that wasn’t a port of entry and wasn’t protected by a wall.

Also, being on the terror watch list doesn’t make them a terrorist, but not being on the terror watch list doesn’t mean they’re not a terrorist. But that’s a different discussion entirely.

Mainstream media’s attempt to reduce the impact of our porous southern border is laughable. It doesn’t take thousands of terrorists to cause massive destruction. It takes one, and there are a lot more than one crossing our border despite these reports.

Advertisement

Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Media

PolitiFact demonstrates pure partisanship declaring Trump’s physical barrier claims as “Mostly False”

Published

on

PolitiFact demonstrates pure partisanship declaring Trumps physical barrier claims Mostly False

Pulitzer Prize winning fact checking agency PolitiFact has been accused of leaning dozens if not hundreds of their fact checks to favor the Democratic perspective on most issues. In one of the most egregious examples of partisan hacking, they declared a statement made by President Trump during his televised address to the nation as “Mostly False.”

Here’s the statement: Senator Charles Schumer “repeatedly supported a physical barrier in the past along with many other Democrats. They changed their mind only after I was elected president.”

This is undeniably 100% true. It’s demonstrable that Schumer and many Democrats have supported physical barriers along the border in the recent past. Their support for changed sharply once then-candidate Trump started talking about needing a border wall, so technically speaking that portion of President Trump’s statement wasn’t entirely true. He said their support changed after he was elected, but it started changing a few months after he first entered the race.

Here’s a graph from Cato Institute that shows support from Democrats at over 40% in October, 2015, when it still seemed far fetched that he would win the nomination, let alone the general election. From that point, it took a nose dive.

Democratic Support for Border Wall

The portion of the PolitiFact article in which the author tries to justify the “Mostly False” rating attempts to distinguish between the differences in security barriers proposed by the President and accepted by Democrats in the past.

Did Democrats reverse border wall position after Donald Trump was elected?

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2019/jan/09/donald-trump/trump-democrats-reverse-border-wall-position/Schumer, along with tens of other Democrats including former President Barack Obama, voted for the Secure Fence Act of 2006, which authorized building a fence along about 700 miles of the border between the United States and Mexico. That’s the majority of the barrier in place today along the southern border.

However, the fence was mocked as a “nothing wall” by Trump in the past and was far less ambitious, both politically and physically, than the wall Trump wants to build now.

This logical gymnastics is farcical when we read the statement that is allegedly “Mostly False.” The President did not suggest nor has he ever believed the Democrats supported the type of wall he’s requesting. That’s why he was very specific in stating Schumer and the Democrats “repeatedly supported a physical barrier in the past” instead of saying they supported his wall. This is important because for a fact-checker, the details are important.

They have repeatedly judged against conservatives for the tiniest nuance in their statements to attack. But when the statement is properly worded, as the President’s was, this fact checker decided to dig into intent rather than fact checking the statement itself. He penalized the statement as being false because he reconstructed what the President said as meaning something different. This is convenient selective inference on their part. But they’re completely unbiased. Just ask them.

When even the “trusted” fact checkers are willing to abandon ethics and call an obviously true statement false for the sake of political expediency, it’s no wonder so many Americans are frustrated with the entire mainstream media mechanism.

This is why we humbly request you support us with a donation so we can try to counterbalance the horrid leftism present in mainstream media.


Subscribe on YouTube

Continue Reading

Automotive

Best-selling 2020 Ford Explorer keeps distancing itself from the competition

Published

on

Best-selling 2020 Ford Explorer keeps distancing itself from the competition

When a vehicle has dominated its class for years, it’s standard operating procedure to keep doing what works while making incremental changes to keep fans coming back for more. Ford’s intentions of eliminating most of their passenger cars from their lineup changes the calculus. This is why the all-new 2020 Ford Explorer made big changes as well as added two new styles to the family.

The Limiting Hybrid and ST versions of the Explorer will give it the flagship options that it’s star SUV needs in order to attract the masses flocking to the midsize SUV segment. But the 2020 model didn’t just add versions. They redesigned the entire vehicle, including switching it from front-wheel drive to rear-wheel drive, a platform shift that will also improve the popular 4×4 variation.

