Explosion at concert in Manchester (UK) - Fatalities

[gimmick]

Sweden bit is fake news btw. Europe already tried genocide once when we had issues with one particular middle eastern nomadic tribe with weird religious beliefs. Sure 99.9% of them were peaceful, but it was scary when they arrived in large numbers and started multiplying. We first just shoved them in the ghettos and when that didn't work we gave genocide a go. Now i'm not saying there was anything wrong with that particular genocide (it was likely enjoyable to all involved parties), but it didn't really work that well and it was a lot of work with very little payoff.

Holocaust jokes now?

I thought you were above that.

Sweden isn't fake news. I have a good friend who lives there, and it's a real problem. There have even been laughable attempts to "teach" the Muslim immigrants there that Western culture doesn't allow raping and groping women at will. I wish I was making this up.

I also know a girl from Sweden who got groped by a Muslim immigrant on the subway. She went to a sexual assault counselor, who was very supportive at first. However, when describing the attacker, the girl said, "He was Arab and was probably one of the Muslim immigrants", the counselor (also a woman) suddenly got very snappy, and lectured how "you don't say things like that" and to "never describe the race of the person attacking you, only the attack itself".

When the girl asked her why she can't simply be honest about the fact that the attacker was Arab and appeared to be an immigrant, she was simply told, "You know we don't do things like that here."

That's the problem with today's left -- whether in the US or abroad. They're so afraid of giving ammunition to the "no Muslim immigrants" side that they are actually attempting to suppress factual discussion of the real problem being faced.

Well that's a convenient story of a girl you know. The rapes in Sweden meme that's been around since 2014 or something is straight up fake news. Just neo nazi propaganda, that has been adopted by right wing "media". It's been debunked multiple times. And the counter to that isn't a personal story from your not at all fictional friend.

I'm not saying that there are no interracial rapes/assaults. I'm saying there hasn't been a significant increase after Sweden took in more refugees.

I've even explained this meme on this forum before, but here's quick snopes article about it...

http://www.snopes.com/crime-sweden-rape-capital-europe/

...you can freely look up other sources. I personally looked it up in Swedish at the time it was relevant. The party that's mentioned in that story Sweden Democrats that's revels in any immigrant related story is a neo nazi front. Their leadership consists of former skinheads and they keep getting in to hate crime related scandals in Sweden.

Ps. Why would i be above holocaust jokes towards someone that doesn't know history of his own kin or maybe you just don't care when it's happening to someone else.

[Baron Von Strucker]

I wonder how many muslim mothers kept there daughters from going to the show that night?
these despicable people need to be hunted down and executed after some sever torture for info.
The only solution i could ever think that would work would be to incarcerate execute family friends of terrorist every time so the consequences for doing such a act has farther reaching consequences than the individual doing the act.

[Lord of the Fraud]

I wonder how many muslim mothers kept there daughters from going to the show that night?
these despicable people need to be hunted down and executed after some sever torture for info.
The only solution i could ever think that would work would be to incarcerate execute family friends of terrorist every time so the consequences for doing such a act has farther reaching consequences than the individual doing the act.

Bit silly that Baron.

But I've held a more watered down version of this idea for years. And more importantly, I think it's something we could pass in Parliament as law.

If anybody commits an act of terror in this country. Then we deport all close family members who were not born in this country back to where they originally came from.

Parents, siblings, aunts & uncles. Possibly even first cousins.

Not done as some sort of punishment. As more often than not these people will have no idea that their son was a cold blooded terrorist.

We should put it in place solely as a deterrent. It would have a dramatic effect and we'd see the Muslim communities take a far greater role in weeding out these radicalized animals before they carry out their acts of mass murder.

[Lord of the Fraud]

So apparently the UK has raised its thread level to "critical", and they are heavily patrolling the streets.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/24/europe...-uk/index.html

This is dumb. After all this time, governments still don't understand the patterns of terror attacks.

Terrorists do not fear death. What they do fear is failure. Getting caught or killed before completing their mission is considered a disaster, and is the worst-case scenario for them.

