'We are all immigrants': Swedish researchers

This is classic liberal gibberish! We are all immigrants? Now lets form, a circle on the floor, hold hands, and aaaaaallll the world's problems will be solved. What's the real purpose of this story, one asks?

This isn't classical liberal gibberish at all... I tried to explain this before in that one recent thread asking "What was Sweden like before immigration?".

There was no Sweden before immigration...

This isn't a political statement. It's a reality that what we think of as homogenous populations today consist of peoples who mixed and traveled around in the past. It's just a part of history, get over it Beynch.

yeah but this kind of history is usually brought up to say that swedes should not have anything against immigrants, since their ancestors were immigrants too.

the problem with that is that most people dont have anything against immigrants per se. they just dislike certain immigrant behaviour. therefore this article fails to do what it intended.

still, it s still interesting to hear where people came from. who were those hunter-gatherers and where did THEY come from, to begin with? what other peoples were they related to? i find it interesting to ask those questions. what i dont like is how they are increasingly used to make political statements.

12000 years ago Sweden was covered in ice.

There was no one in Scandinavia durind the ice age.

So everyone in Sweden is an immigrant.

Simple facts. Simple conclusion.

It is only a political statement if your political view is in some way affected by this information.

Surely it is obvious that people immigrate around the planet, otherwise we would all be living in the same village.

Bad news for the racists. Truth hurts.

what Benynch is worried about is that they may find that HE has got the same genes as somebody from the Middle East. Horror horror

The real crime about this whole thing is that your tax dollars paid for this 'study' that is 100% unnecessary. It is obvious that we are all 'immigrants'. Whether the results are used for political purposes is immaterial.

Suprise Suprise ......... we all knew this.

If you go enough past, we all come from the same root(whatever you believe). But you can't just compare a immigration flow of 50 years or so, with 12000 years of settlement.

I think this is extremely misleading, stupid plain crap. Yes, the first settlers to settle in Sweden were, yes immigrants...but that in NO way means that if you are a Swede, you are an immigrant, plain and utter non-sense. This is the dumbest study to date out of Sweden....If you apply this theory to other countries, you could also say, all Americans are immigrants, all of Britain are immigrants, all white people in Africa are immigrants and I can go on and on...If your born in Sweden, your Swedish, 100%, no question...as the same as if your born in America, your American.

Swedes are the descendants of immigrants who probably migrated from other parts of Europe just as the Britons were said to have migrated from places like Central Europe and the Basque region of Spain.

The complaints about immigration in Sweden are primarily directed towards non-European immigration so this news will do nothing to change those complaints.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/3348004/What-does-being-British-mean-Ask-the-Spanish.html

To the local: You have quoted the heading " We are all immigrants" but I do not see any direct quote of the sort in the article! Could you either please remove the quotation marks or include the quote in context in the article ?

What a hilarious article. Almost as funny as that one about the guy masturbating at the wheel of his truck. LOL.

So we need to reorganised the world borders like there were several thousands years ago.

Italy should reoccupied all middel eastern countries and chase all Arabs back to the Arabian desert where they come from.......I remind you that the Romans used to rule the middel east before the Arabs.....

Newsflash , as a species, we are all Africans! So were we all related to slaves too!? Can I get reparations and who would I get them from!? Can I have some grant money also to do a tediously obvious study?

@Beynch you silly tool, this article has nothing to do with politics or anything liberal. It is anthropological, pure and simple. Methinks you are trying to hide something :-)

Great.

Since it's now established that all human beings are immigrants... Does this now mean that non-muslims will be allowed to reside in Mecca?

.wink.

.

Honestly. Can't some of you people just enjoy reading about the results of some scientific research without getting your knickers all tied up in knots? It's HISTORY. To say that it is worthless would be about the same as to say that anthropology, sociology, mathematics, chemistry and biology are worthless.

The Human Genome project has recently arrived at some interesting assumptions. Taken the length of the period of evolution mankind has faced so far, the results they have gathered point to a possible event which nearly wiped out humankind. We may nearly have become extinct, and on more than one ocasion. The genetic differences between people should have been greater than they are now. Surely this is interesting information. It means that whatever event happened before could happen again and we could go the same way as the dinosaurs.

In the past decade or so researchers have also uncovered evidence that descendants of Scandinavians may have Thracian heritage. The Thracians were a race of tall, pale-skinned warrior seamen who showed up on the coast of Turkey out of the blue and settled there. No one knows where they came from originally, but they looked an awful lot like the Vikings according to evidence found. They intermarried with the local population and built a city state which we now know as Troy. During the years of the war with Greece (attributed to Helen), groups of refugees continuously fled Troy and spread across Europe. Many traveled up the Danube, settled around the region we know today as Germany and others continued north to Scandinavia, displaced "locals" (which could very well be this group of hunter-gatherers mentioned in the article), and settled here. They were probably the ancestors of many tribes the Romans liked to call barbarians.

I'm by no means a historian or expert in these fields, I merely enjoy reading about articles like the one above. Don't be spoil sports.

It reminds me "Animal farm" from Orwell, which somewhere say: All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than other animals…! What ever the purpose of this article might be; Sweden has an Orwellian society, from its blonds to the FRA law of bugging people.

@Pauli, I agree with you.

When do I cease to be called an immigrant in my own country when I am a decendant of the original settlers who created it?

This article is more foder for the islamists and newly arrived to use to make a case that I'm just as much of an immigrant as they are. B.S. !!!

My ancestors fought and died for this country over hundreds of years and dozens of generations.

The newly arrived now have another excuse NOT to integrate and learn but instead to impose their ways on me and my country. The article gives them another reason not to recognize that my country does indeed have a great history that was indeed created by MY ancestors. After all, I'm just another immigrant like them. My history here is meaningless to them. If anything, this article is an insult to me and my ancestors!

God help us all!!!

Desperate stuff from the libs, when they have to pay tax payers money to brief and hire professors to further the destruction of the fine Sweden as we used to know it. We all were cavemen once, but that is no arguement for flooding the country with them 20,000 years later!!!

Of course we are all immigrants if one goes far back enough in time, but that is true for the entire world outside of Africa, so that is a ridiculous statement by the maker of the headline for this article, only meant to catch attention. The article itself, however, is interesting, and fits well with linguistic research that indicate that indoeuropean speaking people settled in southern Sweden and Denmark, in what at some point became known as what may be translated as "Gothland" (today spelled "Jylland" on the western side of Kattegatt and "Götaland" on the eastern side of Kattegatt - same ethymology - and Jylland is spelled "Jutland" in German).

