Republicans, Refugees and the Hysterical Politics of Fear

[TemplarKormac]

If you're so risk-adverse that the slightest possibility of something bad happening causes you to freak the fuck out, how can you even leave your house?

I'm not afraid of taking those risks, because taking those particular risks have no chance of harming anyone but me. You can't seem to make the delineation between a minor risk (walking out of your house) and a major risk (admitting Syrian refugees from a war torn country who may or may not have ISIS terrorists embedded among them).

Statistically speaking - walking out of your house is a much more major risk than admitting a Syrian refugee.

Just walking out of your house you have a risk of from: falling, being hit by a car, exposure to excessive natural heat, cataclysmic storm, contact with sharp objects, hrnets, wasps and bees, being bitten by a dog and struck by lightening not to mention intentional self harm. You're 55 times more likely to be killed by a police officer than a terrorist.

The odds of dying in a terrorist attack are 20 million to 1.

In the above list, the largest odds are being struck by lightening - 1 in 126,158.

Many many times more likely than being killed in a terrorist attack.

Why this irrational fear when the refugee process is one of the best vetted ways of bringing in people to the US?

I don't really care what the odds are. The risks remain, no matter how infinitesimal you think they are. You seem to think this vetting process is perfect. I beg to differ. Nothing in this world is absolutely perfect.

I'm a compassionate man. And my compassion for my countrymen comes before my compassion for these refugees. No, I don't want to get rid of them, I don't want them to be turned away, that would be wrong; and that's the other side of my compassion. Compassion has two faces, not one.

However, the odds are 1 in 1 that someone, somewhere in America will die at the hands of a terrorist who manages to sneak through. It seems to me you are willing to risk the safety of your fellow Americans to give these people a home. That is an unacceptable sacrifice.

People get struck by lightning, but even at those odds, even you still heed warnings not to be outside during a thunderstorm, in order to abate even the slightest chance of being struck. It may never happen, but why risk it?

 

[TemplarKormac]

If you're so risk-adverse that the slightest possibility of something bad happening causes you to freak the fuck out, how can you even leave your house?

I'm not afraid of taking those risks, because taking those particular risks have no chance of harming anyone but me. You can't seem to make the delineation between a minor risk (walking out of your house) and a major risk (admitting Syrian refugees from a war torn country who may or may not have ISIS terrorists embedded among them).

Statistically speaking - walking out of your house is a much more major risk than admitting a Syrian refugee.

Just walking out of your house you have a risk of from: falling, being hit by a car, exposure to excessive natural heat, cataclysmic storm, contact with sharp objects, hrnets, wasps and bees, being bitten by a dog and struck by lightening not to mention intentional self harm. You're 55 times more likely to be killed by a police officer than a terrorist.

The odds of dying in a terrorist attack are 20 million to 1.

In the above list, the largest odds are being struck by lightening - 1 in 126,158.

Many many times more likely than being killed in a terrorist attack.

Why this irrational fear when the refugee process is one of the best vetted ways of bringing in people to the US?

Tell your odds to the families of the victims in Paris...or the Russian plane....or Lebanon....or 9/11....or Boston....or Madrid.....or London.

I'm sure they'll make the families feel much better.

Nothing like making policy based on emotion.

Of course. Nothing says "emotion" like taking refugees in without assessing the risk. The critics be damned, this is compassion!!!

Pathetic.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

However, the odds are 1 in 1 that someone, somewhere in America will die at the hands of a terrorist who manages to sneak through. It seems to me you are willing to risk the safety of your fellow Americans to give these people a home. That is an unacceptable sacrifice.

That's just simply not true. You have convinced yourself that a refugee committing an act of terrorism is a certainty, and that has no basis in reality.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

If you're so risk-adverse that the slightest possibility of something bad happening causes you to freak the fuck out, how can you even leave your house?

I'm not afraid of taking those risks, because taking those particular risks have no chance of harming anyone but me. You can't seem to make the delineation between a minor risk (walking out of your house) and a major risk (admitting Syrian refugees from a war torn country who may or may not have ISIS terrorists embedded among them).

Statistically speaking - walking out of your house is a much more major risk than admitting a Syrian refugee.

Just walking out of your house you have a risk of from: falling, being hit by a car, exposure to excessive natural heat, cataclysmic storm, contact with sharp objects, hrnets, wasps and bees, being bitten by a dog and struck by lightening not to mention intentional self harm. You're 55 times more likely to be killed by a police officer than a terrorist.

The odds of dying in a terrorist attack are 20 million to 1.

In the above list, the largest odds are being struck by lightening - 1 in 126,158.

Many many times more likely than being killed in a terrorist attack.

Why this irrational fear when the refugee process is one of the best vetted ways of bringing in people to the US?

Tell your odds to the families of the victims in Paris...or the Russian plane....or Lebanon....or 9/11....or Boston....or Madrid.....or London.

I'm sure they'll make the families feel much better.

Nothing like making policy based on emotion.

