france has been no friend to muslims

[HamburgerBoy]

The main reason, which was apparently not in the article I linked (and I can't find the one I thought I was linking), it because Sweden vastly expanded the legal definitions of what constitutes rape.

As Wiki explains:

The Swedish Crime Survey (SCS) is a recurrent survey by Brå of the attitudes and experiences of the general population regarding victimization, fear of crime and public confidence in the justice system, with an annual sample size of around 15,000 respondents.[47]

The rate of exposure to sexual offences has remained relatively unchanged, according to the SCS, since the first survey was conducted in 2006, despite an increase in the number of reported sex crimes.[48] This discrepancy can largely be explained by reforms in sex crime legislation, widening of the definition of rape,[49] and an effort by the Government to decrease the number of unreported cases.[42]

In SCS 2013, 0.8 per cent of respondents state that they were the victims of sexual offences, including rape; or an estimated 62,000 people of the general population (aged 16–79). Of these, 16 per cent described the sexual offence as "rape"—which would mean approximately 36,000 incidents of rape in 2012. It should be noted that it may be difficult for a layperson to determine whether an incident should be assessed as rape or sexual coercion, which is a similar but lesser offence in the Swedish Penal Code, meaning this number may be exaggerated. On the other hand, relationship rape may also be under-represented, because of how sensitive the issue is. Most of the sexual offences are committed in a public place (50%), and the perpetrator(s) are most often unknown to the victim (63%).[48]

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

What is *not* the cause, as the propagandists would have it, is a horde of rapacious Muslims raping the white wimmins.

So then why is it that the rate had been increasing consistently prior to 2006? And why has it continued to increase for nearly a decade now since then? When a government agency simply redefines a certain term, you usually see an obvious and unexpected jump followed by a more typical trend observed prior to the jump, such as misleading unemployment statistics that use different data sets on one scatter plot.

 

[blastingcap]

tbh I think it debunks the idea that Sweden truly has the second highest rate of rape in the world

The article doesn't say that. This is what it says:

"A 1996 Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention report bears this out. It noted that Muslim immigrants from North Africa were 23 times more likely to commit rape than Swedish men. It is no wonder why today Sweden is deemed the rape capital of the Western world."

Now granted there are variations in how often people report to the police, and definition variations, but don't get pulled into Victorian's game--he's a Muslim apologist who is trying to change the subject. Whether Sweden is no. 2 or no. 20, is not the point. THIS was the point:

"A 1996 Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention report bears this out. It noted that Muslim immigrants from North Africa were 23 times more likely to commit rape than Swedish men. It is no wonder why today Sweden is deemed the rape capital of the Western world."

And further, the reason why I linked to that article in the first place was because someone mentioned Japan's intolerance of Muslims. How many Muslim attacks take place each year in Japan? Basically zero, because Japan knew better than to import that crap.

 

[Victorian Gray]

So then why is it that the rate had been increasing consistently prior to 2006? And why has it continued to increase for nearly a decade now since then? When a government agency simply redefines a certain term, you usually see an obvious and unexpected jump followed by a more typical trend observed prior to the jump, such as misleading unemployment statistics that use different data sets on one scatter plot.

OK, you win, It's the Muslim hordes. The world is black and white and there is no middle ground. Kill 'em all!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Victorian Gray]

The article doesn't say that. This is what it says:

"A 1996 Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention report bears this out. It noted that Muslim immigrants from North Africa were 23 times more likely to commit rape than Swedish men. It is no wonder why today Sweden is deemed the rape capital of the Western world."

Now granted there are variations in how often people report to the police, and definition variations, but don't get pulled into Victorian's game--he's a Muslim apologist who is trying to change the subject. Whether Sweden is no. 2 or no. 20, is not the point. THIS was the point:

"A 1996 Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention report bears this out. It noted that Muslim immigrants from North Africa were 23 times more likely to commit rape than Swedish men. It is no wonder why today Sweden is deemed the rape capital of the Western world."

And further, the reason why I linked to that article in the first place was because someone mentioned Japan's intolerance of Muslims. How many Muslim attacks take place each year in Japan? Basically zero, because Japan knew better than to import that crap.

You really need to go over to Sweden and help them with their problem. They obviously need your help getting rid of all the Muslim vermin.