These people at least later became what we today refer to as germanic tribes, which before 250 A.D. had developed their language into proto-germanic, and had spread to the area of what today is the Netherlands and northern Germany. (The so-called germanic expansion out of southern Scandinavia took place during the period 750 A.D. to 0 A.D.) It is no coincidence that even today, most people from these areas share a common set of looks, and speak languages belonging to the germanic branch of the indoeuropean language tree. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Germanic

Correction: "A.D." should be "B.C."

Will The Local be publishing an article on how the Palestinians are all immigrants?

An immigrant is someone who has entered another country.

The word does NOT refer to the immigrants' descendants.

Why would the Local so badly distort the meaning of the word.

Most of Sweden is Not composed of immigrants.

So......does this justify Sweden's "Islamization".

@ Jonas

Again, that is just a theory and no more based upon the assumption that the bones found on this vast planet are really the oldest and also based on what we now know to be faulty Genome data!!

And the founders and subsequent indigenous populace of a country are not immigrants.

Ah this is so silly, im Swedish on both side since 1300 something, there we found the earliest information in church books.

Sweden is the most prewared nation in whole Europe, 45% of Swedes still have our pre-germanic hablogroup....WE ARE NOT the same as the immigrants of today!

All multi-kulti societies are going to hell, you can see this everywere so stop defending the shitty media.

By this defenition even if misquoted by the local we're all africian, as it's widely accepted that is where life started,before the human race went on it's world tour.nonsense.As one poster stated you can NOT compare thousands of years of permanet settlemet with fifty years of immigration from completely different cultures from the other side of the world,regardless of the possible pros and cons of said immigration.

Boy, this article really hit a raw nerve!

I'm eagerly awaiting the discovery of the origin of those hunters and gatherers. What if they came from Africa LOL!

So there you have it folks,...the farmers were ere first,...long,long before all the rest of you lot landed and messed the place up, with concrete jungles and your new fangled contraptions.

I imagine it must have been quite a nice place back then.

Now what have we got?,...lots and lots of immigrants,...including the so-called Swedes,... living in unsightly concrete blocks,.... while even the countryside has been destroyed with the original natural forests and vegetation having been replaced with thousands and thousands of acres of bladdy repetitive monotonous pine trees.

Its all a big shame really.

So can all you ppl. who have just arrived in the last 4000 years and messed the place up,....please pack your bags and return forthwith from whence you cometh?

.....and lets get the place back to the way it used to be!

They were not immigrants, they were pioneers. There was no established country to come and leach off of. They moved into the new area (uncoverd from the ice and created a nation).

If I was guessing I would look to the Western Slavs. Like the Wends/Sorbs of North-East Germany. Why:

1. Technology-They had the long boat and were very advanced sailors. You have to get to Sweden. One person may float on a log, but a group, with agricultural tools, needs a large sea going boat.

2. Culture- A Pagan culture that celebrates war, that gathers around strongmen as long as they can pay, feed, and reward them. Both cultures are based on free men who choose their leaders semi-democratically, so the leader who is rich and can provide hospitality is most likely to be King.

3. Opportunity- they occuppy the entire coast of modern Germany at the time. Who else would be there to discover the ice has melted? By the way, they had already pioneered/immigrated all the way from the plains of Russia, the distance across the North Sea/Baltic would be a lark if you had the technology and Warrior and ship wise they did.

4. Early Wendish history says the tribes split into three bodies when the leader died, one group went North (how the hell do you go North with out sailing, if you are on the North Coast of Germany), one group stayed put (modern German Wends and one group went south (Probably toward Venice, Italy).

We now know that Vikings were as far east as Kiev in Russia! How did they pass through Wendish Northern Germany? One ship against a whole country, would be pretty easy to block or ambush. But relatives from the same cultural group would have been welcomed by leaders of a hospitality based culture. Think of the begining of the poem "Beowulf." The Geats (Swedes) and the "Danes" are more Family groups than countries.

If somebody were to study the genetics in the graves I predict that you would find that they came from the plains of Russia to Kiev, thru the Czech Republic, into the Oder River area and Saxon area of Germany and across the sea to scandinavian countries.

Maybe even farther, they are finding Slavic DNA in early Ice Land and Greenland.

It is true bad news for racist. As matter of fact i gathered that our monarch are immigrants too. Most swedish have either german or russian link.

...If your born in Sweden, your Swedish, 100%, no question...as the same as if your born in America, your American. by lukystrike.

No all people born in Sweden with even a swedish passport is recognised as 100%Swedish and that is why this research is very interesting to me.

I am proud of my naturalized Swedish citizenship because I worked for it. It is based on the content of my character and nothing else. That's more important to me.

well everyone in the world is a immigrant except north africa if you belive in evolution that is. this article is BS Swedes hava there own look and cultur and tounge. even Americans dont look like Europeans any more.

@tutu

Russia was settled by Swedes...

@Pauli

Aren't you referring to the HGDP (Human Genome Diversity Project?). I believe they are the ones who early on quoted that the diversity is less than 1%. This is not the HGP which had been closed by the time this new project was started, or so I believe, and the two projects have nothing to do with each other. The HGP was created to map the entire Human Genome, irrespective of ethnic diversity.

In any case, the title of the article may have been better illustrated as "We are all migrants", even so, not everyone falls in that category either . The contemporary definition of immigrant is based on defined terriorial boundaries and the article is talking about a period of time when such things didn't exist yet as wenddiver points out.

The headline, "We are all immigrants" is designed to be an assault on Swedish identity. Science perverted by media-driven goals.

On the one hand, "globalization is bad" and on the other hand, "we are all immigrants". Maybe the media is just confused, or stupid. I don't know.

Anyway, "We are all pioneers" should be the headline, not "...immigrants." A pioneer is one who comes to a land that is unoccupied and settles it. An immigrant isone who comes to an existing country and takes up residence.

Homo Sapiens originated EITHER in Africa or in Iraq (the Garden of Eden is there, many say) -- thus:

1. The entire world should say "we are immigrants" (or perhaps pioneers).

2. Americans are now all African-American? Or Iraqi-American?

TWO KEY POINTS

POINT ONE: Nationalism didn't really exist until fairly recently. See Treaty of Westphalia.

