cut and paste from:
https://www.buzzfeed.com/ishmaeldaro/no-go-zone-myth?utm_term=.yiJOlYxRPB#.chWq3D9jG7The idea of dozens of “no-go zones” across Sweden started in 2014 after a law enforcement report listed 55 “vulnerable” areas in the country.
What police described were areas with socioeconomic issues related to poverty and organized crime. Sometimes police vehicles in these vulnerable areas were attacked, the report said, and the community was less likely to cooperate with investigations.
It was a newspaper columnist — not police — who dubbed these areas “no-go zones,” and the idea has since taken on a life of its own. The term is now firmly tied to the influx of Middle Eastern refugees, and often invoked in anti-Muslim rhetoric.
Tales of violence committed by Muslims and refugees in Sweden often start as local crime stories that are then translated by sensationalistic UK tabloids, conservative outlets like Breitbart News, or the Russian state-funded broadcaster RT, before being further spread by fringe websites and anti-Muslim blogs in the US.
In 2016, the Swedish Embassy in Hungary rebuked the government of right-wing Prime Minister Viktor Orban for perpetuating the myth as part of a referendum campaign.
“It is important to be clear: such zones, however they are labelled or defined, do not exist in Sweden,” a Swedish official told The Local.
Sweden is, of course, far from the only country painted as home to these violent Muslim enclaves. In 2015, a Fox News guest infamously claimed that the entire English city of Birmingham had become off-limits to non-Muslims.
“You basically have zones where Sharia courts were set up, where Muslim density is very intense, where the police don’t go in, and where it’s basically a separate country almost — a country within a country,” said Steve Emerson, a self-described expert on terrorism.
This came as a surprise to residents of Birmingham, and Emerson’s comment was widely mocked in the UK. The prime minister, David Cameron, said he choked on his porridge when he heard the claim, saying that Emerson “is clearly a complete idiot.”
Cut and paste from:
https://debunkingdenialism.com/2017/01/20/debunking-the-myth-of-no-go-zones-in-sweden/The problem of misinformation is perhaps worse now than ever with the recent surge of fake news and misleading claims about everything from politicians to crime statistics. Human confirmation bias, isolated social media filter bubbles and search engine algorithms all contribute to a growing sense of polarization. The misinformation war that has plagues scientific skeptics and pro-science advocates when it comes to pseudoscience has now invaded politics and political policy issues. Dark forces are more willing than ever to lie and misrepresent statistics to provoke fear, anger and suspicion among people towards others.
Debunking Denialism has taken on several such cases of pseudoscientific bigotry, such as falsely comparing ethnic minorities to poisonous M&Ms, conspiracy theories about alleged white genocide, how anti-immigration activists abuse Swedish rape statistics or data on reported shootings in the Swedish city of Malmö. Now it is time to take on the widespread myth that Sweden supposedly has 55 no-go zones where criminals rule society and police are afraid or incapable of entering. This turns out to be a complete fabrication based on a journalist and his misreading of a police report and metaphorical use of language for exaggerated political discourse. Two police crucial police reports that investigate this issue never use the term and the properties they assign to vulnerable areas directly contradict the “no-go zone” narrative. There is a problem with criminal gangs fighting each other in Malmö, but that started in 2008, almost a decade before the refugee crisis in Europe. Let us take a closer look at the original police reports and relevant news articles on this issue.
For something to be a “no-go zone”, it must be blocked off by a paramilitary or insurgency group that prevents the police from entering or an area that is blocked off to certain people. Basically, the police or military has completely lost power or control over the area and the government cannot assert their sovereignty. Language evolves over time and definitions changes, but we must be clear with what the words we use actually mean.