First, a prefatory note from the translator:
This article is by the blogger Roger from the blog Muslimska Friskolan, “the Muslim free-school”. The blogger quite often does his own journalism, as well as discussing different articles and reports, like the much-discussed Rosengård report, by the Defense College of Sweden (which this article is also about).
The article is an interview with the press secretary of the Swedish Security Police (SÄPO). If this is a fairly accurate representation of the interview, it speaks volumes about how political correctness in the Multicultural age is hampering and harming the work of the Security Police and forces their press secretary to practice dissimulation. That in itself gives us a frightening picture of the price of the political elite’s abdication of responsibility for the issue of Muslim radicalization; in fear of the Islamophobia and racism-brand, Swedish authorities are practicing taqiyya.
It’s a tragic irony that the Security Police can’t stand up and say that radical Muslims are a threat to Swedish democracy, given that their crest contains the words: The Security Police — We protect Sweden and democracy.
Here we have the standard trademarked fallback position of “the few violent radicals”. And all the other radicals present no danger, and they are welcome to influence Swedish society as much as they want and can — since they aren’t violent at the moment. This interview shows us that either the Security Police are very much unaware of what Islam is, its history and tenets and the inbuilt supremacy of all the Islamic sects, that Islam is a political ideology as much as a religion, and the legally prescribed subjugation of women and non-Muslims, or the Security Police do know about this, but fear the public stigma to say so aloud. So, the press secretary has to wiggle like a worm on a hook, until the logical finishing statement, that the Security Police are fully OK with Muslim radicalism and that they do not see that as constituting a threat. Only the few radicals turning to violence.
He says this as the representative of the Security Police, who hold the responsibility to protect my country and family from those who want and are intent on the destruction of Swedish constitutional democracy and its replacement with Islamic shari’a law. It is to the shame of all Swedes that this continues, most especially to those in power.
And now CB’s translation of the Muslimska Friskolan post:
Interview with SÄPO about the Rosengård report- - - - - - - - -
Today, Monday June 15th, the blog Muslimska Friskolan [Muslim free-school] obtained an interview with SÄPO. It was the Security police’s press secretary Patrik Peter who promised the blog that he would answer a couple questions and examine the SÄPO commissioner’s Saturday interview [on Swedish public radio] from June 13, 2009:
(Earlier blog post)
Journalists may phone the Security police’s press secretary Patrik Peter at 010-568 79 00.
You may also reach Patrik by e-mail
SÄPO’s press secretary Patrik Peter is a diligent and accessible person. He answered his work-phone on Sunday June 14, 2009. It was only a day later, and he had already gone through the contents of the radio interview with SÄPO commissioner Anders Danielsson. He had also familiarized himself with the extent to which the Defense College’s Rosengård report agrees with SÄPO’s view.
Press secretary Patrik Peter recounted that when Anders Danielsson earlier was county police commissioner, regular meetings with SÄPO were part of the agenda. Now that Danielsson is SÄPO commissioner the meetings with police authorities are also regular. How regular the meetings are is classified.
The press secretary can or will not answer whether or not radicalization among Muslims in Rosengård has increased. He says that in his Saturday interview the SÄPO commissioner meant that radicalization in Rosengård is not worse than in other similar suburbs in Sweden.
The blog now puts forward its objection that at least two of three SÄPO co-workers witnessed that the Rosengård report said that radicalization in Rosengård had increased. The press secretary answered that he does not know what the three co-workers answered. The blog reported to the press secretary that 29 of the 30 interviewed answered independently of each other that radicalization has increased. Three of those interviewed were from SÄPO. Thus, at least two of these are of the opinion that radicalization in Rosengård has increased.
The press secretary then answers that radicalization of Muslims in Rosengård isn’t a threat to democracy, according to SÄPO commissioner Anders Danielsson. He continues by saying that only if radicalization turns violent is it a threat to democracy.
The blog then asks the press secretary whether the closed basement mosque in Rosengård with ensuing riots signified violence. The press secretary agrees.