From Dictionary.com -- nationality - - a people having a common origin, tradition, and language and capable of forming or actually constituting a nation-state.

POINT TWO: When Sweden loses its common origin, common tradition, and common language, it will no longer be Sweden.

It will be a country by another name, perhaps what name though? Does the media think that is a good thing or a bad thing? What do you want for the distant future? Sweden will be just another minor footnote in history, yes?

Oh yes ?

Is that means there is no Swedish type? No Swedish culture?

This is wrong!

If one is saying that Sweden is only a name and nothing else, then him or her should be extraded.

Get out of Scandinavia!

@ Tutu : Swedish passport without Swedish soul is nothing!

Tired of being denied of my identity by all those schmoks living with my taxes.

Are the USA citizens coming from late immigrants? Oh, yes! Are they the most powerful nation in the world? Hello!

The reality proves countries accepting immigrants become stronger. Remember Roman empire vs Greek states...

And what happened to the Roman empire?

This is not even remotely related to this comment thread at all, but heck, does anyone know the song on the new zomig nasal spray ad on TV?

Jonas There is NO Year 0 either BC/BCE or CE/AD.

@Alex Coman

The immigrants that made the US powerful were from Europe.

The immigrants who developed Canada, Australia and New Zealand were also from Europe.

As the US becomes less European in its identity it is also becoming less powerful.

The states with the largest non-European populations are the ones that seem to be performing the worst right now.

People used to talk about California the way they now talk about Sweden.

In 1970 California was about 80% non-hispanic white and it had one of the best economies, one of the best education systems, one of the best judicial systems, one of the best healthcare systems, etc...

Now that California is just over 40% non-hispanic white, a tremendous change in only 40 years, it's among of the worst in education, the prison population has sky rocketed, healthcare is under severe stress, it's almost bankrupt, etc....

My opinion of California is that it has become "paradise lost"

It was always believed that California is the leader in American trends. White people are now a minority and California is bankrupt. That comment is not racism - it is just a factual observation. Is this the USA's future.

We all are immigrants if it's continues like this: http://www.thelocal.se/22322/20090927/

It's from today.

The accomplishements most of you are talking about were made on the backs of non- Europeans. Check your history and see the cruelty that was inflicted upon people who do not look like you. It all comes down to the wrong view of racial superiority. The problems of the worlds are foundationed on that wicked thought.

Seems like a lot of people fail to understand the basic definition of the word immigrant. If you did not migrate to Sweden yourself, then by definition you are not an immigrant. If you are the descendant of some stone age person who migrated to Sweden and you were born in Sweden, then too bad for you. You are not an immigrant. Unfortunately for you, you happen to be a native Swede.

well it seems many people here fear that they maybe have some dark chromosomes somewhere :))))))))))

Read some history Marc to see how was life in all Europe 800 years ago... then check wikipedia to see how was life in Asia 5000 years ago! when China had everything Europe had nothing to offer and it happened that Chinese have dark hairs :D when Iranian introduced Alcohol to the world bathing was forbidden in France. When Egyptian made such a brilliant culture that we all pay lots of money to go there and just enjoy watching what is left there.... what I try to say is that all races have had, have or will have their shares in the world if we observe... you dont agree see the portion of world which is going to be run with china in 5 years !!!!!!!!!

Be calm ... take a breath and try to accept others capabilities

By the way the reason there is a lot of crime in south afrrica is not the new government dear its previous Apartheid

Sweden has a number of unaccomplished, uneducated, angry rednecks who're trying to compensate for their miserable failures at life by trying to correlate success with their genes.

Do you feel unappreciated? Don't have the job you want? Spouse not treating you right? Under a lot of stress?

Look at those filthy brown people all around the streets, with their headscarves and their lack of manners and their welfare checks. That there is an excellent benchmark for your miserable excuse for a life; you're better off than them! And most importantly, you're better of for a reason that cannot be torn down through you being lazy, incompetent or dumb: You have blue eyes and blond hair!

Now just come up with a bunch of pseudo-anthropological explanations about how the success of a country is directly related to the proportion of white people it has, and a thousand anecdotes about ill-behaved immigrants, and you have the perfect case to submit to like-minded racist folk who will bask in the glory of being randomly born as a Swede rather than a Somalian and somehow feeling that they are better human beings because of it.

There are two reasons why redneck logic like this becomes a trainwreck before the first stop;

1) The fact that there are a plethora of compassionate, responsible, reasonable, accomplished and successful human beings who have a skin color that is not white and who were not born in the western world, and scores of white people born with silver spoons in their mouths who are sorry excuses for human beings. This shows that while the culture, the community you live in and the education you receive shape you as a human being, your genes don't and for that simple reason anyone who tries to judge you based on them is being either incredibly lazy (by not putting in the minuscule effort to accurately differentiate between HUMAN BEINGS or disgustingly malicious (because they want to affirm their own miserable status).

2) There aren't as many racist rednecks in Sweden (or anywhere) as anyone would expect. Racists are a very vocal minority; they make a lot of noise and are a very very small proportion of the total population. Everyone else is blissfully silent because they have enough common sense to judge people individually by what they have done and what kind of human beings they are rather than dumping them in a basket and claiming they stink because they don't have the same genes.

Stop being miserable little racists. Anyone who is honest, learns and works hard gets to places, and it has nothing to do with your DNA. If you think some cultures are less honest, or less hard-working or whatever, that's fine. If you think someone is born that way, you're making up excuses to mask your own inadequacies. Because since you were born all white and Swedish and western, then the only reason you don't have what you want must have been because life didn't treat you right, right? Wrong.

Nevon ..........

Nice really nice

Let me explain: It's not because of their DNA.

There's a stark difference between saying that there are serious problems related to immigrant communities and saying that immigrants have genes that are incompatible with civilized life.

The former is an issue that can be solved. Immigrants live in closed communities, they come from countries where there is institutionalized corruption and violence, they are imprinted with societal values that don't always emphasize things like equality or nonviolent, democratic means of conflict resolution. Some of them can get violent, and they are punished like anyone else.

But all the problems here are just that; problems (which are not easy to solve). They can be solved however, and historically have been solved in more than one place around the world.

The latter on the other hand is the stupid spearhead rhetoric of racist goons who would like to preemptively gut any attempt at solving problems or making the situation better by asserting beforehand that the problem can't be solved, because it's about genes and DNA and skin color and European civilization and all that nonsense, which is for obvious reasons beyond solution. Can't change your genes can you?

