Topic: WE'RE STUFFED!!!

[Jahn]

The election ended up with a bit tricky situation. The right wing alliance kept the lead over the red-green wing but as the new party "Swedish democrats" entered the Parliament the right Alliance did not achieve full majority. This has lead to speculations about new constellations but the winning party (actually 4 parties) does not need to make any declarations until 5th October.

That the extreme party "Swedish democrats" got a bit more than 5% of the votes (3% last election in 2004) and by that entered the Parliament should not be such a surprise for the established parties. Immigration problems are obvious and surprisingly, even immigrants join the "Swedish democrat party". However, no one wants to cooperate with them so we shall see how this develops. In Denmark a similar party was elected to the Parliament  in 2001 and they have, ten years later, a heavy role in the political system. So this "problem" has to be handled with care and action. Otherwise the Swedish democrats will be twice as strong in the next election. That is much the consensus summary in Sweden today.

[Jahn]

Sweden has Northern Europe's largest neonazi movement and it is actively spreading to neighbouring states.[/i]

BS

[Builder]

BS

Read the reports of your very own SÄPO. You could also read annual reports of Baltic security services. It is all there - in black and white. Primary sources.

In Estonia, for example, these extreme right movements really began to flourish only after tightening contacts with Swedish neonazis.

[Builder]

Neo-Nazi bomb plot linked to Auschwitz sign theft

Thieves contracted by a neo-Nazi group that planned to sell sign to fund attacks in Sweden, newspaper claims

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/dec/30/auschwitz-sign-stolen-terror-plot


The Auschwitz sign before it was stolen Photograph: Irek Dorozanski/Reuters

It sounds like the plot of a Steig Larsson thriller: a band of eastern European criminals is contracted to steal an iconic piece of Nazi memorabilia, which is then sold to a mysterious collector to finance a neofascist bomb attack on the Swedish parliament.

But today it emerged that Swedish investigators are helping Polish detectives investigate the theft of the sign from Auschwitz, amid reports that the robbery was linked to a rightwing terror plot.

The wrought iron plaque reading Arbeit Macht Frei (work sets you free) which spanned the entrance at the former Nazi death camp was wrenched from the gate on 18 December, and recovered three days later, cut into three pieces, in a forest in northern Poland.

The robbery prompted Poland to declare a state of emergency, and provoked impassioned calls for the sign's return from concentration camp survivors and the Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu.

The five men being held in police custody in Krakow in connection with the theft have been described by Polish prosecutors as common criminals who had apparently acted for financial gain.

But according to the Swedish daily Aftonbladet, the men were contracted by a neo-Nazi group which planned to sell it on to a third party, a foreign rightwing extremist or collector of Nazi memorabilia, with the aim of using the funds to finance a string of attacks in Stockholm.

Boguslawa Marcinkowska, the spokeswoman for the public prosecutor's office in krakow, said: "The evidence that we have so far points to there being links with Sweden". Polish state television TVP1 quoted official sources saying that Swedish neo-Nazis were behind the theft.

Poland's justice minister, Krzysztof Kwiatkowski, said: "The investigations have taken on a much broader dimension than we had initially thought".

The Swedish justice ministry has confirmed that it is helping the Polish police with investigations after the state prosecutor's office in Krakow lodged an official application asking for its help.

Separately, the Swedish security service Säpo, confirmed that it was investigating an alleged neo-Nazi plot to blow up the Riksdagen, the parliament building in Stockholm, as well as the foreign ministry and the home of the prime minister, Fredrik Reinfeldt. The aim of the plot, according to Säpo, was to create as much disruption as possible ahead of the 2010 parliamentary elections. It would not confirm or deny reports of a possible connection between the plot and the Auschwitz sign theft.

Polish investigators, who said from the start of the inquiry that they suspected the mastermind of the robbery operated outside Poland, would only say today that he or she "came from a European country".

The five suspected robbers, aged between 25 and 39, all have criminal records but none is suspected of having a neo-Nazi background. They were reportedly set to receive a total of 20,000 zlotys (£4,320) to share between them for the theft. The police told the Polish press agency PAP that they believe a foreign national, possibly the person who ordered the theft, visited the former death camp prior to the robbery in order to be able to plan it in detail.