 

[blastingcap]

You really need to go over to Sweden and help them with their problem. They obviously need your help getting rid of all the Muslim vermin.

The above is an example of how a Muslim apologists tries to deflect and change the subject when confronted with the truth.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

OK, you win, It's the Muslim hordes. The world is black and white and there is no middle ground. Kill 'em all!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'd say it's more a combination of an incredibly lenient/liberal justice system and not being selective enough in what kind of people a country imports, but whatever you say doll. Obviously the USA has plenty of immigrants from North Africa and the Middle East, yet our first-gen immigrants generally commit less crime than nativeborns. Why? Because we don't just let in refugees by the boatload on a daily basis, and the ones we do allow in know they live in a nation where rape (usually) carries a lengthy sentence in a shitty prison, instead of a couple years in a Swedish resort.

 

[Victorian Gray]

The above is an example of how a Muslim apologists tries to deflect and change the subject when confronted with the truth.

Fuck you. I don't "apologize" for Islam or any other religion. I simply don't see the point in continuing discourse with a bigot.

Now, back to your previously scheduled propaganda dissemination.

 

[1prophet]

You really need to go over to Sweden and help them with their problem. They obviously need your help getting rid of all the Muslim vermin.

The above is an example of how a Muslim apologists tries to deflect and change the subject when confronted with the truth.

Nah, he just has a different definition of rape, just like conservative Republicans and Whoopi Goldberg.:biggrin:

 

[mikeymikec]

The report that's the apparent source of Blastingcap's claim is referenced many times on the Internet (mostly on anti-Muslim sites), yet I can only find the report in Swedish (an English summary is at the end, but it's not a complete translation of the report, simply a ~4 page summary of a 60-page report, and does not include any relevant stats to the claim in question) in a scanned-in format via another site that cited it, here: http://www.pdf-archive.com/2011/05/08/br-1996-2-invandrares-och-invandrares-barns-brottslighet-1/

Admittedly the fact that the report isn't hosted on the official site means that I cannot be that sure that I am reading the correct (or authentic) report, but I searched through it to hopefully find the source of the figure.

Armed with my awesome Swedish translation skills (ie. I was using an online translation site so I could search for particular words or portions of them), here is what I found:

To begin with, if I mention more than one country in a point as having a certain figure, that means those countries were all represented with one figure.
1 - the word 'Muslim' or 'Islam' does not appear in the report.
2 - The "23x" figure can be inferred from the report, but only regarding immigrants from the following four countries: Algeria, Libya, Morocco, and Tunisia.
3 - Almost every country on the list (with a figure beside it) has a rape likelihood rate of at least 2x versus the natives, except two: Czechoslovakia and 'other countries'.
4 - The third highest entry in the list are predominantly Christian countries (Romania and Bulgaria) - 18x.
5 - Bolivia, Peru and Equador (predominantly Catholic) have as high a rate as Iran (predominantly Islam).
6 - Other African countries (excluding Uganda for some reason, it doesn't have its own entry, and excluding others that have their own entries) have a rate of 16.3x. According to Wikipedia, Africa overall has a 45% Christian population.
7 - Those absolute mother fuckers from Britain have a rate that's more than 3x higher than the natives.
8 - Italy has a rate of 7x.
9 - Jordan, Syria and Palestine have a rate of nearly 9.5x.
10 - Ethiopia (67% Christian) has a rate of 7.5x.
11 - Interestingly, India (which I think most will agree has a rape problem) doesn't have a figure, the US doesn't either (ie. there's just a dash on that entry).
12 - Bangladesh and Pakistan (predominantly Muslim) have a figure that's way lower than average (ie. averaging out all the figures) at 5.5x.

There is a second table that includes rape statistics but I don't think it's a good idea to trust an automated translation to try and find out the difference between the two tables. I've only used the table that includes the correlating figure from the news article that blastingcap referenced.

In conclusion, I would say that the author of the article wanted to write an article about how bad Muslims are for Sweden and promptly cherry-picked the most extreme figure they could possibly find while ignoring the rest of the figures. I'm pretty damn sure that had the article said that a Muslim is 7 times more likely (ie. the figure for Italy) to commit rape in Sweden than a Swedish person, that would have suited the author's message just as well, yet we're not seeing any news articles demonizing the Italians, or say the Bulgarians or Romanians who picked up a figure twice as bad as the Italians.