In addition, the blog asks about the closed basement mosque that belonged to the Islamist Islamic Culture Association. The blog claims that the basement mosque wasn’t closed for the premises to become a living-school, but because SÄPO, among others, participated in closing the basement mosque since it constituted a threat to democracy.
The press secretary had nothing to object to in that description.
The blog further asks whether the current daily stone-throwing against firemen and police by Muslims in Rosengård means that radicalization has turned violent and become a threat to democracy.
The press secretary answers that the SÄPO commissioner in the Saturday interview meant that it’s impossible to compare it with the unrest in France.
The blog then wonders if firemen who are pelted daily with stones and bottles and are on the sick-list, and the police who have to back off in Rosengård, will be of the same opinion as the SÄPO commissioner, that it’s OK for them to be subjected to this, since it’s nothing compared to how it is in France.
The press secretary now understands that the SÄPO commissioner’s comparison with France is lame.
The blog also asks about the SÄPO commissioner’s judgment when he compares Rosengård with France. When the riots started in France the police, the press, and other authorities said that something similar could not happen in Sweden. Shortly after that, it started in Rosengård. Is it not the same radicalization that turns violent?
The press secretary answers that in Paris it was of a much larger scope.
The blog answers that Paris is Europe’s largest city, with ten million inhabitants and many times more suburbs. But the exact same things happens with burned cars, war against the police and stone throwing against firemen in Rosengård in the forty times smaller city of Malmö. Shall then the inhabitants who are insecure in Rosengård say only that it’s no danger, since it happens in more suburbs in France?
The press secretary does not know how he should answer.
The blog continues to criticize the judgment of the SÄPO commissioner and relate how the academic essay about Anders Danielsson showed that those working under him when he was county police commissioner in Skåne gave many examples of his poor judgment and bullying management. Just some months prior to the essay’s presentation, Justice Minister Beatrice Ask appointed county police commissioner Anders Danielsson to the new commissioner of SÄPO. If the essay had been published before, the appointment might never have become appropriate, because then his leadership style would have been revealed:
The blog returns to ask the SÄPO commissioner’s view of the Rosengård report.
The press secretary answers that SÄPO’s objection is that it was drawn from as few persons as 30.
The blog wonders about at least two and perhaps three SÄPO co-workers who assert that radicalization has increased in Rosengård.
The press secretary says that radicalization is no threat to democracy.
The blog then wonders why SÄPO maps Muslims with radical views as one of its tasks, if increasing radicalization is not a security threat.
The press secretary grows silent.
The blog wonders why free-religious [free-religious as opposed to the former, Lutheran, state church] Christian sects with radical views are not being mapped by SÄPO, while Muslims who are radical are being mapped.
The press secretary does not want to answer.
The blog continues to ask if that depends on the fact that free-religious Christians with radical views do not turn to violence in Sweden, while some radical Muslims do.
The press secretary has no objections.
The blog wonders if it is indeed true that radicalization of Muslims is a threat to democracy, since SÄPO is mapping them, and SÄPO has the task of mapping threats to democracy.
The press secretary stands by his statement that it is only a threat to democracy when violence ensues.
The blog wonders whether radicalization of Muslims means increasing violence against subjugated and oppressed women, increasing violence against moderate Muslims, and also increasing violence against Swedish society in the shape of stone-throwing and bottle-throwing, honor-violence, and more.
The press secretary answers that SÄPO commissioner Anders Danielsson only means that the Defense College has gone to far when calling increased radicalization in Rosengård a threat to democracy.
The blog then asks about the meaning of the decision in the first place to do the Rosengård report and examine if radicalization in Rosengård has increased, if radicalization among Muslims is no threat to democracy?
The press secretary answers that SÄPO is fully OK with a radicalization of Muslims. They do not constitute a threat. Only a few radical Muslims who resort to violence are a threat.
Therefore, to sum up, the blog Muslimska Friskolan can only draw one conclusion. Congratulation to all Muslims in Sweden. You can freely radicalize. Get to it! You have SÄPO by your side.