Therefore, terrorists typically take great care to choose targets and plan attacks with a high likelihood of success.

They are unlikely to attack the streets of the UK when it's crawling with cops.

They are unlikely to attack anywhere with high security, especially if it's temporary.

If they did have a second attack planned, it's not going to occur in the UK until everything calms down.

Even if the suicide bomber had an accomplice, and even if they have evidence that this accomplice is also planning to attack, it's much more likely that he's hiding somewhere and will surface when he feels it's easier to attack again without getting shot before completing it.

Going to chalk this one off to you being tired at the end of a very long day.

The idea of having greater visible security on the streets is to act as a deterrent and buy the likes of MI5 some time while they hunt down a possible active cell.

They want them to go to ground. I want them to go to ground!

[MrTickle]

Also, two weeks after 7/7 there was a copycat attempt. You can't say that there won't be a second attack.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/21_Jul...ondon_bombings

[Lord of the Fraud]

UK government & security agencies are furious with the US right now. Somebody/s is leaking highly sensitive information about the attack to the US media which is compromising the early but fast moving investigation.

The UK/US security agencies have always been super tight and the trust has always been there to share intelligence. This is why the UK are gobsmacked at these leaks. It goes against everything that has been in place for many decades.

[Dan Druff]

Holocaust jokes now?

I thought you were above that.

Sweden isn't fake news. I have a good friend who lives there, and it's a real problem. There have even been laughable attempts to "teach" the Muslim immigrants there that Western culture doesn't allow raping and groping women at will. I wish I was making this up.

I also know a girl from Sweden who got groped by a Muslim immigrant on the subway. She went to a sexual assault counselor, who was very supportive at first. However, when describing the attacker, the girl said, "He was Arab and was probably one of the Muslim immigrants", the counselor (also a woman) suddenly got very snappy, and lectured how "you don't say things like that" and to "never describe the race of the person attacking you, only the attack itself".

When the girl asked her why she can't simply be honest about the fact that the attacker was Arab and appeared to be an immigrant, she was simply told, "You know we don't do things like that here."

That's the problem with today's left -- whether in the US or abroad. They're so afraid of giving ammunition to the "no Muslim immigrants" side that they are actually attempting to suppress factual discussion of the real problem being faced.

Well that's a convenient story of a girl you know. The rapes in Sweden meme that's been around since 2014 or something is straight up fake news. Just neo nazi propaganda, that has been adopted by right wing "media". It's been debunked multiple times. And the counter to that isn't a personal story from your not at all fictional friend.

I'm not saying that there are no interracial rapes/assaults. I'm saying there hasn't been a significant increase after Sweden took in more refugees.

I've even explained this meme on this forum before, but here's quick snopes article about it...

http://www.snopes.com/crime-sweden-rape-capital-europe/

...you can freely look up other sources. I personally looked it up in Swedish at the time it was relevant. The party that's mentioned in that story Sweden Democrats that's revels in any immigrant related story is a neo nazi front. Their leadership consists of former skinheads and they keep getting in to hate crime related scandals in Sweden.

Ps. Why would i be above holocaust jokes towards someone that doesn't know history of his own kin or maybe you just don't care when it's happening to someone else.

Jews in 1930s Europe were nothing like today's Muslims in Europe. The comparison is so absurd that I won't even waste the time explaining it.

Snopes is garbage when it comes to politically charged topics. Unfortunately they branched out from a reliable internet hoax fact checker to a left-biased phony fact checker to push a specific political agenda.

When asked about snopes, my answer is always, "Great for checking out hoax suspicions, horrible for everything else."

Snopes has taken advantage of their good name they earned from fact-checking internet hoaxes and figured they could report biased political news and still receive the same degree of credibility.

Similarly, think of what I do.

I'm pretty sure you would trust my analysis of a potential poker or casino scam.

I'm pretty sure you would rate me as very reliable and unbiased in my analysis of such scams.