Also, considering that other predominantly Muslim countries have dramatically lower figures, so if one wanted to write an equally disingenuous article that was intended to disparage Christians, they'd cherry-pick the Bulgarians and Romanians as their whipping boy while ignoring the rest...

... from a report that's nearly twenty years old. They honestly couldn't find a newer report from a reasonably sensible-looking source as evidence to support their pre-conclusion?

Isn't it also a little curious that, considering this article is blatantly aimed at Syrian refugees (yet includes the usual substitution of "refugee" for "immigrant" which should be a warning sign to anyone with half a brain) that the author should cite a region which is nowhere near Syria and doesn't have a figure even remotely like Syria's?

The English summary of the Swedish report is quite an interesting read by the way.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

fwiw my initial post was meant to infer that it's as much a geographical cultural issue as anything. Just as Christian African nations practice female genital mutilation on levels comparable to that of Muslim African nations, you're also going to see heightened levels of rape in those regions. I think most people would agree that women's rights are much better in far East/Oceanic Muslim countries than in North African ones. Christianity in Africa, aside from some really old groups like the Egyptian Coptics or the Ethiopian Orthodox, is a relatively recent product of colonialism afaik, and while Islam has of course had reign for quite a while longer, these kinds of issues predate both.

Also, I think the reason you don't find newer reports on this is due to privacy laws or some such thing. I believe Sweden may not report crime by ethnicity at all anymore.

 

[blastingcap]

The report that's the apparent source of Blastingcap's claim is referenced many times on the Internet (mostly on anti-Muslim sites), yet I can only find the report in Swedish (an English summary is at the end, but it's not a complete translation of the report, simply a ~4 page summary of a 60-page report, and does not include any relevant stats to the claim in question) in a scanned-in format via another site that cited it, here: http://www.pdf-archive.com/2011/05/08/br-1996-2-invandrares-och-invandrares-barns-brottslighet-1/

Admittedly the fact that the report isn't hosted on the official site means that I cannot be that sure that I am reading the correct (or authentic) report, but I searched through it to hopefully find the source of the figure.

Armed with my awesome Swedish translation skills (ie. I was using an online translation site so I could search for particular words or portions of them), here is what I found:

To begin with, if I mention more than one country in a point as having a certain figure, that means those countries were all represented with one figure.
1 - the word 'Muslim' or 'Islam' does not appear in the report.
2 - The "23x" figure can be inferred from the report, but only regarding immigrants from the following four countries: Algeria, Libya, Morocco, and Tunisia.
3 - Almost every country on the list (with a figure beside it) has a rape likelihood rate of at least 2x versus the natives, except two: Czechoslovakia and 'other countries'.
4 - The third highest entry in the list are predominantly Christian countries (Romania and Bulgaria) - 18x.
5 - Bolivia, Peru and Equador (predominantly Catholic) have as high a rate as Iran (predominantly Islam).
6 - Other African countries (excluding Uganda for some reason, it doesn't have its own entry, and excluding others that have their own entries) have a rate of 16.3x. According to Wikipedia, Africa overall has a 45% Christian population.
7 - Those absolute mother fuckers from Britain have a rate that's more than 3x higher than the natives.
8 - Italy has a rate of 7x.
9 - Jordan, Syria and Palestine have a rate of nearly 9.5x.
10 - Ethiopia (67% Christian) has a rate of 7.5x.
11 - Interestingly, India (which I think most will agree has a rape problem) doesn't have a figure, the US doesn't either (ie. there's just a dash on that entry).
12 - Bangladesh and Pakistan (predominantly Muslim) have a figure that's way lower than average (ie. averaging out all the figures) at 5.5x.

There is a second table that includes rape statistics but I don't think it's a good idea to trust an automated translation to try and find out the difference between the two tables. I've only used the table that includes the correlating figure from the news article that blastingcap referenced.

In conclusion, I would say that the author of the article wanted to write an article about how bad Muslims are for Sweden and promptly cherry-picked the most extreme figure they could possibly find while ignoring the rest of the figures. I'm pretty damn sure that had the article said that a Muslim is 7 times more likely (ie. the figure for Italy) to commit rape in Sweden than a Swedish person, that would have suited the author's message just as well, yet we're not seeing any news articles demonizing the Italians, or say the Bulgarians or Romanians who picked up a figure twice as bad as the Italians.

