The bloody death of a liberal dream: After throwing open its borders to 2million migrants, Sweden has been left with an underclass of alienated teenagers, a murderous gang culture and gun crime that's spiralling out of control
On a bitingly cold morning in Stockholm, two days ago, I stood among 200 mourners in a Muslim cemetery, set in a magnificent pine forest.
They had come to bury a 15-year-old Afghan boy who had been shot dead, allegedly by a gangster of the same age.
Yet as his coffin was lowered into the frozen ground, it seemed to me that we were also witnessing the death of Sweden’s great multi-cultural dream.
Brought to this famously hospitable country three years ago, to escape the impending return of the Taliban, it appears that Ali Shafaei is the latest victim of a vicious war being waged largely by child gangsters from Sweden’s migrant sink-estates.
Among Swedish politicians, the precise causes of this internecine conflict may be a matter for debate.
Yet even those on the liberal Left now grudgingly agree that they are rooted in the country’s disastrously failed immigration policy — which in recent years opened Sweden’s borders. Some 2 million immigrants (20 per cent of the entire population), now live in Sweden, often from the most troubled parts of Asia and Africa — and the country failed to plan for the immense difficulties of integrating them into society.
Many of the offspring of these migrants have morphed dangerously into a lost generation who are effectively stateless.
Though they were born here, many don’t feel remotely Swedish, yet have no allegiance to their parents’ homelands, either. Their alienation and discontentment smouldered for several years.
But in recent weeks it has erupted with a terrifying upsurge in ultra-violent gang crime and, with its hand-wringing justice system, which many feel prioritises young offender’s rights over those of their victims, Sweden evidently has no fix.
Twenty years ago, gun crime was almost non-existent here. Today, the grisly murders we see in Scandi-Noir TV series are no longer fictional. Sweden is awash with real-life crime podcasts, documentaries and books.
Coming soon to Sweden’s cinemas (after special screenings for police chiefs, politicians and criminologists) is Bullets, a docu-drama about a 12-year-old Egyptian boy who lobs a grenade at a police car after being lured into a gang.
In Stockholm alone, 52 gangs are vying for control of the burgeoning drugs trade, according to a recent police report, and they are becoming ever more ruthless.
Last year, the country saw 63 fatal shootings. In the UK, whose population is six times the size of Sweden’s, there were 35 in 2021. This cradle of liberalism is, along with Croatia, the most trigger-happy nation in Europe.
Since Christmas, the spree has reached epidemic proportions in the capital, with 30 shootings and bombings, four of them fatal. Half the suspects are aged under 18.
Elegant Stockholm, hitherto known for its Scandinavian splendour and gentility, is now redolent of Al Capone’s Chicago.
The crisis is so serious that, this week, scores of extra police officers were drafted in from other cities and billeted in hotels. I have watched them blitzing the most notorious crime areas and raiding buildings for weapons and drugs.
Last night, three more people were shot in Fittja, south of Stockholm, an area with high levels of immigration and crime.
And as buildings are randomly sprayed with machine gun fire — a new gangland tactic designed to scare rivals and show strength — it seems only a matter of time before more people are killed.
The youngest boys to have been arrested are aged just 13 and 14. Caught after a car chase through the city streets, they had with them semi-automatic weapons.
Some child gang members reportedly even carry explosives in their school thermos flasks. A police officer tells me that boys aged nine are groomed to serve as street corner lookouts, and to hide drugs and guns.
********************************************
Dems Want to Remove 'Shameful' Statue Across from White House Due to Racism - But it's Andrew Jackson a Founder of Their Party
A Democrat House member wants to remove a historic statue in Washington DC because of “racism”, but there is one major inconvenience for the Democrats.
On Wednesday, according to local DC outlet WJLA-TV, Eleanor Holmes Norton, the District of Columbia’s non-voting delegate to the House, introduced legislation to remove the statue of Andrew Jackson that sits across from the White House in Lafayette Park.
The arguments that she puts forward are the ones that we have heard time and again from the left: Jackson owned slaves and he was apparently responsible for the genocide of indigenous people.
“This prominent location in the nation’s capital, right outside of the White House, should never have honored a man who owned slaves and was responsible for the deaths of roughly 4,000 Native Americans. Jackson’s entire tenure is a shameful part of our history, and I will see to it that he is no longer honored with a statue in Lafayette Park,” Norton said in a statement, according to WJLA.
