Development Site - Changes here will not affect the live (production) site.

Terrorist Attacks Are Not at All Like Household Accidents

Feb. 21 2017

Every so often, a journalist or politician proclaims that Americans are more likely to die from slipping in the bathtub (or from car accidents, or lightning strikes) than terrorist attacks—a point most recently made by Nicholas Kristof in the pages of the New York Times. Justin Fox dissects this particular bit of statistical sophistry:

First [of all], terrorism is designed to . . . sow terror. As [Janan] Ganesh writes, “most people can intuit the difference between domestic misfortune and political violence. The latter is an assault on the system: the rules and institutions that distinguish society from the state of nature. Bathroom deaths could multiply by 50 without a threat to civil order. The incidence of terror could not.”

Second, . . . ladders, stairs, and bathtubs are undeniably useful. Terrorists, less so.

Finally, comparing the incidence of terrorism with that of common accidents is an incompetent and irresponsible use of statistics. Household accidents are lots and lots of small, unrelated events. As a result, while individual accidents can’t be predicted, the overall risk is easy to quantify and is pretty stable from year to year.

Terrorism is different. There are small incidents, but there are also huge ones in which hundreds or thousands of people die. It’s [what statisticians call] a “fat-tailed distribution,” in which outliers are really important. It also isn’t stable: five or ten or even 50 years of data isn’t necessarily enough to allow one to predict with confidence what’s going to happen next year.

Read more at Bloomberg

More about: Idiocy, New York Times, Politics & Current Affairs, Terrorism

The Summary: 10/7/20

Two extraordinary events demonstrate something important about Israel’s most fervent adversaries. One was a speech given at something called The People’s Forum (funded generously by Goldman Sachs), which stated, “When the state of Israel is finally destroyed and erased from history, that will be the single most important blow we can give to destroying capitalism and imperialism.”

The suggestion that this tiny state is the linchpin of a global, centuries-old phenomenon like capitalism goes well beyond anything resembling rational criticism. Even if Israel were guilty of genocide, apartheid, and oppression—which of course it is not—it would not follow that its destruction would help end capitalism or imperialism.

The other was an anti-Israel protest that took place in front of New York City’s Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, deemed “complicit” in Israel’s evils. At organizers’ urging, participants shouted their slogans at kids in the cancer ward, who were watching from the windows. Given Hamas’s indifference toward the lives of Gazan children, such callousness toward non-Palestinian children from Hamas’s Western allies shouldn’t be surprising. The protest—like the abovementioned speech—deliberately conveyed the message that Israel is the ultimate evil and its destruction the ultimate good, cancer patients be damned.

The fact that Israel’s adversaries are almost comically perverse does not mean that they can be dismissed. If its allies fail to understand the obsessive and irrational hatred that it faces, they cannot effectively help it defend itself.

Read more at Mosaic