2005 December 19 Monday
Muslim Immigrants Drive Up Rape Rates In Scandinavia
Norwegian blogger Fjordman has the details in a FrontPage article. Look at what the Scandinavians have inflicted on their women.
According to a new study from the Crime Prevention Council, Brå, it is four times more likely that a known rapist is born abroad, compared to persons born in Sweden. Resident aliens from Algeria, Libya, Morocco and Tunisia dominate the group of rape suspects. According to these statistics, almost half of all perpetrators are immigrants. In Norway and Denmark, we know that non-Western immigrants, which frequently means Muslims, are grossly overrepresented on rape statistics. In Oslo, Norway, immigrants were involved two out of three rape charges in 2001. The numbers in Denmark were the same, and even higher in the city of Copenhagen with three out of four rape charges. Sweden has a larger immigrant, including Muslim, population than any other country in northern Europe. The numbers there are likely to be at least as bad as with its Scandinavian neighbors. The actual number is thus probably even higher than what the authorities are reporting now, as it doesn't include second generation immigrants. Lawyer Ann Christine Hjelm, who has investigated violent crimes in Svea high court, found that 85 per cent of the convicted rapists were born on foreign soil or by foreign parents.
Rape is an extremely scarring experience for many women. Why let in immigrant groups which will commit rape at much higher rates than natives?
Let's review the statistics: By 2020, there will be hundreds of portable briefcase size civilian nukes in the hands of many of the "immigrants" in Europe. These civilian nukes will reinforce the ability of these immigrants to demand more "rights" over there. If any judge or prosecutor questions their rights, these immigrants will open their briefcases and show the judges and the prosecutors the instruments that document their rights, and the judges and prosecutors will not have the courage to question these rights.
Invisible, isn't that the right to bear arms?
In any event, if nukes become that common then it won't just be the Islamic loons we've got to worry about - any city with teenagers will almost certainly cease to exist.
I loved this link:
Is this culture worth saving? I feel for the Swedish women (among others) who are suffering. However, for some bizarre reason Sweden seems to have no problem f&*cking itself and its women over. Should we really care if they don't? If their populace doesn't do enough to save them, what can we do?
Things that happened in Australia or in the USA with the minutemen are NECESSARY evils (I really hate to say this) to stem the political tide for blind multiculturalism. Without such necessary evils, the leftist elite in the Anglosphere won't be forced to do what the populace really wants with respect to illegal immigration.
Somebody explain to me why the leftists are so much more impassioned about things like increasing immigration and being anti- death penalty than the average citizen seems to be.
I dunno. But, it's not our problem in the USA.
nukes supplied by whom?
How many of the regimes in the ME & N.Korea do you think will exist in 2020?
The number of regimes in ME and N.Korea will depend on how exactly the US loses influence in the region, and how the economy goes. My intuition says that 1) Gradually the extremist elements will overthrow the Saudi Royal Family, creating a cash source for their militarization, 2) Pakistan is likely to collapse and its nukes may fall in dangerous hands, 3) If the United States is forced to cut back significantly on its foreign trade deficit, the money that is subsidizing the world will be cut, and the impoverished Middle Eastern peoples will suffer a lot more, adding fuel to the extremist fires. I would say that all of these 3 possibilities are pointing towards the collapse of the pro-American oil producing governments, and this means that the oil money will fall in the hands of extremists. I guess I have answered your question in detail, as far as why and how exactly the nukes will be supplied. By 2020-2025, there will probably be hundreds of loose nukes.
"I guess I have answered your question in detail, as far as why and how exactly the nukes will be supplied. By 2020-2025, there will probably be hundreds of loose nukes."
I have strong doubts about any of this occuring in America on a large scale. Even if it does come to this in certain places of the world, the response from, at least some nuclear states (in America or the EU), will be profound. Democracy is responsive to massive public pressure. For example, if the public in America decides that we can no longer trust Muslims, they'll simply be thrown out of the country- or tightly sequestered therein. There may even be a massive, largely one sided nuclear response against certain anti-American regimes (in ME or N. Korea). If the public feels so threatened, there is little that's going to stop it from demanding massive revenge and curtailment of some civil liberties as a result. Sitting by passively while PC leftist professors tell us that Islam is a religion of peace won't be an option at that point.
I don't welcome this scenario though. It is quite likely that there won't be much differentiation between non-threatening 'non-white foreigners' like myself or millions of others like myself and the real threats.