Would you trust me to give unbiased political analysis? Pretty sure the answer is no, as you would state that my political posts usually have a conservative bias to them.

Same idea with snopes.

[Dan Druff]

So apparently the UK has raised its thread level to "critical", and they are heavily patrolling the streets.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/24/europe...-uk/index.html

This is dumb. After all this time, governments still don't understand the patterns of terror attacks.

Terrorists do not fear death. What they do fear is failure. Getting caught or killed before completing their mission is considered a disaster, and is the worst-case scenario for them.

Therefore, terrorists typically take great care to choose targets and plan attacks with a high likelihood of success.

They are unlikely to attack the streets of the UK when it's crawling with cops.

They are unlikely to attack anywhere with high security, especially if it's temporary.

If they did have a second attack planned, it's not going to occur in the UK until everything calms down.

Even if the suicide bomber had an accomplice, and even if they have evidence that this accomplice is also planning to attack, it's much more likely that he's hiding somewhere and will surface when he feels it's easier to attack again without getting shot before completing it.

are you suggesting in the immediate aftermath of a terrorist attack they should lower the threat level and reduce patrols/security of potential future targets? they should do nothing and just carry on like the situation is normal?

are you just being captain obvious here or do you think there is a more appropriate response to an attack like this?

just to recap:

-a deadly terrorist attack occurred outside a pop concert targeting and killing young children
-govt raises the threat level from where it was prior to the attack
-police patrols are ordered to be increased

what bizarro world am i living in where this response is "dumb?"

i guess it would be more appropriate to lower the threat level and give the police some time off since there is clearly no risk of further attacks according to your perfect hindsight regarding past events?

Because it's just a feelgood move to make people FEEL safe when the threat is still fresh in people's minds.

The only justification for raising a "threat level" or increasing visible patrols is if you have uncovered information that there is a second attacker who planned an immediate follow-up attack, but hasn't done so yet.

If that's really what was found, then this is fine.

But I see this as the response after every terrorist attack, and it's more for symbolism than providing any real protection.

If I were a terrorist looking to make a second attack, I would simply cool my heels for another month and attack when everyone's guard is back down. Terrorist aren't stupid, and they realize when their odds are higher.

[TheXFactor]

These guys were amateurs.

The big terrorist organizations will look at this attack and prepare something far bigger.

I won't be going to any big stadiums for a long time.

All a terrorist has to do now is set off a bomb outside the stadium, then set off more bombs, once thousands of people come running out of it.
The people will come running to the terrorists outside and you will see hundreds of people getting killed.

[RealTalk]

are you suggesting in the immediate aftermath of a terrorist attack they should lower the threat level and reduce patrols/security of potential future targets? they should do nothing and just carry on like the situation is normal?

are you just being captain obvious here or do you think there is a more appropriate response to an attack like this?

just to recap:

-a deadly terrorist attack occurred outside a pop concert targeting and killing young children
-govt raises the threat level from where it was prior to the attack
-police patrols are ordered to be increased

what bizarro world am i living in where this response is "dumb?"

i guess it would be more appropriate to lower the threat level and give the police some time off since there is clearly no risk of further attacks according to your perfect hindsight regarding past events?

Because it's just a feelgood move to make people FEEL safe when the threat is still fresh in people's minds.

The only justification for raising a "threat level" or increasing visible patrols is if you have uncovered information that there is a second attacker who planned an immediate follow-up attack, but hasn't done so yet.

If that's really what was found, then this is fine.

But I see this as the response after every terrorist attack, and it's more for symbolism than providing any real protection.

If I were a terrorist looking to make a second attack, I would simply cool my heels for another month and attack when everyone's guard is back down. Terrorist aren't stupid, and they realize when their odds are higher.

you still havent said what the proper response is. obviously trying to calm and reassure the general public is "dumb." better to just tell the boys in blue to pack it in for the day and let paranoia and mass hysteria take over.

it is really perplexing to me that a person who thinks we need to send our military to intervene in jamaica to thwart WU romance scammers is against a raised threat level and increased police activity immediately following a deadly terrorist attack. does not compute.