The theft was carried out without attracting the attention of nightwatchmen or being caught on CCTV cameras. But in their haste to make off with the sign, the thieves dropped the letter i from the word Frei. It was found in the snow nearby.

The wider plot has the whiff of a thriller by the late Swedish writer Larsson, not least because he was an expert on right-wing extremism, a subject which he wove into many of his books.

Larsson sought to expose neo-Nazi activity in Sweden, forming in 1995 the group Expo-foundation, following eight murders for which neo-Nazis were held responsible. For several years the scene was considered small but particularly brutal.

There are plans next month to celebrate the 65th anniversary of the liberation of the Auschwitz death camp in which around 1.1 million people, most of them Jews, died. Blacksmiths are meanwhile working on repairing the sign, which stands as a cynical commentary on the Holocaust, in time for the event.

Concern about the safety of the Auschwitz site, which is now a memorial and museum, has prompted local authorities to promise to install more close circuit television cameras and to review its security procedures.

Publicity surrounding the robbery has attracted financial donations from around the world.

Swedish connection

[Michael]

The election ended up with a bit tricky situation. The right wing alliance kept the lead over the red-green wing but as the new party "Swedish democrats" entered the Parliament the right Alliance did not achieve full majority. This has lead to speculations about new constellations but the winning party (actually 4 parties) does not need to make any declarations until 5th October.

That the extreme party "Swedish democrats" got a bit more than 5% of the votes (3% last election in 2004) and by that entered the Parliament should not be such a surprise for the established parties. Immigration problems are obvious and surprisingly, even immigrants join the "Swedish democrat party". However, no one wants to cooperate with them so we shall see how this develops. In Denmark a similar party was elected to the Parliament  in 2001 and they have, ten years later, a heavy role in the political system. So this "problem" has to be handled with care and action. Otherwise the Swedish democrats will be twice as strong in the next election. That is much the consensus summary in Sweden today.

I am having some trouble understanding this Swedish election Jahn - the names are misleading.
Which was the traditional party in power - or at least most recently?
Which is the party which has been pushing the immigrant issue?
Which part has won? Or has no one party won?
Which is the Left and which the Right parties?

[Builder]

Talking to a Republican

I have had an opportunity to converse for couple of hours with a high-ranking Republican. He was an extraordinary man: talented, powerful, knowledgeable, successful, very charismatic. Talking to him and hearing his views on various world issues was a gift. Imagine a strong and confident man telling you of the ideas and plans on how to manage various problems, solve them, achieve positive change and then tackle next problems.

He exuded strength, confidence and most of all – certainty. World was clear-cut. Good-bad, ‘ours’-‘theirs’, right-wrong – it was all clear, settled, beyond doubt.

What an attractive setting, what a temptation it was to indulge oneself into his train of thought!

World was about states, non-state actors like tefforists, individuals, non-governmental organisations were of little effect. World affairs have to be managed through states and tools for doing it are known, tested and effective. Ways for dealing with threats and problems are known and it is about the will to apply oneself or one’s nation.

Such clarity! Such an irresistibly attractive certainty! Exuding confidence!
Like a siren singing and tempting: ‘Just get into my cocoon of clear and certain world view and you will be as happy and powerful as I am’.

That’s how they sell themselves and their agenda – certainty, clarity and strength to effect the required changes.

I have also talked to Democrats and basked in the warmth of their sales pitch as well. It is different, but I leave that for another time.

[Jahn]

I am having some trouble understanding this Swedish election Jahn - the names are misleading.
Which was the traditional party in power - or at least most recently?
Which is the party which has been pushing the immigrant issue?
Which part has won? Or has no one party won?
Which is the Left and which the Right parties?

The" Alliance" is the right wing and they have been ruling since 2006. A coalition led by Mr Reinfeldt.
The opposition is lead by the social democrats and Mrs Sahlin. Now, she have not convinced the voters that she is a better prime minister than Reinfeldt. The Alliance has been quite successful to minimize the effects of the global crisis.

Now one has to know that the Social Democrats built this country and have, with few exceptions, had the majority in politics since the 1930's. The Social Democrats made their worst electiion since 1914 or something, only getting about 30% of the votes.