What if moslem and tropical adapted, assisted immigration is a terror offensive itself, on the part of officials, and their professoriate and regulated media; who champion it? What if such immigration is a terror offensive against the majority, and an indulgence of freedom for aggression, and an attempt to destroy freedom from aggression, in order that the power of officials might grow? One can note how officials delight in the rape offensives, as of old, their counterparts would have sent in the cossacks. A terrrorized population, like that of the middle ages, is docile to absolute power; and that condition would be the objective. Someone has to raise this question now, as it is censorable in many of the affected countries, and especially since that censorship could spread.
I also do not welcome this kind of WMD provocation scenario, because this will mean total discrimination and separation of races. After 9/11, some Indian non-Muslim immigrants were harassed in the United States, even though India is currently one of the most pro-American countries in the world...
No, Invisible, not separation of races. Separation of religions. A totally different phenomenon. Too many people confuse Islam with a particular race. No, Islam is a form of insanity, not an ethnicity. Insanity, Ethnicity. Similar sounding words in English perhaps, but with entirely different meanings.
I agree 100 % with what you are saying, but unfortunately, the average person in the street, has a totally different understanding of what ethnicity is. Despite the "new era", a lot of people are still in the 19th century, and think that Jesus was a member of the Aryan race. I am not exaggerating.
For this reason, the religious war will often be exploited by a lot of people malevolently in order to discriminate in several other dimensions...
While this article was shocking and (most likely) true, and we all know the situation in Europe in regards to immigrants is becoming increasingly worse, it's important to check sources and analyze stories before posting them. FrontPage is an extremely right-wing magazine, featuring articles such as "I'm fed up with Democrats" and Anne Coulter commentary such as "Why won't the New York Times let the Bush administration spy on jihadists the way it spies on pedophiles?"
The article itself features some very clear biases that takes away from the accuracy and tragedy of this piece, including the claim that "law and order is completely breaking down in the country," instilling a sense of panic in the reader, and " Lawyer Ann Christine Hjelm, who has investigated violent crimes in Svea high court, found that 85 per cent of the convicted rapists were born on foreign soil or by foreign parents." Although this could mean Muslims, as the article frequently insists, it doesn't have to be. The paper that is quoted as saying that over 80% of women are afraid to go out after dark, Aftonbladet, while featuring some serious articles, considers itself a tabloid (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aftonbladet), losing my credibility as a reader who feels that all Swedes are terrified to go outside.
While the heart of the article is startling and should get us thinking, the way the facts are presented may turn some people off.
Are you suggesting that some news media are not sufficiently PC to have credibility?
I'm saying that some media sources are way too biased to have credibility. Why does America collectively laugh at Fox News as being too right wing? Why are some organizations, like the ACLU, always associated with "way left liberals?" And are those organizations usually seen as credible sources for news, or simply sources that should be taken with one or two or three grains of salt?
I have serious problems with the Gray Lady's political slants for example. But it is hard to argue seriously that the NY Times is not a very useful source of information. My point is that political slants by themselves to not render a news source useless.
In some countries on some issues only an extremist press will report on the truth of certain issues. The mainstream has decided to engage in collective lies. If you dismiss the extremists just because they are extremists then you basically allow the mainstream to engage in a massive lie.
The issue is the oncoming Swedish dystopia. And this is an outrageous question from Raj:
Is this culture worth saving?
Well, Raj, anyone residing in the USA who describes the Minutemen as a "necessary evil" is a treasonous transnational skunk. But I will play along and answer your asinine question.
The fact is Sweden is under attack from within - by Marxist, transnationalists like you, Raj. A preponderance of which are Jews who have successfully instilled a state of psychological conditioning that equates ANY AND ALL national identity, cultural identity, or racial identity with Nazism.
Sweden has a tiny population compared to the US. It takes a much smaller population of "revolutionaries and radicals" to compromise the educational and government institutions.
Is Sweden the future of all of Europe? The fact is that the White Western world's intellectual ass is between a rock and a hard place for the time being thanks to Hitler and the guilt-tripping international Holocaust industry. But this is a temporary state of affairs.
There is a serious challenge posed by Marxists in many Western countries. But the furious backlash is coming.
"Raj" may ask if the Swedish culture is worth saving here on an internet message board in late 2005. But something tells me that when Swedish culture reasserts itself in the future with mass deportations and/or exterminations of aliens - then "Raj" will take offense and soon be asking the same kind of insulting question.
In other words this particular Swedish culture - like any other Western culture - is morally suspect during those periods when it succumbs to alien cultures AND it is morally suspect during those periods when it repels alien cultures.
The bottom line is that, in the minds of Raj and his fellow travelers, Swedish culture is never worth saving. It can only veer from one repugnant extreme to the other.
Before refuting my comments please consider: This is an entirely logical deduction considering Raj's description of the Minutemen. The Minutemen are obviously trying to preserve a strain of Western culture here in the US - yet Raj describes the Minutemen as a "necessary evil".
