Michael Savage’s Version or Anthony DeFazios?

In an article entitled “ Are Refugees Really a Threat, the Numbers say No” that ran this morning on Bull Elephant author Anthony Defazio ,President of American Individualists , who also serves on the communication team with the Loudoun County Republican party attempts to make the case citing a variety of statistics that the threat from resettlement of immigrants primarily from war torn middle eastern nations is being blown out of proportion. Mr. DeFazio cites the likelihood of dying from a terrorist attack  committed by a refugee is 1 in 3,638,587,094……..” hardly worthy of a moratorium on admitting any more refugees” . I wonder if New Yorkers and local citizens surrounding Orlando or San Bernadino would share Mr. Defazio’s rather casual attitude on the topic .

I would ask readers to consider another point of view shared with listeners of his Radio program “ The Savage Nation” on Tuesday of this week by noted author, and commentator Dr. Michael Savage.

Dr. Savage notes that during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State 680,000 refugees were settled here in the U.S. Dr. Savage asked a very interesting question on the number itself. What percentage of that 680,000 have been radicalized already and believes in the Sharia version of Islam ?  Is it 10 % ?  Of course not, that would be 68,000 and no one would dispute that estimate would be erroneous. Is it 1% ?  That would be 6,800…….and even 1% is probably too high.  So ( as Savage suggested ) let’s settle on .01%.  That is 680 people , predominantly young Muslim men who are now on U.S soil and have a 14^th century mentality embedded in their “ religion” that killing infidels and a worldwide caliphate is their mission in life.   Statistics aside and all due respect to Mr. Defazio but reasonable intelligent citizens find that to be a disturbing reality that statistics fail to recognize as material. To accept this or to suggest that a ban on immigration from specific nations where this mindset is prevalent defies common sense and  the instinctive self- preservation of any society that is worthy of  preservation. Certainly America falls into that category.

It also bears contemplation of just what the aggregate costs are in combatting this. We know in just this instance the Governor of New York called up 1000 New York State police & National guardsmen to reinforce the already thousands of law enforcement officers on duty as a direct result of the heightened state an attack brings with it. A new federal Agency , Department of Homeland Security was created after 9/11 and it’s costs are alone staggering. Add into the mix the economic losses resulting from these attacks , lost revenue from depressed tourism in these areas affected, increased cost of liability/property insurance,  lost incomes of American’s that certainly is a measurable number and you begin to see why the economic losses must be a part of the equation.

Measuring the impact of this as some sort of statistical anomaly misses the entire core issue, particularly when it is your lost income, your destroyed business,  or your limb blown off by one of these monsters.   Trumps proposal of a temporary ban and elevated levels of vetting is not only a pragmatic one, but one that is resonating with Americans that still have a modicum of common sense. Let’s pray that number is still large enough to tip the scales November 8^th.

Bob Shannon   King William