To: epicure who wrote (91270 ) 12/14/2004 10:31:00 AM From: carranza2 Read Replies (1) | Respond to I think in this last election fear was paramount- and what is worse, the fears were irrational. If people want to really worry about what will kill them, they should worry about heart attacks, stroke, and cancer- not terrorism. Odds are one of the big three will get you, and if not one of those, there are plenty of other major killers out there. It is rational to rank one's risks, and to prioritize based on risk. It is irrational to focus on that which is unlikely to affect you. you may never be affected by terrorism, there were 3,000 people in NYC, Pa., and D.C. who were not, and don't forget their families, friends, co-workers, and the substantial economic damage that was done [perhaps your stock holdings have recovered, but I doubt everyone can say so]. possibility of a terror attack creates a governmental obligation to protect those who might be affected, a subset which includes you and your family, regardless of the extremely low individual odds that might affect any single individual.all of us. It suggests that we should relax our guard, not a particularly realistic attitude towards those who have attacked us and who will undoubtedly attempt and perhaps succeed in another mass attack which, according to the tea leaves I'm reading, will make 9/11 look like Romper Room.