Sweden is suffering from the classic ultra-leftist, neo-Marxist essential contradiction-- that the inevitable result of their policies is the ruin of the very liberal society that enables them to exist. Swedish ultra-liberals seem to believe that the greatest expression of tolerance and enlightened thinking is to allow in the very people whose extreme views would bring down your society's foundation. It's self-destruction as a "higher value." The ultra-libs in Sweden and the USA who are wrecking our countries demographically, are the same people running our divorce courts and penalizing productive (especially white) Americans and discouraging children and the nuclear family, the same people who are pushing affirmative action so hard to rip our countries apart.
Your unfair and ridiculous use of ad hominem attacks makes whatever point you are trying to incoherently raise largely moot. I am neither a transnationalist nor a anti-semite, which you may very well be. Please tell me what makes you conclude I am a 'transnationalist.' Maybe, anyone who deigns to point out the follies of immigration policy and possible linkages to rape becomes, by definition, a 'transnationalist.' I dunno, but that is about as logical as your arguments.
I am an agnostic South Asian born and raised in America. This is the only country I've known and cannot see myself living elsewhere. I have about as much in common with extremist Muslims as an all American white boy does. Or maybe you think that just because I have brown skin I am supposed to support immigration policies that blindly allow more 'brown' peoples. If you read any of my other comments on this thread and this site, you'll note that I don't support 'blind' multiculturalism.
I doubt this will get through to your brain, but I believe that an immigration policy should be in the best interests of a country's native citizens. I believe that certain immigrant groups that assimilate well and are economically successful should be welcomed into the country. I accept the fact that there may be other reasons for not allowing different ethnic groups into a country, like cultural preservation issues. However, it should be up to the country's citizens to decide how important that issue is to them in drawing up immigration policy. For the record, I don't feel this type of necessary debate is going on in this country or in much of the Anglosphere with respect to immigration.
You know what is really pathetic, Jorge. Almost any reader on this site who actually read my comments realizes that you and I would actually agree on most of the points with respect to immigration. But then, they are likely able use logic better than you. Just because I describe the 'minutemen' as a 'necessary evil' doesn't mean I don't support them- especially given our government's stance on immigration. Going ape-shit just because I used a term that was confusing to you simply shows everyone you need to brush up on your reading comprehension skills.
For the record, it is sad that our government won't enforce immigration laws such that our fellow citizens are forced to act as watchdogs on the border. It is sad that they are risking their lives to do such a task. It is sad that illegal immigration drives blue collar wages down, adversely affecting poor blacks, poor whites, and poor latinos. It is sad that the majority of Americans are so passive on this issue that it takes people like the minutemen to bring such an issue to the national stage. So, for all these reasons, the minutemen are a 'necessary evil' in the face of a broken democracy.
Feel free to go ape-shit again now that I obviously have proven my love for the Jihadists in the EU and my disdain for the minutemen. You're just making yourself look all the more stupid.
Please tell me what makes you conclude I am a 'transnationalist.'
I will stand by my previous comment: anyone residing in the USA who describes the Minutemen as a "necessary evil" is a treasonous transnational skunk.
You use the 'necessary evil' description. And yet claim to do so without hostility to border enforcement. I reject that premise. I think you are hostile to the Minutemen and that is the mentality of a transnational. Your use of the term all American white boy is also full of hostility to the people who invented this nation and is duly noted.
If your point is that official government control of the borders is morally upright, yet grass roots border enforcement is "evil"...well all I can say is you're out of touch with the American credo.
Raj, posting here is not the same world as Oprah or MSNBC. I think we can agree on that. I am a racial realist. I tend to notice the stuff you're not supposed to notice in polite society. Like the fact that the Minutemen are 99% white. And that nearly every voice creating this long overdue anti-illegal groundswell here in late 2005 is white.
The fact is that non-white folks are much less interested in border enforcement in the USA than white folks. And the core reason for that dichotomy is hostility toward the traditional (white) USA vs. love for the traditional (white) USA.
Now, let's take a look at your reasoning behing the claim that you're in fact not hostile to the Minutemen even though you term them a 'necessary evil':
it is sad that the majority of Americans are so passive on this issue that it takes people like the minutemen to bring such an issue to the national stage. So, for all these reasons, the minutemen are a 'necessary evil' in the face of a broken democracy.
Huh? I still don't get why you characterize the Minutemen as at all evil. That doesn't compute. You are drinking major koolaid. Only an open-borders, multicultural Marxist would use that terminology. Yes, they have proved "necessary" in the current climate. But in no way are they "evil". No way.
