Knife attacks kill 2 people at central Sweden Ikea store

[7by7]

And here we have a translation from a Danish newspaper article commenting on how the taboo subject of mass immigration may a last be getting talked about in Sweden.

http://gatesofvienna.net/2015/08/ikea-killings-open-swedens-taboo-debate-on-immigration/

And before anyone starts with the normal "aahmmaaahghhaaaddd gates of Vienna is right-wing blah blah blah" i can tell you that there is nothing wrong with the translation from the danish news paper "Berlingske Tidende".

Thank you for that clarification. You have to feel sorry for the immigrant featured in the report, he actually wants to integrate and befriend native Swedes, but there are none in the immigrant only ghettoes, along with no work and chronic housing problems. That he should be moved to comment that it seems Sweden has accepted a flood of immigrants without having a plan of what to do with them when they arrive. He goes on as follows;-

In his pursuit of Swedish friends, Gabi Alwashy found the organization Kompis Sweden, a private initiative that tries to create contact between refugees and Swedes. Here he found a friend named Simon, who he hopes can help him become a part of Swedish society.

The project leader of Kompis Sweden, Sofia Thorsmark, also sees the problems with integration as massive.

“There are many closed doors in Sweden. We live in a segregated society where Swedes and the newcomers have little to do with each other. We are trying to change this because otherwise integration will fail. Right now we live in the same country, but in two different worlds.”

You may be surprised to hear that we do have a point of agreement.

It does not matter how much an immigrant, individual or community, wishes to integrate if the indigenous population wont allow them to!

The phenomenon of 'white flight' is not uncommon in many countries and is one, but not the only, cause of immigrant ghettoes. As immigrants start to move in, the indigenous people start to move out.

It can also, as seen from the Spectator quotes in my previous, be very difficult for newly arrived immigrants to find work.

It takes two to tango, and it takes two for integration to work.

[Asheron]

If the original article used the Danish word for 'taboo' in their headline then either all the reports dating back at least 5 years that I have found about the public debate in Sweden are false, or that newspaper's headline is also very misleading.

Has this article got it wrong?

It’s not as if Sweden no longer has any problems. There is a highly regulated labour market which favours those with jobs at the expense of those seeking them, mainly the young and immigrants.....

The only real winners were the populist Sweden Democrats, who demand more benefits and fewer immigrants.........

Sweden has a big problem with unemployment among immigrants: it’s so difficult to fire people that employers tend to avoid hiring. This tends to disadvantage the young and the recently arrived. The established parties don’t want to know about this problem because the trade unions control the jobs market. The Sweden Democrats’ slogan — ‘we are the only opposition party’ — would have rung true to many voters. To their supporters, distrust of other politicians is just as pressing an issue as immigration......

Can you read swedish and actually understand all the "5 years back" articles and what they write in them? Because if you can't then how do you know what the journalists who write the articles is saying in them? Do you know that a very large majority of all swedish journalists vote either Vänsterpartiet, Miljöpartiet or Socialdemokraterna (Leftist party (former communist party), Greens, Social democrats). This very weird anomaly has been shown in several studies. And we all know that leftists people firmly believe there should be no borders nor nations... right?

[7by7]

I appreciate that English is not your first language, but you seem very competent in it's use. So surely you must understand what 'reports in the UK media' means?

Are you saying that they, right wing, left wing and centre, are all wrong?

I, personally, do believe that people should be allowed to travel to and live anywhere they wish, provided they have the means to support and accommodate themselves; in an ideal world.

But I am also a realist who knows we do not live in an ideal world.

I certainly believe that those claiming they are fleeing persecution or worse should be given shelter and the chance to prove they are genuine and then, if they do so, the opportunity to make a new life for themselves and their family.

I also firmly believe that a whole race, nationality or religion should not be judged on the few who are criminals.

I assume you live in Sweden; or are you one of the 'anti immigration immigrants' living in Thailand?

Edited August 17, 2015 by 7by7

[Asheron]

And before anyone starts with the normal "aahmmaaahghhaaaddd gates of Vienna is right-wing blah blah blah" i can tell you that there is nothing wrong with the translation from the danish news paper "Berlingske Tidende".

Thank you for that clarification. You have to feel sorry for the immigrant featured in the report, he actually wants to integrate and befriend native Swedes, but there are none in the immigrant only ghettoes, along with no work and chronic housing problems. That he should be moved to comment that it seems Sweden has accepted a flood of immigrants without having a plan of what to do with them when they arrive. He goes on as follows;-

In his pursuit of Swedish friends, Gabi Alwashy found the organization Kompis Sweden, a private initiative that tries to create contact between refugees and Swedes. Here he found a friend named Simon, who he hopes can help him become a part of Swedish society.

The project leader of Kompis Sweden, Sofia Thorsmark, also sees the problems with integration as massive.

“There are many closed doors in Sweden. We live in a segregated society where Swedes and the newcomers have little to do with each other. We are trying to change this because otherwise integration will fail. Right now we live in the same country, but in two different worlds.”

You may be surprised to hear that we do have a point of agreement.

It does not matter how much an immigrant, individual or community, wishes to integrate if the indigenous population wont allow them to!

The phenomenon of 'white flight' is not uncommon in many countries and is one, but not the only, cause of immigrant ghettoes. As immigrants start to move in, the indigenous people start to move out.

It can also, as seen from the Spectator quotes in my previous, be very difficult for newly arrived immigrants to find work.

It takes two to tango, and it takes two for integration to work.

Unemployment is something like 8-9% right now in Sweden. The real number is more like 15-20% if you count students in universities (yes, they should be counted as unemployed as they do not have a pay check). There is something like 200-300k shortage of apartments in Sweden and they predict that "we" need a "new Stockholm" (apartment wise) within like 15 years... this is never going to happen.