The extreme party, that has their focus on the immigrant problem is the Swedish democrats, a party that have many similarities in other extreme right wing parties in Europe. The close as you can get to a fascist party, I suppose. They got about 5% of the total votes.

"Which part has won? Or has no one party won?"

The two parts are the Alliance, with four conservative parties and Mr reinfeldt as prime minister and the opposition that consist of three parties, the Social Democrats plus the left wing party (before the Berlin wall went down they was called the Communist party) and then the Green party which is by nature not either right or left wing but care for the ecological issues.

The delicate situation is that all votes are not registered yet and there can be significant changes popping up in the middle of this week. The winner so far is the prime minister party and his alliance.

I hope that this summary answers your questions.

[Michael]

Talking to a Republican

Yes, I know that - I've heard them on the radio a few times. It is so seductive to just fall in line - the certainty is really something to die for.

[Michael]

Thanks Jahn - that clears it up a bit for me.

The" Alliance" is the right wing and they have been ruling since 2006. A coalition led by Mr Reinfeldt.
The opposition is lead by the social democrats and Mrs Sahlin. Now, she have not convinced the voters that she is a better prime minister than Reinfeldt. The Alliance has been quite successful to minimize the effects of the global crisis.

Now one has to know that the Social Democrats built this country and have, with few exceptions, had the majority in politics since the 1930's. The Social Democrats made their worst electiion since 1914 or something, only getting about 30% of the votes.


The extreme party, that has their focus on the immigrant problem is the Swedish democrats, a party that have many similarities in other extreme right wing parties in Europe. The close as you can get to a fascist party, I suppose. They got about 5% of the total votes.

"Which part has won? Or has no one party won?"

The two parts are the Alliance, with four conservative parties and Mr reinfeldt as prime minister and the opposition that consist of three parties, the Social Democrats plus the left wing party (before the Berlin wall went down they was called the Communist party) and then the Green party which is by nature not either right or left wing but care for the ecological issues.

The delicate situation is that all votes are not registered yet and there can be significant changes popping up in the middle of this week. The winner so far is the prime minister party and his alliance.

I hope that this summary answers your questions.

[Builder]

Climate change enlightenment was fun while it lasted. But now it's dead

The collapse of the talks at Copenhagen took away all momentum for change and the lobbyists are back in control. So what next?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/sep/20/climate-change-negotiations-failure

The closer it comes, the worse it looks. The best outcome anyone now expects from December's climate summit in Mexico is that some delegates might stay awake during the meetings. When talks fail once, as they did in Copenhagen, governments lose interest. They don't want to be associated with failure, they don't want to pour time and energy into a broken process. Nine years after the world trade negotiations moved to Mexico after failing in Qatar, they remain in diplomatic limbo. Nothing in the preparations for the climate talks suggests any other outcome.

A meeting in China at the beginning of October is supposed to clear the way for Cancún. The hosts have already made it clear that it's going nowhere: there are, a top Chinese climate change official explains, still "huge differences between developed and developing countries". Everyone blames everyone else for the failure at Copenhagen. Everyone insists that everyone else should move.

But nobody cares enough to make a fight of it. The disagreements are simultaneously entrenched and muted. The doctor's certificate has not been issued; perhaps, to save face, it never will be. But the harsh reality we have to grasp is that the process is dead.

In 2012 the only global deal for limiting greenhouse gas emissions – the Kyoto protocol – expires. There is no realistic prospect that it will be replaced before it elapses: the existing treaty took five years to negotiate and a further eight years to come into force. In terms of real hopes for global action on climate change, we are now far behind where we were in 1997, or even 1992. It's not just that we have lost 18 precious years. Throughout the age of good intentions and grand announcements we spiralled backwards.

Nor do regional and national commitments offer more hope. An analysis published a few days ago by the campaigning group Sandbag estimates the amount of carbon that will have been saved by the end of the second phase of the EU's emissions trading system, in 2012; after the hopeless failure of the scheme's first phase we were promised that the real carbon cuts would start to bite between 2008 and 2012. So how much carbon will it save by then? Less than one third of 1%.