Also, considering that other predominantly Muslim countries have dramatically lower figures, so if one wanted to write an equally disingenuous article that was intended to disparage Christians, they'd cherry-pick the Bulgarians and Romanians as their whipping boy while ignoring the rest...

... from a report that's nearly twenty years old. They honestly couldn't find a newer report from a reasonably sensible-looking source as evidence to support their pre-conclusion?

Isn't it also a little curious that, considering this article is blatantly aimed at Syrian refugees (yet includes the usual substitution of "refugee" for "immigrant" which should be a warning sign to anyone with half a brain) that the author should cite a region which is nowhere near Syria and doesn't have a figure even remotely like Syria's?

The English summary of the Swedish report is quite an interesting read by the way.

The question is not how high Sweden ranks relative to other countries, since definitions of rape vary. The question is, do Muslim immigrants to Sweden commit the Swedish definition of rape, at a rate higher than native Swedes?

Also consider this: it's SUPER, SUPER shameful to admit to being raped in most Islamic cultures, and many Muslim-majority countries have become even more conservative over the last several decades. There are literally women who won't admit to being raped because they fear that a male relative will punish or even kill them for shaming the family. And in some cases it IS those male relatives raping them in the first place.

It's like the joke about how there aren't any gays in Saudi Arabia. Yeah, because very few people admit to being gay or raped or anything over there that is considered shameful.

So while you try to make the report sound biased, you should be aware of your own biases, and lack of Swedish fluency.

 

[OutHouse]

Fuck you. I don't "apologize" for Islam or any other religion. I simply don't see the point in continuing discourse with a bigot.

Now, back to your previously scheduled propaganda dissemination.

typical liberal, get embarrassed or lose an argument and start name calling and labeling.

I think the only bigot in this thread is you.

see what i did there?

 

[mikeymikec]

The question is not how high Sweden ranks relative to other countries, since definitions of rape vary. The question is, do Muslim immigrants to Sweden commit the Swedish definition of rape, at a rate higher than native Swedes?

Do you admit that those statistics have little value in answering that question? Perhaps you would like to check them yourself to see whether what I posted was correct?

So while you try to make the report sound biased, you should be aware of your own biases, and lack of Swedish fluency.

I'm not actually aware of any reason to suggest that the Swedish report was biased, nor did I say anything to that effect. No, I said that I thought that the article you posted was biased.

 

[JEDIYoda]

The above is an example of how a Muslim apologists tries to deflect and change the subject when confronted with the truth.

true~~! But can she speak the language?

 

[blastingcap]

Just because a problem is tough to quantify does not mean it's not a problem. There is a probability of an extinction event such as a large asteroid slamming into Earth. Tough to quantify. Climate change's effects are tough to quantify accurately as well. Overpopulation is something politicians never want to discuss, but it's a problem to increase human population indefinitely on a finite sphere. Etc.

Let me put it this way to the liberals and moderates reading this (and I am a moderate myself):

Are you a "bigot" if you oppose Westboro Baptist (also known as the "godhatesfag" church)?

If no, then realize that many people who oppose Islam aren't bigots, either--we just know that American Muslims are nonrepresentative of Muslims worldwide and that the average Muslim abroad would be equivalent of a fundamentalist Christian from the Deep South. (Actually even worse, because I doubt many of those fundie Christians would advocate for the death penalty for those leaving their church, in contrast to many Muslims worldwide.)

http://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the-worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-overview/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westboro_Baptist_Church
https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...soaring-Far-Right-march-reports-SUE-REID.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nA3xN5ptZXM

Do you care about civil liberties such as women's rights? Freedom of expression? Freedom to leave the religion you were born into? Gay rights?

What would you say if I started my own personal cult that made it so women had 1/4 the say of men in court? Where anyone who speaks against my cult is ruthless suppressed or even killed, under the justification of blasphemy? Where it is literally the law of the land to execute anyone who tries to leave the cult? Where it is illegal for any other cult to build houses of worship on land my cultists are already on? Where I jot down my thoughts into a "holy book" and claim it was written by God and perfect, despite its many self-contradictions that allow readers to justify practically any atrocity under the pretext of giving glory to God, including extermination of anyone who will not convert to my cult (via the pretext of self-defense even when the facts clearly contradict that)?