And all the while about 80-100K immigrants come to Sweden each year. Most of the immigrants coming to Sweden barely have junior high school education, there are no jobs for people like that in Sweden. On average it takes for an immigrant about 7 years after coming to Sweden to get a job. For some groups it's more than a decade (somalis for instance). These numbers DO NOT apply to immigrants that move to Sweden from EU/US.

The national debt is sky rocketing. Literally. Swedish national bank has gone minus/deficit (not sure the correct word for that in english) interest.

You really don't have to be an economist to understand that this isn't sustainable.

[Asheron]

I appreciate that English is not your first language, but you seem very competent in it's use. So surely you must understand what 'reports in the UK media' means?

Are you saying that they, right wing, left wing and centre, are all wrong?

I, personally, do believe that people should be allowed to travel to and live anywhere they wish; in an ideal world.

But I am also a realist who knows we do not live in an ideal world.

I assume you live in Sweden; or are you one of the 'anti immigration immigrants' living in Thailand?

I'm not generally against immigration if you can prove that a job is waiting for you, you contribute to your new society and atleast try to integrate into the new society. Just like the past 2,5 years i have stayed in Thailand i haven't cost a single satang for the thai society, i have paid everything from my own pocket. But i am going back to Sweden very soon.

You can't compare "immigrants" in Thailand (we are mearly semi-tolerated guests) compared to people coming to Sweden. It's entirely different thing. For instance it's basicly impossible to get a thai citizenship all the while swedish citizenships are basicly handed out in Kelloggs frosties.

[7by7]

I edited my post while you were typing the above; but the gist is the same.

I see you are using the same old tired "I am not an immigrant in Thailand because I don't have permanent residence' excuse.

If you live there; you are an immigrant; even if you have no visa and rely on visa runs.

From the Swedish Migration Agency, it seems that obtaining Swedish citizenship is not as straightforward as you think; easier than obtaining Thai citizenship for sure, but about the same as most other EEA countries.

[7by7]

A lecture on economics cannot be be taken seriously when it begins with

Unemployment is something like 8-9% right now in Sweden. The real number is more like 15-20% if you count students in universities (yes, they should be counted as unemployed as they do not have a pay check).

Lot's of people do not have a pay cheque!

Babies, school children, pensioners; why not include them in your figures as well!?

[Asheron]

I edited my post while you were typing the above; but the gist is the same.

I see you are using the same old tired "I am not an immigrant in Thailand because I don't have permanent residence' excuse.

If you live there; you are an immigrant; even if you have no visa and rely on visa runs.

From the Swedish Migration Agency, it seems that obtaining Swedish citizenship is not as straightforward as you think; easier than obtaining Thai citizenship for sure, but about the same as most other EEA countries.

It is very straightforward to get swedish citizenship, only 3 years of stay in Sweden and been that time together with a swedish national, 5 years if your partner isn't swedish citizen. You don't even have to know a word of swedish to get the citizenship and no bullshit 5-10 years of wait while they shuffle the papers around like in Thailand. Furthermore there are no "you must have had this and that" taxed income.

And no i'm not an immigrant if i have to leave Thailand every 30, 60 or 90 days... i'm a guest or longer time tourist with such rules[1] (first sentence) and [2]. If you HAVE TO leave every 30, 60, 90 days then you aren't a permanent resident.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration

[2] https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/immigrant#Noun

[Scott]

Let's try not to get personal.

Years ago, I worked in refugee services and Sweden was a role model. At that time, Sweden was very selective about the number of refugees that it would take, however, they took individuals for whom resettlement was a challenge. They were willing to take persons with mental and physical problems. They also provided excellent services for the select few.

Some years later, I noted a lot of people headed to Sweden and it was of concern to me, since this could jeopardize the truly needy. Also, many of those people were not refugees.

As has been mentioned, it is important that the dominant culture accept the newly arrived. Illegal immigration basically destroys that delicate fabric which exists between the newly arrived and the society at large.

The welcome mat may have been worn out.

[Asheron]

Let's try not to get personal.

Years ago, I worked in refugee services and Sweden was a role model. At that time, Sweden was very selective about the number of refugees that it would take, however, they took individuals for whom resettlement was a challenge. They were willing to take persons with mental and physical problems. They also provided excellent services for the select few.

Some years later, I noted a lot of people headed to Sweden and it was of concern to me, since this could jeopardize the truly needy. Also, many of those people were not refugees.

As has been mentioned, it is important that the dominant culture accept the newly arrived. Illegal immigration basically destroys that delicate fabric which exists between the newly arrived and the society at large.

The welcome mat may have been worn out.

It's entirely true that Sweden has a long time been a safe haven for people seeking refuge and rightfully so... but not anymore.

Almost all of the so called refugees to Sweden aren't real refugees. They are fortune seekers. Because surely if you are REALLY running for your life then you would be happy to be in a nation that hasn't seen war for 200 years and in that nation you get shelter and food three times a day right? But that is not the case anymore. Just yesterday some guy was whining to the swedish news that he had fleed Syria but had studied design in Libanon and now he wanted an apartment in Sweden... that kind of attitude pisses off even the calmest swede.

Not long ago Migrationsverket moved a bunch of "refugees" to another city. Do you know what the so called "refugees" did? They refused to exit the buss and demand "this and that". Yeah.. sounds like real refugees. Also want to point out that all of them were men around 20-30, not a single child nor woman.

Two days ago i saw a short clip from a british news channel who were filming "refugees" at the greek island of Kos. In it a syrian woman was demanding to get her papers so she could go move on to Europe (guess geography isn't her strong side).

[thaibeachlovers]

I appreciate that English is not your first language, but you seem very competent in it's use. So surely you must understand what 'reports in the UK media' means?