First off, this is yet another example of the left trying to erase and discredit the achievements of famous Americans just because they do not meet today’s politically correct standards.
Andrew Jackson, regardless of what one may think of him, is a very significant figure in our history. He defeated the invading British at the Battle of New Orleans in 1815, saving the nation from invasion, and he went on to become the first president who was not born into wealth, but rather worked for it.
The modern left seems to hate America so much, that they seem intent on discrediting their achievements, even those of men like Abraham Lincoln who fought to end slavery.
But there is also a major caveat in this particular tale of far-leftism run amok – Andrew Jackson was one of the founders of the Democratic Party!
According to the Miller Center, what we now know as the Democratic Party first emerged from the large popular following of Jackson when he was president, and became an organized party under his successor Martin van Buren.
Thus, the man who owned slaves and was responsible for the genocide of Native Americans was a Democrat.
The Democrats are not only erasing American history, but they are also erasing evidence of their own party’s historic failures and shortcomings.
The Democratic Party in the 19th century was the pro-slavery party and many of its members had sympathies with the Confederacy during the Civil War. The Republican Party, by contrast, was founded as an anti-slavery party and its first president was the one to end slavery.
But by getting rid of this statue, the Democrats are hoping that Americans will forget that they were not always the righteous, moral, anti-racist party that they claim to be today.
In many ways, the Democratic Party hasn’t changed since the 19th century. It is the party that promotes and celebrates abominable evils like abortion, and it has sided with radical political movements that are trying to divide this nation along racial lines.
Now we see that the problems in this party go back to the very beginning of the party, but the Democrats do not want to acknowledge that.
Instead, they just want to pretend like they are and have always been the good guys fighting against those evil, racist Republicans who are “threats to democracy.”
The problem for them, however, is that history is never that simple.
It is frankly rather messy, and we need to be willing to own up and face the hard facts if we are really interested in learning from the past.
From everything we’ve seen them say and do, however, Democrats aren’t nearly as interested in learning from the past as erasing it. And that’s not good for anyone.
******************************************************
Texas Boots Big Bank After Discovering Anti-Gun Policy
Banks and corporations should stay out of politics, just like government should stay out of business. But when one or the other crosses the line, the other side has to push back or roll over.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and crew are pushing back.
Paxton’s office has deemed that Citigroup Inc. “discriminated against the firearms sector,” according to Reuters. Because of this, the banking giant was barred from underwriting most municipal bond offerings in the state.
This is no small thing. Citigroup was recently eliminated from the group of banks set to handle the biggest-ever municipal-bond transaction from Texas. The deal was reportedly worth $3.4 billion.
Governor Greg Abbott chimed in on the move, tweeting, “We won’t be bullied or discriminated against by woke ESG policies.”
ESG stands for environmental, social and governance investment practices, criticized by some conservatives as prioritizing ultra-liberal social and environmental justice initiatives over profits.
Lee Deviney, executive director of the Texas Public Finance Authority that oversees borrowing, reported that the Texas Natural Gas Securitization Finance Corporation board convened earlier this month and took action to “reconstitute” the syndicate on the deal, Bloomberg reported. Citigroup, which was approved by the board as one of the underwriting firms in May, is no longer included in the deal.
Citigroup is not the first bank to be sanctioned for playing politics when it should be focused on business and finance. In October, UBS Group AG was booted from the deal after Texas placed it on the list of firms viewed as boycotting the fossil fuel industry, according to Bloomberg.
The $3.4 billion deal is designed to help natural gas utilities impacted by the devastating storm that pounded Texas in February 2021. It aims to spread out exorbitant energy costs over decades to shield state residents from skyrocketing energy bills.
That’s what governments are intended to do: protect citizens.
In this case, Paxton and company are also preventing an end-run by Citigroup that would quietly impact the Second Amendment. If gun manufacturers are held in check by big banks with political agendas, the people’s right to bear arms is diminished. No product, no right.
In a similar move by progressive corporate players, DirectTV dropped the conservative news channel Newsmax in January. This was an obvious play to curb free speech. DirectTV dropped another conservative outlet, One America News, in January 2022.
These are not mere business decisions made by corporate leaders. They are political maneuvers taking place outside the government’s purview. If the Biden regime can’t openly defy the First and Second Amendments of the U.S. Constitution, it welcomes corporate players to step in and do the work for them.
