Doc110 Loc: York PA

'Staggering': 680,000 Muslims to USA Under Obama. Issuing Green-card totals over 5 years enough to populate Washington D.C.

http://www.wnd.com/2015/11/staggering-number-of-muslim-refugees-under-obama/

The U.S. issued 680,000 green cards to migrants from Muslim-majority countries in the five-year period encompassing 2009 through 2013, according to Department of Homeland Security data.

This Islamic “invasion,” as some are calling it, occurred on the Obama administration’s watch, with plans for 10,000 Syrian Muslims grabbing much of the headlines.

But the actual number is many times higher with a refugee program that is rooted in the 1980s and has the support of both parties.

The U.S. has brought in more than 1.5 million Muslims through the refugee program since the passage of the Refugee Act of 1980.

They have been coming from Islamic states with active jihadist movements such as Somalia, Bangladesh, Burma, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Bosnia and the Democratic Republic of Congo.

To put this five-year tally – 680,000 – in context, it surpasses the total population of Washington, D.C., which is 660,000.

Yet, the Gang of Eight immigration “reform” bill co-sponsored by GOP p**********l candidate Marco Rubio would have tripled the number of green cards being issued.

Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala. The data was released by Sen. Jeff Session, R-Ala., who serves on four Senate committees: Armed Services, Budget, Environment and Public Works, and Judiciary, where he is chairman of the Subcommittee on Immigration and the National Interest.

What do YOU think?

How many Muslim ‘refugees’ are too many?

Among those receiving green cards are foreign nationals admitted to the United States as refugees.

Within one year, they must apply for lawful permanent resident status, also referred to as a green card, and are placed on a fast track to full citizenship, which is obtainable within five years.

Refugees, which are hand-picked by the United Nations for resettlement in more than 180 U.S. cities and towns, have instant access to federal welfare and entitlements, along with local benefits and education services.

These costs are not offset.

The 680,000 number is not an estimate of total migration, as it does not include temporary migrants who return home, nor is it an estimate of population change, as it does not include births or deaths, among other considerations.

There is no official tally of the Muslim population in America because the Census does not track religious affiliation.

The estimates range from 2.8 million by Pew Research based on a 2011 study and 7 million as estimated by the Council for American-Islamic Relations.

“Wh**ever the exact level, it can hardly be considered surprising that as the Muslim population in the country has expanded, so has the incidence of radicalism,” wrote Ian Tuttle in an article for National Review titled “The Troubling Math of Muslim Immigration.”

In fact, many of the recent terrorist attacks on U.S. soil have been carried out by Muslim immigrants, including the Boston Marathon bombing in 2013 and the Chattanooga shooting earlier this year.

Sessions’ immigration subcommittee has documented 72 cases of Muslim suspects carrying out attacks or attempted attacks over the past year.

He believes all of them are either foreign-born Muslim immigrants or their offspring and has asked the Obama administration to clarify their immigration histories, but the administration has ignored the request.

Rubio’s stance on Muslim immigration

Rubio told Fox News host Sean Hannity earlier this week that he would not use Congress’ power of the purse to shut off funding for the refugee program.

Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla. said he’d prefer Speaker Paul Ryan’s plan, which would allow the Obama administration to continue on its resettlement binge – bringing in 85,000 refugees this year, up from 70,000 annually in recent years.

Obama wants to increase the number of refugees coming to the U.S. to 100,000 in 2017. More than half of these refugees will come from Muslim-dominated countries with active jihadist movements.

Policy is bigger than just Obama administration

Assuming no change in visa policy, the U.S. can expect to give green cards to another 680,000 migrants from these countries over the next five years.

A green card entitles recipients to access federal benefits, lifetime residency, work authorization and a direct route to becoming a U.S. citizen.

The numbers could be higher still: Census Bureau data shows migration from the Middle East to be one of the fastest-growing categories.

If left in place, Obama’s refugee plan would substantially boost the annual number of migrants from this region admitted to the U.S. who, in turn, would be able to petition for their overseas relatives to join them in America.

Refugees and asylees from Iraq, Somalia and Iran alone accounted for 124,000 Muslim immigrants from 2009 through 2013.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the foreign-born population in the United States is at a record 41.3 million.