Are you saying that they, right wing, left wing and centre, are all wrong?

I, personally, do believe that people should be allowed to travel to and live anywhere they wish; in an ideal world.

But I am also a realist who knows we do not live in an ideal world.

I assume you live in Sweden; or are you one of the 'anti immigration immigrants' living in Thailand?

I'm not generally against immigration if you can prove that a job is waiting for you, you contribute to your new society and atleast try to integrate into the new society. Just like the past 2,5 years i have stayed in Thailand i haven't cost a single satang for the thai society, i have paid everything from my own pocket. But i am going back to Sweden very soon.

You can't compare "immigrants" in Thailand (we are mearly semi-tolerated guests) compared to people coming to Sweden. It's entirely different thing. For instance it's basicly impossible to get a thai citizenship all the while swedish citizenships are basicly handed out in Kelloggs frosties.

I disagree that one HAS to try and integrate into your new society. I have no desire to eat sitting on the floor and watch stupid Thai soaps. However, IMO, one should behave politely and DEFINITELY not try and change that society to your alien culture. One doesn't even have to agree with the new society's norms, but one should respect them and behave accordingly.

[Asheron]

I appreciate that English is not your first language, but you seem very competent in it's use. So surely you must understand what 'reports in the UK media' means?

Are you saying that they, right wing, left wing and centre, are all wrong?

I, personally, do believe that people should be allowed to travel to and live anywhere they wish; in an ideal world.

But I am also a realist who knows we do not live in an ideal world.

I assume you live in Sweden; or are you one of the 'anti immigration immigrants' living in Thailand?

I'm not generally against immigration if you can prove that a job is waiting for you, you contribute to your new society and atleast try to integrate into the new society. Just like the past 2,5 years i have stayed in Thailand i haven't cost a single satang for the thai society, i have paid everything from my own pocket. But i am going back to Sweden very soon.

You can't compare "immigrants" in Thailand (we are mearly semi-tolerated guests) compared to people coming to Sweden. It's entirely different thing. For instance it's basicly impossible to get a thai citizenship all the while swedish citizenships are basicly handed out in Kelloggs frosties.

I disagree that one HAS to try and integrate into your new society. I have no desire to eat sitting on the floor and watch stupid Thai soaps. However, IMO, one should behave politely and DEFINITELY not try and change that society to your alien culture. One doesn't even have to agree with the new society's norms, but one should respect them and behave accordingly.

I would call "sitting on the floor and watching stupid Thai soaps" brainwashed assimilation

[Steely Dan]

Let's try not to get personal.

Years ago, I worked in refugee services and Sweden was a role model. At that time, Sweden was very selective about the number of refugees that it would take, however, they took individuals for whom resettlement was a challenge. They were willing to take persons with mental and physical problems. They also provided excellent services for the select few.

Some years later, I noted a lot of people headed to Sweden and it was of concern to me, since this could jeopardize the truly needy. Also, many of those people were not refugees.

As has been mentioned, it is important that the dominant culture accept the newly arrived. Illegal immigration basically destroys that delicate fabric which exists between the newly arrived and the society at large.

The welcome mat may have been worn out.

It would be comical were it not so tragic, how the current government puts immigration as number one priority at the expense of all others. This results in Sweden, with 2% of the EU population receiving 20% of the immigrants coming into the EU.

The only political party wanting decreased immigration has essentially been frozen out of the system in a manner similar to how Mussolini abused the system to retain power in Italy. The Swedish electorate, of whom over 50% would like less immigration were denied a snap election called by the government in order to stop the surging support for the only anti-immigration party. In other words the governing coalition has shown contempt for the wishes of their own citizens.

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/5108/sweden-failed-state

Sweden's "December Agreement" may be fairly described as a soft coup d'état; it has paved the way for Sweden's demise. Six of the eight political parties in parliament have simply decided to exclude from the parliamentary process the only party to oppose mass immigration and defend Swedish culture. The new system may also be described as a consensual dictatorship.

The price tag for immigration is possibly 110 billion Swedish kroner (close to $14 billion) per year. That is a lot of money in a country with 10 million inhabitants. The politicians, however, keep insisting that immigration from third-word countries is an economic boon. Nor is it discussed in the media. Anyone even daring to mention that there may be a problem is labeled a "racist," a "fascist," or a "xenophobe."

One may safely predict that Sweden's goose will be cooked well before the December Agreement runs out in 2022. Its days as a free and democratic welfare state will be over. A population of perhaps eight million Swedes cannot accommodate and pay for perhaps four million such immigrants in eight years. It is as if the U.S. were to accept 150 million.

P.s I see the same old canard of immigrants to Thailand keeps coming up. This is a false comparison based on every metric. From economics, crime, social cohesion, housing ,you name it. It all boils down to yet another cynical ploy to try and shut down discussion.

[simple1]

Let's try not to get personal.

Years ago, I worked in refugee services and Sweden was a role model. At that time, Sweden was very selective about the number of refugees that it would take, however, they took individuals for whom resettlement was a challenge. They were willing to take persons with mental and physical problems. They also provided excellent services for the select few.

Some years later, I noted a lot of people headed to Sweden and it was of concern to me, since this could jeopardize the truly needy. Also, many of those people were not refugees.

As has been mentioned, it is important that the dominant culture accept the newly arrived. Illegal immigration basically destroys that delicate fabric which exists between the newly arrived and the society at large.

The welcome mat may have been worn out.

It would be comical were it not so tragic, how the current government puts immigration as number one priority at the expense of all others. This results in Sweden, with 2% of the EU population receiving 20% of the immigrants coming into the EU.

