Is the "Extreme" Terror Threat a Logical Fallacy?

[Mempho]

I was a big supporter for a while in the War on Terror. Then, I started to see inconsistencies between what Bush did and what he said. He kept saying that we were in grave danger and, as a result, he needed more power. He made a big deal about security at ports, points of entry, etc. He said he needed various spying capabilities.

Then it hit me, if he's so concerned about terrorists, why is our border not protected? The answer can only be one of three answers if you use logic:

1) Terrorism is not as big of a threat as the Administration has been making it out to be
2) The president wants an open border so bad that he's willing to take the chance of an American city going up in "a mushroom cloud"
3) The President only cares about the expansion of executive power even if it means extreme exaggerations to the American People
4) The President is a complete idiot

I can logically eliminate all other answers...so, which one is it? I don't think the answer is #4.

[Brainwalter]

1 and 3.

[Jimbo]

The correct answer is #5) your assumptions are fallacious.

Jimbo

[Mempho]

[ QUOTE ]
The correct answer is #5) your assumptions are fallacious.

Jimbo

[/ QUOTE ]

Please explain. I wasn't trying to assert a position as much as I was trying to understand the reasoning why the position in the OP is a fallacy. For the life of me, I can't come up with the answer.

[Jimbo]

You are making an assumption that Mexicans are likely terrorists. I submit to you that Arabs are more likely to be terrorists. Even if we assumne the Mexicans are likely to be terrorists they haven't flown planes into the WTC yet.

Also your primary assumption that our borders are not adequately protected from terrorists is contray to the evidence freely available to all. Seen any acts of terrorism on US soil lately?

Jimbo

[DougShrapnel]

Terrorists are muslim and have oil. Neither applies to countries on america's border.

[Poofler]

[ QUOTE ]
You are making an assumption that Mexicans are likely terrorists. I submit to you that Arabs are more likely to be terrorists. Even if we assumne the Mexicans are likely to be terrorists they haven't flown planes into the WTC yet.

Also your primary assumption that our borders are not adequately protected from terrorists is contray to the evidence freely available to all. Seen any acts of terrorism on US soil lately?

Jimbo

[/ QUOTE ]

He's making an assumption that terrorists could cross the border, not that Mexicans are terrorists. Didn't some 9/11 guys come through Canada?

[Mempho]

[ QUOTE ]
You are making an assumption that Mexicans are likely terrorists. I submit to you that Arabs are more likely to be terrorists. Even if we assumne the Mexicans are likely to be terrorists they haven't flown planes into the WTC yet.

Also your primary assumption that our borders are not adequately protected from terrorists is contray to the evidence freely available to all. Seen any acts of terrorism on US soil lately?

Jimbo

[/ QUOTE ]

Poofler is dead on. I'm making the assumption that it is easier to get access to the the US by coming in through Mexico (or some other Central/South American country) than it is to enter by flying into JFK with that suitcase nuke as carry-on.

[[Phill]]

[ QUOTE ]
You are making an assumption that Mexicans are likely terrorists. I submit to you that Arabs are more likely to be terrorists. Even if we assumne the Mexicans are likely to be terrorists they haven't flown planes into the WTC yet.

Also your primary assumption that our borders are not adequately protected from terrorists is contray to the evidence freely available to all. Seen any acts of terrorism on US soil lately?

Jimbo

[/ QUOTE ]

Wasnt the first and only 'imported' terrorist attack before 9/11 in 1993, with the first attack on the WTC?

You see my point?

[Stu Pidasso]

[ QUOTE ]
2)The president wants an open border

[/ QUOTE ]

People in this country are not having babies fast enough to keep afloat the ponzi scheme of social security and medicare. Unfortunately we are just not in a position to close our boarders; we need the flood of illegal immigrants.

Stu