[Dan Druff]

Because it's just a feelgood move to make people FEEL safe when the threat is still fresh in people's minds.

The only justification for raising a "threat level" or increasing visible patrols is if you have uncovered information that there is a second attacker who planned an immediate follow-up attack, but hasn't done so yet.

If that's really what was found, then this is fine.

But I see this as the response after every terrorist attack, and it's more for symbolism than providing any real protection.

If I were a terrorist looking to make a second attack, I would simply cool my heels for another month and attack when everyone's guard is back down. Terrorist aren't stupid, and they realize when their odds are higher.

you still havent said what the proper response is. obviously trying to calm and reassure the general public is "dumb." better to just tell the boys in blue to pack it in for the day and let paranoia and mass hysteria take over.

it is really perplexing to me that a person who thinks we need to send our military to intervene in jamaica to thwart WU romance scammers is against a raised threat level and increased police activity immediately following a deadly terrorist attack. does not compute.

So it sounds like you're agreeing with me that this is just a move to calm people, with little actual utility in saving lives.

I believe the proper response is to analyze what happened, aggressively find the responsible parties, and attempt to come up with plans for the future to prevent it (if possible).

A longer term increased police or tightened security presence would actually do some good. At some point, you can't strangle the population with excessive security measures, but a small but noticeable increase would probably be effective.

Something like, "We will be increasing police presence / security in these public areas for the long term, but while we are getting that in place, we will have extra security immediately" would be a good response.

Right now, the way it stands, the terrorists will say "lol extra security" and just wait a little longer before attacking.

[RealTalk]

you still havent said what the proper response is. obviously trying to calm and reassure the general public is "dumb." better to just tell the boys in blue to pack it in for the day and let paranoia and mass hysteria take over.

it is really perplexing to me that a person who thinks we need to send our military to intervene in jamaica to thwart WU romance scammers is against a raised threat level and increased police activity immediately following a deadly terrorist attack. does not compute.

So it sounds like you're agreeing with me that this is just a move to calm people, with little actual utility in saving lives.

I believe the proper response is to analyze what happened, aggressively find the responsible parties, and attempt to come up with plans for the future to prevent it (if possible).

A longer term increased police or tightened security presence would actually do some good. At some point, you can't strangle the population with excessive security measures, but a small but noticeable increase would probably be effective.

Something like, "We will be increasing police presence / security in these public areas for the long term, but while we are getting that in place, we will have extra security immediately" would be a good response.

Right now, the way it stands, the terrorists will say "lol extra security" and just wait a little longer before attacking.

so do you not think that there is a component of the "war" on terror that involves a propaganda battle for and against the minds and morale of the general public?

also are these terrorists infallible? do they not make mistakes and panic? the guy in paris ditched his bomb vest and fled like a bitch. he also slipped through the fingers of law enforcement initially, maybe if he encounters more than 1 officer he gets caught in a timely manner?

finally the UK has flat out said they have intel that this guy was part of a network that coordinated this attack. you really think they are just putting on a dog and pony show strictly as a show of symbolism?

[gimmick]

Well that's a convenient story of a girl you know. The rapes in Sweden meme that's been around since 2014 or something is straight up fake news. Just neo nazi propaganda, that has been adopted by right wing "media". It's been debunked multiple times. And the counter to that isn't a personal story from your not at all fictional friend.

I'm not saying that there are no interracial rapes/assaults. I'm saying there hasn't been a significant increase after Sweden took in more refugees.

I've even explained this meme on this forum before, but here's quick snopes article about it...

http://www.snopes.com/crime-sweden-rape-capital-europe/

...you can freely look up other sources. I personally looked it up in Swedish at the time it was relevant. The party that's mentioned in that story Sweden Democrats that's revels in any immigrant related story is a neo nazi front. Their leadership consists of former skinheads and they keep getting in to hate crime related scandals in Sweden.