It's not just unscientific, nonfactual, laughable and ridiculous but it's also unsurprisingly lazy (considering the average person who believes in it). What you're implying is that there is a GENE that makes you rape women and commit crimes, and thus certain people are born rapists and criminals. That's a ridiculous, degrading and baseless claim, and if you won't find a single ounce of reputable evidence for it other than your impotent use of (non-cited, unreferenced) statistics (which you quite obviously don't understand yourself, if you think it means those dirty non-whites are more prone to crime because they ain't white).

Blow-everything-out-of-proportion racists like yourself enjoy drama-mongering, doom-saying, pseud-science and a lot of incessant kindergarden whining while there are a lot of people with common sense working on fixing problems. That's why you're sad and amusing at the same time.

NEVON so true

@nevon

There actually are genes that increases a persons likelihood of committing crime - especially under certain conditions such as exposure to abuse or trauma in childhood.

"These gene-environment interaction findings indicate that certain genotype effects and the effects of social control are mutually dependent.

For example, in the MAOA model of serious delinquency, the effect of repeating a grade depends on whether one has a 2 repeat in MAOA.

Without a 2 repeat, repeating a grade raises the serious delinquency score by only .30. With a 2 repeat allele, repeating a grade raises the score by the large value of 6.44. The aforementioned interaction term is interpreted as an effect of

grade retention that depends on a genotype. An interaction term can also be interpreted as a genotype effect that hinges on the level of social control.

The key innovation of this study is the incorporation of molecular genetic variants into a social-control life-course model of delinquency.

We use three genetic polymorphisms in the DAT1, DRD2, and MAOA genes to measure genetic propensities for delinquency and criminality.

All three genetic variants are significantly related to self-reported serious and violent delinquency in a model of social control—a social-control model that includes social-structural conditions and a number of indicators for family and school processes."

http://www.asanet.org/galleries/default-file/Aug08ASRFeature.pdf

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monoamine_oxidase_A

It's not a concession to say that there are problems with immigrant communities that can be solved. It's common sense. It's ridiculous and humiliating to say they can't be solved because they have rape-genes.

Immigrants commit all the rape in Norway. Some shoddy research links a gene to violence and non-whites commit more knife and gun crimes in the UK. This is your reputable evidence?

The research done on the Monoamine Oxidase A gene has no significant connection to gangs or violence or any ethnic group other than the Maori of New Zealand for that matter. Their sample size is small, their supposed link to violence (even if it actually exists) is marginal, their findings have been questioned comprehensively by many scientists and not accepted by mainstream science, and even if it were all true, the study indicates that white people have the shorter variation of the gene in plenty too, and I'm sure there aren't many Maori immigrants anywhere.

It seems like you're trying to grossly misrepresent a minor study and twist the results. I'm sure no one is surprised.

The little known "Norway Post" doesn't count as reputable evidence (and does not provide links to it either), and even if it did, I don't see how showing that an underprivileged, economically and socially marginalized group of foreigners commit more crimes proves that they are genetic rapists. Neither does showing that there are more black people in prison than white people, given how black people weren't even treated as human beings a few decades ago and there are still serious racial biases in police work and the judicial process against them. And again, even if there weren't, even if the system worked perfect (which it doesn't) and only convicted real criminals rather than inclining towards those filthy black people who are genetically inclined to crime, what does that prove? That they have the fictional violence-gene? Or that you would logically expect that a group of people who were treated as sub-humans until very recently haven't yet accumulated the economic and social means to eliminate crime in their communities and that gang-formation in these communities is naturally based on race, which was their defining feature for centuries?

Edit: spacing

In both cases, scientific research or just simple common sense points to factors that are not even remotely genetic or DNA related. When you have poverty, racism, historical exclusion and a million other overwhelming external reasons, you have to be a special kind of twisted and malicious to rule them all out and conclude that they are GENETIC RAPISTS because someone did a marginal and widely refuted study on the native MAORI of New Zealand.

That is even if your statistics are correct and not copy-pasted from some white supremacist website (I don't see any links other than to an unreliable little website in Norway). Even then, you're still horribly wrong.

Once again, we have the simple fact that when given the economic means and the socially inclusive environments, people of all races and colors can and HAVE succeeded in life. And given less favorable conditions, we have seen that chalky-white youths in the UK and elsewhere have resorted to senseless violence and gang related crimes. It can be and is explained by a myriad of factors, and none of them is DNA.

Science, reason and common sense all say that being a decent human being has nothing to do with your skin color. You're spouting nonsense and trying to misrepresent studies and statistics to say otherwise.

@Waspy

It's hard to dispute that some people are more aggressive than others by nature. More testosterone makes people easy to anger, as the simplest example. However it is very easy to refute the consequent claim here which actually matters; that it is a significant or overriding factor in crime or violence. This would imply that regardless of social circumstance, economic status, upbringing or anything else, if you have a lot of testosterone or have the violence-gene, you're going to be criminal and violent or you are at least significantly more likely to commit crime and be violent.

This is the claim that racism and anti-immigrant sentiment pitches its rhetoric with. That no matter what is done, there is something about immigrants that make them fundamentally unsuitable to live with, or fundamentally unsuitable for civilization. That there is a genetic factor which is so significant that it overshadows everything else. And that black people, or middle-eastern people, or anyone at all possess this factor.

This is ridiculous. It is not science or reason to look at an impoverished immigrant community full of people who don't speak the local language are excluded and have societal/cultural conventions with seriously violent undertones and say "IT'S BECAUSE OF THEIR DNA". It's infinitely more likely because of their housing, their social conditions and a billion other things.

It's also hugely damaging any effort to end crime and violence in these communities when you have a crowd of irresponsible little men trying to convince themselves that they're better because they won the genetic lottery, and discarding every other cause while doing so.

Also, the study on the Maori is just that; a study on the Maori. A very marginal ethnic group, far far away from Europe, and a group that is also marginalized within New Zealand much like an immigrant community. I think this is just as important as the fact that the study was seriously disputed by scientists worldwide in the first place.

Social problems related to immigration can be solved, this is a historical fact. DNA can't. This is what racism related to immigration is all about.

@nevon

There are non-genetic causes of violence but that doesn't mean that we should ignore scientific evidence of genetic factors increasing the risk of violent behavior.