One-quarter of the U.S. population is now either foreign-born or has foreign-born parents.

The Census Bureau projects the percentage of the population born outside the country will soon pass the highest percentage ever recorded and continue rising to new all-time records never before witnessed – unless Congress passes a law to reduce green card allotments.

“Without such changes, the Census Bureau projects that, for each coming year the total number of immigrants in the United States will increase, the annual rate of immigrant admissions will increase, and the foreign-born share of the population will increase,” according to a statement from Sessions office.

“Pew polling data shows that 83 percent of the public (across all parties) opposes this growth baseline and believes the level of immigration should either be frozen or reduced,” Sessions’ statement said.

“By a nearly 10-1 margin, Americans of all backgrounds are united in their shared belief that companies with positions to fill should raise wages instead of bringing in new lower-wage labor from abroad.

And yet, despite this, the Senate’s Gang of Eight bill would have tripled the issuance of green cards over the next decade, and this year’s I-Squared bill would substantially increase both low-wage guest-worker admissions and green card allotments – all on top of the existing record-breaking and unprecedented growth in future immigration.”

Green Card Totals, FY09-FY13

Pakistan (83K),
Iraq (83K),
Bangladesh (75K),
Iran (73K),
Egypt (45K),
Somalia (31K),
Uzbekistan (24K),
Turkey (22K),
Morocco (22K),
Jordan (20K),
Albania (20K),
Lebanon (16K),
Yemen (16K),
Indonesia (15K),
Syria (14K),
Sudan (13K),
Afghanistan (11K),
Sierra Leone (10K),
Guinea (8K),
Senegal (7K),
Saudi Arabia (7K),
Algeria (7K),
Kazakhstan (7K),
Kuwait (5K),
Gambia (5K),
United Arab Emirates (4K),
Azerbaijan (4K),
Mali (3K),
Burkina Faso (3K),
Kyrgyzstan (3K),
Kosovo (3K),
Mauritania (2K),
Tunisia (2K),
Tajikistan (2K),
Libya (2K),
Turkmenistan (1K),
Qatar (1K),
Chad (1K)

[Note: These are the specific DHS green card totals during this time range for Muslim-majority countries which sent at least one-thousand or more migrants, and include any refugees or asylees who adjusted to LPR status.]

jelun

"According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the foreign-born population in the United States is at a record 41.3 million.

One-quarter of the U.S. population is now either foreign-born or has foreign-born parents."

Can you explain what this is supposed to mean?
Parents who are foreign born could be 100 and have lived in the US for 99 years. What does that signify?
Without a breakdown of when people came this number is meaningless, isn't it?

JimMe

We in the USA Must Stop ALL IMMIGRATION INTO OUR COUNTRY ASAP...

With Islamic Terrorists proving their ability to Enter Any Country From Any Other Country by Simply Claiming to be a Refuge Fleeing Islamic Terrorists It Is IMPOSSIBLE TO KNOW WHO IS AND WHO IS NOT A THREAT TO OUR USA Regardless of Where They Are Emigrating From...

This Is NOT A GAME... This Is SURVIVAL...

Doc110 Loc: York PA

Fruit-Loop

meridianlesilie Loc: mars

well maybe we ought to be refugees in there country !!!!well we will be in trouble if they act like ISIS = A SUCKING RELIGION THEY DONT NEED TO BE HERE . check this out
allnewspipeline.com/Migrants_Human_ocean_ISIS_INfiltrate.php

they need to go back if they do not want to live peacefully they think they can just take over ..its Obama's fault if it happens here ..i hope the link will pull up..the link will not pull up will have to enter in browser

lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas

Right! We need a law banning all but Primitive Baptists from entering our country. That way, we really will be able to control the religion in a country founded on religious freedoms. After all, the founders didn't specify WHICH religion shall be free to express themselves - so it's up to us to correct that oversight.

JMHO Loc: Utah

Man, you're just rolling in stupid today. You moderates, fence straddlers, and l*****ts, don't have a clue what is in the Quran...read it sometime, and if you half a brain you will figure out that there is no such thing as a peaceful Muslim. Read it, learn something.

lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas

I'm Christian, I don't follow the Qaran or Torah. Do you? You seem to know a lot about it. If I were you ( thank God I'm not ) I'd concentrate on my OWN religion and try to live by it's precepts.