Worse still, the reduction in industrial output caused by the recession has allowed big polluters to build up a bank of carbon permits which they can carry into the next phase of the trading scheme. If nothing is done to annul them or to crank down the proposed carbon cap (which, given the strength of industrial lobbies and the weakness of government resolve, is unlikely) these spare permits will vitiate phase three as well. Unlike the Kyoto protocol, the EU's emissions trading system will remain alive. It will also remain completely useless.

Plenty of nations – like Britain – have produced what appear to be robust national plans for cutting greenhouse gases. With one exception (the Maldives), their targets fall far short of the reductions needed to prevent more than two degrees of global warming.

Even so, none of them are real. Missing from the proposed cuts are the net greenhouse gas emissions we have outsourced to other countries and now import in the form of manufactured goods. Were these included in the UK's accounts, alongside the aviation, shipping and tourism gases excluded from official figures, Britain's emissions would rise by 48%. Rather than cutting our contribution to global warming by 19% since 1990, as the government boasts, we have increased it by about 29%. It's the same story in most developed nations. Our apparent success results entirely from failures elsewhere.

Hanging over everything is the growing recognition that the United States isn't going to play. Not this year, perhaps not in any year. If Congress couldn't pass a climate bill so feeble that it consisted of little but loopholes while Barack Obama was president and the Democrats had a majority in both houses, where does hope lie for action in other circumstances? Last Tuesday the Guardian reported that of 48 Republican contenders for the Senate elections in November only one accepted that man-made climate change is taking place. Who was he? Mike Castle of Delaware. The following day he was defeated by the Tea Party candidate Christine O'Donnell, producing a full house of science deniers. The enlightenment? Fun while it lasted.

What all this means is that there is not a single effective instrument for containing man-made global warming anywhere on earth. The response to climate change, which was described by Lord Stern as "a result of the greatest market failure the world has seen", is the greatest political failure the world has ever seen.

Nature won't wait for us. The US government's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reports that the first eight months of 2010 were as hot as the first eight months of 1998 – the warmest ever recorded. But there's a crucial difference. In 1998 there was a record El Niño – the warm phase of the natural Pacific temperature oscillation. The 2010 El Niño was smaller (an anomaly peaking at roughly 1.8C, rather than 2.5C), and brief by comparison to those of recent years. Since May the oscillation has been in its cool phase (La Niña): even so, June, July and August this year were the second warmest on record. The stronger the warnings, the less capable of action we become.

Where does this leave us? How should we respond to the reality we have tried not to see: that in 18 years of promise and bluster nothing has happened? Environmentalists tend to blame themselves for these failures. Perhaps we should have made people feel better about their lives. Or worse. Perhaps we should have done more to foster hope. Or despair. Perhaps we were too fixated on grand visions. Or techno-fixes. Perhaps we got too close to business. Or not close enough. The truth is that there is not and never was a strategy certain of success, as the powers ranged against us have always been stronger than we are.

Greens are a puny force by comparison to industrial lobby groups, the cowardice of governments and the natural human tendency to deny what we don't want to see. To compensate for our weakness, we indulged a fantasy of benign paternalistic power – acting, though the political mechanisms were inscrutable, in the wider interests of humankind. We allowed ourselves to believe that, with a little prompting and protest, somewhere, in a distant institutional sphere, compromised but decent people would take care of us. They won't. They weren't ever going to do so. So what do we do now?

I don't know. These failures have exposed not only familiar political problems, but deep-rooted human weakness. All I know is that we must stop dreaming about an institutional response that will never materialise and start facing a political reality we've sought to avoid. The conversation starts here.

Right, you cannot change the world...

[Michael]

Perhaps, though it was fascinating last week in Australia to see BHP Billiton chief executive Marius Kloppers come out in favour of a Carbon Tax.

Now this is no ordinary man. He is the head of the largest mining company in the world. He has never spoken publicly before to my knowledge. BHP weathered the GFC very well, as distinct from RIO.

His public expression of the inevitability of Carbon Tax in one form or another, and the need for Australia to adopt it or be left behind, sent ricochets around the world. You could hear God change chords - the debate has shifted.

Big business knows the writing is on the wall, and the sooner governments fall in line the better for them, because they are moving already - they see that global industry is now in a new era and those who drag the chain will be left behind.