Ps. Why would i be above holocaust jokes towards someone that doesn't know history of his own kin or maybe you just don't care when it's happening to someone else.

Jews in 1930s Europe were nothing like today's Muslims in Europe. The comparison is so absurd that I won't even waste the time explaining it.

Snopes is garbage when it comes to politically charged topics. Unfortunately they branched out from a reliable internet hoax fact checker to a left-biased phony fact checker to push a specific political agenda.

When asked about snopes, my answer is always, "Great for checking out hoax suspicions, horrible for everything else."

Snopes has taken advantage of their good name they earned from fact-checking internet hoaxes and figured they could report biased political news and still receive the same degree of credibility.

Similarly, think of what I do.

I'm pretty sure you would trust my analysis of a potential poker or casino scam.

I'm pretty sure you would rate me as very reliable and unbiased in my analysis of such scams.

Would you trust me to give unbiased political analysis? Pretty sure the answer is no, as you would state that my political posts usually have a conservative bias to them.

Same idea with snopes.

Jesus fucking Christ you think that was worth wasting both of our time? In the time it took you to bitch about snopes you could have read the article and the fact checked that if you cared enough.

Your super solid case about all the rapes in Sweden is based on a old neo nazi meme, your friend that wasn't raped and your own bias. That's some reliable shit.

Neo nazi meme precedes Syrian refugee wave. Before it was just immigrants in general, but after the latest refugee wave it was updated to tie it to Syrians.

In 2015 rapes went down 12% in Sweden. Is that something we should credit immigrants or does this only work one way. It's an easy figure you can look up or you can keep spreading fake news.

[Cupid Stunt]

Jews in 1930s Europe were nothing like today's Muslims in Europe. The comparison is so absurd that I won't even waste the time explaining it.

Snopes is garbage when it comes to politically charged topics. Unfortunately they branched out from a reliable internet hoax fact checker to a left-biased phony fact checker to push a specific political agenda.

When asked about snopes, my answer is always, "Great for checking out hoax suspicions, horrible for everything else."

Snopes has taken advantage of their good name they earned from fact-checking internet hoaxes and figured they could report biased political news and still receive the same degree of credibility.

Similarly, think of what I do.

I'm pretty sure you would trust my analysis of a potential poker or casino scam.

I'm pretty sure you would rate me as very reliable and unbiased in my analysis of such scams.

Would you trust me to give unbiased political analysis? Pretty sure the answer is no, as you would state that my political posts usually have a conservative bias to them.

Same idea with snopes.

Jesus fucking Christ you think that was worth wasting both of our time? In the time it took you to bitch about snopes you could have read the article and the fact checked that if you cared enough.

Your super solid case about all the rapes in Sweden is based on a old neo nazi meme, your friend that wasn't raped and your own bias. That's some reliable shit.

Neo nazi meme precedes Syrian refugee wave. Before it was just immigrants in general, but after the latest refugee wave it was updated to tie it to Syrians.

In 2015 rapes went down 12% in Sweden. Is that something we should credit immigrants or does this only work one way. It's an easy figure you can look up or you can keep spreading fake news.

But then went up again in 2016...


I'm not getting involved between you and Druff, but honestly, that Snopes article is sketchy.

For instance:

"The idea that sexual crimes in Sweden are rising isn’t limited to partisan media. On 8 February 2017, the mainstream American publication USA Today made a claim similar to Farage’s comments:


Sweden has about 47 reported rape cases per 100,000 people, according to a 2014 survey by the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, which provides data about the 28-nation EU, including Sweden. That compares to about three reported rape cases per 100,000 in Portugal.

But, again, this apparent disparity may have less to do with the amount of rape in each country, and more to do with a difference in how each country defines and records rape."

"May" have. Right. Or may NOT have. They can't say, because as the article says, the Swedish terms for rape have broadened.

"While the graph does seem to indicate a general upward trend in rape since 2005, the numbers do not tell the whole story. Brå notes in both 2005 and 2013, Sweden broadened its definition of rape, contributing to the apparent upward trend"

LOL


If I would have submitted this when I was doing media in college, instafail.

