I'd like to spend more time vetting a source like this, which claims:

The foreign rape figures at 77.6% Muslim has been anonymously confirmed by Swedish police in a phone conversation.

Don't get me wrong, I consider the matter very important. And I consider it likely immigrants are committing violent crimes. But when an article is reverse engineering an "anonymously confirmed" phone conversation, it isn't exactly a premium source. Sure they add additional sources as cross-reference points to create their conjecture, so why not use officially vetted annual statistics to make the same point.

Also I realize official statistics are probably fudged at times, but it feels like the conclusion was drawn before the ancillary sources which seem to jump around a couple decades (late 80s referenced, then 2005). I agree with the article overall but I have a gut feeling it's omitting a variety of factors which could provide better context and perhaps more correlation to the statistics which are presented a bit sensationally here.