If YOUR religion sanctions k*****g folks NOT of your religion - then it is as bad as Islam - is it not? I suppose when Jesus said "bless them that persecute you", he didn't mean Muslims - but then - one would have to believe in the teachings of Christ, for THAT to be a problem. Since you do not believe in Jesus and know an awful lot about Islam - I think the conclusion is clear - you Muslim creep. That explains everything stupid that's passed your lips here - which is everything that's passed your lips.

The greatest c**p for Islamic radicals - is to get "so called" Christians to go to war against Islam - which will retroactively justify EVERY atrocity they've committed since 1936. Way to go you Muslim plant!

jelun

People moving into the US increases the need for product, services, and employment. People living here benefit from people moving here.
The need for housing, for food production, and for t***sport of goods means more jobs for residents.
Your claims are based on irrational fear.

jelun

So you cannot explain the point of the content of article you posted.
Thanks for your honesty.

JMHO Loc: Utah

I don't take advice from morons. Yes, I have read the Quran, and yes I know a lot about it because I have researched it, and I was taught by a man who is considered an expert on the subject. And, if you took the time to read the Quran, instead of just espousing a bunch of nonsensical bulls**t, you would know that you don't know crappola about Islam. Islam is not just a religion, it is a way of life with a political and military doctrine. As for the rest of your ignorant rant, it is just that blatant ignorance.

JMHO Loc: Utah

Well, he was honest in calling you a fruit loop...an accurate statement, I would say.

Doc110 Loc: York PA

What a bunch of garbage you spew.

All you do is deflect from the Clinton/Obama muslim strategy.

Your the one who is ignorant and have this crappified thought pattern that what ever the regressive liberal is in power you espouse, you have total ignorance of the ramifications of your thoughts and actions on this subject.

Its called: “Do-Goodism”

Definition of: “Do-Goodism”, “Do-Gooder” and “Do-Gooda”

Do-goodism (ˈdu gʊdˌɪzˌ əm) also do-good•er•ism (du-ˈgʊd əˌrɪzˌ əm) Noun   
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/do-goodism 

The actions or attitudes of a do-gooder.  This kind of “thinking” is spreading across the country. It’s easy to see how “good intentions” can lead to bad results.

Attitudes or actions of well-intentioned but sometimes ineffectual people, especially in the area of social and political reform.

Definition:  do-good·er (du gʊdˌ ər)  Noun 

 http://www.thefreedictionary.com/do-gooder 
 
A naive person who's well-intentioned proposals fail to take into account their repercussions. i.e.. We must not enforce policies with simply good intentions, we have to take into account the larger picture.

A person who wants to "do you" good; As in taking your money, property, and personal freedom.  Usually a liberal or a l*****t in political orientation.  Do-gooders do very well for themselves, usually by cashing in on government grants and private donations. Examples: Reverend Al Sharpton, Reverend Jessie Jackson and the far left fringe in Congress like Harry Reid, Dick Durban, Nancy Pelosi, Debbie Wasserman-Shultz and Philanthropic persons or organizations and sponsors like George (Shultz) Suros, the Tides foundation and most PBS Television group sponsors like the Annenberg foundation.

A white liberal. Someone who knows what is best for everyone else, and dev**es his life to shoving it down our throats.  Someone like Hillary Clinton is a do-gooder who wants to make us all pay for medical care for lazy bums who piss their lives away spray painting graffiti on other
people's property. But feels your pain.   
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=do-gooder

A naive idealist who supports philanthropic or humanitarian political causes or reforms.  http://www.thefreedictionary.com/do-gooder
Informal, usually disparaging a well-intentioned person, especially a naive or impractical one.  http://www.thefreedictionary.com/do-gooder

A well-intentioned but naive and sometimes ineffectual social or political reformer.  Someone dev**ed to the promotion of human welfare and to social and political reforms. (See) Bleeding heart liberal.  Someone who thinks they are helping society by championing the oppressed minority, victimized homosexual, and L**T groups when in fact they are ruining society and crippling free speech. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/do-gooder  
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=do-gooder

An earnest but often naïve person (typically educated and white) who wants reform through philanthropic or egalitarian means. e.g. wealth redistribution, social justice, welfare, third world immigration, adoption of "disadvantaged" children (usually non-white and from abroad), affirmative action and spending other peoples' money for good causes. See also white guilt. 