The only political party wanting decreased immigration has essentially been frozen out of the system in a manner similar to how Mussolini abused the system to retain power in Italy. The Swedish electorate, of whom over 50% would like less immigration were denied a snap election called by the government in order to stop the surging support for the only anti-immigration party. In other words the governing coalition has shown contempt for the wishes of their own citizens.

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/5108/sweden-failed-state

Sweden's "December Agreement" may be fairly described as a soft coup d'état; it has paved the way for Sweden's demise. Six of the eight political parties in parliament have simply decided to exclude from the parliamentary process the only party to oppose mass immigration and defend Swedish culture. The new system may also be described as a consensual dictatorship.

The price tag for immigration is possibly 110 billion Swedish kroner (close to $14 billion) per year. That is a lot of money in a country with 10 million inhabitants. The politicians, however, keep insisting that immigration from third-word countries is an economic boon. Nor is it discussed in the media. Anyone even daring to mention that there may be a problem is labeled a "racist," a "fascist," or a "xenophobe."

One may safely predict that Sweden's goose will be cooked well before the December Agreement runs out in 2022. Its days as a free and democratic welfare state will be over. A population of perhaps eight million Swedes cannot accommodate and pay for perhaps four million such immigrants in eight years. It is as if the U.S. were to accept 150 million.

P.s I see the same old canard of immigrants to Thailand keeps coming up. This is a false comparison based on every metric. From economics, crime, social cohesion, housing ,you name it. It all boils down to yet another cynical ploy to try and shut down discussion.

It would greatly assist your credibility if you provided content that is not sourced from far right web sites with ridiculous claims e.g. A population of perhaps eight million Swedes cannot accommodate and pay for perhaps four million such immigrants in eight years. OECD claims Sweden's foreign born population is 14%, yet your source is speculating migrants will represent 50% in eight years - utter nonsense!

http://www.oecd.org/migration/integrationindicators/keyindicatorsbycountry/name,218347,en.htm

[Asheron]

Let's try not to get personal.

Years ago, I worked in refugee services and Sweden was a role model. At that time, Sweden was very selective about the number of refugees that it would take, however, they took individuals for whom resettlement was a challenge. They were willing to take persons with mental and physical problems. They also provided excellent services for the select few.

Some years later, I noted a lot of people headed to Sweden and it was of concern to me, since this could jeopardize the truly needy. Also, many of those people were not refugees.

As has been mentioned, it is important that the dominant culture accept the newly arrived. Illegal immigration basically destroys that delicate fabric which exists between the newly arrived and the society at large.

The welcome mat may have been worn out.

It would be comical were it not so tragic, how the current government puts immigration as number one priority at the expense of all others. This results in Sweden, with 2% of the EU population receiving 20% of the immigrants coming into the EU.

The only political party wanting decreased immigration has essentially been frozen out of the system in a manner similar to how Mussolini abused the system to retain power in Italy. The Swedish electorate, of whom over 50% would like less immigration were denied a snap election called by the government in order to stop the surging support for the only anti-immigration party. In other words the governing coalition has shown contempt for the wishes of their own citizens.

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/5108/sweden-failed-state

Sweden's "December Agreement" may be fairly described as a soft coup d'état; it has paved the way for Sweden's demise. Six of the eight political parties in parliament have simply decided to exclude from the parliamentary process the only party to oppose mass immigration and defend Swedish culture. The new system may also be described as a consensual dictatorship.

The price tag for immigration is possibly 110 billion Swedish kroner (close to $14 billion) per year. That is a lot of money in a country with 10 million inhabitants. The politicians, however, keep insisting that immigration from third-word countries is an economic boon. Nor is it discussed in the media. Anyone even daring to mention that there may be a problem is labeled a "racist," a "fascist," or a "xenophobe."

One may safely predict that Sweden's goose will be cooked well before the December Agreement runs out in 2022. Its days as a free and democratic welfare state will be over. A population of perhaps eight million Swedes cannot accommodate and pay for perhaps four million such immigrants in eight years. It is as if the U.S. were to accept 150 million.

P.s I see the same old canard of immigrants to Thailand keeps coming up. This is a false comparison based on every metric. From economics, crime, social cohesion, housing ,you name it. It all boils down to yet another cynical ploy to try and shut down discussion.

It would greatly assist your credibility if you provided content that is not sourced from far right web sites with ridiculous claims e.g. A population of perhaps eight million Swedes cannot accommodate and pay for perhaps four million such immigrants in eight years. OECD claims Sweden's foreign born population is 14%, yet your source is speculating migrants will represent 50% in eight years - utter nonsense!

http://www.oecd.org/migration/integrationindicators/keyindicatorsbycountry/name,218347,en.htm

And it would help your case if you actually used official data from swedish BRÅ (even though they are heavily politicised) and not data from OECD[1]. Quick calculation put them at 1.8 million (2014) in a country with 2015 population of ~9,7 million people (about 18,5%). And in those 1,8 million they do not count someone born in Sweden if either the mother or father was born in Sweden but the other parent wasn't. Let's not also forget that almost all of the population increase in Sweden is because of immigration and about 25% of all new born children have foreign background.

Where did you get 50%... isn't 4 / 12 = 0,33*? As in 8 million swedes and 4 million immigrants (2 million increase as there are already almost 2 million immigrants in Sweden). Sure, 2 million increase in just 8 eight years is bit "over the top" but ~1 million isn't, far from it if you consider the amount of immigrants coming to Sweden each year together with the fact that 20-30% of all new born children have foreign background. About 110 000 babies are born each year in Sweden so that is ~22 000-33 000 babies with foreign background.