Marius Kloppers with his European accent has the quiet power of a deity in the world of business. Mostly because he never says anything.

Don Argus, the recently resigned Chairman of the Board of BHP - the 'old man' of BHP - has always been in favour of a Carbon Tax, and is now engaged with the current Labor Government to review its Resources Tax.

Times are changing despite the flopping back and forth of Governments. Too late unfortunately.

[Michael]

Read an interesting article last night on the rise of Asia - especially China and India.

Some experts on these economies were reported on, which gives a perspective that is being completely missed by the Western world.

USA and Europe? Forget them - they are no longer in the ball game by a degree that is simply incomprehensible. The level of economic activity along with the growth demand in Asia is of a quantity that vastly exceeds anything the world has ever seen.

They say to comprehend Asia, you have to understand what is called BFN.
B stands for 'Big' and N for 'Numbers'.

"Dines, an old China hand at just 53 thanks to starting in 1978, professes dismay at the West's conceit in its dealings with China. We just don't get it, don't understand how fundamentally the game has changed, how little China needs of us."

"An example of his examples: if you've been half tuned-in to the state of the world, you'd know that more cars are sold in China now than the US. That's already history. The insight that's worth thinking about is that car ownership penetration in China is only 3 per cent, 80 per cent of buyers are purchasing their first-ever car and 90 per cent pay cash. Not only is it a massive market, it's ungeared and untapped."

"Over the past 30 years, nearly 400 million Chinese have moved to the cities. There are some 170 Chinese cities now with more than one million residents compared with only 35 in all of Europe. The urbanisation process has a long way to run with another 300 to 400 million people expected to move from the country to the city over the next 20 years. A typical 90 square-metre apartment in China requires about six tonnes of steel. Every tonne of steel requires around 1.7 tonnes of iron ore and more than half a tonne of coking coal. You can work it out from there.

And that's just high-rise apartments. China is building railways like no-one ever has and every 10km of metropolitan subway requires about 75,000 tonnes of steel. And so on."

He also said the Commonwealth Games debacle in India is front page news, but don't let that fool you. India is a vast economy, close on the heals of China with labour-intensive growth.

The world economic power structure has shifted, and no one seems to notice. He said if you think you know about Chindia, you don't know half of it!

[Builder]

"We just don't get it, don't understand how fundamentally the game has changed, how little China needs of us."

That is an interesting statement.

I have mostly been looking at India's and China's military developments and...the weird thing is...that they seem to need us quite a bit equipment-wise. No, they do not need Western equipment as such, but they need it as an example for copying. All China's latest combat aircraft have been pretty much without an exception either clones or cross-breeds of Western aircraft. There are many other newly-unveiled items of war machinery that are nothing but clones and facsimiles of things built either in Europe or the US.

Then there are cars... Well, decide for yourself:

China rolls out a Rolls-Royce Copy

http://realitypod.com/2010/04/china-rolls-royce-copy/

Luxury British car maker Rolls-Royce is considering legal action after a Chinese company unveiled a prototype limousine that is a dead ringer for the Rolls-Royce Phantom and which would sell for about a fraction of the price.

Geely Automobile, one of China’s major independent car makers, launched its GE – which stand for “Geely Excellence” – at last week’s Shanghai Auto Show, and the sedan attracted much interest for its resemblance to the Rolls-Royce model.

The glossy black Geely GE, still a prototype, comes with some of the Phantom’s signature features, including the Grecian temple grille, down-sloping rear deck, and even a badge that looks like the iconic Rolls-Royce Spirit of Ecstasy winged mascot.

The GE also comes with a knock-off of the Rolls-Royce’s “starry-night” headliner – the interior roof detail above the passenger seat, which features hundreds of fibre-optic lights to give the impression of a star-spangled night sky.

“In one sense it’s quite complimentary, but we have to be protective of our brand image,” Rolls-Royce spokesman Andrew Ball told The News, a British newspaper based in Portsmouth. “We’re having a bit of a chat with our lawyers about where we could take it.”

On its website, Geely also says the GE is “reinventing the classic”, without saying which classic car it is reinventing.

