Here is a true Da Vinci. A USA Today article, written by Jared Goyette, a writer for Public Radio International. Click the link below to read it:
The moustache on this Mona Lisa is the fact that what is purported to being "now clear" is not clear at all. The first hint of something amiss is that the author does not give a link to the data that supports his claims. There is a reason for this as will be seen below.
Later in the article, it is hinted that the whole thing comes out of a phone call with folks running the Obama Administration’s US Citizenship and Immigration Service. (USCIS) Sure enough, a poke around their website yields a transcript of the telephone call that took place on August 5th, 2016, 3 days before the publication of the article.
During the presidential campaign at this time, Donald Trump and his team were raising questions about the vetting of Syrian refugees. It appears this phone call was hastily arranged to provide a refutation of Trump’s claims. A few writers were invited to this phone call, the purpose being to provide a data source for the refutations.
Because, as it turns out, hard data WAS available. As a matter of fact, it is the job of USCIS to provide an annual report on immigration demographics, coinciding with the Federal Fiscal Year. However, this year, no report was to be published. For some strange reason, it is missing. The fiscal year ended on September 30, 2016, and now, at the end of January 2017, there is still no report to be found.
During this phone call, Anne Richard of USCIS read a few scant statistics from the hard data. Callers were asking questions and she would respond “…we should be able to get that for you, just a minute, wait…” as if the data was coming in on radio waves from some alien planet, scrambled by the background radiation at the rim of the cosmic sphere.
The articles author, Jared Goyette, was one of the invited writers and he asks some questions that Richard could not answer during the recorded conversation, indicating she would follow up after participants had disconnected. Then, a short time later, this curious exchange takes place, quoted verbatim as fair use:
Coordinator: Our next question comes from (Esa Gomez) with ABC News. Your line is open.
(Esa Gomez): I was wondering out of the 8,000 of the admitted refugees how many of them were children?
Anne Richard: I should - we should have that number for you. Seventy eight percent were women and children and the number of children we’ll have to get you but let’s see - nearly - let’s see, 4,576 were under 18 - just a little under half female and roughly half male of the children.
(Esa Gomez): Is that of the children or women and children?
Anne Richard: So the first number I gave you the 78% were women and children. And then the second that’s 78% out of 8,000. And then the number of children is - or under 18 year olds (sic) is 4,576 and they’re roughly half and half men and - girls and boys rather.
(Esa Gomez): Oh okay, thank you.
Please do make a note of Anne Richard’s Freudian Slip, ("men and girls").
Esa Gomez asked a relatively simple question: How many children were included in the number of Syrian Refugees admitted to the USA so far in the fiscal year? The total admitted was ‘estimated’ at 8000 although clearly Anne Richard was reading from hard data to get the quite specific count of 4,576 children. What was the true number admitted? USCIS folks were repeating ‘we are talking about 8000…’ but why this special grouping? Wasit really exactly 8000? Were there more than that? Why not just release the data? Well, we know why. The purpose of this phone call was to manipulate the numbers in order to refute Trump.
Note that Anne Richard did not directly answer Esa Gomez question. She gave this strange answer: 78% were women and children. And then, she tuned in her space radio for help from above and miraculously it came through, an exact number: 4,576. The puzzled Esa Gomez asked for clarification but then the transmission apparently broke up and the clarification only confused things further. Esa Gomez's brain imploded and she gave up.
Why was the agency eager to give out this 78% number? And to repeat it as 78% of 8000, almost like 78% is almost 8000 all by itself? Is she trying to imply that only 22% were men? We know the answer now; the Obama administration has always been counting on the hope that the American public has been subjected to sufficient brain degradation by the dumbing down of the American educational system over the past decade. In other words, they think everyone is, to put it kindly, mentally adrift, and treats them as if they are.