*But maybe i'm wrong, never been great at arithmetic

[1] http://www.statistikdatabasen.scb.se/pxweb/sv/ssd/START__BE__BE0101__BE0101Q/UtlSvBakgTotNK/table/tableViewLayout1/?rxid=0b820050-a799-4a4f-831c-334b11085d9c

[Steely Dan]

^^

You correctly identified the principle distortion in the misuse of the OECD figures, namely non-inclusion of children born to mixed Swedish-immigrant families. Not to mention Simple1 tripping over his own hyperbole claiming the article predicted a 50% not 33% figure for those of a foreign background by 2022.

Here is an article from a Swedish economist of Kurdish origin, so progressive white skin prejudice can't be so easily used to castigate him as some 'far right' neo-nazi sympathizer.

http://swedenreport.org/2015/04/22/tino-sanandaji-things-are-not-going-well-for-sweden/

The Director General of the Employment Office recently warned that welfare funding requires a net immigration of about 100,000 per year going forward. Around the same time the new health budget was released. It is interesting to contrast the Employment Office’s image with how [swedish Finance Minister] Magdalena Andersson’s own budget describes the Swedish economy.

Firstly, we note that instead of catching up with the native-born, the immigrants have lost further ground in terms of income:

“The position of the foreign-born in the income distribution has worsened between 1995 and 2013 (see Table 2.3). One reason for this is that the immigration structure has changed over time. From being almost totally dominated by labor migration, the refugee and family immigration has come to represent an increasing share of immigration since the 1990s.”

So by the governments own admission it needs 100,000 migrants a year to find welfare (?!) yet the income gap between native Swedes and immigrants is increasing. The whole detailed report makes the OECD figures to be more indicative of Narnia than Sweden.

[7by7]

(Nested quotes removed for clarity)

I disagree that one HAS to try and integrate into your new society. I have no desire to eat sitting on the floor and watch stupid Thai soaps. However, IMO, one should behave politely and DEFINITELY not try and change that society to your alien culture. One doesn't even have to agree with the new society's norms, but one should respect them and behave accordingly.

In the UK, whatever their race, religion, country of origin, immigrants do respect the UK culture and way of life and do not attempt, or even want, to change that society.

I can see no reason why the situation should be any different in Sweden.

Unfortunately there is a comparative handful of fanatics who do not respect our cultural and societal norms and it is they who get most, if not all, of the news coverage. Immigrants integrate and get on with their neighbours doesn't sell newspapers; immigrants demand special rights does! But they are rightly condemned by both the indigenous population and the immigrant one.

Of course, those with an anti immigration agenda, particularly an Islamaphobic one, and the prejudiced or gullible who swallow their outpourings, concentrate on this very small minority and ignore the vast majority.

[simple1]

It would be comical were it not so tragic, how the current government puts immigration as number one priority at the expense of all others. This results in Sweden, with 2% of the EU population receiving 20% of the immigrants coming into the EU.

The only political party wanting decreased immigration has essentially been frozen out of the system in a manner similar to how Mussolini abused the system to retain power in Italy. The Swedish electorate, of whom over 50% would like less immigration were denied a snap election called by the government in order to stop the surging support for the only anti-immigration party. In other words the governing coalition has shown contempt for the wishes of their own citizens.

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/5108/sweden-failed-state

Sweden's "December Agreement" may be fairly described as a soft coup d'état; it has paved the way for Sweden's demise. Six of the eight political parties in parliament have simply decided to exclude from the parliamentary process the only party to oppose mass immigration and defend Swedish culture. The new system may also be described as a consensual dictatorship.

The price tag for immigration is possibly 110 billion Swedish kroner (close to $14 billion) per year. That is a lot of money in a country with 10 million inhabitants. The politicians, however, keep insisting that immigration from third-word countries is an economic boon. Nor is it discussed in the media. Anyone even daring to mention that there may be a problem is labeled a "racist," a "fascist," or a "xenophobe."

One may safely predict that Sweden's goose will be cooked well before the December Agreement runs out in 2022. Its days as a free and democratic welfare state will be over. A population of perhaps eight million Swedes cannot accommodate and pay for perhaps four million such immigrants in eight years. It is as if the U.S. were to accept 150 million.

P.s I see the same old canard of immigrants to Thailand keeps coming up. This is a false comparison based on every metric. From economics, crime, social cohesion, housing ,you name it. It all boils down to yet another cynical ploy to try and shut down discussion.

It would greatly assist your credibility if you provided content that is not sourced from far right web sites with ridiculous claims e.g. A population of perhaps eight million Swedes cannot accommodate and pay for perhaps four million such immigrants in eight years. OECD claims Sweden's foreign born population is 14%, yet your source is speculating migrants will represent 50% in eight years - utter nonsense!

http://www.oecd.org/migration/integrationindicators/keyindicatorsbycountry/name,218347,en.htm

And it would help your case if you actually used official data from swedish BRÅ (even though they are heavily politicised) and not data from OECD[1]. Quick calculation put them at 1.8 million (2014) in a country with 2015 population of ~9,7 million people (about 18,5%). And in those 1,8 million they do not count someone born in Sweden if either the mother or father was born in Sweden but the other parent wasn't. Let's not also forget that almost all of the population increase in Sweden is because of immigration and about 25% of all new born children have foreign background.

Where did you get 50%... isn't 4 / 12 = 0,33*? As in 8 million swedes and 4 million immigrants (2 million increase as there are already almost 2 million immigrants in Sweden). Sure, 2 million increase in just 8 eight years is bit "over the top" but ~1 million isn't, far from it if you consider the amount of immigrants coming to Sweden each year together with the fact that 20-30% of all new born children have foreign background. About 110 000 babies are born each year in Sweden so that is ~22 000-33 000 babies with foreign background.

*But maybe i'm wrong, never been great at arithmetic

[1] http://www.statistikdatabasen.scb.se/pxweb/sv/ssd/START__BE__BE0101__BE0101Q/UtlSvBakgTotNK/table/tableViewLayout1/?rxid=0b820050-a799-4a4f-831c-334b11085d9c

OECD has a great deal of credibility. SD, along with others, has admitted sympathy, admiration, even promoted the far right; personally this fact alone puts such people beyond the pale.

