Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

UN: Sweden Will be Third World by 2030


Dark_Grey
 Share

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Paranormal Panther said:

Many of us support legal immigration. We just oppose letting in scores of people who can't or won't assimilate. That's just common sense.

Yet I havent heard anyone on here screaming about banning jews or chinese from coming in.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a fundamental failing in the argument.

 

There is nothing magical about the boundaries of Sweden or any other country. There is nothing that sets aside that land as being predominantly for the use of those born within those borders. There is nothing that sets aside the people of Sweden or any other country as being fundamentally different from any other Homo sapiens. 

 

Eventually, people are going to have to accept this and live with it. A lot of the indigenous peoples from around the world knew this a century or more ago. Some of them, such as Chief Seattle, spoke and left written words to that effect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Border Collie said:

There is a fundamental failing in the argument.

 

There is nothing magical about the boundaries of Sweden or any other country. There is nothing that sets aside that land as being predominantly for the use of those born within those borders. There is nothing that sets aside the people of Sweden or any other country as being fundamentally different from any other Homo sapiens. 

 

Eventually, people are going to have to accept this and live with it. A lot of the indigenous peoples from around the world knew this a century or more ago. Some of them, such as Chief Seattle, spoke and left written words to that effect.

So you don't believe in the concepts of culture or "nation" ? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Border Collie said:

There is a fundamental failing in the argument.

 

There is nothing magical about the boundaries of Sweden or any other country. There is nothing that sets aside that land as being predominantly for the use of those born within those borders. There is nothing that sets aside the people of Sweden or any other country as being fundamentally different from any other Homo sapiens. 

 

Eventually, people are going to have to accept this and live with it. A lot of the indigenous peoples from around the world knew this a century or more ago. Some of them, such as Chief Seattle, spoke and left written words to that effect.

If they submit to islam, it's just a matter of time before they become islamic nations. The last thing they need to do is get use to it. It's cultural suicide. 

And I mean really this is just common sense. You don't go letting massive amounts of people from third world hell holes, where women are property similar to cattle. Who hate to the bone anything outside their cultural norms like gay people. And think anything good could possibly come from it. 

I have literally seen women viscously attacked just for not having their faces covered. Who were dressed modestly. 

These people better get their heads out of their asses before their countries turn into third world hell holes. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

Yet I havent heard anyone on here screaming about banning jews or chinese from coming in.  

Why would they? Both groups assimilate well. We don't have the same issues and problems with them. I'm assuming that I understand your point.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

Yet I havent heard anyone on here screaming about banning jews or chinese from coming in.  

There are already many who oppose all sorts of groups. Jewish people have to thank Barbara Spectre for having pleasure of being rejected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/8/2017 at 1:51 PM, godnodog said:

uh didn´t wrote you were, I added my opinion while agreeing with you

My bad.  Misread your post a bit I think.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/8/2017 at 6:01 PM, Arbenol said:

Just to add something. I prefer to discuss things rationally and dispassionately. I apologise if that comes across as casual indifference - it really isn't.

And here's a few links to illustrate the point I was making.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-39056786

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nigel-farage-sweden-donald-trump-rape-capital-of-europe-refugees-malmo-why-wrong-debunked-claim-a7591636.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_Sweden

From the wikipedia sourced by you:

Quote

Rape in Sweden has a legal definition described in Chapter 6 in the Swedish Penal Code.[1] Historically, rape has been defined as forced sexual intercourse initiated against a woman or man by one or several people, without consent.[2] In recent years, several revisions to the definition of rape have been made to the law of Sweden,[3] to include not only intercourse but also comparable sexual acts against someone incapable of giving consent, due to being in a vulnerable situation, such as a state of fear or unconsciousness.[4]

So in other words rape in Sweden is now defined the same as the rest of the civilized world.  Good to know. 