Be honest.

Ask youself: what's the difference between a "cult" and a "religion"?

The short answer is: a religion is a cult that was popular enough to survive long enough to propagate itself for a substantial period of time (the cutoff is arbitrary but let's say, at least a century). Otherwise there is no difference.

In the 21st century, should the laws prescribed by ancient cults take precedence over democratic laws?

Most people in the world are secularists in the sense that they say: "No. The law of the land trumps religious belief if the two ever conflict."

Hardcore Muslims are the largest chunk of humanity that says: "Yes. We want Sharia law (Islamic law) to be part of or reign supreme over the law of the land." Even when Islamic law is extremely hostile to the rights of minorities--women, homosexuals, and non-Muslims. These hardcore Muslims seem to be either a very large minority or outright majority of all Muslims worldwide.

The more-secular Muslims like those in the USA make up only 3-4 million. They are not representative of most Muslims worldwide. Think of the most progressive Christian church you know. That's American Muslims. Then think of the most hardcore fundie Christian church like Westboro Baptist. That's Saudi Wahhabism. Most Christians are somewhere between the two extremes, and likewise most Muslims are too. The problem is that over the last century, most people (Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, etc.) have moved away from Westboro Baptist-like thinking, whereas Muslims did not. http://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the-worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-overview/

To some extent, the Ottoman Empire's collapse after World War I exacerbated the resistance of Islam to change. Without the moderating voice of the Turks, the center for Sunni Islamic thought shifted back to the Arabs. Unfortunately the Saudi king allied with hardcore fundie Muslims, who supported the king only so long as they held lots of influence, including funding. So when vast oil wealth was discovered in the Arabian peninsula, a chunk of it went to the hardcore clerics who exported their strain of Islam to the rest of the world. Imagine if Westboro Baptist existed in the 1930s and got astronomical sums to export their propaganda for the next 80+ years. Now imagine that the US were vastly poorer, so that many people lived in poverty and the local church is small and run-down. Do you see why many people started listening to the well-funded hate preachers from Saudi Arabia? It's the price of admission for having a big, shiny new church with free food, free "education," and other trappings of wealth. Maybe you thought you'd just pay lip service and take the free buffet food, but over time, even if you don't turn more fundamentalist, what about other people like your neighbors and kids?

Further exacerbating the situation is how fundamentalists of many cults (not just Islam) tend to outreproduce secularists. A woman with feeble education and rights gets stuck back home cranking out more fundamentalists, and soon those kids grow up and make even more. It's like a runaway chain reaction in a nuclear reactor once you remove the control rods (the moderating effect of the Ottoman Empire).

When you support Islam on the grounds that it is a "religion," think about the above. It's really a cult that happened to become popular--but it's still just a cult. And realize that the 3-4 million American Muslims are not representative of the other 1.6 BILLION Muslims.

Can Muslims undo cancerous Wahhabism? Maybe, but it will be hard, like trying to stuff a genie back into the lamp.

Can Islam be Reformed? No, not unless it becomes something other than Islam. A Reformation would entail treating Mohammed like a falliable human instead of an infallible prophet, and the Quran as written by men and not God. At that point is it even Islam anymore?

So the prospects of Muslims voluntarily Reforming Islam are grim. Most would-be reformers live in the West, because their views are unpopular with both their neighbors as well as the government. If they stayed back home they would get beaten and killed like the bloggers in Pakistan, Bangladesh, Saudi Arabia, etc. (Google it.) The states are complicit: Egypt fired that guy for daring to question Islam. Saudi Arabia literally criminalizes atheism. Etc.

Personally I think that if what is now the Muslim world ever gets its act together, it won't be due to a Reformation but due to mass atheism.

http://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the-worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-overview/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westboro_Baptist_Church
https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...soaring-Far-Right-march-reports-SUE-REID.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nA3xN5ptZXM

 

[mikeymikec]

Just answer the question I posed. I'm not particularly interested in having yet another very long discussion regarding say Islam and/or its followers, but I'm especially disinterested in having said discussion with someone who can't concede a point gracefully, which tends to be the problem on a topic like this.