Granted my maths is awful, but doesn't distract from the core message.

[7by7]

<snip>they do not count (as a foreign immigrant) someone born in Sweden if either the mother or father was born in Sweden but the other parent wasn't.......

^^

You correctly identified the principle distortion in the misuse of the OECD figures, namely non-inclusion of children born to mixed Swedish-immigrant families.......

So you both think that children with a Swedish parent are not Swedish?

Asheron; do you have a Thai spouse or partner? Do you include any children you have, or may have in the future, in this? Would you deny them Swedish citizenship?

Steely Dan; same questions, but substitute British for Swedish.

[Asheron]

It would greatly assist your credibility if you provided content that is not sourced from far right web sites with ridiculous claims e.g. A population of perhaps eight million Swedes cannot accommodate and pay for perhaps four million such immigrants in eight years. OECD claims Sweden's foreign born population is 14%, yet your source is speculating migrants will represent 50% in eight years - utter nonsense!

http://www.oecd.org/migration/integrationindicators/keyindicatorsbycountry/name,218347,en.htm

And it would help your case if you actually used official data from swedish BRÅ (even though they are heavily politicised) and not data from OECD[1]. Quick calculation put them at 1.8 million (2014) in a country with 2015 population of ~9,7 million people (about 18,5%). And in those 1,8 million they do not count someone born in Sweden if either the mother or father was born in Sweden but the other parent wasn't. Let's not also forget that almost all of the population increase in Sweden is because of immigration and about 25% of all new born children have foreign background.

Where did you get 50%... isn't 4 / 12 = 0,33*? As in 8 million swedes and 4 million immigrants (2 million increase as there are already almost 2 million immigrants in Sweden). Sure, 2 million increase in just 8 eight years is bit "over the top" but ~1 million isn't, far from it if you consider the amount of immigrants coming to Sweden each year together with the fact that 20-30% of all new born children have foreign background. About 110 000 babies are born each year in Sweden so that is ~22 000-33 000 babies with foreign background.

*But maybe i'm wrong, never been great at arithmetic

[1] http://www.statistikdatabasen.scb.se/pxweb/sv/ssd/START__BE__BE0101__BE0101Q/UtlSvBakgTotNK/table/tableViewLayout1/?rxid=0b820050-a799-4a4f-831c-334b11085d9c

OECD has a great deal of credibility. SD, along with others, has admitted sympathy, admiration, even promoted the far right; personally this fact alone puts such people beyond the pale.

Granted my maths is awful, but doesn't distract from the core message.

You don't know swedish so you can't possibly have read the party program from Sweden democrats (SD). And as you haven't read it you have no idea what they are promoting, admiring or even sympathising with. As you can't read swedish you couldn't possibly know that SD has been kicking out "lots" of people that have had more or less weird statements. They even kicked out the SD youth parties (SDU) "chair man" (Gustav Kasselstrand). So please do give me some links to recent higher ups in SD that has "admitted sympathy, admiration, even promoted the far right" and are still left in the party. Preferable from the "party board"... think there's like 20? people in it.

And no, mass media articles aren't a source if a party is left, centre or right... however what is a source, the only source, is a parties program.

Just a news flash for you as you know nothing of the politics SD is running: they are quite on the left side when it comes to economical issues (you know, what most say defines "what" a party/person "is" politically).

[Asheron]

<snip>they do not count (as a foreign immigrant) someone born in Sweden if either the mother or father was born in Sweden but the other parent wasn't.......

^^

You correctly identified the principle distortion in the misuse of the OECD figures, namely non-inclusion of children born to mixed Swedish-immigrant families.......

So you both think that children with a Swedish parent are not Swedish?

Asheron; do you have a Thai spouse or partner? Do you include any children you have, or may have in the future, in this? Would you deny them Swedish citizenship?

Steely Dan; same questions, but substitute British for Swedish.

Is Obama black or white? I'm sure you'll answer black but hey... up to you... even though he is just as white as he is black.

Swedish citizenship goes by the parents, if one is then the child will also be swedish citizen. But citizenship has nothing to do with if someone is swedish by ethnicity. If i miraculous got thai citizenship, learned academic thai, adopted their values and culture i still wouldn't be thai and not a single sane thai person would see me as thai either.

The statistics are bullshit because of the following reason: I'm not ethnic swede and therefore my children are not swedish even though they are counted in statistics (like the one i linked) as swedish because i was born in Sweden but their mother (thai) wasn't. In other words, none in my family has any ethnic swedish heritage at all in them but they are still counted as swedish.

[7by7]

Earlier on you stated you were born and raised in Sweden; giving the impression that you were Swedish.

Now you seem to be saying that you consider neither yourself nor your children to be Swedish because you are not an ethnic Swede (whatever that is).

I assume that you are therefore sticking to your principles and do not have a Swedish passport and neither do your children and that when (if) you stop living in Thailand you will be returning to whatever country you consider your ethnicity belongs to.

Addendum:

I guess you don't consider the Swedish football captain to be Swedish, either.

From his Wikipedia entry: Zlatan Ibrahimović was born in Sweden to a Muslim Bosniak father, Šefik Ibrahimović,^[14] who emigrated to Sweden in 1977, and a Croatian Catholic mother, Jurka Gravić,^[15] who had also emigrated to Sweden, where they first met. His father was born in Bijeljina and his mother was born in the village of Prkos near Škabrnja in Croatia's Zadar County.^[16]

Edited August 18, 2015 by 7by7

[Asheron]

Earlier on you stated you were born and raised in Sweden; giving the impression that you were Swedish.

