NY Times Totally Worried About The Price Of Fear

The Editorial Board, comprised mostly of White People and men who live a nice 1%er life, is Very Concerned that everyone will overreact to the threat from ISIS and, primarily, wants to defend the “Syrian” refugees to Obama’s satisfaction

The Price of Fear

After the attacks in Paris, the world is again challenged by fear. With every bombing, beheading and mass shooting, the dread spreads, along with the urgency of defeating this nihilism.

But no less a challenge for the civilized world is the danger of self-inflicted injury. In the reaction and overreaction to terrorism comes the risk that society will lose its way.

What do they see as overreactions? The Iraq War (they just can’t get over it), which they initially supported, along with the majority of Democrats and intelligence agencies. Guantanamo Bay detention facility, which holds/held lots of stone cold jihadis, whom are called “perceived threats” by the EB. They do have a point on the expansion of the “ever-expanding surveillance apparatus”, which their Democratic elected officials seem to support.

Al Qaeda and the Islamic State did not compel us to shackle ourselves to a security state, or to disgrace our values by vilifying and fearing refugees and immigrants.

Yet, is this a perceived fear, or a true concern? In sales we refer to questions and concerns, and not to conflate questions with real concerns. A question is “how much does this cost?” A concern is “I’m not sure I can afford it”. The American people seem to be more in terms of asking a question, namely “how can we be assured that these refugees from places that feature hardcore Islam will not be extremists, and will be valued members of the USA?”

As for the members of the House, Democratic and Republican, who voted to effectively shut down the Syrian and Iraqi refugee program, and the governors who would somehow block Syrians from their borders — Americans should hope it’s just fearful ignorance that clouds their vision, and that in time it clears.

The bill in question requires several key members of the Obama administration to sign off on the background checks of each Syrian refugee, putting them on record. They do not want to do this. That’s how it “effectively shuts down” the refugee program. If these refugees were so darned safe, they’d have no problem signing off. They are obviously fearful of the potential fallout and have concerns over the background checks

Terrorist violence is terrifying, and it is natural to want to restore a shattered sense of safety. But the best way to do that has always been to draw upon our greatest ideals.

Our greatest ideals include protecting the citizenry from foreign threats. Humorously, the NY Times is the same paper that, well, let’s say, craps itself in fear over anthropogenic climate change constantly, like a 3 year old who thinks something moved under the bed or that the closet door moved. Concern for Islamic jihadis is very real, and poll after poll after poll show that the American People are concerned over that very real threat. Liberals worry about ACC, which is as imaginary as the monster under the bed and the boogeyman in the closet.

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove. Follow me on Twitter @WilliamTeach.

Leave a Comment

Share this!

Enjoy reading? Share it with your friends!

Send this to a friend