I can be very brief since most of the many comments involved a battle between posters over free trade. My position on that issue is well known, and I will leave it for others to continue the discussion. I do not even mind being included among the "people with academic jobs" since I do have one. I should point out, however, that as I have written on this blog, I oppose tenure for academics, including myself, and that I earn much of my income from the "cut throat" competitive markets of writing books and giving lectures.
As someone pointed out, what is relevant is the unconditional probability, not the conditional probability, of the increase in terrorism due to the port deal. For example, if the probability of terrorism was minuscule, it would hardly matter if the conditional probability of a terrorism act, given that one occurred, was greatly increased by the Dubai operation of a few ports.
As I indicated in my column on illegal immigration, I would favor much more immigration, perhaps even free immigration, if governments played a small role, as they did in the nineteenth century. But given the welfare state, and the importance of votes, it is no longer sensible to be a free trader on immigration.