Of course. Nothing says "emotion" like taking refugees in without assessing the risk. The critics be damned, this is compassion!!!

Pathetic.

You assume that because we don't agree with your assessment of the risk, we have not assessed it ourselves. That is incorrect.

We have assessed the risk, and we have found it to be small enough that we've chosen not to panic over it.

(Apologies Coyote if I am incorrect in speaking for you)

 

[TemplarKormac]

However, the odds are 1 in 1 that someone, somewhere in America will die at the hands of a terrorist who manages to sneak through. It seems to me you are willing to risk the safety of your fellow Americans to give these people a home. That is an unacceptable sacrifice.

That's just simply not true. You have convinced yourself that a refugee committing an act of terrorism is a certainty, and that has no basis in reality.

You have convinced yourself that such a thing will NEVER happen. That, sir, also has no basis in reality. I'm not saying it's a certainty, I'm saying it is a distinct possibility.

 

[TemplarKormac]

You assume that because we don't agree with your assessment of the risk, we have not assessed it ourselves. That is incorrect.

We have assessed the risk, and we have found it to be small enough that we've chosen not to panic over it.

Interesting. You have assessed the risk, and have automatically deduced that none of these refugees are capable of committing terrorism, well, that is at least what I'm getting from you two. You choose not to panic... or rather, you're choosing to ignore it. That is a mistake.

The risk is small, but still present.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

However, the odds are 1 in 1 that someone, somewhere in America will die at the hands of a terrorist who manages to sneak through. It seems to me you are willing to risk the safety of your fellow Americans to give these people a home. That is an unacceptable sacrifice.

That's just simply not true. You have convinced yourself that a refugee committing an act of terrorism is a certainty, and that has no basis in reality.

You have convinced yourself that such a thing will NEVER happen. That, sir, also has no basis in reality. I'm not saying it's a certainty, I'm saying it is a distinct possibility.

You said "the odds are 1 in 1". That means you believe it's a certainty.

 

[TemplarKormac]

However, the odds are 1 in 1 that someone, somewhere in America will die at the hands of a terrorist who manages to sneak through. It seems to me you are willing to risk the safety of your fellow Americans to give these people a home. That is an unacceptable sacrifice.

That's just simply not true. You have convinced yourself that a refugee committing an act of terrorism is a certainty, and that has no basis in reality.

You have convinced yourself that such a thing will NEVER happen. That, sir, also has no basis in reality. I'm not saying it's a certainty, I'm saying it is a distinct possibility.

You said "the odds are 1 in 1". That means you believe it's a certainty.

No.

For whomever the victim will be, yes. Their death is a certainty. The odds are 1 in 1 that they will be one unlucky enough to be struck down by this terrorist. Not a certainty for all, but a certainty for one, or a few, perhaps a hundred, or even a thousand; whatever the number of people there may be.

The odds may be 1 in 20 million for us, but it's 1 in 1 for someone else or some group of people, and the sad part is they are unsuspecting of it.

 

[TemplarKormac]

These three links make my case:

Yannis Koutsomitis on Twitter

Suspected Paris terrorist 'was rescued near Greece after his refugee boat sunk'

French police issue photograph of the third Stade de France bomber

I will not sit here and be told that the risk isn't there, or that we are perfectly capable of weeding these people out. Sure. I will have none of it.

 

[ninja007]

18 trillion in debt, race wars, terrible ocare, terrible UE- Libs say lets bring in more immigrants!

 

[theDoctorisIn]

However, the odds are 1 in 1 that someone, somewhere in America will die at the hands of a terrorist who manages to sneak through. It seems to me you are willing to risk the safety of your fellow Americans to give these people a home. That is an unacceptable sacrifice.

That's just simply not true. You have convinced yourself that a refugee committing an act of terrorism is a certainty, and that has no basis in reality.

You have convinced yourself that such a thing will NEVER happen. That, sir, also has no basis in reality. I'm not saying it's a certainty, I'm saying it is a distinct possibility.

You said "the odds are 1 in 1". That means you believe it's a certainty.

No.

For whomever the victim will be, yes. Their death is a certainty. The odds are 1 in 1 that they will be one unlucky enough to be struck down by this terrorist. Not a certainty for all, but a certainty for one, or a few, perhaps a hundred, or even a thousand; whatever the number of people there may be.

The odds may be 1 in 20 million for us, but it's 1 in 1 for someone else or some group of people, and the sad part is they are unsuspecting of it.

No. This refugee turned terrorist that you speak of does not exist yet, and that he will ever exist is nothing close to a certainty.

 

[TemplarKormac]

However, the odds are 1 in 1 that someone, somewhere in America will die at the hands of a terrorist who manages to sneak through. It seems to me you are willing to risk the safety of your fellow Americans to give these people a home. That is an unacceptable sacrifice.

That's just simply not true. You have convinced yourself that a refugee committing an act of terrorism is a certainty, and that has no basis in reality.

