GOP rep: What if terrorists self-infect and bring Ebola into the U.S.? « Hot Air: "BuzzFeed’s point here, I guess, is that it’s bad form for a congressman to articulate this possibility even if plenty of Americans are already worried about it because that would be fearmongering, quite unlike what Democrats do routinely with climate change, the “war on women,” horsesh*t like this, etc etc. It’s one thing for the rank-and-file boobs on the right to see terrorists under every rock, it’s another for a man in power who’s, um, almost certainly going to be reelected anyway to broach the subject. But never mind that. What’s the actual argument for why Last’s point is stupid? I can see the argument for why an Ebola attack is inefficient: If you’re an Al Qaeda or ISIS ringleader who’s eager to kill a bunch of Americans, it’s easier to send someone into the U.S., have him buy a couple of guns and a few hundred rounds on the black market, and then open fire on the subway. You might kill a few dozen people that way. To kill the same number with Ebola, you’d have to enter the west African hot zone, try hard to get infected, immediately hop a plane to the U.S. via Europe (doing everything you can to suppress an early fever so that you’re not screened out at the terminal), wait while your viral load builds and then hop on the subway. An infected terrorist might have the strength to do that, but the longer he waits to let the disease spread in his system, the weaker he’d get."
'via Blog this'