[gimmick]

Jesus fucking Christ you think that was worth wasting both of our time? In the time it took you to bitch about snopes you could have read the article and the fact checked that if you cared enough.

Your super solid case about all the rapes in Sweden is based on a old neo nazi meme, your friend that wasn't raped and your own bias. That's some reliable shit.

Neo nazi meme precedes Syrian refugee wave. Before it was just immigrants in general, but after the latest refugee wave it was updated to tie it to Syrians.

In 2015 rapes went down 12% in Sweden. Is that something we should credit immigrants or does this only work one way. It's an easy figure you can look up or you can keep spreading fake news.

But then went up again in 2016...


I'm not getting involved between you and Druff, but honestly, that Snopes article is sketchy.

For instance:

"The idea that sexual crimes in Sweden are rising isn’t limited to partisan media. On 8 February 2017, the mainstream American publication USA Today made a claim similar to Farage’s comments:


Sweden has about 47 reported rape cases per 100,000 people, according to a 2014 survey by the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, which provides data about the 28-nation EU, including Sweden. That compares to about three reported rape cases per 100,000 in Portugal.

But, again, this apparent disparity may have less to do with the amount of rape in each country, and more to do with a difference in how each country defines and records rape."

"May" have. Right. Or may NOT have. They can't say, because as the article says, the Swedish terms for rape have broadened.

"While the graph does seem to indicate a general upward trend in rape since 2005, the numbers do not tell the whole story. Brå notes in both 2005 and 2013, Sweden broadened its definition of rape, contributing to the apparent upward trend"

LOL


If I would have submitted this when I was doing media in college, instafail.

Yea it went up to 2014 levels in 2016. Stats kinda do that.

Yea Sweden has something like the broadest definition of rape, hence it appears hella rapey internationally. Pretty much any source should tell you that you can't compare countries with each other. It's the same thing why Australia and Canada had most kidnaps in the world in 2010 with 17 and 12.7 per 100000 people while Columbia and Mexico were at 0.6 and 1.1. Australia and Canada included child custody disputes to their figures.

Anyway back to raping...



...blue line is reported sexual offenses, red is rapes and green is national crime survey figures about rapes. Reported rapes went up from roughly 4000 to 6000 a year while the survey figures just stayed flat the whole time.

[Wiganer]

Swedish rape stats are meaningless without adjusting re Julian Assange.

[Cupid Stunt]

But then went up again in 2016...


I'm not getting involved between you and Druff, but honestly, that Snopes article is sketchy.

For instance:

"The idea that sexual crimes in Sweden are rising isn’t limited to partisan media. On 8 February 2017, the mainstream American publication USA Today made a claim similar to Farage’s comments:


Sweden has about 47 reported rape cases per 100,000 people, according to a 2014 survey by the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, which provides data about the 28-nation EU, including Sweden. That compares to about three reported rape cases per 100,000 in Portugal.

But, again, this apparent disparity may have less to do with the amount of rape in each country, and more to do with a difference in how each country defines and records rape."

"May" have. Right. Or may NOT have. They can't say, because as the article says, the Swedish terms for rape have broadened.

"While the graph does seem to indicate a general upward trend in rape since 2005, the numbers do not tell the whole story. Brå notes in both 2005 and 2013, Sweden broadened its definition of rape, contributing to the apparent upward trend"

LOL


If I would have submitted this when I was doing media in college, instafail.

Yea it went up to 2014 levels in 2016. Stats kinda do that.

Yea Sweden has something like the broadest definition of rape, hence it appears hella rapey internationally. Pretty much any source should tell you that you can't compare countries with each other. It's the same thing why Australia and Canada had most kidnaps in the world in 2010 with 17 and 12.7 per 100000 people while Columbia and Mexico were at 0.6 and 1.1. Australia and Canada included child custody disputes to their figures.

Anyway back to raping...



