I also worry that sometimes the 'r' word gets thrown around too much and starts to lose meaning after awhile (and 'racist' starts to become an all-encompassing term that doesn't actually mean anything), which is why I'm asking.
I do not wish to quote that post, but you can find it in their history after enabling the "showdead" option on your profile.
I would say we should be fixing broken countries, not helping some 1-2% of those countries to immigrate. It doesn't solve any problems for the rest 98% in those countries; and can take receiving countries on the verge of breakdown too if they fail to integrate those immigrants.
http://www.ibtimes.com/which-governments-are-most-generous-c... http://www.thelocal.se/20141130/sweden-fifth-largest-ebola-a...
As for the last point, it looked to me as though the implied reasoning was "Person with roots in the middle east = Jihadist", as this is also a frequent way to reason among real racists. If this was not the intention, which seems unlikely given the next post, I apologize for drawing a rushed conclusion. I have not seen anything indicating that we have elected any jihadists in our government, only people with roots outside Scandinavia. I follow several different media daily. I do not live in a bubble.