The studies on MAOA are numerous and involved more than just Maori participants.

A few excerpts from studies on MAOA (links not included because of link spam policy):

The VNTR 2 repeat in MAOA and delinquent behavior in adolescence and young adulthood: associations and MAOA promoter activity:

"The present study demonstrated a link between the 2 repeat of the 30-bp VNTR in the MAOA gene and much higher levels of self-reported serious and violent delinquency. The finding is supported by a statistical association analysis and a functional analysis of MAOA promoter activity. The association analysis showed that men with a 2R reported a level of serious delinquency in adolescence and young adulthood that were at least twice as high as that for those with the other variants in the VNTR. A very similar finding was obtained for violent delinquency for men. Women with Any2R also reported much higher levels of serious and violent delinquency than those with other repeats, although the P-values associated with these estimates are 0.097 and 0.108, respectively."

Role of genotype in the cycle of violence in maltreated children:

"We studied a large sample of male children from birth to adulthood to determine why some children who are maltreated grow up to develop antisocial behavior, whereas others do not. A functional polymorphism in the gene encoding the neurotransmitter-metabolizing enzyme monoamine oxidase A (MAOA) was found to moderate the effect of maltreatment. Maltreated children with a genotype conferring high levels of MAOA expression were less likely to develop antisocial problems.

MAOA and the "cycle of violence:" childhood abuse and neglect, MAOA genotype, and risk for violent and antisocial behavior:

"Genotypes associated with high levels of MAOA activity buffered abused and neglected whites from increased risk of becoming violent and/or antisocial in later life. This protective effect was not found for non-white abused and neglected individuals."

MAOA, maltreatment, and gene-environment interaction predicting children's mental health: new evidence and a meta-analysis:

...meta-analysis demonstrated that across studies, the association between maltreatment and mental health problems is significantly stronger in the group of males with the genotype conferring low vs high MAOA activity. These findings provide the strongest evidence to date suggesting that the MAOA gene influences vulnerability to environmental stress, and that this biological process can be initiated early in life."

@Pauli

You've become incoherent and your claims are unsubstantiated. You provided two links to unknown small-time news websites with no further citations or references, and the study on the Maori is at best insignificant. You can follow the link posted above and read the conclusions yourself if you want. None of your statistics come from a real source, and even if they did, there is nothing that substantiates your claim that there is a link between intelligence, race and criminality. You're basically yelling that blacks commit more crime because they're black, and expecting some poor simple soul out there to take your word for it because it sounds intuitively right.

Please keep up the good work.

@Waspy

I went over the study in the ASR, and it says nothing of race in the findings, and the statistical results also don't show any significance by race, even though it is included. The statistical outcomes are also not as significant as the wording might suggest. The study concedes that the sample size is too small for a firm conclusion and that it's hard to clearly distinguish genetic and environmental factors. Also, it's a sociological study with a dozen unquantifiable, highly subjective sociological variables included. This study and it's conclusions are not remotely evidence (or relevant to the topic at hand for that matter) that non-whites have the rape-gene, unless you simplify and inflate it with racist rhetoric of course (Paging Pauli to yell "BLACKS ARE RAPING OUR TENDER WHITE WOMEN!").

(Edit: Also, the study concludes that "[the genes] are conditional and interact with family processes, school processes, and friendship networks". If anything that proves the argument that this is about social environment and economic status way more than it is about the fictional "Pauli" gene that causes rowdy Arabs to assault danish women.)

I don't know where the other quotes you've pasted are from. You should probably post links. I doubt you'll find a reputable study on this that won't become largely irrelevant in-context when read in detail. It's despicably easy to simplify these and serve them to people saying "Look! Here's the scientific evidence you want! Don't bother reading the whole thing though!"

@nevon

Yes that one study I linked to complained of the small sample size of persons with the 2R genotype but we have results from multiple studies that reach the same conclusion about its effect on violent bahavior.

The reason for the small number of subjects with 2R might be a result of the racial disparities in the numbers of individuals with that genotype:

"A 2006 paper in "Biological Psychiatry

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16814261

Table 1, entitled "Distribution of Alleles by Gender and Race/Ethnicity" lumps everything in just two categories, whites and non-whites. Non-whites were defined like this: "Using self-reports by study participants to determine race/ethnicity, the non-white group includes African Americans, Hispanics, American Indians, Pacific Islanders, and others."

The table lists that out of 98 non-white males, there were 6 individuals with 2R allele. Among 180 whites, only one individual had 2R allele."

http://hiberniagirl.blogspot.com/2008/07/genetic-link-to-violence-and.html

Unfortunately a subscription is required to see the full results of that study.

Here's the links to some of the articles I posted earlier:

Role of genotype in the cycle of violence in maltreated children:

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12161658

Yeah I'm sorry, I burst out laughing when I saw the title to this article. And I am not a native Swede. I mean come on, the use of the word immigrant does not apply to migration before the country had a name, or language. It essentially only existed as Sweden when these people MIGRATED here A LONG time ago, then they evolved together, and created the country the way they wanted it. And this includes a very modern society that supports the rights of women. It does not include beliefs that women are dirty whores if they go out in public without being covered in a black sheet. Nor does it allow men to marry as many women as they want while the woman are stuck with one husband. Please. Culture defines a group of people.

And I don't understand how the same liberal groups who claim we are all the same without any racial separation also support evolution and claim intelligent design is unfounded, archaic B.S. Because then logicallly evolution happens to such a large degree that species go from dolpins to monkeys to humans. Then groups of humans spending many thousands of years apart, long enough to look both like a dark, short, muscular African or a tall, pale Swede must have begun to evolve differently. Thus having certain biological differences. And come on now biological traits are the results of genes. Isn't likely that behavior became selected for just as physical traits were through sexual selection. If you know anything about evolution you know about sexual selection. So isn't it possible that certain people such as Swedes preffered quieter, less aggressive, more calm individuals. And so over many thousands of yeas those personality types were selected and more often bread for? ...I'm just saying it should not be so complicated to accept differences in races.

And to Waspy. You seem a little over the top. But if you wana see some places with pale skin, hair, eyes that are seriously dysfunctional, just check out most of eastern Europe. The slavs of today, esp. the Russians and Ukranians have massive corruption and insanity in their countries. NOT where I would want to raise my kid.....

I'm sorry, do either of you believe that the marginal influence of a remote gene which is triggered by environmental stress is the basis on which we should differentiate between human beings?

