Defensive Carry banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

U.S. closes part of Arizona to Americans

8K views 164 replies 60 participants last post by  ksholder 
#1 ·
I don't know how to do a link but it's on fox news.
 
#77 ·
#79 ·
re: zacii



Replaying the exaggerated report really doesn't help deal with what is actually going on.


From my post above: " Bream [The FOX commentator] welcomed Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu who furthered the suggestion that the refuge had been recently closed. Babeu said, "It's literally out of control and violence has increased just in the last four months."

Bream didn't mention that the refuge is not in Babeu's jurisdiction.

Bream falsely added, "We're talking about something that's north of Tucson, I mean, 80 miles away from the border." Perhaps she was referring to Pinal County but the refuge is not only along the border, that's where the closure is. A media advisory from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service states,"

Problems can't be solved when their magnitude isn't correctly understood, or when their magnitude is exaggerated. This isn't the first time, and I'm sure it won't be the last when this particular sheriff has gone on tv to talk about things in parts of AZ which are quite far removed from his jurisdiction.

Again, DC member Gilraens tag line says it all, ""Those who believe things without evidence will believe anything."

I've scoured Google news and can find no news reports about this alleged closure that didn't originate from that one Fox report.

Maybe we should be asking US Fish and Wildlife what the story is.

Again, I'm not saying things are rosy. I'm not saying there isn't a problem. I'm just saying the claim of the US ceding territory to Mexico is ridiculous.
 
#80 ·
Fear mongering. That one has gotten a lot of play lately, almost as good as "Astroturf".

Propaganda 101 - when met with resistance, cry out "fear monger!".

Don't listen to them or be frightened little girl, we'll protect you from harm, keep you warm, and you won't be scared in this lovely concentratrion camp.
 
#83 ·
Hopyard......I understood the "claim" of US ceding territory to Mexico meaning that we just put up signs saying "hey you need to stay out due to the outlaws in this area that we aren't doing anything about"

of course we haven't officially given any territory back, just in theory since we're not doing anything about it

that is a fact and the area is large
 
#101 ·
re: 64Zebra ceding territory has a context and meaning



I understand your point, but the term used, the accusation flung, ceding to Mexico, has a more sinister meaning than what you have suggested.

There is a park nearby where I live. It has signs that it is closed from 10:00 PM to 5 AM. That doesn't mean the city is ceding the park to
druggies and vagrants. The opposite. It means ordinary folks keep out, police go in and clear it.

I'm sure the same is going on in this US Forrest Service controlled area. People are asked to stay out, but officials-- Border Patrol, Guardsmen, State Troopers, and Sheriffs, do go in. Hardly ceding anything.

I don't doubt that that particular area is too dangerous and that something must be done. But putting up some signs warning people of the danger isn't the same as "ceding territory" to Mexico, as was purported in the initial stories.

If the news story simply stated the truth, that there is an area where it is now too dangerous for ordinary folks to go, I wouldn't have jumped into this discussion.
 
#84 ·
FOX news made a fictitious story out of this. I have no doubt that the signs are real and the problem is real. We certainly need to get this problem under control. However, FOX made completely false statements including... "Obama gave parts of Arizona to Mexico" is a ridiculous inflammatory statement that is designed to enrage and incite anger in people.

This type of story is pure hype designed by FOX to get viewers to watch their shows. The angry right wing sit salivating like Pavlov's dog for the next tasty pack of lies and FOX knows it. (BTW...Nazis will be marching down your street soon according to Glenn Beck so be sure to tune in.)

I'm shocked how gullible people are. (This includes the left wing.) The far right takes anything FOX says and then, without any question, swallow it hook line and sinker. They run with it and spread the message as if it were gospel. Hate mongering at its best. I don't believe this is a good thing for our country.

I don't know about the rest of you but when someone tells me outright lies I will lose my trust in them. I'll take what they say in the future with much more scrutiny. Again, that goes for both Left and Right news sources However, I find FOX to be the most egregious offender.
 
#85 ·
Actually when a governor of a state and a county sheriff BEG you for troops to combat an invasion and you sit back and do nothing you technically ceded that territory to criminals, in this case illegal Mexican cartels. How many more citizens and cops need to get shot?

So technically Obama, and Bush before him by ignoring repeated calls for help, ceded that territory.