Now you seem to be saying that you consider neither yourself nor your children to be Swedish because you are not an ethnic Swede (whatever that is).

I assume that you are therefore sticking to your principles and do not have a Swedish passport and neither do your children and that when (if) you stop living in Thailand you will be returning to whatever country you consider your ethnicity belongs to.

It's not really rocket science: if i'm not ethnic swede then i can't be swedish regardless what my passport says. And yes i do hold a swedish passport and also hold a passport from another european country that's just as good for travelling and it shares joint first place with Sweden and UK[1]. Surely you know, or atleast can guess, who is the ethnic swede if i show you a picture of a blond haired green eyed girl and a black haired brown eyed girl from say Nigeria... right?

I don't get your last sentence about "my principles". According to swedish law i have "unrestricted right as swedish citizen to stay in and travel to Sweden no matter what" and as such i intend to use that right but that still doesn't magically turn me into a swede. None of my non-ethnic friends born in Sweden who have swedish passports view themselfs as swedish, not a single one. And if i count all the "i know him loosely" then that number grows quite high.

[1] http://www.ibtimes.com/best-passports-have-unrestricted-travel-around-world-1422038

*edit*

And no, Zlatan isn't swedish. He is half bosnian and half croatian.

Edited August 18, 2015 by Asheron

[Scott]

A troll post and reply have been removed. Continue with personal remarks directed at other members and you will get a suspension.

[simple1]

It would greatly assist your credibility if you provided content that is not sourced from far right web sites with ridiculous claims e.g. A population of perhaps eight million Swedes cannot accommodate and pay for perhaps four million such immigrants in eight years. OECD claims Sweden's foreign born population is 14%, yet your source is speculating migrants will represent 50% in eight years - utter nonsense!

http://www.oecd.org/migration/integrationindicators/keyindicatorsbycountry/name,218347,en.htm

And it would help your case if you actually used official data from swedish BRÅ (even though they are heavily politicised) and not data from OECD[1]. Quick calculation put them at 1.8 million (2014) in a country with 2015 population of ~9,7 million people (about 18,5%). And in those 1,8 million they do not count someone born in Sweden if either the mother or father was born in Sweden but the other parent wasn't. Let's not also forget that almost all of the population increase in Sweden is because of immigration and about 25% of all new born children have foreign background.

Where did you get 50%... isn't 4 / 12 = 0,33*? As in 8 million swedes and 4 million immigrants (2 million increase as there are already almost 2 million immigrants in Sweden). Sure, 2 million increase in just 8 eight years is bit "over the top" but ~1 million isn't, far from it if you consider the amount of immigrants coming to Sweden each year together with the fact that 20-30% of all new born children have foreign background. About 110 000 babies are born each year in Sweden so that is ~22 000-33 000 babies with foreign background.

*But maybe i'm wrong, never been great at arithmetic

[1] http://www.statistikdatabasen.scb.se/pxweb/sv/ssd/START__BE__BE0101__BE0101Q/UtlSvBakgTotNK/table/tableViewLayout1/?rxid=0b820050-a799-4a4f-831c-334b11085d9c

OECD has a great deal of credibility. SD, along with others, has admitted sympathy, admiration, even promoted the far right; personally this fact alone puts such people beyond the pale.

Granted my maths is awful, but doesn't distract from the core message.

You don't know swedish so you can't possibly have read the party program from Sweden democrats (SD). And as you haven't read it you have no idea what they are promoting, admiring or even sympathising with. As you can't read swedish you couldn't possibly know that SD has been kicking out "lots" of people that have had more or less weird statements. They even kicked out the SD youth parties (SDU) "chair man" (Gustav Kasselstrand). So please do give me some links to recent higher ups in SD that has "admitted sympathy, admiration, even promoted the far right" and are still left in the party. Preferable from the "party board"... think there's like 20? people in it.

And no, mass media articles aren't a source if a party is left, centre or right... however what is a source, the only source, is a parties program.

Just a news flash for you as you know nothing of the politics SD is running: they are quite on the left side when it comes to economical issues (you know, what most say defines "what" a party/person "is" politically).

Newsflash - I was not referring to the Swedish Democrats

[Steely Dan]

Earlier on you stated you were born and raised in Sweden; giving the impression that you were Swedish.

Now you seem to be saying that you consider neither yourself nor your children to be Swedish because you are not an ethnic Swede (whatever that is).

I assume that you are therefore sticking to your principles and do not have a Swedish passport and neither do your children and that when (if) you stop living in Thailand you will be returning to whatever country you consider your ethnicity belongs to.

Addendum:

I guess you don't consider the Swedish football captain to be Swedish, either.

From his Wikipedia entry: Zlatan Ibrahimović was born in Sweden to a Muslim Bosniak father, Šefik Ibrahimović,^[14] who emigrated to Sweden in 1977, and a Croatian Catholic mother, Jurka Gravić,^[15] who had also emigrated to Sweden, where they first met. His father was born in Bijeljina and his mother was born in the village of Prkos near Škabrnja in Croatia's Zadar County.^[16]

This nit picking achieves nothing and only distracts from what is a fairly clear cut issue.

Sweden was once a very affluent ethnically homogeneous nation. This worked because all Swedes subscribed to the social contract of high taxes but excellent benefits. One and a half years paid maternity leave in the three years of a child's life, the male parent also had a generous paternity leave allowance and maybe still does.