Let’s take Anne Richard’s number at face value and have a hard look. In the table that follows, the top section is hard data that can support her claims, if indeed we are only talking about 8000 total Syrian Refugees. We have to estimate these numbers because the real data is missing. Nobody closer than 14.5 billion light years away seems to know where it is. I have marked her figures in red:
| Gender | Category | Age Group | Count | Percentage |
| male | adult men | 18 or 0ver | 1760 | 22.00% |
| male | older kids | 15 to 17 | 2271 | 28.39% |
| male | young kids | 0 to 14 | 123 | 1.54% |
| female | young kids | 0 to 14 | 161 | 2.01% |
| female | older kids | 15 to 17 | 2021 | 25.26% |
| female | adult women | 18 or over | 1664 | 20.80% |
| Total | 8000 | 100.00% | ||
| all genders | adults | 18 or 0ver | 3424 | 42.80% |
| all genders | older kids | 15 to 17 | 4292 | 53.65% |
| all genders | young kids | 0 to 14 | 284 | 3.55% |
| all genders | all kids | 0 to 17 | 4576 | 57.20% |
| male | all | 0 + | 4154 | 51.93% |
| female | all | 0 + | 3846 | 48.08% |
| male | all kids | 0 to 17 | 2394 | 29.93% |
| female | all kids | 0 to 17 | 2182 | 27.28% |
| all | all kids | 0 to 17 | 4576 | 57.20% |
| all | adults | 18 or over | 3424 | 42.80% |
| ration of female kids | to all kids | 0 to 17 | 47.68% | |
| ration of male kids | to all kids | 0 to 17 | 52.32% | |
| adult women + all kids | 6240 | 78.00% | ||
| adult men + all kids | 6336 | 79.20% | ||
| male | adult + older kids | military | 4031 | 50.39% |
The blue figures are the ones most germane to this discussion, but Anne Richards would not speak to those. I believe this is a fair interpretation. You are welcome to come up with one of your own as long as it supports Anne Richard’s figures. In all events, your extrapolation would not be far removed from mine. I have faithfully kept true to her 78% women and children claim, although it implies that the percentage of men and children come in at 79.2 % (!) In other words, she gave the data in a manner that implied only 22% of the refugees were males when in truth, there were more males than females admitted.
This is the signature of the never-ending stream of #FakeNews coming out of the Obama Administration and its cohorts, the main stream media, that ultimately cost Hillary her virtual lock on the election. She might consider filing a lawsuit against the entire lot of them.
So, as it turns out, 52% of the admitted refugees are male, 48% female. And as Anne says, the number of male and female children breaks roughly in half. Quite roughly.
The table concludes with an extrapolation of data that was concerning the American public leading up to the election: How many military aged males were being admitted by the Obama Administration in their hurried effort during the latter half of 2016?
Indeed, what is the TRUE number? We have given Anne Richards the benefit of the doubt here, but given her blatant attempt to mislead, she has perhaps, for this matter, abandoned appeals to kindness. Let us take another hard look at this data, and extend it out to meet the projected goal of 13,000 Syrian refugees. I have used the same data above, adding in the required number of males that bring the total to 13,000 and remain true to her one fact, 4,576 children:
| Gender | Category | Age Group | Count | Percentage |
| male | adult men | 18 or 0ver | 6760 | 52.00% |
| male | older kids | 15 to 17 | 2271 | 17.47% |
| male | young kids | 0 to 14 | 123 | 0.95% |
| female | young kids | 0 to 14 | 161 | 1.24% |
| female | older kids | 15 to 17 | 2021 | 15.55% |
| female | adult women | 18 or over | 1664 | 12.80% |
| Total | 13000 | 100.00% | ||
| all genders | adults | 18 or 0ver | 8424 | 64.80% |
| all genders | older kids | 15 to 17 | 4292 | 33.02% |
| all genders | young kids | 0 to 14 | 284 | 2.18% |
| all genders | all kids | 0 to 17 | 4576 | 35.20% |
| male | all | 0 + | 9154 | 70.42% |
| female | all | 0 + | 3846 | 29.58% |
| male | all kids | 0 to 17 | 2394 | 18.42% |
| female | all kids | 0 to 17 | 2182 | 16.78% |
| all | all kids | 0 to 17 | 4576 | 35.20% |
| all | adults | 18 or over | 8424 | 64.80% |
| ration of female kids | to all kids | 0 to 17 | 47.68% | |
| ration of male kids | to all kids | 0 to 17 | 52.32% | |
| adult women + all kids | 6240 | 48.00% | ||
| adult men + all kids | 11336 | 87.20% | ||
| male | adult + older kids | military age | 9031 | 69.47% |
70 percent military aged males, 30 percent female. An army of 9,000 men. When we take Somalia and other hastily admitted regions into consideration, this size of Islam’s army jumps alarmingly above 50,000 men. This roughly coincides with the 70+% military male experience currently crushing the European Union, where Islam is running amok, raping and killing at will.
Granted, this second table of data is estimated as a worst case scenario, but absent the real data how can we know? Which is the truth? It is here in this second table above, or somewhere in between. In any case, it is one of the reason’s that Donald Trump is President of the United States of America. The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)can resolve the question completely by publishing the data.
No comments:
Post a Comment