@Waspy

Those studies are simply not enough to convince a reasonable person that a black man is more like to be a criminal because of his DNA rather than because of his social circumstances. It's not just because the sample size is too small to be significant, or because the studies themselves do no conclude that race is a significant ground for distinction. None of these studies are concluding what you are concluding; that race plays an important role in propensity to violence or that this gene is significant enough that social problems and the such are secondary (In fact, they're clearly correlating their results with environmental stress).

You're basically presenting other peoples studies and making conclusions that those people themselves either didn't make, or furthermore outright rejected.

@Pauli

Yes, I am a member of the PC cult. We are plotting to take over the world. Ever notice how all computers are called PC's? IS IT A COINCIDENCE? I THINK NOT.

The dispute isn't if immigrants commit more crime or not. The dispute is whether they commit more crime because they're genetically inferior to us whites, or because of external factors which would effect any person negatively, and whether this is a social problem that can be solved or a genetic issue that is permanent and non resolvable.

Saying that black people grow muscles faster because of genes thus they could also steal car stereos faster because of genes is a huge fallacy. Growing muscle is a simple biological function. Crime is an infinitely more complex social and economic function. I'm sure you'd prefer it be simpler, and want to portray it as simpler, but it isn't.

Yes, I've read the conclusions of the Florida study too. The conclusion is that males with low levels of that gene are more prone to joining gangs and using violence. Fascinating. I missed the part where it says BLACKS COMMIT CRIME BECAUSE THEY'RE BLACK AND THAT'S WHY WE SHOULDN'T LET THEM IN OUR COUNTRY BECAUSE THEY'RE BLACK.

The most probable reason that isn't in the conclusion is because that's not what the study says. And that means you can't just point at it and say "Look! There's some sort of connection (the magnitude of which remains uncertain and probably small) between a gene and violence! THUS IMMIGRATION IS WRONG. GENES DETERMINE CRIMINALITY AND SOCIETY HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT".

Excluding a gene somewhere that might (just might) make you more aggressive if you live in a ghetto, the great vast majority of the problems related to immigration have nothing to do with DNA or genes. They are social problems related to culture, wealth, communication and a myriad of reasons that are much more relevant than a study with conclusions that don't support either of your racially endowed theories. Stop trying to masquerade science as your fiction.

Yeah, good point nik82. How about them chalky-white Russians and Eastern Europeans Pauli? You'd think with all those perfect white genes they wouldn't be the most innovative entrepreneurs in organized crime and institutionalized corruption would you? How about we check their MAOI levels too just to make sure?

Corruption, crime and violence are much more deep seeded in culture and religion than DNA and your skin color. And by much more, I mean so much more that the effect of DNA is negligible. It doesn't take a gene or a pair of blue eyes to be a decent human being. Even if you're a bit more edgy because you have gene X or prone to lose your temper because you have gene Y, it's nothing that having common sense, reason and a hot meal can't solve, and that's the main problem with any community that sports high rates of crime, regardless of whether they're from Somalia or a garden variety group of Swedish rednecks. Evolution doesn't happen in 2000 years, and 2000 years ago we were pretty much all busy raping, pillaging and cutting each other up.

@nevon

The social problems are experienced by many but only a few people turn to crime and violence as a result.

Why?

Why don't all people in those conditions turn to crime and violence?

The research that I linked to shows that genetic differences affect they way people react to negative aspects of their environment.

Even if you refuse to believe in the genetic component acting as a catalyst for violent behavior in people who have experienced certain traumas can we at least agree that certain traumas do increase the likelihood of violence?

If we can agree on that problem then can we agree that it would not be wise to bring in people who experienced those traumas and are therefore more likely to commit acts of crime and violence?

@Waspy

No, we certainly cannot agree on that. It's morally incomprehensible to say that a child who has been abused and raped cannot seek refuge in Sweden while a child who hasn't can, because someone stretched the conclusions of a study beyond imagination and beyond scientific reason and made the ridiculous "decision" that the first child will most likely grow up to become a criminal while the second won't.

The research you posted shows a link, the magnitude of which is unclear, and the results of which are self-admittedly not nearly certain. The same goes for Pauli and his posts, although I have the creeping suspicion that you're both copy-pasting from the same white supremacist website. Either way, the conclusions that you make, that we shouldn't "let people in" and "immigrants have the rape-gene" are not remotely close to what those studies conclude; neither on the grounds of race, or genetic propensity or certainty.

You must be off your bonkers if you expect anyone to take the step from that point to altering immigration policy in any way at all.

@nik82

Many of the places in Europe that are not as developed as Western European countries are very diverse as a result of invasions and colonizations from Turks, Persians, Mongols and others.

Perhaps if they had less ethnic and religious diversity they might be more developed right now.

BTW, I'd prefer to live in the Ukraine rather than Somalia or Haiti.

"Perhaps if they had less ethnic and religious diversity they might be more developed right now."

Yeah Waspy. Remember the time the Turks invaded Ukraine? I don't, because it never happened. Ukraine is a pretty ethnically and religiously homogeneous country. Not that your assertion made any sense worth refuting in the first place, but just saying, you should quit your repulsive hobby of simplifying everything until it comes down to race.

Sandwich you had at lunch tasted bad? Having a hard time performing in bed? Mother-in-law won't shut up? Stubbed your toe on a chair? On the job but no toilet paper left? IF ONLY SWEDEN HAD LESS ETHNIC DIVERSITY.

@nevon.

I wasn't alive when the Turks invaded the Ukraine but it did happen on more than one occasion.

"Ottoman forces, numbering 80,000 men and led by Grand Vizier Köprülü Fazıl Ahmed and Ottoman sultan Mehmed IV, invaded Ukraine in August, took the Commonwealth fortress at Kamianets-Podilskyi and besieged Lviv. Sobieski's forces were too small to meet the Ottoman army head on, and could only score several minor tactical victories over the Ottoman detached units. Unprepared for war, and torn by internal conflict between the king Michał Korybut Wiśniowiecki and the szlachta nobility, the Commonwealth Sejm could not act to raise taxes and gather a larger army. Its representatives were forced to sign the Peace of Buczacz in October that year, which ceded to the Ottomans Commonwealth part of Ukraine (the Right-bank Bracław Voivodeship, Podole Voivodeship and part of Kiev Voivodeship; the Left-bank of the Ukraine was already controlled by Muscovy since the Treaty of Andrusovo of 1667) and promised an annual tribute of 22,000 ducates."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish-Ottoman_War_%281672%E2%80%931676%29

The Ukraine, however, was not the main country that I was referring to.