Geely spokesman Zhang Xiaoshu told the AFP news agency that the GE was set to go on sale within three years, probably for about 1 million yuan ($200,000), which could be up to a sixth less than a Phantom, depending on Chinese taxes.

The GE has one key feature not found in the Phantom: the passenger compartment has just one seat, dubbed the throne. The front compartment seats two.

Zhang admitted that there were some similarities but insisted the GE was an original.

“As it were, they are actually different … people may feel they are the same at the first glance, but the details are certainly different,” he said.

ROLLS-ROYCE PHANTOM

BUILT: Goodwood, Sussex
PRICE: £250,000
ENGINE: Mammoth 6.75litre V12
LENGTH: 19ft 2 inches
TOP SPEED: Artificially restricted to 150mph / 0-62mph: 5.7 seconds
FEATURES:
Original ‘Grecian-style’ large grille. Spirit of Ecstasy mascot, also dubbed ‘The Flying Lady’. Romantic ‘starlight Headliner’ in roof to emulate night sky. Drip dry umbrellas hidden in rear doors. 9 standard wood veneers. 44,000 different exterior colours.
Cashmere blend headliner. Lambswool rugs Special soft leather interior

THE GEELY EXCELLENCE

BUILT: Zhejiang, China
PRICE: circa £30,000
ENGINE: 3.5litre V6
LENGTH: 17ft 6 inches.
TOP SPEED: 110mph (estimated) 0-62mph: 10 seconds (estimate)
FEATURES:
Single rear ‘throne’. Pastiche ‘Grecian-style’ large grille. Flying Lady-style mascot
Romantic ‘starlight Headliner’ in roof to emulate night sky. Glass interior divider
Pure wool carpet. ‘Six star’ safety. Cigar store. Refrigerator. Wine cabinet


Rolls:



Clone:

Is it all about Chinese being in need of 'us' - the 'other' - to identify with or against? Hard to tell, but the more I look at what they do technology and society-wise, the more it looks as if they need somebody to compare with, to copy from and to better. Take 'us' away from them and...

[Michael]

I suppose you are aware Juhani of the huge technological 'stealing' that China has been doing intensively for the past ten or twenty years especially. It is not just factories setting up next door to the top brand name production factories in China, making direct duplicates. It is also the IT hacking that has predominantly targeted Corporate Intellectual Property secrets.

First thing I would say is that the artical I read explained:
"the United States' share of China's exports is 20 per cent so the much ballyhooed American consumer is only good for 0.3 per cent of China's GDP growth - growth that runs along in double digits or close to it even in the Great Recession.

That's only part of it. The stuff China exports to the US is mainly low value-added – clothing, toys, electronic gadgets. About half of China's exports now go to the developing world and that half has higher value-added content – power stations, mining machinery and the like."

Meaning this has moved from imitation to high level production and now export - even to the US, California is looking to purchase trains from China - no doubt copies of Western trains.

Second thing, China has a big problem with creative, innovative thought. I could go into lengths about this, but suffice to say their entire culture from a long way back has been about reproducing what is asked for, and reproducing the works of the 'masters' whoever they may be. Julie's Chinese students plagiarise shamelessly, but it wasn't long before we discovered they are taught to do this from birth - imitation of others is what they do. New thinking is strongly discouraged.

[Builder]

Second thing, China has a big problem with creative, innovative thought. I could go into lengths about this, but suffice to say their entire culture from a long way back has been about reproducing what is asked for, and reproducing the works of the 'masters' whoever they may be. Julie's Chinese students plagiarise shamelessly, but it wasn't long before we discovered they are taught to do this from birth - imitation of others is what they do. New thinking is strongly discouraged.

Precisely, that is what is so very strange about them. It is as if they do not need 'us' (as Westerners) to fuel their economy and fill their wallets, but they need 'us' to show them where to go technology- and society-vise.

If there is time, it might be interesting to take a look at their strategic thought in comparison to, say, the US. The US talks about domination, changing and shaping the world. Harnessing opportunities, changing and being ready for change (at least at the declaratory level).

Chinese aim at stability and control. Everything must be controlled. World must be stable. No sudden turns, no unexpected events. That's why quite a few observers are not that worried about them having such a large share of the US debt - they would not go radical about it as they are too concerned with stability.