Do-gooders always mean well but may misinterpret opposing preferences to be r****t, cold, intolerant or greedy. They genuinely want human development & positive environmental awareness, although the methods are a source of debate. Do-gooders can be either liberal/left or “social conservative” (as opposed to fiscal responsibility). 

For some, issues such as "ethnic diversity" & "m**************m" this is a religious calling, but they generally don’t have the same burden for promoting it in countries apart from western ones and don't feel that having a lack of ethnic diversity is a crime for any non-european countries (e.g. Japan).

A few inherent contradictions may exist, such as the fact that literal
"m**************m" would instead favor separation of ethnic or cultural groups to maintain “diversity”. Some subconsciously believe that decreasing the "european-descent" portion of the population pie is indicative of western progress.

Do-gooder methods do not always create the positive outcomes intended. The t***sfer of money from one group of people to another is usual… characteristic.

A pesky pinko/wooly liberal more concerned with uber-censorship and helping everyone who the biased l*****t liberal media has tricked them into thinking that they “Need their help.” This, naturally, means ethnic minorities i*****l a***ns and people with disabilities.

Pretty much all affirmative action incentives may please minorities, but fail to take into account that welfare is an addictive cycle, and that Minorities are hurt if they are given advantages over others. It creates a more unequal society, one where to our welfare and education system race and ethnicity is stressed more then anything else.

It suggests that minorities would be unable to help themselves, and that is prejudice, i thought we wanted everyone to have equal opportunity and rights, isn't that what reconciliation is about? 
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=do-gooder

Do-gooders are naive wishful thinker, who supports political and social thinking causes or reforms!  They are ineffective people, who's well intentioned proposals fail to take into account the long term ramifications of a political or social endeavors.

By using the liberal media as a forum to champion these ideas and views points which are encouraged, exhorted and exchanged on a particular belies system by progressives sound-bite and which regurgitated too the ill-informed masses.

Often times the issues and facts are exacerbated and taken out of context, with wild assertions and statistics to back up their claims, with keeping constant pressure on existing social issues, political laws and citizens, forcing them to take action with out debunking those assertions, facts or statistics and becoming reactionaries to the status-quo-ante in the de jure vs De-facto society that we live in.


When talking and confronting these do-gooders on the issues and
facts, it is like dealing with an AAHD child on Ritalin, it is difficult to
speak with do-gooders, due to the inability to focus their brain on one
issue at a time, because they, the do-gooders are all over the place
t***sforming their universe into their warped thoughts, of a perfect
utopian society.

Consistently they become highly charged, emotionally and they walk away from fact minded people in the of great debate of ideas. Do-Gooders rarely change their mindset or mantra and quite often get into name calling.

Common phrase words used:

Your a r****t, you Republicans or Tea-party r****t and child speech: I’m right and your wrong, deranged type of thinking.

The debate usually ends because logic, common sense and compromise are not part of their moral philosophy.

Do-gooders seek out like minded lawmakers to rewrite and pass new complex legislative laws, when common sense and existing laws just need to be enforced. 

The new laws are more complicated and restrictive and infringe on your Constitutional civil rights. Do-gooders perceive that the Constitution is an old dead document, which is taught in colleges and schools but not put into practice in the current real world Republic.

Examples of do-gooders legislative law bans:

The soda big-gulp ban, butter ban, cupcake ban in schools, water bottle
ban, plastic bottle ban, smoking ban in your home, gun violence restrictive laws ban, and the creme-a-la-creme of do-gooders laws is, ObamaCare.

The congress passed a financial pork-barreled (tax) legislative riddled loop-hole bill without even reading the law, which the majority of Americans did not support.


Just throw out rational common sense thinking out the door use your emotions to solve complex issues.

 
Definition:  Do-Gooda (ˈdu gʊdˌ ah)  Noun
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Dodged 

Someone who puts there nose in other people personal and financial
business like immigration, affirmative action, welfare, ObamaCare and
21 New taxes. The Democratic 2009 -2010 Congress, Hillary and
Obama .are such good Do-Gooda’s.
 

