The politics of fear: We need better than these cowards

(Part 2 of 2)

So let’s take a minute and hit the pause button on all this talk for a minute and look at some facts and not over-simplified political rhetoric.

First, we know based on information we have and the information on refugees already well settled in the U.S. that refugees have been a virtual non-risk here. We also know, at least through the Paris attacks, that no Syrians were involved (though the nationalities of several suspects and 2 killed in police raids is not yet known). Based on that factual information, then, Syrians appear to pose little risk to us as refugees or otherwise.

Let’s take Chris Christie’s statement that he wouldn’t let “women and orphaned children” into the U.S. Why? What does that statement serve other than to fan the flames of fear and ignorance? Is some 5-year-old going to mount a terrorist attack? Ridiculous. And yet people cheer the statement.

Look, I’m afraid of plenty of stuff, but I know there aren’t monster’s under my bed.

Maybe we should stop thinking that everyone not like us is a monster under the bed. Even cops and security officials think the current “stop the refugees” talk is cheap, easy and dodges other risks.

There are approximately 1 million names on the so-called terror watch list. About 5 percent of them, or 50,000 are U.S. citizens or permanent residents. The “no fly list” (a U.S. only list that is designed to prevent those people from getting on a commercial plane) contains about 45,000 names (though that number has been questioned). Both lists have been widely criticized as generating false positives, listing people who pose no security list, and some who are children. So while it’s apparent we need to pay better attention to and tighten screening of suspects, the lists provide what may be a worthwhile risk assessment.

So why are people on these lists allowed to purchase guns here?

Why, too, are we worried about possibly 10,000 refugees when every year we let tens of millions from 38 countries into the U.S. without visas. Under the waiver program, those people can stay for up to 90 days.

Two of the 9/11 hijackers overstayed their visas . . . (expired visas) . . . all entered the U.S. on visas . . . Of the other 18 9/11 hijackers, 14 came to the United States on six-month tourist visas and four came on business visas, according to the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States. Once in the U.S., two of the hijack pilots applied to have their immigration status changed to vocational student, but neither used such a visa on their subsequent re-entry into the country.

So while student visas may also be an issue, they weren’t, despite rumors and threads to the contrary, an issue on 9/11.

While many of the security measures that failed on 9/11 have been changed in the ensuing years, it’s clear that the visa waiver program could be tightened and the terrorist watch and no fly lists can be better used to limit weapons (or materials) purchases.

Congress can and should tighten those loopholes immediately.

It’s easy to say, “Let’s stop the Muslims,” especially if one is not a Muslim, but apparently it’s more difficult to look at what events have actually (factually) happened here. By far the most attacks have been perpetuated by white males with guns, shooting up schools, malls, political gatherings, churches, and movie theaters.

Not to go all Facebook on clever little sayings, but should we ban white makes from movie theaters or malls? Why not? If they are responsible for the dozens of multiple public deaths and shootings over the past 10 years . . . According to the FBI, there have been 146 mass shootings in the past 7 years (in which more than 4 people died). Without getting into a gun debate, you’re more likely to be killed by7 a neighbor with a gun than a terrorist refugee.

And what’s with the “I’d rather take care of 50,000 vets before I take in 1 refugee” . . . ? Apples and oranges. We need to take much better care of our vets, manage programs and service for vets better than we do, and jump on Congress for failing, time and time again, to do its job and properly fund programs for veterans. That has not a thing to do with refugees, but is rather a smoke screen that dodges the issue under false pretenses. Why can’t we do both?

Why are we not preventing Saudis from entering the U.S. if most of the 9/11 hijacker were Saudis?

In the end, if we look at the facts instead of listening to political rhetoric and clever little Facebook blurbs, many of these muddled anti-Muslim and anti-refugee arguments just don’t hold up to much scrutiny.

I’m hardly some whiney over-wrought bleeding heart who cares nothing about anything but hugging people from around the world in every possible Kumbaya campfire moment. The world has indeed changed and we need to keep pace. We need to constantly review all our security measures and constantly adapt them to an ever-changing world and its ever-changing threats.

But I hope we can start using our brains again when we listen to politicians, who really know less than we do and are motivated, unlike us, by the need to convince people to vote for them. Is it worth throwing our Constitution aside to monitor religious groups? Are you really saying we need to have Muhammad Ali, Kareem Abdul Jabbar and thousands of other Muslims here register as threats?

Donald Trump would have us believe that every Muslim in the world is out to get us. His hateful rhetoric does nothing but fan the flames of hate . . . both with his own supporters and those overseas and here he has put on his own hate list. Trump is a coward.

Who is next?

I’d argue the danger is in our politicians, who have lost their moral compasses in the face world events, and would throw out the Constitution, our personal freedoms and our history because they are afraid. We need better leaders than this crop of narrow-minded cowards.