But still I have not had a reply to my query, if Sweden is not the country with the highest incidence of rape in Europe what country is (not necessarily directing this at you)?  According to every source that comes up on a google search it is Sweden.  As a matter of fact on the couple that gave the statistic for highest incidence of rape per capita in the world Sweden ranked number three.  I don't understand people arguing counter to the statistics.  You say you prefer to argue these things rationally and dispassionately but apparently you took it at face value that the rape laws in Sweden had been changed to make things which should not be rape to be represented as rape when the fact is that Sweden's definition of rape was updated to match that of every other civilized nation, sexual intercourse with a person unable to give consent IS rape. 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Sweetpumper said:

SWEDISH POLICE “CANNOT COPE” WITH HUGE NUMBERS OF RAPES SINCE MIGRANTS ARRIVED

Known rapist who brutally attacked 12-year-old girl still not apprehended 2 months later

https://www.infowars.com/swedish-police-cannot-cope-with-huge-numbers-of-rapes-since-migrants-arrived/

Soon as I saw this video I thought of this thread. Ya beat me to it though.

I cant believe there are people that would have us look the other way. Many of them who cry all day about woman not having equal rights, or complain about the nearly non existent "rape culture" going on in college campuses across America. The double standard is sickening.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Sweetpumper said:

SWEDISH POLICE “CANNOT COPE” WITH HUGE NUMBERS OF RAPES SINCE MIGRANTS ARRIVED

Known rapist who brutally attacked 12-year-old girl still not apprehended 2 months later

https://www.infowars.com/swedish-police-cannot-cope-with-huge-numbers-of-rapes-since-migrants-arrived/

There's no connection there. Swedish Christians are as likely to commit rape as are Middle Eastern Muslims, and the rape rate hasn't changed since the time when Sweden had much less immigration from Muslim countries. The apparent rise is false due to different classifications and statistics that may classify a flirtatious wink as a serious rape. (sarcasm disclaimer for the mentally disabled)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Kismit said:

Your source is from the Swedish government.  According to the detractors the Swedish government scews the facts in favor of their own narrative that "there is nothing to see here, move along"  I think the only way to effectively argue this is to get facts and figures from a neutral party.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (IP: Staff) ·
5 minutes ago, OverSword said:

Your source is from the Swedish government.  According to the detractors the Swedish government scews the facts in favor of their own narrative that "there is nothing to see here, move along"  I think the only way to effectively argue this is to get facts and figures from a neutral party.

I agree.  I also agree that the neutral party is not Infowars. 

Infowars gets viewers by creating fear and fuelling hysteria. It's basis is sensational tabloid, non-journalistic, fear mongering. 

I do whole heartedly agree with you, but if the Governments own statistics can not be viewed as viable. Infowars most certainly should not be used as factual evidence.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kismit said:

I agree.  I also agree that the neutral party is not Infowars. 

Infowars gets viewers by creating fear and fuelling hysteria. It's basis is sensational tabloid, non-journalistic, fear mongers. 

I do whole heartedly agree with you but if the Governments own statistics can not be viewed as viable. Infowars most certainly should not be used as factual evidence.

I'm with you there :tu:

info wars isn't even good for a laugh anymore.  And certainly could not be viewed as a neutral third party.

Edited by OverSword
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/9/2017 at 8:23 AM, Phaeton80 said:

Always nice to read the confirming reports of the existential threat that is 'immigrants'. Besides the fact a considerable percentage of these evil backward migrants ensue after we destroyed yet another ME nation / regime 'in an effort to save the people from their tirant', the report does certainly not indicate 'Sweden will be third world by 2030'. Which is completely false.

Beth Daponte who has written the UN report "A Hypotechical Cohort Model of Human Development" was asked "So it's wrong to say that Sweden will be a third world country by 2030"? Her reply was "It's obviously wrong and a total misinterpretation of the report."

falskt-LARGE.jpg

 

https://www.metro.se/artikel/nej-sverige-kommer-inte-vara-ett-u-land-år-2030-xr

 

What is especially indicative of the raging bias at play here, is the idealization, idolization of the Vikings of old. Which could be labelled one of the first terrorists of our age. These people, barbarians, raped and pillaged whole (foreign but 'Western') communities left and right. More or less exactly what we lament immigrants of doing (while it is an absolute minority that actually does so, while our resp. governments stand idly by and watch the frustration / hate within the native population grow (almost like its the desired effect)).