Definition:  Do-Gooda-Shat (ˈdu gʊdˌ ahˌ shaˈt)  Noun 
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=do%20good%20shat  

 A expression of the language of do - AKA do language

 Do everything and anything that can not only be good, but also can be
good shat. Can be used in any variation, form, style, prose, accent.  

Do good shat is always do good shat, but it's at its best when said with
a Caribbean Jamaican beach accent, which immediately satisfies the
human race." Krakage:  it’s do good’s shat. (Caribbean beach voice)    
         

Definition:  Shat, (ˈshaˈt)  Noun
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=do%20good%20shat

Old english past tense of s**t. And lo, he was shat upon, and he did
weep for his misfortune.
2. Past tense of "to s**t." I shat myself.
The past tense of "s**t"; to have taken a s**t.
Upon smelling a really nasty fart: "Ewe...who shat themselves?"

I, We all digress . . . this “Do-Gooder” conversation. . .

Doc110 Loc: York PA

11/4/2015 Taxpayer Bill To resettle 35,000 Mideast Refugees: $2.3 BILLION 'Heavy welfare cost' cited in new study
http://www.wnd.com/2015/11/taxpayer-bill-to-resettle-35000-mideast-refugees-2-3-billion/

The Syrian civil war has caused 4 million refugees, with 400,000 targeted by the United Nations for resettlement outside the region.

It costs U.S. taxpayers nearly $65,000 to resettle one Middle Eastern refugee over the first five years, which is 12 times what it would cost to care for that same refugee in a neighboring country in the region, according to a new study.

The Center for Immigration Studies cites “heavy welfare use” as the main reason why refugees are so costly to resettle. This flies in the face of oft-quoted comments by U.S. mayors who claim refugees add to their tax base and promote economic growth, making for a more “culturally diverse” and “economically resilient” city.

The CIS study indicates they are more of a drain on the economy than a boost.

The $64,370 cost to U.S. taxpayers over five years is a “conservative estimate” presented in a new study released by CIS’ chief researcher and statistician.

If the U.S. takes in 35,000 refugees next year from countries like Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and Somalia, which is a reasonable estimate for fiscal 2016, it would cost the U.S. taxpayer $2.3 billion just in the first five years.

This does not include the cost of refugees from non-Middle Eastern nations, which will be another 50,000 refugees costing at least another $2.5 billion.

The cost of resettlement includes heavy welfare use by Middle Eastern refugees, said the lead author of the study, Steven Camarota, the CIS’ director of research.

“Very heavy use of welfare programs by Middle Eastern refugees, and the fact that they have only 10.5 years of education on average, makes it likely that it will be many years, if ever, before this population will cease to be a net fiscal drain on public coffers – using more in public services than they pay in taxes,” he said.

As WND has reported numerous times, 91 percent of refugees from the Middle East receive food stamps, 68 percent receive cash assistance and 23 percent live in public housing. Costs also include processing refugees, cash assistance given to new refugees, and aid to refugee-receiving communities.

While the U.S. Office of Refugee Resettlement often claims that most refugees are self-sufficient within five years, that claim is deceiving.

The ORR defines “self-sufficiency” as any refugee that no longer receives cash welfare payments. A household is still considered “self-sufficient” if it is using any number of non-cash programs such as food stamps, public housing or Medicaid.

“So we have a pretty good idea of what refugees cost, and it’s a lot,” Camarota told WND. “This raises the question of what is the most effective way to help people, and it turns out helping them in their home country or in a neighboring country may be the most effective. You can’t just ignore that question. Right now the United Nations has a $2.5 billion deficit in helping refugees in the Middle East. Funding is limited.”

The Syrian civil war has caused 4 million displaced persons, according to the U.N. Most are being temporarily housed in camps in Lebanon, Jordan and Turkey, but the U.N. wants to permanently resettle at least 400,000 in neighboring countries. This is on top of the more than 1 million who have already migrated illegally to Europe.

“I think the public is sympathetic, but we’re not going to spend unlimited resources. Congress is neglecting a very important question if they don’t look at this, and it is a question of how best to help,” Camarota said. “It’s very costly, and this is a population that is extremely costly in terms of its usage of government services. You can’t just say, ‘I want to help,’ and not look at the costs.”

