Aggregator
Swedish Police Veteran Warns Islamization Is Replacing Gang Violence As Country's Defining Threat
A veteran Swedish police officer says tougher criminal laws have sharply improved security in Uppsala, but warns that Islamization and parallel social structures now pose a deeper long-term threat.
Maria Rosander, a police officer of 17 years and Sweden Democrat group leader in Uppsala, told Samnytt that conditions for officers had changed dramatically since shootings and explosions reached crisis levels.
“From a police point of view, it’s like night and day,” she said.
Rosander credited tougher sentences, expanded surveillance, better cooperation between police regions, and greater use of covert measures. Suspected young gang recruits can now be intercepted before carrying out attacks, she said.
The improvement showed that political decisions could reverse criminal decline, but it still has a long way to go. “We have come to the conclusion that it is not profitable to be a criminal,” Rosander said.
However, the police chief suggested that while legislation to tackle gang violence was starting to produce the desired effect, religious segregation and increased Islamization across Swedish society remain a huge problem.
“Islamization is a contributing factor to what we have seen in society. I am absolutely convinced of that,” she said.
Rosander described the mosque in Uppsala as a symbol of segregation, honor-based oppression and unequal treatment of men and women. She said female officers were often ignored in favor of male colleagues and claimed girls in heavily segregated areas were kept away from public life.
“We are letting Islamization creep in to the point where we will not be able to say no,” she said. “Society is being eaten from within.”
Rosander called for a halt to new mosque construction, restrictions on the niqab and burqa in public, and a ban on children wearing Islamic veils.
She also rejected the language of integration. “I think we should talk about assimilation,” she said.
Swedish society, Rosander argued, should not continually adapt to newcomers who maintain separate cultural and social systems. She criticized multilingual municipal information, saying it removed incentives to learn Swedish.
Rosander further claimed that parallel structures were facilitating welfare abuse, false address registration, and informal financial transfers through religious networks.
She described couples registering at separate addresses while remaining married under Islamic law, allowing them to claim additional housing and benefits.
“The woman receives housing allowance, extra allowance and an apartment for her children,” she said. “The man also receives an apartment that he rents out illegally.”
Rosander also warned that foreign criminal gang networks were deeply established in Uppsala’s vulnerable districts. “We absolutely have gang structures in our society,” she said.
She said extended families repeatedly appeared in criminal investigations and described reports of business owners being forced to pay protection money.
“It’s classic mafia,” she said. “I see clan and mafia as basically the same thing.”
“It’s not the Swedes. These are foreign groups that have connections to organized crime and networks,” Rosander added.
“It is not Swedish youth who commit these crimes.”
Rosander called for stricter background checks for sensitive public-sector positions, arguing that clan loyalty could override loyalty to Swedish institutions.
She also criticized Uppsala Municipality for allegedly failing to scrutinize the foreign funding of Muslim associations and mosque projects.
“If you can’t account for 100 percent where the money comes from, it should never be opened,” she said.
Rosander supports an active remigration policy and wants Uppsala to establish a municipal unit focused on illegal residence, improper settlement, and misuse of public housing.
“For me, remigration is necessary,” she said.
She said Sweden’s success in reducing crime proved that its cultural decline could be reversed, but only if politicians were willing to confront uncomfortable realities.
“As a Swede, I should not have to change my life and start deviating from things that we in Sweden have always done just to suit someone else,” she said.
Read the full interview here.
Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 02:00ICE urges North Carolina to keep illegal immigrant charged in triple-fatal hit-and-run behind bars
Kelsey Grammer warns of chilling danger facing Americans who forget nation’s founding history
Iconic California restaurant chain offers brutal takedown of home state
Hasan Piker tells Mamdani to ‘shut the f— up’ over cautious messaging, claims mayor needs to be more ‘bold’
Rep. Ayanna Pressley speaks out after teen found shot dead at husband’s Boston property
NYPD hate crimes unit investigating separate antisemitic and anti-Muslim attacks across NYC
Minnesota assassin Vance Boelter who killed top state Dem Melissa Hortman, her husband to be sentenced
Jack Smith hit with criminal referral for allegedly making false statements to Congress about Trump probe: ‘Strong evidence’
Paul Blackburn is no longer a Yankees secret as he continues stellar work
Transfer mystery swirls around NYCFC star Nicolás Fernández Mercau
Selfless cop proposed to girlfriend just hours before sacrificing his life to save her from raging river
Battle of the Badges: The greatest rivalry in NY returns to Citi Field
Caitlin Clark picks up seventh technical foul of season — and is one away from a suspension
Delta pilot spooked with false warning of rocket launcher attack while landing at LaGuardia Airport
Yankees know they need ‘everyone to step up’ as offensive woes deepen
Matt Freese gets heavily booed in first game back with NYCFC after USMNT World Cup blunder
Washington Can't Afford To Let The US Lose The Open-Source AI War
Authored by Julio Rivera via American Greatness,
President Trump was right about China.