Please, read more of Fox News lies

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...tel-danger-public-parks-intensifying/#content
 
#98 ·
My take is you haven't visited or been to Arizona so you have no clue what you are talking about. The smuggling lanes out here where the danger is are larger than some US states. You WILL get shot at out here if you run into a drug smuggling op. Count on it.

it is being given away because the Sheriff does not have the manpower and the logistics to patrol it, so it is free to roam at will.

Where are the feds? Giving it away. guarding Iraq's borders and not our own
 
#104 ·
CASA GRANDE, AZ - Two men shot earlier this week could be the result of the ongoing battle between Mexican drug cartels now spilling over deep into Arizona, officials say.

Pinal County investigators say an area known as the smuggling corridor now stretches from Mexico's border to metro Phoenix.

The area , once an area for family hiking and off road vehicles has government signs warning residents of the drug and human smugglers.

Night vision cameras have photographed military armed cartel members delivering drugs to vehicles along Highway 8.

"We are three counties deep. How is it that you see pictures like these, not American with semi and fully automatic rifles. How is that okay?" asked Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu.

Babeu said he no longer has control over parts of his county.

"We are outgunned, we are out manned and we don't have the resources here locally to fight this," he said at a Friday news conference.

Five weeks ago Deputy Louie Puroll was ambushed and shot as he tracked six drug smugglers.
Mexican Drug Cartels now control parts of Arizona
 
#109 ·
ok. so looking into it more i am somewhat confused.
we know that a section was closed off in 2006
http://www.fws.gov/southwest/refuges/arizona/buenosaires/PDFs/Closure.pdf
which was 3500 acres. From what I had initially gathered, this new section is 80 miles long (ei way more than that).
Can anyone provide some hard data as to where these signs are actually posted and what areas they are referring to?
 
#112 ·
#114 ·
Thank you friesepferd; EXCELLENT



Thank you. EXCELLENT. Isn't the truth from the horse's mouth refreshing.

From the US Fish and Wildlife Service Media Advisory pointed to by friesepferd:
3,500 acres were closed in 2006 and may soon be reopened as

"the Refuge has experienced a significant decline in violent activity in the area
thanks to ongoing cooperation between the US Fish and Wildlife Service and US Customs and
Border Protection."

I suppose that answers the question, "where have the Feds been."

The USFWS Media Advisory also makes plain, "Recent news items further falsely stated that the closure extends from the border 80-miles to the
north. This distance is far from accurate."

Folks, we can't make good public policy on anything when the wildest of wild claims are propagated and believed by large segments of the population. As Pogo famously said, "we have met the enemy and he is us."
 
#122 ·
This is a serious law enforcement, military, government and sovereignty issue.
News reports will always like to make things sound juicy, no matter what channel, magazine, newspaper, or web site.
Some people read or listen to these things with biased ears/eyes...some don't. Sometimes the editors/reporters don't state things in the best manner so they are easily understood.
My apologies for posting so many times but I saw things that were being misrepresented and wanted to point out what facts of the stories for that purpose only, not to argue for the sake of arguing.

:bier: to all
 
#123 ·
re: 64 Zebra "a serious... issue"

This is a serious law enforcement, military, government and sovereignty issue.
:bier: to all
Of course it is a serious issue, which is why we should not tolerate untruthful reporting. We can't make serious decisions about this serious issue when we are being handed propaganda which exaggerates the nature of the problem, or conversely propaganda which attempts to diminish the problem.

We need accurate reporting and truthful correct information so that we know what is going on, and so that Congress can know what is going on--as opposed to imagine or assume or suppose what is going on.

I think we have been given that truthful information by the Fish and Wildlife Service.

The material provided by friesepferd at

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Home

seems straightforward and truthful to me. YMMV.
 
#130 ·
Oh, it's only a strip 3/4 of mile wide.......
I don't care if it's 3/4 of an inch wide! When the United States government is saying that it is either not willing or not able to secure a piece of real estate that it has known is an infiltration route for armed criminals for four years we have a serious problem.
 
#138 ·
re: CT SKETCH see this movie



Sometime in the 60s or so there was a comedy movie, "The Russians are Coming, The Russians are Coming."

