Yep, that's the head-scratcher for me.
“Yep, that’s the head-scratcher for me.”
Shouldn’t be...it’s their religion and history. If France had simply limited their immigration to Christians from sub-Saharan Africa, for example, they may have still had problems, particularly when Leftists riled them up in race riots (as in the US), but they would not be facing a credible insurrection that may well topple the government there.
Bringing in Algerians and others like them was a time bomb, and the warnings as to the risks were TOTALLY KNOWN by the people in power, as this is far from the first riot and their pronouncements stating their goals (taking full control of European countries) are there for all to see. But the Globalists running France (and most of Western Europe) somehow thought that they could use the ‘energy’ of these migrants for their own political objectives (to keep voting for White Globalists), but, obviously, they were totally wrong on that.
And here I will take my usual wild guess.
In some respects, Sweden was an enabler of Nazi Germany. They sold Germany high-grade iron ore, iron necessary to make tank and ship steel. This trade probably prolonged the war. Sweden also permitted German units in Norway to cross Sweden on the way to Finland.
On the other hand, neutral Sweden was in a bind, surrounded on all sides by the Axis. So they had to be careful.
What’s my point? I wonder if there’s a bit of lingering moral guilt there. And the Swedes are trying to assuage that guilt by admitting poor, helpless Muslim jihadists.