Border wall for illegal inmigration

  • Thread starter Thread starter ajac
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Just pointing out that we need to be logically consistent.

If we admit a paradigm and use it in one instance, we ought to be willing to apply it to other instances, the logic following the same form and all.
 
HarryStotle said:
40.png
LeafByNiggle:
As to the contribution of terrorism to the crime rate, Snopes addresses it.
Click to expand...
And I “addressed” Snopes.
Click to expand...
You didn’t address the content of the Snopes piece. You just ad hominemed them.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
You didn’t address the content of the Snopes piece. You just ad hominemed them.
Click to expand...
Huh? Let me help you out with my argument. Snopes set up a strawman regarding how Trump’s comment was to be “interpreted,” based not upon what he actually said, but based upon what they supposed he meant by what he said.

Here is my post from above. The argument is bold-faced and conclusions additionally italicized. Perhaps you need to reread it with your blinkers off, this time.
HarryStotle said:
And Snopes is hardly a reliable source for drawing conclusions that logically follow from the facts.

The claim that " …Trump’s linking of Islamist terrorism to a 13 percent rise in recorded crime “in the U.K.” (or in England and Wales, for that matter) is grossly misleading…" could only be “grossly misleading” if it is proved that very little or none of that rise in recorded crime is linked to Islamist terrorism.

What Snopes has not done is actually show that it isn’t so linked, so the very best they could claim is that Trump’s claim is only POSSIBLY "grossly misleading."

Trust Snopes to be unreliable with their conclusions.

In addition, Trump doesn’t appear to claim “most or all” of that rise is linked to Islamist terrorism. He simply uses the words “amidst the rise of Islamist terrorism,” which doesn’t actually propose a necessary link, just suggests that the rise of one has accompanied or occurred at the same time as the rise of the other.

Trump’s actual tweet:
Just out report: “United Kingdom crime rises 13% annually amid spread of Radical Islamic terror.” Not good, we must keep America safe!
Click to expand...
Crucial point: “amid spread of” entails no causal connection but merely that one thing (increased crime) is happening in the midst of something else (Islamic terrorism or unrestricted immigration – which Trump DOESN’T bring up) also occurring. It may mean “because of,” it could also mean “in response to,” or even merely “coincidentally.” Trump’s words alone do not signify any one of those, in particular.

Snopes is in error by presuming that by “amid spread of” Trump meant “caused by.” If Snopes wants to hold itself up as the bastion of truth, they need to up their inferential skills just a wee bit.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
The fundamental issue is that nations want “cool people at their parties”. They don’t want people just because they are destitute. The PC propaganda that Americans are awesome because of immigration is utter crap. People tend to love their own nation and lifestyle. Of course we think we are awesome. Ask a Jamaican or a Saudi if Americans are awesome and see what he thinks.
The truth is that lot of people who came here were mediocre losers, some were great, some were kickass but horrible people. It was mixed bag. But no nation wants uneducated criminals from the third world just because “their kids are starving”. When we went through the green card interview they meteclously interviewed us and our family history.
Shoot, there are people out there in the third world, waiting for a green card, who are downright brilliant. I am a mediocre loser compared to them. Why should the US take me in instead of them.
I know someone who overstayed his visa. He’s not some ambitious pioneer from the 1800s. He actually thinks that it’s ok to rob people, grobe women on the subway, trick them into sleeping with you. No college education. Why should the US grant him status and reject a engineer from waiting for a green card.
By the same token I don’t want atheistic narcissists from Western Europe, I don’t want people who want to jage jihad and believe in polygamy. The US is not a dumpster for the globe.
 
Last edited:
What the Western left and many in the Catholic Church fail to understand is the amount of scandal involved in unregulated immigration.

The reason why there is so much push-back isn’t really a call to nationalism or right-wing identity politics. It’s because unregulated immigration means more crime against said immigrants (maybe more so) and the natives as well as things like human trafficking.

I have not heard one word about any of that from the Vatican, the USCCB or any Western liberals.

The whole immigration system in the EU and North America is all about getting cheap labor and scoring political points.

People who say they “care” are almost always just virtue-signaling their way through the subject to their peers.

A lot of good that does Nigerian women in Italy who have to make deals with suave African human traffickers, NGOs who break the law the bring them in to make themselves feel good or because they want to undermine Italian for revenge and finally the mafia when they have to work their turf and become prostitutes and end up owing everyone 130,000 euros on average.

But hey, we’ve all got make our sacrifices from the EU project and the American dream of backwards left-wing values, which basically means making one’s “friends” happy on Facebook.com
 
HarryStotle said:
And Snopes is hardly a reliable source for drawing conclusions that logically follow from the facts.
Click to expand...
At least they don’t reference themselves as sources in a self-aggrandizing circle. I have always found that is a good indicator of a truly unreliable source. One of the Catholic “news” blogs does the same thing, as does Life Site News. In this article, Breibart references itself 8 times, and other news sites 3. I has 0 first
hand references.

Snopes actually linked the study that they used explain their answer. Even wikipedia is better than Breibart, as are most junior high students, in that they used references to back what is said.

You are right about one thing though, Snopes is unable to prove a negative. Good thing for them debunking something does not require this. Hence the “mostly false.” They could have just as easily said there is no evidence of truth.
 
Last edited:
De_Maria said:
I think so, since I consider myself a devout Catholic and I’m all for the border wall.