“Changing the Explorer to rear-wheel drive was a really big deal,” said Ford Motor Company’s Executive Vice President Jim Farley. “It allows our designers to deliver those beautiful proportions, give that athletic stance for Explorer, and helped our engineers to do so much more. The best towing capacity we’ve ever had. Off-road ability you hear about. On top of all that, it gave the customer more room.”

With 5,600 lb for towing, it’s more than older Explorers. More importantly, it’s more than their competitors in the segment.

But Ford will need more than a couple of new versions of the Explorer and more towing power if they intend to make a strong move in the segment. Despite the segment growing 11% last year, Explorer’s sales numbers declined 3.5%. It’s still on top, but the contradicting directions on sales numbers was a clear indicator they needed to make big changes.

The hybrid model will obviously attract a completely different type of buyer, but it’s with the new ST that Ford hopes to impress those who are moving from performance sedans or even sports cars to the midsize SUV market. The new 2020 Ford Explorer ST trim is basically a performance package. It’s the most powerful Explorer Ford has ever built with a 3.0L, twin-turbocharged V6 with 400 hp and 415 ft-lb of torque. We’ll confirm our expectations when we’re able to actually drive it, but based on the numbers we’ve seen, this is going to be an extremely fun SUV to take on the road.

The biggest changes over the previous generation are on the inside. Technology has been an unavoidable push by every automaker as they attempt to keep up with the rapidly improving available options. Today’s cars are smart cars. We’re seeing the transition in a way that’s extremely similar to what happened between smartphones and feature phones. If your vehicle doesn’t have a touchscreen infotainment system and safety assistance features, it’s old.

Ford clearly took this to heart with their most connected and functional technology suite ever in the new Explorer. It has two option touchscreens with similar capabilities to a smartphone. With connection options to Amazon Alexa, Apple CarPlay, and Android Auto, there is no shortage of ways the drive and passengers can interact with the outside world.

Safety features are dramatically improved with braking assist moving forward or backwards, lane assist that knows when the vehicle is towing, and cameras on all sides to keep full awareness.

“In the insider, there are thousands of thoughtful touches,” Farley said. “A second row seat that a child can activate and move forward with one hand, cup-holders that double as juice box holders. It’s an SUV for families that is so smart in a way that we couldn’t even imagine years ago. Speaking to Alexa to unlock your car, start the ignition. The vehicle can even read speed limiting signs and actually react to them to save you a ticket.”

With all of this, the price tag is only expected to go up $400 from the previous generation.

Ford CEO Jim Hackett said, “If there’s a heart and soul of Ford Motor Company, it’s this vehicle.” We’ll see if midsize SUV buyers agree when the 2020 Ford Explorer goes on sale this spring.

As a side note, Micah Muzio, managing editor for video at KBB, is the most entertaining car review guy on YouTube.

 

Continue Reading

Democrats

Will Democrats abandon Dreamers over the political ploy of the border wall?

Published

on

Will Democrats abandon Dreamers over the political ploy of the border wall

The ball is back in the Democrats’ court. Some may say it’s been there the whole time. I do. Unfortunately, most Americans have bought into the leftist media narrative that the President is forcing the government shutdown to continue by not negotiating despite clear evidence to the contrary.

Nevertheless, the President has decided to make his compromise public. He took to national television to offer three years worth of protection to Dreamers.

Trump’s immigration offer brings polarized reactions from Dems and GOP

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trumps-immigration-offer-brings-polarized-reactions-from-dems-and-gopPresident Trump’s immigration compromise package to end the partial government shutdown drew sharp reactions from Democratic and Republican lawmakers alike.

In a televised White House address Saturday, Trump offered Democrats a three-year extension of protections for 700,000 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients, in exchange for the $5.7 billion to fund a barrier along the southern border with Mexico.

The Democrats’ responses were predictable. They don’t want any deal that includes the border wall because they realize if they can keep the wall from going forward, it harms the President’s chances for reelection in 2020.

Period.

This has never been about helping immigrants. Democrats are willing to harm both Dreamers and 800,000 Americans hurt by the shutdown in order to make the President look bad for 2020. They’re a disgrace to our nation’s government. Build the wall.


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Facebook

Twitter

Trending

Copyright © 2019 NOQ Report