 

[blastingcap]

1. I wasn't talking to you Mikey.
2. Since I don't speak Swedish, I am not qualified to read the original report.
3. Since YOU don't speak Swedish, you aren't qualified either.
4. If you aren't here to talk about Islam, but instead just want to talk about one extremely narrow topic, then maybe you want to start a new thread specifically on that topic. All I've seen from you is completely one-sided muddying of the waters similar to what climate change skeptics do. Don't like a climate change or Islamic report? Criticize it to death by pointing out how it wasn't perfect. Sure, it wasn't perfect, but why be so one-sided in your criticisms? Surely you know as well as I that rapes are likely underreported in general and especially in very conservative cultures. Do you have anything better? You did the same with the Pew results, completely ignoring how it doesn't really matter THAT much if, say, 60% instead of 70% of the Muslims in a state want you executed if you leave Islam. Any number more than zero is unacceptable.
5. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nA3xN5ptZXM

 

[mikeymikec]

2. Since I don't speak Swedish, I am not qualified to read the original report.

Yet you were perfectly happy with the idea of accepting as fact some random stat you found in a news article because it suits your views.

At least I bothered to track it down and check its applicability. I looked up about three Swedish words to track down the figures to find the one that the article referenced, so I fail to see how my analysis of said statistics could have gone wrong. After that, I translated a few country names that weren't obvious.

Of course, you could try checking it yourself if you were actually interested in little things like fact-checking. If you're adamant in your belief that a fluent knowledge of Swedish is required, perhaps you should find someone who speaks the language.

 

[blastingcap]

Yet you were perfectly happy with the idea of accepting as fact some random stat you found in a news article because it suits your views.

At least I bothered to track it down and check its applicability. I looked up about three Swedish words to track down the figures to find the one that the article referenced, so I fail to see how my analysis of said statistics could have gone wrong. After that, I translated a few country names that weren't obvious.

Of course, you could try checking it yourself if you were actually interested in little things like fact-checking. If you're adamant in your belief that a fluent knowledge of Swedish is required, perhaps you should find someone who speaks the language.

You are not a native Swedish speaker by your own admission and here you are trying to lecture me to accept your Google-translated interpretation of the original text.

Leaving language barriers aside, I will agree that they're inconclusive in part because they are old and because definitions and crime rates change, among other things. But inconclusive does not necessarily mean incorrect. Are you willing to concede that?

As long as it's un-P.C. in Sweden to collect better data on these kinds of things, I think we'll see a dearth of statistical studies on Muslim crime rates in Sweden.

 

[mikeymikec]

You are not a native Swedish speaker by your own admission and here you are trying to lecture me to accept your Google-translated interpretation of the original text.

There are columns of figures next to a list of countries. The only thing that needs translating is the word for 'rape', liberal use of Ctrl+F until you come across the group of countries in question being listed, and the country name.

I'll throw you a bone - the word you need is "Våldtäkt". In my PDF viewer it lists the page as 55 of 64, however the page number in the corner of the scanned page is 107. A simple bit of maths confirms the stat (4,6, divide that by the figure for Swedish people, 0,2, equals 23) that the article referenced (PS - some European countries use a comma instead of a decimal point).

Leaving language barriers aside, I will agree that they're inconclusive in part because they are old and because definitions and crime rates change, among other things.

Inconclusive? Oh brother. Either the use of the statistic was valid in the context it was used or it wasn't.

But inconclusive does not necessarily mean incorrect. Are you willing to concede that?

I have no problem with assuming the figures were correct when they were recorded, what I have a problem with is how you and the author of the news article are willing to use them.

As long as it's un-P.C. in Sweden to collect better data on these kinds of things, I think we'll see a dearth of statistical studies on Muslim crime rates in Sweden.

Well considering that I've heard stats on the radio about immigrants from certain countries (Romanian gangs to be specific) directly from official sources such as the UK police, I don't think it's a "P.C." issue per se. I would be extremely surprised if every police force doesn't collect data such as country of origin (actually material things), when arresting people. Knowing the country of origin of a suspected criminal is a useful piece of information - do they have allies, do they have a criminal record where they used to live, etc. Knowing their religion only becomes relevant if the crime is likely to be due to belief in the immaterial. In the context of where this subthread is rooted, a rapist mostly rapes because it makes them feel good in some way, and while I'm sure that some nutcases have said "God/Allah made me do it", one can be fairly sure that the answer will involve medication, not a deep insight into the religion that the criminal claims to believe in yet rapes anyway.