There are other advantages even for the refugees, he said.

“The material life might be better here, but there are other considerations. One example may be if they stay there once the war is over, they are much more likely to return home,” he said. “If they stay also in countries more culturally similar, they don’t have the disruption of adjusting to life in an alien society like America.”

Caring for refugees “in the region” is also “less disruptive to our society,” Camarota said.

“Unfortunately, we have had refugees come to the U.S. and commit terrorist acts, the most cited example being the Boston Marathon bombers, who came from the Caucuses as asylum seekers,” he said.

FBI Director James Comey has also warned Congress and the Obama administration that his agency is not capable of screening the Syrian refugees because the U.S. has no access to reliable intelligence data in that broken country.

Costs likely ‘much higher’

Camarota said the study used an extremely conservative methodology to come up with the cost, only using the costs that are tracked by government data.

“If you assume $12,500 as the national average per student per year and 28 percent of refugees are kids between 5 and 17, if gives you actual costs,” he said.

However, the study did not include many other costs, such as the cost of having to bring in mobile classrooms and eventually build new schools to deal with overcrowding. Nor does it include the cost of hiring new teachers, special tutors and language t***slators. Also not included in the study were costs such as energy assistance programs or refugee children using the Head Start program.

“So this is very conservative. The actual costs are higher, likely much higher,” Camarota said.

“It’s a lot to consider, but we can also help a lot more people with the same amount of money. Wh**ever amount you have to spend, you can do a lot more, 12 times more if you take the five-year costs to help them here, versus what it costs to help them in the Middle East for five years.”

Among the other findings:

• On average, each Middle Eastern refugee resettled in the United States costs an estimated $64,370 in the first five years, or $257,481 per household.
• The U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees has requested $1,057 to care for each Syrian refugee annually in most countries neighboring Syria.
• For what it costs to resettle one Middle Eastern refugee in the United States for five years, about 12 refugees can be helped in the Middle East for five years, or 61 refugees can be helped for one year.
• The UNHCR reports a gap of $2.5 billion in funding that it needs to care for approximately four million Syrians in neighboring countries.
• The five-year cost of resettling about 39,000 Syrian refugees in the United States is enough to erase the current UNHCR funding gap.
• Of Middle Eastern refugee households that have arrived in the last five years, 91 percent receive food stamps and 68 percent receive cash welfare.
• The five-year costs of resettlement in the United States include $9,230 spent by the Office of Refugee Resettlement within HHS and the Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration within the State Department in the first year, as well as $55,139 in expenditures on welfare and education.

In 1970, fewer than 1 in 21 U.S. residents were foreign-born. Today is it nearing 1 in 7, and will soon eclipse every historical watermark and keep rising.

Meanwhile, the wage compression enabled by long-term low-sk**led migration has helped employers keep wages down beneath 1973 levels.

One of the fastest-growing categories of immigration is from the Middle East, driven in part by refugee resettlement. Here are some stats:

Muslim immigration at all-time high

As part of the annual admission of 1.1 million refugees, asylum-seekers and green cards holders, the United States resettles more than 100,000 migrants from Muslim nations. For instance, in 2013, the United States …

• Issued 117,000 green cards to migrants from Muslim countries, including about 70,000 to migrants from just Middle Eastern countries
• Admitted 40,000 designated refugees and asylum-seekers from all Muslim nations, of which approximately 30,000 come from the Middle East

Looking at just the Middle East over the last five years (FY ’09-’13), the United States …

• Issued 400,000 green cards to migrants from the Middle East
• Admitted 115,000 refugees and asylum-seekers from the Middle East

Looking at Muslim nations in general over the last five years (FY ’09-’13), the United States …

• Issued 680,000 green cars to migrants from Muslim countries
• Admitted 155,000 refugees and asylum-seekers from Muslim countries

Meanwhile, polling from Rasmussen shows:

• 49 percent of v**ers think the correct admissions number for all Middle Eastern refugees is zero
• 69 percent think it should be either zero or capped at 10,000
• Only 5 percent would appear to support the current policy of admitting more than 100,000 in the next five years.

jelun

A very wordy means of saying that NO you do not have any way to explain or support what you posted.