So yeah, a bit of nuance seems to be lacking in this thread here. As with so many of these emotionally laden anti 'foreigner / immigrant' articles / posts these days.

Go Trump!

So, other than the violence being perpetrated by Antifa and their ilk, where are Muslims being attacked in large numbers - just for being Muslim?  WHERE, in the U.S. are Muslims being actually attacked and killed or driven from their neighborhoods or homes?  Search as you may, all you'll find are individual attacks, WIDELY separated, and few in number because NO ONE is attacking Muslims as a group in America.  If the Swedes, Germans, and French have decided they want to bring in masses of individuals who don't even speak the language so they can have a tax base in the future then good on 'em.  If their populations want to fight that, good on THEM as well.  If Muslims settle in my area and seek to become part of the community they will be welcomed just as Hispanics and all other groups were welcomed.  If they choose to separate themselves and live apart then they will not be so well received.  If they grow to a number that they feel enables them to decide what others can or cannot do in their presence, they will be fought VICIOUSLY.  I'D SAY THE SAME OF ANY OTHER GROUP OF IMMIGRANTS IN MY AREA.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, OverSword said:

From the wikipedia sourced by you:

So in other words rape in Sweden is now defined the same as the rest of the civilized world.  Good to know. 

But still I have not had a reply to my query, if Sweden is not the country with the highest incidence of rape in Europe what country is (not necessarily directing this at you)?  According to every source that comes up on a google search it is Sweden.  As a matter of fact on the couple that gave the statistic for highest incidence of rape per capita in the world Sweden ranked number three.  I don't understand people arguing counter to the statistics.  You say you prefer to argue these things rationally and dispassionately but apparently you took it at face value that the rape laws in Sweden had been changed to make things which should not be rape to be represented as rape when the fact is that Sweden's definition of rape was updated to match that of every other civilized nation, sexual intercourse with a person unable to give consent IS rape. 

 

 

In fact, it is other countries that have followed suit, not Sweden catching up. In America the FBI changed it's official definition some time ago (but later than Sweden). However this was mostly for data gathering - each state still gets to define it and prosecute as it sees fit.

I don't take anything at face value. If anything, it's you that is doing so. This sentence "sexual intercourse with a person unable to give consent IS rape" from you is patently incomplete. The definition is much broader than this.

People are not arguing counter to the statistics. Statistics are what they are - just a tool. You still have to use them correctly. This involves understanding how they are collected and if they're comparable to other stats. You're just looking at figures without fully understanding them. For example, are you aware of the differences in how the total number of offences is calculated from one country to another? Does Sweden collect the data and record it the same way as all other nations? Did you even ask these questions? If you had you would possibly understand the issue better. For example, serial offences over a period of time (eg, a man repeatedly raping his wife) are often recorded as one offence. In Sweden, each offence is recorded separately. That difference alone will create a major difficulty in comparing the figures between different nations.

But let's be clear. I don't disagree with you in principle, only in degree. Both sides use the same stats to further their socio-political propaganda. Breitbart, Gatestone and Infowars are shamelessly dishonest in how they present it. Whilst the BBC and Guardian seem terrified to acknowledge it when offences are committed by Muslims. Preferring to call Muslim gangs who groomed young women for rape "Asians". The retarded morality that some migrants have brought with them is a serious issue for many countries - overstating and exaggerating the issue just trivialises it. It's too important to be used as a tool for political propaganda.

It will always amaze and sadden me how many people are prepared to accept the lies and misinformation simply because it's suits their own agenda. 

 

PS. Did you know that, statistically, Australia and Canada are the kidnap capitals of the world?

Edited by Arbenol
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Arbenol said:

PS. Did you know that, statistically, Australia and Canada are the kidnap capitals of the world?

