Or you are. It really is up to where you stand. You believe in your propaganda, I believe mine. I have the data to back up my claims, do you? I can point you to the most hated politician in Finland: Jussi Halla-aho. He backs up everything he says with reports, data and studies. He uses governmental and police reports, reports from all over Europe. Still people think he is just a right-wing idiot.
The thing is, truth really hurts when you don't agree with the facts.
Well, let's examine Jussi Halla-Aho's facts then.
This is by the way just one example. I went to his blog and chose his most recent post about refugees (
here)
In his blog he states that:
Maahanmuuttoviraston turvapaikkayksikön johtaja Esko Repo kertoi 20.10. harhaanjohtavasti, että ... "... suurin osa turvapaikanhakijoista on tähän mennessä saanut kielteisen päätöksen."
Translation through google translate, because I'm lazy:
The Finnish Immigration Service Asylum Unit Director Esko Repo told 20.10. misleadingly, that ... "... the majority of asylum seekers have so far received a negative decision."
He then goes on to state:
Migrin julkaisemat tilastot kertovat aivan muuta. Kuluvana vuonna on tehty yhteensä 1393 myönteistä (turvapaikka, toissijainen suojelu, humanitaarinen suojelu tai "muu") ja 989 kielteistä ratkaisua. Repo on laskenut kielteisiin päätöksiin tutkimatta jätetyt (esim. Dublin-tapaukset) sekä rauenneet (eli hakijan itsensä peruuttamat) hakemukset. Nämä eivät kuitenkaan ole mitään kielteisiä päätöksiä, koska niitä ei ole edes tutkittu.
translation:
Migri's tell about something else. In the current year there has been a total of 1393 positive (asylum, subsidiary protection, humanitarian protection or "other") and 989 negative decicions. Repo has added the excluded (eg. The Dublin cases) and expired (ie the applicant's self-withdrawals) applications to negative decisions. These are, however, not negative decisions because they have not even been studied.
Now, he's technically right there and he makes his case based on those numbers he posted. However he does frame his numbers in an odd way, for example what else would a rejection of an application be other than negative?
By doing this he leaves the majority the applications outside his narrative and thus doesn't have to state that (based on true figures) of all the applications under a third result in positive decision. I don't have the exact table he posted, but these are the total decisions made by Migri in 2015:
Code:
Decision on asylum:
Total positive: 1879
Total negative: 1307
Annulment: 3186
Non-examined applications: 1094
Total: 7466
Source
Can you hear the spin?