I don't know if it can be found in a DVD makeover, but besides the hoots, there is a message about the effectiveness of local militias.
 
#141 ·
Article IV, Section 4 of the US Constitution

"Republican government

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence."

The US Government is obligated to protect any state:
- from invasion
- from domestic violence upon request of the legislature or governor.

It seems to me that we have either an invasion - may be a tough sell as it is not a government-sponsored invasion - or domestic violence above the level which local law enforcement and border patrols (given the current ROE) can address. Anybody know if the AZ legislature or governor has requested assistance?
 
#154 ·
I wouldn't have a problem with off-limits sections in Arizona, IF it means off-limits to the invaders as well. But, it's not the case.

Americans can't go there, but the invading aliens can come and go as they please. That's not right.
 
#155 ·
Hopyard,
I don't always agree with you, but I do respect your well written and generally well reasoned arguments. Perhaps I am looking at this in a semi simplistic and cynical way, but for me what it boils down to is this.
1) Is the refuge in question in Arizona?
2) Is it managed by a department of the United States federal government?
3) Did that department post signs saying a portion of that area is closed to U.S. citizens?
4) Is that closure because the administrators of that refuge are either unwilling or unable to provide for the safety and security of U.S. citizens in that part of the refuge?
5) Are the identified threats to safety of U.S. citizens in that area of Mexican origin?

We have two information sources on this, Fox news, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service who administer the refuge. Fox news is a for profit operation that some say is hostile to the adminstration and may be spinning things to make the administration look bad. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife service is a department of a government whose chief administrator has publicly declared his hostility to Fox. Each side is motivated to spin this their way to make the other side look bad. Why should we think either side is more credible than the other? Do we have any information from disinterested third parties that tends to support either sides version of things better than the other's?
 
#157 ·
re: mcp1810



See post #69 in this thread for information from a third party, not Fox and not Fish and Wildlife Service.
 
#156 ·
I love being called a liberal who lives in Nerf world. It is a sure way to know that the person presenting said argument has no factual or logical basis for their position. Makes things easier for me.
 
#158 ·
re: OPFOR



I thought that remark had been sent in my direction. But, you are welcome to share.
 
#160 ·
I thought that remark had been sent in my direction. But, you are welcome to share.
It was, but I share your view regarding propaganda in general, and this story specifically. Having spent time on the border (albeit a good while ago) working with JTF-6, being in law enforcement, following events on the border closely, and serving this country under arms for 20 years (and never having voted democrat, and being an ideological libertarian for the most part), I think it's good fun to be called out for not knowing what's going on, or for being some sort of Pelosi poster boy.
 
#162 ·
For ksholder--- think a little about this question, "Is gold still the best investment?"

(Folks, this isn't about gold and investing, it is about how language is used to lead and mislead.)

First, the very question leads the reader or listener to an assumption that at one time "gold was the best investment." This may be true, or false, or in between, but the question is leading the audience.

Second, the answer one might get will depend in part on who is being asked the question? Is it being asked by a naive new home buyer of his real-estate broker? Is it being asked of the naive young investor of his stock and bond broker? Is it being asked by a hawker on TV trying to make a market in gold for his own profit?

My contention here is that the way the question was posed with respect to US ceding land to Mexico, falls in the last of these three options. The work of the hawker trying to make a sale; in this instance push a partisan issue or perhaps merely a viewpoint on unlawful migrants. Still, it is undeniably a propagandistic technique which should immediately invite scrutiny.

ksholder wrote: "The fact that some people don't critically assess news stories and get led to erroneous conclusions is lamentable, but hardly shocking."

I never said I was shocked. And yes, these things are lamentable especially given the huge amount of money we pour into public education. But, that's for a different soap box.
__________________
 
#165 ·
For ksholder--- think a little about this question, "Is gold still the best investment?"
Hopyard - I am not sure where you are headed. Yes the question above is worded with some assumptions as you pointed out. See my prior post for how to analytically think.

What I am not sure about is what you want done about what you obviously see as Fox News' pejorative comment. They made some statements with which you do not agree. You have made that clear here, but we cannot, even if we were so inclined, make changes at Fox News. Just what is it you are looking for: a retraction and correction by Fox News; a boycot of Fox News; the gov't to sensor Fox News; something else? I am just curious at this point what it is that you want.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top