 

[blastingcap]

In the context of where this subthread is rooted, a rapist mostly rapes because it makes them feel good in some way, and while I'm sure that some nutcases have said "God/Allah made me do it", one can be fairly sure that the answer will involve medication, not a deep insight into the religion that the criminal claims to believe in yet rapes anyway.

Now you're just making up a straw man. It's not about people raping in the name of Allah or any such nonsense. It's about mentality. Is it so hard to comprehend that if men come from countries where women are treated as chattel, the opportunity for "miscommunication" rises?

Is Arab Muslim culture different? Why don't you ask this Norwegian lady who was raped and then imprisoned by Dubai authorities because she had sex outside of marriage? http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/22/world/meast/uae-norway-rape-controversy/

In any case perhaps we are overly-focused on rape. But the picture doesn't look that great if you include other crimes, either:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_crime#Sweden

"A report studying 4.4 million Swedes between the ages of 15 and 51 during the period 1997-2001 found that 25% of crimes were committed by foreign-born individuals while and additional 20% were committed by individuals born to foreign-born parents. In particular, immigrants from Africa and Southern and Western Asian were more likely to be charged of a crime than individuals born to two Swedish parents by a factor of 4.5 and 3.5 respectively. Findings from a previous study published by the Swedish government in 1996 determined that between 1985 and 1989 individuals born in Iraq, North Africa (Algeria, Libya, Morocco and Tunisia), and Africa (excluding Uganda and the North African countries) were convicted of rape at rates 20, 23, and 17 greater than individuals born in Sweden respectively.[12]

In a study by the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention in 1997-2001, 25% of the almost 1,520,000 offences were found to be committed by people born abroad, while almost 20% were committed by Swedish-born people with a foreign background. In the study, immigrants were found to be four times more likely to be investigated for lethal violence and robbery than ethnic Swedes. In addition, immigrants were three times more likely to be investigated for violent assault, and five times more likely to be investigated for sex crimes. Overall, North Africa and Western Asia were strongly overrepresented in the crime statistics.


The report is based on statistics for those "suspected" of offences, but Stina Holmberg of the Council for Crime Prevention said that there was "little difference" in the statistics for those suspected of crimes and those actually convicted.


"Slightly under 60 percent of the almost 1,520,000 offences ... registered during the period covered by the study can be attributed to persons who were born in Sweden to two Swedish-born parents," it said.[35]"

Obviously not all 1st- or 2nd-generation immigrants from North Africa and Western Asian (e.g., Pakistan) are Muslims, but those countries tend to have very high percentages of Muslims. To be fair, though, one should control for things like education and age and such, but isn't that the point--that the sane people in Sweden want to keep the riff-raff out while their leaders want to invite the dredges of the world into their welfare state? Because Sweden is certainly not getting the cream of the crop when it comes to immigrants from North Africa and Western Asia. So why do it, especially as a country with a tiny population?

 

[mikeymikec]

Now you're just making up a straw man.

No, a straw man is when one makes up an alternative argument point to attack and attributes it to their opponent.

Back to the point now, come on. Either the use of the statistic was valid in the context it was used (in the news article) or it wasn't.

 

[blastingcap]

No, a straw man is when one makes up an alternative argument point to attack and attributes it to their opponent.

Back to the point now, come on. Either the use of the statistic was valid in the context it was used (in the news article) or it wasn't.

You keep spouting straw men arguments, outright lying about my allegedly not responding to you (when in fact I did), and missing the larger point in your incessant pedantry.

Yes, you did give a straw man argument because you were speculating that if a Muslim raped a Swede then it was due to medication and not for Allah. The straw man is the implied assumption that anyone was saying that Muslims go raping around in the name of Allah or somesuch. Perhaps you need to brush up on your definitions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

And stop beating a dead horse and pretending like I didn't reply when I did. I already responded to this by saying I'm happy to say the study was inconclusive, if you accept that inconclusive does not mean wrong. I'm sorry if you didn't like my answer, but there it is.