Long before it became conventional wisdom in Washington, he recognized that America wasn't simply competing with another trading partner. China was executing a long-term strategy to dominate the industries that would define the 21st century. From manufacturing and telecommunications to semiconductors and artificial intelligence, Beijing understood that technological leadership translates directly into economic and geopolitical power.Artificial intelligence is the next front in that competition, and the United States cannot afford to get it wrong. The greatest danger isn't that China builds a better AI model. It's that China builds the AI platform the rest of the world decides to use. Those are two very different contests.
Recent research suggests Beijing has chosen a strategy designed for long-term dominance rather than short-term profits. A June 2026 analysis by FourthWeb concluded that "Chinese open source AI models have quietly surpassed their American competitors" on several important benchmarks while "U.S. companies like Anthropic and OpenAI have gone increasingly proprietary." Another report, China's Open Source Strategy and Its Global Implications, found that Chinese firms, including Alibaba and DeepSeek, are making "a huge bet on open source," releasing state-of-the-art AI models for anyone to use, improve, and build upon.
That isn't generosity. It's geopolitical strategy. When Alibaba released its Qwen models, developers didn't simply download them. They began creating new products, businesses, and applications on top of them. Today there are more than 180,000 derivative versions in 119 languages. Every one of those projects pulls more developers, companies, and institutions into China's technological ecosystem.
Technology works a lot like language. The language everyone learns eventually becomes the language everyone speaks. The operating system everyone builds on becomes the operating system that dominates the market. The AI platform developers choose today will influence which country sets the standards tomorrow.
China understands that better than many people on Capitol Hill and in Silicon Valley. Some of America's leading AI companies have taken the opposite approach. Rather than encouraging widespread adoption, they are moving toward increasingly closed systems that maximize subscription revenue and centralized control. That may be good for quarterly earnings, but it limits how quickly American technology spreads throughout the global economy.
FourthWeb captured the contrast in one sentence: "Chinese open models winning on capability, U.S. closed models winning on revenue."
Lawmakers need to understand that Silicon Valley revenue matters, but winning matters more. History shows that the cheapest and easiest technology often becomes the global standard. Businesses rarely choose the most expensive option simply because it's American. They choose the platform that is flexible, affordable, and easy to integrate into existing operations.
Open-source AI gives startups, manufacturers, hospitals, and even allied governments the ability to deploy powerful models on their own infrastructure while keeping sensitive information in-house. They aren't forced to send proprietary data through someone else's servers or commit to increasingly expensive licensing agreements.
Some organizations have reportedly reduced AI deployment costs by as much as two-thirds by using open models such as Alibaba's Qwen. That's the kind of economic advantage businesses notice.
If the most affordable, adaptable AI platform in the world is Chinese, companies around the globe will build on Chinese technology. Once that happens, China gains something far more valuable than another software customer. It gains influence over the next generation of digital infrastructure.
America shouldn't hand Beijing that opportunity.
Closed AI models create another strategic problem. They concentrate technological power inside a small number of corporations. If America's AI future depends on two or three dominant companies, innovation inevitably narrows. Smaller firms struggle to compete. Universities face higher barriers to experimentation. Manufacturers become customers instead of innovators. Entrepreneurs spend more time paying licensing fees than building new products.
That isn't how America became the world's technology leader. Our greatest strength has always been broad participation. We led the personal computer revolution because thousands of companies competed. We led the internet revolution because innovators could build without asking permission. America has always won by expanding opportunity, not restricting it.
Artificial intelligence should be no different.
Anthropic has made no secret of its preference for closed AI models. The company argues that limiting access reduces the risks of misuse, cybercrime, and disinformation. Those concerns deserve serious consideration. Advanced AI carries real risks, and policymakers should not dismiss them.
But those safety concerns also align with a business model built around proprietary technology, recurring subscriptions, and centralized control.
Policymakers should recognize that what serves a company's commercial interests does not always serve America's strategic interests. A closed ecosystem may maximize revenue for a handful of firms, but it also limits the number of developers, startups, manufacturers, and researchers who can build on American technology. At a time when China is encouraging global adoption of its open-source models, that tradeoff deserves far more attention than it has received.
There is also a practical consideration. Anthropic's Claude models have become increasingly expensive to deploy at scale. Large corporations may be able to absorb those costs, but many startups, universities, and midsize businesses cannot. High prices inevitably slow adoption, and adoption is what ultimately determines which technological ecosystem becomes the global standard.
The country whose AI is used by the greatest number of builders - not simply the one with the most valuable AI company - will enjoy the greatest long-term strategic advantage.
President Trump correctly challenged the assumption that America could outsource strategic industries without consequences. Artificial intelligence deserves the same level of urgency.
Capitol Hill shouldn't measure success by the market capitalization of a handful of AI companies. It should measure success by how many American businesses build on American technology, how many universities teach it, how many entrepreneurs launch companies with it, and how many allies choose American AI over Chinese alternatives.
The AI race won't be won by whichever company reports the strongest quarterly earnings. It will be won by whichever country creates the largest community of innovators. China has already made its choice. America should make its own before the rest of the world makes it for us.
Julio Rivera is a business and political strategist, cybersecurity researcher, founder of ItFunk.org and ReactionaryTimes.com, and a political commentator and columnist. His writing, focused on cybersecurity and politics, has appeared in major publications around the world.
Tyler Durden Wed, 07/22/2026 - 23:25