There are many countries in Europe that were invaded by Turks or Tatars and and also by Persians and Mogols. Their genetic legacy is evident in many European countries especially the ones with the most problems.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman_wars_in_Europe

@Nevon

And who the h-ll are you to accuse me (or us) of racism?

That's really PC to do that, yes?

You need to learn a few things about life and grow up.

@Waspy

Are you seriously suggesting that the reason for Ukraine's problems is because the Ottomans invaded 500 years ago and changed the "gene pool", and that ethnicity is the main drive behind development?

@Pauli

I'm not sure why you're so angry. I've already told you I now completely agree with you. Unsatisfied? Here, I'll even point at crime statistics and say that immigrants commit more crime because of their DNA, even though that isn't at all logical. But logic is overrated right? Otherwise you would stop hurling around the exact same statistics that you posted in your first post and expecting a different logical conclusion because you now include a link. Damn those "PC cultists" and their logic :( If only everyone were as simple as us and could accept that "MORE BLACK = LESS SMART" without question. Heil.

Every last one arguing about this article are related to either adam or eve who come from Africa, period. There is no such thing as race as you really think there is. Your eye can sometimes fool you as some people can pass for another colro anyhow and you would never know it! You can be blond and blue eyed and have black parents of be very dark skinned and have a white or other parent. It happens all the time especially becuase for so long men have had their for far too long. As for California being a dump becuase of Mexicans according to a few on this board I have to laugh. California was stolen land! To all the proud Canadiana, Americans, Europeans in South and Central America as well as White West Indians -- YOU STOLE THE LAND AND WIPED OUT MOST OR ALL OF THE NATIVE INHABITANTS!! I come from America and the Caribbean and can see the nonsense for myself. I look at America which talks about "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" yet I often wonder how Americans can puruse happiness off the misery of others. I never wonder where serial killers and rapists come from in America nor am I ever surprised that law enforcement still profiles a serial killer or rapist as a white male in his 30's becuase that is who primarily went across the entire continents and systematically killed off the native inhabitants (they gave disease infected blankets given to American Indians who had no resistance, killing them as they ran from their burning homes and shooting them as they ran out from the smoke inhilation, etc.) and then just chalk it up to a day's work and go home to the wife and kids like it was nothing. So much raping of Black women in America and the Caribbean has been done that it's safe to assume that most of America during that time and now is related! People like to like and deny it but DNA and the truth endures! America is a stolen land and those who feel entitled to it will pay the price one day. It won't be forgotten. Payback is a real bitch and you will pay and pay and pay!

Pauli: Superb posts, well done, keep it up, the truth will set people free from the prison of PC. The role of Consanguinity (marriage between first cousins along paternal lines) is significant when discussing social/medical/criminal problems of certain groups: 55% of Moslems, world-wide, have first cousin marriages;"even though Paki births represent 3-4% of births nationally, the incidence of recessive disorders from this group accounts for 30% of all births nationally with these traits" (i.e. paternal first cousin marriages). BBC: 55% of British Pakis married to 1st cousins (UK Racial Equality Commission) http://vladtepesblog.com/?p=277 First cousin marriages among Moslems for centuries has produced an ethnic group which is mentally, physically, socially unsuited to peaceful and productive social intercourse with others. Large parts of sub-Saharan Africa has been Moslem for centuries due to almost 1400 yrs of Moslem slave trade and subjugation; this also helps to explain African criminal rates in Africa as well as outside Africa.

Once again people are getting a little off topic here. I actually think it is interesting to find out migrational paths of people through the DNA and genetic diversity. From this type of research scientists can see changes and ask why. The reasons can be beyond imagination, and can lead to better understanding of the regions history (including climate) which can in turn lead to better prediction of the future. I would really like to know more about this. Where did the people come from?

The whole statistics thing here, well there is no arguing with the truth. All around the world in westernised countries ethnic minorities commit more crime that the majority whites. It is not a disputed topic, but fact proven time and time again. Part of the problem is western civilisations resistance to change, but that is human nature. We like what we know, it makes us comfortable, and change should not happen so quickly (as in Sweden). The government has forced 20 years of radical ethnic change on the Swedish people which is both unfair, and understandably they are shaking their heads. New ideas are always good, they often don't work, but they must be explored. The immigrants coming right now are resistant to the point of refusal to change. Do you think the "immigrants" that migrated here 4000BCE kept all of their religious and ethnic traits? If a Swede migrated to Syria, do you think that the government (or the public) would accept them continuing the Swedish way? If people move to another land, they must assimilate in some way, or there will lead to segregation on such a level that could lead to civil war. In middle eastern and African countries it happens every day, some of the reasons why they come here. Is it OK for them to bring this ideology?

I have lived here for 5 years now, and the change I have seen since I arrived is substantial. More and more people are unhappy with this to the point of rage.

How long will this go on? We are all immigrants. THAT is just rhetorical nonsense.

@ppk

I m from another country, where, most of people here seem to not like it. although here seem to be some people collecting social assistance which i personally find it a shame. I m not living with your taxes, instead i m paying tax 1.5 times necessary for someone to live. I haven't seriously applied for residence caz lots of comments disappoint me, even though i respect the Sweden history, identity, and all its belongings, have very good communication to society, working in a high tech company and so on. one must have been lost to insult like that or to generalize like that..

nevon,

As always when the PC cultist is unable to use their only weapon of 'racist' to shout down and shut down debate fails to have any effect and they are forcibly exposed to the reality of their agenda, they have to resort to idiotic ramblings and hysteria.

You challenged those horrific Third World crime figures just as you challenged everything proven here without producing a single scrap of evidence to back up your own contentions.

But that's all the PC cultist is trained to do: Shout 'racist' at heretics and challenge everything incessantly. Critical theory.

You are a thoroughly nasty and dishonest example of the PC cultist and cannot even bring yourself to admit that you were complete wrong to say to waspy "Yeah Waspy. Remember the time the Turks invaded Ukraine? I don't, because it never happened" - so when your ignorance is exposed you just move onto to more ignorance and criticism, ignoring your own lamentable failings and base dishonesty.