And it’s not just corporate leaders and government officials who advance — by whatever means necessary — the progressive agenda. There are plenty of wokesters in the schools teaching your children what to think, encouraging them to kneel on playing fields for political ideals when they should be striving for excellence. They’re even in our armed forces, where servicemembers should be focused on defending us from enemies both foreign and domestic.
The wokesters are the enemy. And they are minions.
It is clear that wokesters in corporate board rooms, schools and the government aim to advance the progressive agenda — which includes doing away with the Constitutional rights of citizens — by doing their part to control what you hear, what you think, what you say and what businesses you have access to.
These people despise free-market economies. They consider free speech as a threat. And they fear competition because they know, somewhere deep down in their hearts, that what they are doing is wrong.
At bottom, the wokesters are aiming to usurp God. It was God who endowed humans with free will. The wokesters want to take that away.
First and foremost, the government’s job is to protect the inalienable rights of its citizens. In America, the government does not dole out rights to those whom they view as fit. God gives these rights to everyone. They cannot be taken away.
When it comes to business, if the government intervenes, it must be to protect the rights of citizens, not dictate them. More states — all states — should follow Texas’ lead.
https://thefederalistpapers.org/us/texas-fires-off-big-bank-discovering-anti-gun-policy
*********************************************Australian Labor party risks getting on wrong side of religious leaders over school hiring rights
Anthony Albanese’s initial response to the concerns of faith-based schools being severely limited in their rights to hire teachers who share the same faith is true, but risks being seen as tricky.
After the Prime Minister was asked in his own party room about the fears of religious schools being denied the existing right to preference teachers in employment who share the same faith and ethos of the school he said Labor had supported the position “for a long time”.
This is true and it is also true that the Australian Law Reform Commission’s proposal still “allows” schools to preference teachers of the same faith when hiring.
But, the reality, particularly as all the religious schools of all faiths see it, is that the commission’s proposal is such a severe limitation of that right, with so many potential legal hazards, challenges and costs, that it is a denial of that right.
The commission has proposed that faith-based schools only be allowed to preference teachers who would support the school’s ethos in a role where “religion is a genuine requirement” while in all other subjects teachers would not have to share the schools beliefs, ethos or even have to support those beliefs.
The argument is that teachers of religion would be allowed to be hired with a preference over teachers who didn’t share the school’s faith or ethos but all others would be subject to the same employment requirements as state schools.
The religious schools argue this would defeat the creation of an ethos, put a new and uncertain test into employment law, increase litigation and deter schools from hiring a candidate of the same religion in preference to other candidates.
This mix of religious rights, the rights of parents, employment rights and gay rights has dogged governments for more than a decade, cost Scott Morrison dearly in his inability to bring forward religious protection laws and is recognised by Labor as a potent political issue.
Albanese’s reassurance to his colleagues reinforces the ALP argument that religious teachers will be allowed to be hired on the basis of religious belief and that will satisfy the faith-based schools.
But, the faith-based schools are aware of the impact of the detail of the proposal and see a threat to their ability to operate as faith-based schools in the interests of millions of students and parents.
As shadow attorney-general, Julian Leeser, argues: “If the only people that are modelling a life of faith is the religious education teacher then the school is no different to a government school where you have … a special religious education class for a session once a week.”
“This is about schools creating communities of practice. Schools creating teachers that model a life of faith,” he said.
The 30 faith leaders who have reacted strongly to the proposal argue: “The purpose of religious schools is not only to impart intellectual knowledge, but also to instil religious values. In addition to teaching the prescribed curriculum, they provide religious activities that seek to demonstrate to students what a life lived in accordance with the relevant religion looks and feels like in practice.”
Labor needs to recognise that glossing over significant detail with a general affirmation is not going to pacify the religious leaders who are clearly not going to allow the millions of fee-paying parents to be fobbed off with disingenuous claims to longstanding positions.
****************************************
My other blogs. Main ones below:
http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)
http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)
http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)
http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)
http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs
*****************************************
/>
Kristina Pimenova, once said to be the most beautiful girl in the world. Note blue eyes and blonde hair
Bliss: What every woman wants: to feel safe and secure in the arms of her man. Robert Irwin and Rorie Buckey. See 
1 comment:
The Democratic party also openly embraces racism as much today today as it ever has in the past. The only thing that's changed is the targets of their racism.
Post a Comment