So from the 90's Swedens population rose from 8.2 million to about 9.7 today. Social welfare, housing, health care, policing, the military all declined or were cut to pay for s massive influx of immigrants, A country this size can't hope to employ the number of immigrants arriving, most unskilled and not speaking the language. So a situation developed where immigrants concentrated in ghettoes. It takes (by the governments own admission) 7 years for the average immigrant to find employment, crime soared by 300%, the number of rapes by nearer 1400%. As an aside the government changed the way these figures were recorded and stopped collation by religion or ethnicity in an obvious move to disguise the problems caused. No go zones formed with Perennial riots and car burnings. Not surprisingly while fight resulted in indigenous and 'new Swedes' living in separate worlds.

The government seems aware of the problems caused because they somehow plan to reduce the time taken for immigrants to get a job to two years. They also plan to somehow force the communities to mix by housing new immigrants throughout the Country, mixing oil and water on a national scale. The government seems to take the same pious sanctimonious view I have read in this thread, that it is equally incumbent on the ethnic Swedes to change to cater for the new ones. To a degree this is happening by force as many Swedish women now dye their hair black to reduce the risk of being raped.

Finally ethnicity should be a read herring. A slow digestible inflow of people from anywhere on earth would be manageable if there was enough time and resources to integrate them. Done properly second and certainly third generation iimmigrants should be culturally far closer to the indigenous norms. The leftist self hatred of their own identity is largely responsible for the mess. Swedes should be confident in asserting their own culture. Parallel cultures should only be tolerated so far as they don't demand special dispensation or try to impose themselves on their hosts by force.

[ABCer]

Quoting from the previous posts on this topic:

"... in Sweden it's not allowed for media to say if the perps were of foreign (muslim) origin so if no names are mentioned then you can assume..." <post #8 >

"Going berserk is purely a Scandinavian treat but only if you ate a certain mushroom dish.

I notice no names named. Not the perpetrators. Sveeden being what it is, the Swedish Law is protecting the criminals first, especially now that the victims are dead.

No names, no nationality, no motives, no crime, no vember..." <post #4 >

From the OP:

"Sweden's security police, responsible for investigating suspected terror cases, told national news agency TT they had no reason to be involved in the investigation based on the information they were given."

"Someone must have had a screw loose." <post # 12 >

A lot of Swedes nowadays have their screws loose. In medical terms this highly contagious disease is called Multiculturalism and it affects mostly low intellect.

In Sweden it is not allowed for media to say if perps are of foreign (muslim) origin. Apparently the same rules applies to what Police say to Sweden's Security. No wonder Russian spy subs are found often in Swedish waters - nobody cares to mention their Nationality!

To continue with the screw analogy - Sweden's newly acquired multiple internal problems fit together like a nut, bolt and a stop washer assembly.

The nut must be the Multiculturalism and Liberal Immigration policy.

The bolt must be the Muslim Immigrants.

The stop washer - Swedish Social Security Services and benefits.

I think something's gotta give. Or as some poster succinctly put it - "the welcome mat may have been worn out".

Edited August 19, 2015 by ABCer

[Lissos]

The leftist self hatred of their own identity is largely responsible for the mess. Swedes should be confident in asserting their own culture. Parallel cultures should only be tolerated so far as they don't demand special dispensation or try to impose themselves on their hosts by force.

Yep, that seems to be the trojan horse. The term Islamophobia was a creation of a left leaning think tank in England, and so many of the alterations made to our cultures are happening with the signatures of secular white men who are determined to fulfill everyone 'elses' needs above locals. Essentially we have a multitude of traitors in our midst who feel little love for their own lands and peoples and are going to the gates in the dead of night and opening the lock. I dislike much of what goes on in my own culture but that doesn't mean I want to throw the baby out with the bath water.

To quote maximus from Gladiator - "I've seen much of the rest of the world. It is brutal and cruel and dark, Rome is the light". While I certainly wouldn't claim our 'Rome' is flawless, it IS a light in many ways, in a world of brutal cruel darkness. While I also wouldn't claim other cultures are ALL brutality, cruelty and darkness, the problem is that it is very easy to not just invite the baby into the west, but the bathwater too.

[Sheryl]

A number of posts which had degenerated into petty bickering have been removed. Please stay on topic and keep it civil.

UPDATE: More posts have been removed. Stick to the topic.

Edited August 20, 2015 by Scott

[thaibeachlovers]

(Nested quotes removed for clarity)

I disagree that one HAS to try and integrate into your new society. I have no desire to eat sitting on the floor and watch stupid Thai soaps. However, IMO, one should behave politely and DEFINITELY not try and change that society to your alien culture. One doesn't even have to agree with the new society's norms, but one should respect them and behave accordingly.

In the UK, whatever their race, religion, country of origin, immigrants do respect the UK culture and way of life and do not attempt, or even want, to change that society.

I can see no reason why the situation should be any different in Sweden.

Unfortunately there is a comparative handful of fanatics who do not respect our cultural and societal norms and it is they who get most, if not all, of the news coverage. Immigrants integrate and get on with their neighbours doesn't sell newspapers; immigrants demand special rights does! But they are rightly condemned by both the indigenous population and the immigrant one.

Of course, those with an anti immigration agenda, particularly an Islamaphobic one, and the prejudiced or gullible who swallow their outpourings, concentrate on this very small minority and ignore the vast majority.

Living and working in London I rarely saw a native English person. When I went to the immigration office I saw NO white immigration officers, the hospital I worked at was staffed by a large majority of immigrants, serving mainly immigrant patients, at Heathrow, most of the customs officers were foreigners and did not understand British culture, which made it difficult to deal with the native British passengers.

That's fine if you want to destroy the British way of life, not if you don't.

There are two types of immigrants, those that want to fit in with the native culture, and those that don't. It's when the majority of immigrants are opposed to everything that the natives hold dear that you have a problem, and that is more likely with a poorly educated Muslim immigrant than a highly educated, skilled non Muslim immigrant. If westerners in Saudi had behaved as disrespectfully as some Muslims do in Britain, they would have been deported pronto.