I have lived by the border many years and I think it will solve many problems. I hope its a wall and not a fence, because one of the problems we’ve had in our area is shots that come from the other side of the border.
Click to expand...
Sshhh, you’re wrecking the narrative with your pesky first-hand experience and legitimate problems that the wall will solve. Remember: Wall Bad, Trump Bad, Because Feelings.
 
Preaching to the choir (Armenian) buddy boy. You forgot Arabs, Persians and Turks.
I never said whites were the only conquerors, just the most obnoxious 🙂
 
Unscrupulous people don’t have to worry about being pharisees (virtue aignaling). Not exactly a vindication of feckless behavior. As to dangers of illegal immigrants. Isn’t it a bit paternalistic. Oh, I’m just trying to save you by getting raped by drug dealers by stopping you from coming here. Guess what. Illegals think the risks are worth it.
The big issue is beyond all those small issues. The bottom line was outlined by Ann Coulter. We have enough bums on our own. Why should we take in more bums. There are people who are waiting for a green card who are absolutely brilliant. Why should the US take in people who are mediocre at best. And don’t say that all immigrants are awesome, because they are not. I’m pretty mediocre myself.
Of course the propaganda machinery of the schools tries to peddle this BS that everyone who came here was a rugged pioneer who invented the MRI scanner.
 
Last edited:
HarryStotle said:
The claim that " …Trump’s linking of Islamist terrorism to a 13 percent rise in recorded crime “in the U.K.” (or in England and Wales, for that matter) is grossly misleading…" could only be “grossly misleading” if it is proved that very little or none of that rise in recorded crime is linked to Islamist terrorism.

What Snopes has not done is actually show that it isn’t so linked, so the very best they could claim is that Trump’s claim is only POSSIBLY "grossly misleading."
Click to expand...
Let’s start with crime “in the U.K.” (or in England and Wales, for that matter) . Right off the bat Trump is wrong in saying the report was about the U.K. But the report was not. It was about England and Wales. It would be like taking crime figures for New York and saying “Just out report: Crime in the U.S. is up x%”. I know it is a small thing, but we have come to expect slips like this from Trump so that we don’t give it a second thought.

The next thing is to look at the exact words - and punctuation - in Trump’s tweet:
Just out report: “United Kingdom crime rises 13% annually amid spread of Radical Islamic terror.” Not good, we must keep America safe!
Click to expand...
Note where the quotation marks are. When someone says a report just came out and then follows that with a colon and then a quotation mark, the meaning is that what is contained in the quotation marks is from that report that was “just out.” The crime figures are indeed reported by officials. But the mention of its causal connection to the spread of violent ideologies is just someone’s speculation. The OANN report that Trump probably used as his source even says as much, even though the banner they used in their video contained the same innuendo that Trump used - “amid spread of Radical Islamic Terror.” So Trump can blame grossly misleading OANN for his grossly misleading tweet. But he still should be responsible for what he tweets. “I saw it on the internet” does not cut it.

…continued…
 
Last edited:
As for what Snopes would have to do to prove “grossly misleading,” I disagree with your characterization. It is not necessary to prove that “little or none of that rise in recorded crime is linked to Islamist terrorism.” All they have to do to support their point is to prove that Trump’s statement goes beyond what is actually known. That is, the burden is on Trump to prove that Islamic terror causes a significant portion of the rise in crime. To illustrate the point, suppose I tweeted that “Report just out: 'Violence in Charlottesville amid Trump’s prior reluctance to disavow white supremacists.” That tweet could be called “grossly misleading” because it implies some sort of official acknowledgement that Trump’s behavior caused the violence. To make the case that my tweet is grossly misleading, you would not have to prove that little or none of the violence was inspired by Trump’s behavior. All you would have to do is point out that I don’t have proof that the violence was inspired by Trump. The first part of my tweet was factual. There was violence in Charlottesville. But the second part of my tweet - the connection to Trump - is misleading because it presents as fact something that is just my speculation.

Similarly for Snopes. They do not have to prove very little of the rise in crime was due to radical Islamic terror. All they have to do is prove that the actual degree of causation is speculation.
In addition, Trump doesn’t appear to claim “most or all” of that rise is linked to Islamist terrorism. He simply uses the words “amidst the rise of Islamist terrorism,” which doesn’t actually propose a necessary link, just suggests that the rise of one has accompanied or occurred at the same time as the rise of the other.
Click to expand...
You have said this before, and it is no more believable now than it was then. In fact, the speculation as to the causal link is explicit in the OANN piece.
It appears that Trump is very good at using indefinite language to trigger derangement among his critics.
Click to expand...
Speaking to sow confusion is not an admirable trait. I do agree that Trump is an expert at it though.
 
But the thing is, don’t we already have a wall? Yes we do. But it is not strong enough to keep out Quetzalcoatl which is what Humpty Trumpty fears the most.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
Last edited:
Fair enough, though I think “obnoxious” is a bit of a strange measuring stick. Rampaging hordes are going to be pretty obnoxious all on their own, yeah?
 
I’m talking about conquerers making it sound like they did a favor to their victims. That’s why it’s called Futūḥāt al-Islāmiyya. By raiding other people’s caravans, they think they are making openings (futuhat) for Islam.
In Arab movies you always hear what a paradise Spain became when stupid statue worshippers became second class citizens in their own land.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top