You have convinced yourself that such a thing will NEVER happen. That, sir, also has no basis in reality. I'm not saying it's a certainty, I'm saying it is a distinct possibility.

You said "the odds are 1 in 1". That means you believe it's a certainty.

No.

For whomever the victim will be, yes. Their death is a certainty. The odds are 1 in 1 that they will be one unlucky enough to be struck down by this terrorist. Not a certainty for all, but a certainty for one, or a few, perhaps a hundred, or even a thousand; whatever the number of people there may be.

The odds may be 1 in 20 million for us, but it's 1 in 1 for someone else or some group of people, and the sad part is they are unsuspecting of it.

No. This refugee turned terrorist that you speak of does not exist yet, and that he will ever exist is nothing close to a certainty.

How apt...

"yet"

Makes my point perfectly. They already do exist. Not even you can deny that. We can go round an' round about it but it doesn't make the threat go away.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

 

[Claudette]

These three links make my case:

Yannis Koutsomitis on Twitter

Suspected Paris terrorist 'was rescued near Greece after his refugee boat sunk'

French police issue photograph of the third Stade de France bomber

I will not sit here and be told that the risk isn't there, or that we are perfectly capable of weeding these people out. Sure. I will have none of it.

Yup and from what I heard on the news this AM one of the Paris killers got into Europe as a refugee.

Anyone who wants to let them in then wait to see if any of these are terrorists is a damned fool.

 

[BlindBoo]

These three links make my case:

Yannis Koutsomitis on Twitter

Suspected Paris terrorist 'was rescued near Greece after his refugee boat sunk'

French police issue photograph of the third Stade de France bomber

I will not sit here and be told that the risk isn't there, or that we are perfectly capable of weeding these people out. Sure. I will have none of it.

Yup and from what I heard on the news this AM one of the Paris killers got into Europe as a refugee.

Anyone who wants to let them in then wait to see if any of these are terrorists is a damned fool.

The human wave of refugees flooding Greece is not they type of refugee they are planning to resettle here. It's mostly women and children from UN Refugee Camps.

 

[Coyote]

If you're so risk-adverse that the slightest possibility of something bad happening causes you to freak the fuck out, how can you even leave your house?

I'm not afraid of taking those risks, because taking those particular risks have no chance of harming anyone but me. You can't seem to make the delineation between a minor risk (walking out of your house) and a major risk (admitting Syrian refugees from a war torn country who may or may not have ISIS terrorists embedded among them).

Statistically speaking - walking out of your house is a much more major risk than admitting a Syrian refugee.

Just walking out of your house you have a risk of from: falling, being hit by a car, exposure to excessive natural heat, cataclysmic storm, contact with sharp objects, hrnets, wasps and bees, being bitten by a dog and struck by lightening not to mention intentional self harm. You're 55 times more likely to be killed by a police officer than a terrorist.

The odds of dying in a terrorist attack are 20 million to 1.

In the above list, the largest odds are being struck by lightening - 1 in 126,158.

Many many times more likely than being killed in a terrorist attack.

Why this irrational fear when the refugee process is one of the best vetted ways of bringing in people to the US?

I don't really care what the odds are. The risks remain, no matter how infinitesimal you think they are. You seem to think this vetting process is perfect. I beg to differ. Nothing in this world is absolutely perfect.

Exactly - nothing in this world is absolutely perfect. And no - I do not think the vetting process is perfect. Clearly you haven't read my posts. I'm fine with it being reassessed regularly as events change.

What I think is ridiculous is shutting it all down until a zero-risk can be guaranteed. We are more likely to be caught up in random gun violence than in a terrorist action.

I'm a compassionate man. And my compassion for my countrymen comes before my compassion for these refugees. No, I don't want to get rid of them, I don't want them to be turned away, that would be wrong; and that's the other side of my compassion. Compassion has two faces, not one.

Well the bill that is under discussion would effectively prohibit refugees from Syria and Iraq from coming here - turning them away. Giving ISIS propoganda for it's recruiting.

However, the odds are 1 in 1 that someone, somewhere in America will die at the hands of a terrorist who manages to sneak through. It seems to me you are willing to risk the safety of your fellow Americans to give these people a home. That is an unacceptable sacrifice.

Umm...where are you coming up with this 1:1 odds? Nowhere have I seen anything like that. The odds are 1 in 20 million.

People get struck by lightning, but even at those odds, even you still heed warnings not to be outside during a thunderstorm, in order to abate even the slightest chance of being struck. It may never happen, but why risk it?

You have a 1 in 80,000 chance of drowning in your bathtub 1 in 19,000 of dying in a carwreck. We take reasonable precautions sure - and the refugee process in place seems to cover that quite well. Sure keep on improving it, but halt the entire project because of irrational fears?

 

[SuperDemocrat]

The politics of fear is the dumbest slogan in the universe considering that people do get afraid. I really think that liberals get their idealogy from star wars because yoda said something like fear leads to hatred... Now liberals go around talking about fear as if it is some kind of bad thing. It just shows the childishness of their thinking.