Don't know where you get that from.  Every source seems to agree that the countries you're most likely to be kidnapped are:

  1. Mexico
  2. Haiti
  3. Brazil
  4. Philippines
  5. India

Canada and Australia?  Okay :whistle:

You do spout a fairly reasonable sounding line of BS without actually committing to saying anything I'll give you that.

 

edit to add:

Mind you I didn't come into this thread with any point of view, all I did was state that a good way to prove Sweden is not the rape capital of Europe would be to list the country or countries that actually have more rapes per capita, something that nobody has attempted to do probably because when you do any kind of casual internet search on the subject it seems that Sweden is indeed the ignominious title holder.  I just don't get what vested interest you have to deny it, at this point.

Edited by OverSword
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, OverSword said:

Your source is from the Swedish government.  According to the detractors the Swedish government scews the facts in favor of their own narrative that "there is nothing to see here, move along"  I think the only way to effectively argue this is to get facts and figures from a neutral party.

There is smoke here, even if there may not be a fire. There are simply too many cops, journalists, citizens and Govt officials coming forward with stories of alleged cover ups to ignore that something has changed in Sweden since the advent of the migrant crisis. 

Along that same vein, note the number of cops, citizens and officials that alleged a cover up of the Muslim "grooming gangs" and child slavery rings in the UK. That turned out to be true. There is definitely an interest for the ruling political parties to maintain a certain public view of immigration, even if that means covering up the crimes. Hell, Canada abolished race based crime statistics years ago for similar reasons. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10-9-2017 at 0:55 AM, Paranormal Panther said:

Many of us support legal immigration. We just oppose letting in scores of people who can't or won't assimilate. That's just common sense. The lack of it will lead to the demise of some European countries. 

 

I fully agree, well almost, I dont think they need to assimilate, I like a rich diversity in any given society. They just need to adapt, integrate and function in society. The point is though; we are being massaged to fear these people, focus on them as the clear and present threat.. the source of all these problems. While all of this, including a considerable percentage of the influx to begin with, hails from our resp. governments policies (which are largely synchronized in the West by way of union and 'cooporation'). You cant reap chaos and destruction in consequtive attempts to topple ME heads of state (to save the locals of their evil dictator! Yay!) and not expect millions of people to come your way. And when certain extremist idiots think they have the right to harass British or Swedish girls for wearing skirts, walk the British / Swedish streets in groups calling for Sharia law, lament your government for it. What you dont do, is project that behaviour unto a whole group on account of the continuous barrage of reports about such instances in the mainstream media. There wasnt a problem mind you, until.. oh, say just after September 2001.

Your government is responsible for the large numbers of foreign cultures they just allowed to enter without any real effort to integrate these folk. Certain governments seem to prefer to do very little at all when some of these fools demand Sharia law in the nation they are guests in, and our 'fantastic, trustworthy investigative reporting media' jumps on it filling newsreport after newsreport about the terrible scorge that is 'the migrant'. The 3M in the USA (Mexicans, Migrants, Muslims). Long story short; I think we should be careful to not focus on these people as the source of these issues, but focus on the element which is in fact to blame for this situation. Which is that 'kind looking, well spoken (well, exceptions always remain ofcourse, especially since 2017), well suited individuals we keep voting into office.. Only to find their promise to govern in favor of the people, was changed to in favor of 'not the people', when they are firmly placed in the seat of power.. when its all said and done.

It seems obvious certain people in the West regard certain situations in a vacuum, ignoring any and every causal relation that would increase the complexity in the resulting 'blame game'. Take ISIS for instance. We lament and lament, but completely ignore our own hand in the persistence of this Golem. We cheer on presidents handing out military hardware deals worth billions to the ideological and financial homeland of that Wahhabi sidebranch. We arm 'moderate rebels' only to be surprised, shocked the hardware ends up in the hands of the very element we claim we are fighting. We even demonize Russian heads of state when they act against ISIS like we should have done. Its all such biased BS, so distorted, so misrepresenting. And until we stop playing that game, stop drinking the 'West is Good, East is Bad' koolaid, things will only get worse.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.