Anyway, yours is a simplistic view of the current state of immigration in the USA. Your term "passive" (it is sad that the majority of Americans are so passive on this issue) is not very accurate at all, and to the small extent that it is accurate, it is the source of the passivity that is important. And a key question is how this state came about: a massive pyschological conditioning program spearheaded by an culturally alien radical diaspora population of leftwing Jews.
Instead of dismissing that last comment as "anti-semitic" paranoia, do some research on leftwing Jews and their impact on US immigration policy in the 20th century.
The point is, Raj, instead of describing the American people as passive it is correct to describe them as having been bullied on the immigration issue. They have been lied to and intimidated. And they have been completely ignored by their representatives in government until here in late 2005. And the US media elite has deliberately and methodically buried the illegal issue for decades (as part of an ideological campaign to elect a new people with the hated white man as just another minority).
Finally, you describe me as going ape-sh*t. But I didn't use any derogatory racial language like the term "white boy" as you do. In fact I didn't use any foul language at all as you did repeatedly with you ape-sh*t comments.
I did call anyone who describes the Minutemen as a "necessary evil" a skunk. I stand by that. The Minutemen have perpetrated no evil acts. Quite the opposite. The only way one could see the Minutemen as a "necessary evil" is if one was recently educated in the USA or a similar environment of psychological conditioning.
It's not surprise to learn that you, Raj, have been educated in the USA. IMO you've been brainwashed. Ingrained with the mentality that the white man stole everything and therefore it is morally questionable for white people to enforce the borders of stolen territory aka the USA. That is the source of your considerable and demonstrated hostility to historically white nations, their borders and their cultures including, obviously, the culture of Sweden.
Gotta agree with Jorge that I see nothing evil about the Minutemen.
The view that they are evil reminds me of the general liberal disdain for "fly-over country" people. One can reject liberalism and yet still have a lot of liberal attitudes seep into you from the liberal media.
The only evil in the Minutemen situation is the federal failure to perform its most basic task: to protect the sovereignty of the USA from foreign invaders.
I fail to see anything necessary about that evil.
He's calling the minutemen a 'necessary evil' in the same way that a supporter of a failing welfare state would call a private charity a 'necessary evil'. Clearly neither are "evil" in the moral sense.
Hence Jorge's assertion that Raj is necessarily a transnationalist. Calling a private charity a necessary evil has the same moral bankruptcy.
I actually live in Sweden (I am not Swedish) I can perhaps provide a more informed opinion
I would be decribed as "transnational" by the white supremacist Jorge.
The Swedish ruling classes (mainly Olef Palmer) decided on a policy of immigration
from the third world for ideological reasons. Sweden does indeed have issues regarding
WWII and the sypathy some of its citizens felt for the nazi movement (the same is
true for the netherlands, i have live there also). In my humble opinion, the Nazi
used fear and flattery (you are the master race bullshit) to win popular support.
I believe only 1% of germans swedes or whatever would have voted for the
final solution. These nations I think are overdoing the guilt trip bit, but still
one has to watch out for Nazi nonsense.
Swedish society is simply not in danger. The ruling classes and the well off
are not effected by immigration, since immigrants typically concentrated
in suburbs far from the city and centre. Moreover, immigrants are ususally
unemployed. Non muslim minorities have integrated o.k and Iranians are
typical educated and are not muslim fundamentalist in any way.
The ruling classes have their grip on power. The welfare state
however cannot sustain more newcomers.
Swedish society is alive and well and making its way in the post
WWII world. Sweden is going o.k and the political feminist movement
is making this the most woman friendly country in the world.
Sverige har en bra framtiden
(Sweden has a great future)
TIME to stop the so caled refugee immigration. When people in countries such as US who love the coulture and lifestyle of scandinivia , the barbaric muslims who have no interest in justice and liberal thinking are allowed to let in to breed, rape and do honor killings.
NO COUNTRY SHOULD DIG THEIR OWN GRAVE> ITS UNJUST TO THE PEOPLE WHO WORKED SO HARD TO KEEP SCANDINIVIA AS IT IS NOW> IT IS UNJUST TO THE FUTURE GENERATIONS TOO>
i dont understand
why no one shoots these people here.
they ruin our countries-
and this whole thing is invasion of coloured people.
they with their barbaric gang culture come- none of them seem to have sympathy towards us- and when they are majority- they attack.
You can see it already in those areas they are majority.
finally all nmordic countries are ruined by these bullshitters.
when we tell this truth- police is sent to accuse us because of racism.
what kind of racists these people are?: in their home countries multiculturalism or christianity is punished by death!!!!!!
wake up- nordic morons.
our governments are the enemy!