...blue line is reported sexual offenses, red is rapes and green is national crime survey figures about rapes. Reported rapes went up from roughly 4000 to 6000 a year while the survey figures just stayed flat the whole time.

The survey figures only represent around 15,000 respondents.

I'm not saying you are wrong, or right. The fact is, nobody knows.


https://www.bra.se/bra-in-english/ho...me-survey.html

Offences against individual persons
Of those who answered the questions in the 2016 SCS, 13.3 per cent state that during the course of 2015, they were exposed to one or more of the types of offences referred to in the report as offences against the person: assault, threats, sexual offences, robbery, fraud or harassment. This is an increase as compared with the preceding year (in 2014 the percentage was 11.3%), but is approximately the same level as in 2005. When compared with 2014, the increase was greatest for threats, sexual offences, and harassment. The results from coming years will show whether the increase for the most recent year is the beginning of a new trend, or a temporary deviation from an otherwise relatively stable level.

Until there is a decent sample size, then nobody can claim it is either true, or "fake news".

[Lord of the Fraud]

Former SAS man nails it for me.

(Bonus Thatcher clip at the end for Tory whores)

[Tellafriend]

These guys were amateurs.

The big terrorist organizations will look at this attack and prepare something far bigger.

I won't be going to any big stadiums for a long time.

All a terrorist has to do now is set off a bomb outside the stadium, then set off more bombs, once thousands of people come running out of it.
The people will come running to the terrorists outside and you will see hundreds of people getting killed.

Imagine the reaction to casino stocks, Paradise, Nevada, hell Nevada itself if just one bomb went off inside of the Bellagio. It would be over for them for good. Seems to me there was a similar 007 movie plot about the stock part...

[gimmick]

Yea it went up to 2014 levels in 2016. Stats kinda do that.

Yea Sweden has something like the broadest definition of rape, hence it appears hella rapey internationally. Pretty much any source should tell you that you can't compare countries with each other. It's the same thing why Australia and Canada had most kidnaps in the world in 2010 with 17 and 12.7 per 100000 people while Columbia and Mexico were at 0.6 and 1.1. Australia and Canada included child custody disputes to their figures.

Anyway back to raping...



...blue line is reported sexual offenses, red is rapes and green is national crime survey figures about rapes. Reported rapes went up from roughly 4000 to 6000 a year while the survey figures just stayed flat the whole time.

The survey figures only represent around 15,000 respondents.

I'm not saying you are wrong, or right. The fact is, nobody knows.


https://www.bra.se/bra-in-english/ho...me-survey.html

Offences against individual persons
Of those who answered the questions in the 2016 SCS, 13.3 per cent state that during the course of 2015, they were exposed to one or more of the types of offences referred to in the report as offences against the person: assault, threats, sexual offences, robbery, fraud or harassment. This is an increase as compared with the preceding year (in 2014 the percentage was 11.3%), but is approximately the same level as in 2005. When compared with 2014, the increase was greatest for threats, sexual offences, and harassment. The results from coming years will show whether the increase for the most recent year is the beginning of a new trend, or a temporary deviation from an otherwise relatively stable level.

Until there is a decent sample size, then nobody can claim it is either true, or "fake news".

15k is fairly decent from a population of 10million. Even if you go by official rape stats from the last 3 years there is no significant increase. In 2016 less incidents than 2014 and 2015 less than 2014. Between 2014-2016 Sweden took in something like 350k refugees. Might have been the most they have ever taken. It peaked in 2015 and that was the same year rapes dipped 12%. It's impossible to claim from those stats that rapes increased significantly because of migration. So of course you can say it's "fake news" (or propaganda if you like that word better).

The current rapes in Sweden story is about last few years. I think it did the rounds around February in the aftermath of Trump having said something stupid. Possibly 2016 numbers weren't even out then. Story in different forms has been debunked in like 4ish different news cycles. 2012ish the first time.

2005 and 2013 were the years they changed the way they define and record rape/sexual offenses. So the largest impact of that was for years 2006 and 2014.