Donald Trump Jr. compares Syrian refugees to poisoned Skittles

[angelatc]

It's an old analogy, and it's appropriate enough. A few immigrants or children of immigrants will become terrorists. It doesn't make all of them bad, just a very small percentage. The hysteria over this is ridiculous, unfounded and hypocritical.

Now if there was a bowl of Skittles, and half of them were "deplorable", then it would be OK.

Exactly right. Hillary called people in this country deplorable because they disagree with her politically, and CPU agreed with her. But pointing out that som Middle Easterners are terrorists? That's offensive? (mod edit)


For the record, my old analogy uses dog shit and cookie dough instead of a bowl of Skittles.

 

[CPUd]

https://twitter.com/WalshFreedom/status/778030543803822080

 

[LibertyEagle]

Does this mean you now agree, CPU?

 

[PierzStyx]

Look at all the tinpot tyrants all too willing to sell away the essential freedoms of every person for a delusional security that never can come. The TSA is massively ineffective. The FBI can only catch people it radicalizes and funds. Government spying doesn't catch people planning attacks. War over there inspires attacks here. When are you people going to understand that you aren't any safer with the Leviathan State? You're just more of a slave. You are selling yourself for literally nothing. You aren't even whores because at least whores get paid. You just get used to get tyrants in power and then discarded like used condoms. Yet you still keep coming back for more. And you keep promoting the same acts that inspire terrorism; murdering people in their homes, destroying countries, and mass slaughter. You want less terrorism? Stop bombing foreign nations. Stop support this military intervention bullcrap that causes blowback. I shouldn't have to tell you about this if you have ever actually listen to Ron Paul.

 

[misterx]

I love how "dozens" of angry people on Twitter always represents a scandal or justifies a national conversation.

 

[robert68]

Let’s do some Skittle math!

The image posted by Trump pictures a small bowl containing perhaps 100 Skittles. Assuming that three of said Skittles could kill you, eating a handful from this tiny bowl would, indeed, be risky.

Here’s the thing, though: The image drastically oversells the "risk" posed by these Skittles (read: refugees).

A report released last week by the Cato Institute measured the risk to Americans posed by refugees. The report found that an American’s chances of being killed by a refugee in a terrorist attack in any given year are 1 in 3.64 billion. America’s murder rate — at 4.5 per 100,000 capita — is about 163,800 times higher.

As the Washington Post’s Philip Bump points out, adhering to Trump’s analogy, a bowl with three deadly Skittles (refugees) in it would need to contain 10.93 billion Skittles.Bump calculated this to be the equivalent of 1.5 Olympic-size swimming pools full of the candy. This would equate to a bowl of Skittles roughly 246 feet long, 123 feet high, and 9 feet deep.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opini...ogy-is-completely-wrong/ar-BBwp5D0?li=BBnb7Kz

 

[EBounding]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opini...ogy-is-completely-wrong/ar-BBwp5D0?li=BBnb7Kz

Still can't risk it. Excuse me while I go drive recklessly on the freeway while eating my cheeseburger and fries.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opini...ogy-is-completely-wrong/ar-BBwp5D0?li=BBnb7Kz

Well, I certainly don't expect scientific and mathematical accuracy with a simple analogy.

But I would hope for it when someone attempts to refute it with science.

As the Washington Post’s Philip Bump points out, adhering to Trump’s analogy, a bowl with three deadly Skittles (refugees) in it would need to contain 10.93 billion Skittles.

This leap of "logic" by renowned Washington Neocon Post Scientist Philip Bump is worthy of Zippy. We have had more than three radical Islamic terrorists in the US. While we do have too much immigration, we certainly did not need to import 10.93 billion people for that result.

 

[AZJoe]

It is the weirdest and silliest things that throw the leftist statists into hissy fits. Our government is lying on massive scale, starting wars, killing people, making millions destitute or refugees, but hey "I'm going to get all bent out of shape because someone used a skittles analogy" (vs what? M&Ms, marbles, peanuts?)

What, so the leftist position is you must not differentiate the poison skittles out, but instead you must eat the poison ones along with the rest? Eat that poison!

Taste the Rainbow:

 

[LibertyEagle]

Look at all the tinpot tyrants all too willing to sell away the essential freedoms of every person for a delusional security that never can come. The TSA is massively ineffective. The FBI can only catch people it radicalizes and funds. Government spying doesn't catch people planning attacks. War over there inspires attacks here. When are you people going to understand that you aren't any safer with the Leviathan State? You're just more of a slave. You are selling yourself for literally nothing. You aren't even whores because at least whores get paid. You just get used to get tyrants in power and then discarded like used condoms. Yet you still keep coming back for more. And you keep promoting the same acts that inspire terrorism; murdering people in their homes, destroying countries, and mass slaughter. You want less terrorism? Stop bombing foreign nations. Stop support this military intervention bullcrap that causes blowback. I shouldn't have to tell you about this if you have ever actually listen to Ron Paul.

None of us here that I have seen wants our government over in the Middle East, Styx. But, that is a different matter than who we allow to immigrate to our country. Personally, I'd prefer to go back to the pre-1965 immigration law. If we were still going by that, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

 

[misterx]

Well, I certainly don't expect scientific and mathematical accuracy with a simple analogy.

But I would hope for it when someone attempts to refute it with science.



This leap of "logic" by renowned Washington Neocon Post Scientist Philip Bump is worthy of Zippy. We have had more than three radical Islamic terrorists in the US. While we do have too much immigration, we certainly did not need to import 10.93 billion people for that result.

There aren't 10.93 billion people in the whole world. So he's saying there are less than three terrorists in the entire world?

 

[Brian4Liberty]

There aren't 10.93 billion people in the whole world. So he's saying there are less than three terrorists in the entire world?

Neocon logic. There are 10.93 billion terrorists and they are exclusively in Afghanistan Iraq Libya Syria Iran.

 

[Lucille]

 

[euphemia]

Clearly what we're doing now isn't working. Something needs to change. Calling immigrants refugees doesn't change the problem.

 

[notsure]

What's wrong with this analogy? Would you eat from a bowl of skittles if you knew one, or three, could kill you? Would you take in refugees from war torn areas where isis has said they will use the refugee programs to spread their violence, and when several Federal officials have said there's no way to properly vet them? If Hillary, the administration, and neocon hawks can train, arm, fund isis fighters, and create an environment for them to grow; what makes you think these same people won't allow terrorists to come here, attack the US or create another false flag event that'll be used as a pretext to expand the police state?