More and more people are seeing through this PC insanity because more and more people are being exposed to it first hand and can see the realities for themselves, not just hear the warm and fluffy PC fantasy.

Anyway, as promised I will post Australia's experience with their new Third World intake, but first, lets not overlook the French:

"Radical Muslims in France's housing estates are waging an undeclared "intifada" against the police, with violent clashes injuring an average of 14 officers each day.

As the interior ministry said that nearly 2,500 officers had been wounded this year, a police union declared that its members were "in a state of civil war" with Muslims in the most depressed "banlieue" estates which are heavily populated by unemployed youths of north African origin.

It said the situation was so grave that it had asked the government to provide police with armoured cars to protect officers in the estates, which are becoming no-go zones.

... the "taboo" of attacking officers on patrol has been broken.

Instead, officers - especially those patrolling in pairs or small groups - faced attacks as soon as they tried to arrest locals."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1530659/Muslims-are-waging-civil-war-against-us-claims-police-union.html

Challenging the overt symbols of authority is a prevalent feature with the Third Worlder's; Sounds familiar in Australia too:

"It [police] dropped charges against men arrested at a confrontation last December in which some 100 Africans surrounded 21 police and sent one to hospital with suspected cracked ribs.

Sen-Sgt Mario Benedetti, in charge of Moonee Ponds police station, says he suspects the charges were dropped because of the alleged offenders' race. Other police involved tell me the same, adding that the charges were dropped without their knowledge or consent."

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,24672971-25717,00.html

Plenty more to come...

Modern Day Trojan Horse: The Islamic Doctrine of Immigration by Sam Solomon and E Maqdisi reviewed in The American Thinker www.americanthinker.com August 16, 2009. "Solomon, trained as an Imam and Sharia jurist, review phases of the Hijra (immigration) and its juristic/legal basis in Islamic doctrine. Under cover of taquiya/deception, the step-by-step methodology of the migration process is designed to subdue, then, subjugate the host culture, culminating in implementation of shari'ah law." Mosques, dress, sharia law & courts as parallel jurisprudence, 'faith' schools,halal food,segregated public facilities, sharia-compliant finance, murder/death threats against critics of islam,jihadists travel to country of origin for further indoctrination & terrorist training, no-go areas, intifadas..."As Solomon & Maqdisi point out, hijra is a comprehensive & direct political attempt to undermine the culture & values of the host country & replace them with islam and shariah. It is an insidious migration seeking transformation of the culture, behaviors, customs, rules & laws of a host society to spread islam and establish an islamic state."

@nevon

You need lessons in either reading comprehension or in the importance of honesty in debate.

My earlier statement did not single out the Ukraine as a place that is undeveloped because of non-European immigration.

This was my statement:

"Many of the places in Europe that are not as developed as Western European countries are very diverse as a result of invasions and colonizations from Turks, Persians, Mongols and others.

Perhaps if they had less ethnic and religious diversity they might be more developed right now."

Notice that I said 'many' not all.

I doubt that you can deny the ethnic and religious diversity in Southeast Europe and Euarasia that was the result of centuries of invasions by Turks and Tatars, Mongols and Persians. They also had the Roma (gypsies) from South Asia to contend with.

Amazing and a great example of the PC tyrannical censorship of facts in action:

This has site has seen fit to delete virtually all of my fully substantiated comments detailing the horrific extent of Third World crime in all western countries that arose in natural flow of debate, but it has also seen fit to leave the demented PC cultist nevon comments in tact even though he didn't use a single scrap of evidence and was proven to be a liar throughout the thread.

They even blocked my first posting ID and removed this thread from the "most commented on" list.

What are they so afraid of?

The truth quite clearly.

The day of the PC cult is drawing to a close.

And here is "nevon", the PC lying PC cultist - caught out on every one of his lies and in hiatus after his last piece of immense was so succinctly expose.

But now he is back again with absolutely nothing of substance, just more spite and lies that the PC cult are renowned for, no doubt re-invigorated by the acts of censorship against the heretics of his cult which he no doubt incited by hitting that "report abuse" button time and time again in a rage of indignation that someone dared to defy the PC cult line, post the truth and was unfazed by the only weapons the PC cult has: Insults and labels of 'racist' and every other 'ist.'

No matter that entire areas of Swedish cities are no-go zones and are burning on a nightly basis due to this Third World influx; no matter that these Third Worlder's dominated the crime rate in massive disproportion to their number in every western country they reside, as I fully proved.

No, the only thing that matters is the PC cult etiquette is not upset and congenital idiots like "nevon" get to carry on with that smug glow of power in denouncing the heretics to his cult, like some latter day witch accuser.

Like I said "nevon", the days of your cult are ending, and when it finally ends you will be left entirely on your own wallowing in your insane fantasies and hateful methodology.

I'd just like to point out the irony in a raging white supremacist calling a fellow white person a congenital idiot. Just in case anyone missed it.

Yip - just more of you baseless hate labels pal.

I am not a "white supremacist" or a "racist" or any of the other PC cult knee jerk vindictive smears that you love to use nor have I said anything whatsoever to indicate that I am; I have just posted some true figures about the horrific extent of Third Worlder's crime in western countries and some scientific research. You know, just posted the truth - you have vaguely heard of that?

I couldn't care less what color you are - but based upon everything else you have had to say here being a lie, the chances are this is too - you are a just an idiot; a stupid feckless PC fascist censorship gloating hate inciting trouble making idiot.

And the lies and tyranny or the PC cult is crashing down, bit by bit, day by day as more and more people are subjected to the terrible effects of its twisted ideology.

Your days are numbered.

And here in America, it has been scientifically proven that Europeans made trips to America around the same time or even before Asians crossed the Bering Sea land bridge!!

The Kennewick Man skeleton is more Caucasian than American Indian.....and a 16,000 year old European style spearpoint and another ancient weapon implement were found in sediment near Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania!!

No one can prove, even with modern science, where anyone really came from!!

Nevon,

You have provided no proof at all to back up your claims. Seems when you don't like what someone else is saying you just call them names. Is there any evidence to back up your claims?

Thanks.

Exactly, since human origins seem to point to Africa 2 million years ago, does the fact Sweden is all immigrants really come as a shock to anyone. After all everyone is an immigrant in that context originating from Africa.

Waspy, your great.

So you are saying that because of these invasions people in the East and Southern Europe became mixed race and thus racialy inferior? Is this how the Dinaric race emerged?