Lindsey strike talks adjourn

Talks have been held between unions and employers after almost 650 contract staff working on a major construction project were sacked last week after seven days of unofficial industrial action.

Owners Total, the French oil giant, said the action had left a construction project six months behind schedule and around £85.5 million over budget.

Meanwhile, more workers have walked out around the country in support of the strike. Employees at the Coryton oil refinery in Essex have now taken action for the first time since the dispute flared.

And contract staff at a number of sites, including the Longannet power station in Scotland, Sellafield nuclear site in Cumbria, and Didcot power station in Oxfordshire continue to take unofficial action.

GMB general secretary Paul Kenny was cheered and applauded when he announced that the union had launched a £100,000 hardship fund to support strikers.

"As far as we are concerned, they are victimised and locked-out people, and it is an official dispute from the moment those notices arrived," he said, adding that the union is pressing ahead with a national ballot of thousands of workers in the industry in a long-running dispute over jobs and conditions.

He continued: "We are committed to a national ballot. We think we are about a week away from launching that national ballot. There are lots of technicalities, but we are absolutely clear we are going down that road."

Mr Kenny and the Unite union made clear there would be no resolution of the dispute unless all the sacked workers are reinstated.

A statement released by the company said further cost overruns would "jeopardise the future viability of this important inward investment into the UK".

The firm urged discussions to focus on restarting the project and said it had been assured by contractors that workers would not face reduced pay or conditions.

It said: "Total is actively encouraging talks to be opened between its contractors and the unions about how to facilitate the return to work of its contracting companies' former workforces.

"These discussions between the unions and the contracting companies should focus on getting the project back up and running within the agreed timeframe and budget.

"The contracting companies have assured Total they remain committed to the national agreement between themselves and the unions. There is no question of a reduction in pay or dilution of existing terms and conditions."

Total said it would be the end of the week before the number of contract staff wanting to return to work would be known.

"However, the contractor companies have advised us that they believe they will have sufficient workforce necessary to meet their programming requirements," the company added.

Speaking in reaction to the statement, Phil Whitehurst, of the GMB union, said he knew nothing about any proposed talks.

He said: "I've spoken to the general secretary of the GMB, he knows nothing about any talks at all. Paul Kenny doesn't know anything at all about it."

French group Total appears to be bowing to pressure from striking workers at its Lindsey oil refinery – it’s now ‘actively encouraging’ talks between its contractors and the union representatives of the 650 workers sacked last week. It’s obvious why: Total said in a statement that the long-running dispute at Lindsey has already cost the company €100m and left it six months behind schedule. And with more and more workers joining wildcat strikes in support of their brethren, the problem seems to be getting worse rather than better. But this does leave Total in a pretty weak negotiating position…

This row has been rumbling on since January, when workers walked out on strike in protest at the use of foreign labour. Since then, unions have been agitating for strike action if local workers didn’t get first dibs on jobs (thanks partly to Gordon Brown’s daft/ illegal ‘British jobs for British workers’ slogan). The latest flashpoint came when 51 workers were made redundant but not allowed to apply for vacant jobs with another subcontractor; when workers walked out in protest, 647 of them promptly got the sack. But this just made things worse: the workers have refused to budge, and some 3,000 of their brethren have now gone on strike in their support across the UK.

All in all, Total said, the delays, underperformance and low productivity on the Lindsey £200m hydro-desulphurisation project have already cost it a whopping €100m. And the problem isn’t going away: yesterday the sacked workers were burning their dismissal letters outside the refinery, and wildcat strikes were spreading across the country. So you can see why the French group has ‘changed its position’ (according to union Unite) and started pressing for a solution. Technically Total doesn’t employ these people – they work for the nine subcontractors that ituses to deliver the work on site – but its intervention will clearly carry a lot of weight.

The problem will be that the unions now have Total over a barrel (so to speak). The likes of Unite and GMB – which hadn’t supported the unofficial strikes, until the workers got the boot – are now on the offensive, insisting that the dispute won’t be resolved until all 647 workers are given their jobs back. That will be a fairly humiliating climb-down for the refinery bosses.

And the longer-term worry is whether this will affect the UK’s reputation as a place to do business. Total muttered darkly today that ‘further cost overruns will jeopardise the future viability of this important inward investment into the UK’. Of course it would say that - but it's true that this has proved to be a very expensive headache, and you wouldn’t be surprised if in future, Total decides to avoid running projects in the UK wherever possible. The unions appear to have won this battle, but they might yet lose the war...

24-06-2009 om 00:22 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

By Hilary Whiteman
CNN

LONDON, England (CNN) -- More than six hundred workers at Total's Lindsey oil refinery in Northern England have been told they no longer have jobs after staging what the company calls an "unofficial, illegal walk out."

Protesters gathered outside Total's Lindsey oil refinery on Friday, June 19, after hundreds of striking workers were sacked.

The steel workers started striking last Thursday after one contractor axed 51 jobs while another employer on the same site was recruiting.

Protesters gathered outside Total's Lindsey oil refinery Friday with placards calling for solidarity from fellow workers.

The dispute has prompted a number of wildcat strikes at power stations and oil refineries around the United Kingdom.

The workers' union GMB, which represents around half of the sacked workers, estimates that, as of late yesterday, up to 4,000 other workers at four power stations and three oil refineries had walked off the job in sympathy.

Early this afternoon, Total confirmed that negotiations had started between the workers' employers and ACAS, the British Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service.

Earlier, in a statement posted on its Web site, Total announced that its contractors had started the process of ending employment contracts for 647 workers on the HDS-3 construction project.

The statement said the project has been temporarily shut down and that all employees had until 5pm on Monday to reapply for their jobs.

Phil Davies, national secretary and head of the manufacturing section at the GMB Union, told CNN the invitation to a job interview would only stoke workers' anger. "I think that would just humiliate people to be quite honest and it will put their backs up and make them more determined to win it," he said.

He said union representatives were in the process of gathering information to hold an official industrial ballot, a process that could take six weeks.

The British Press Association published one sacked Lindsey worker's appeal for support from fellow union members: "We are asking for support from workers across the country which I am sure will be given. Total will soon realize they have unleashed a monster."

Workers at the Lindsey oil refinery walked off the job for more than one week in early February to protest against the hiring of hundreds of foreign workers.

They returned to work after the unions and the company gave assurances that half the jobs would go to British workers.

23-06-2009 om 07:52 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

Mission-statement

Onderteken ons mission-statement.

Liberales is een onafhankelijke denktank binnen de liberale beweging. De leden zien het liberalisme als een progressieve beweging die opkomt voor de vrijheid van het individu, rechtvaardigheid en mensenrechten. Liberales zet zich af tegen het bekrompen conservatisme op sociaal-economisch, ecologisch en ethisch vlak van de verzuilde partijen en structuren.

De leden geloven in de kracht, de eigenheid en de zelfontplooiing van de mens om als ontvoogd individu zijn verantwoordelijkheid op te nemen in de samenleving. Opdat ieder individu in staat zou zijn dit te doen, dienen wij ernaar te streven dat er zoveel mogelijk gelijke startkansen zijn.

Vrijheid en verantwoordelijkheid zijn met elkaar verbonden. Individualisering betekent grotere vrijheid en zelfstandigheid van mensen in de vormgeving van hun eigen bestaan, in de keuze met wie men omgaat en van de manier waarop aan die omgang vorm en inhoud wordt gegeven. Vanuit die vrije situatie moet ieder individu zijn verantwoordelijkheid opnemen ten aanzien van zichzelf (door zijn kansen te gebruiken) en van de anderen waarmee hij een samenleving vormt.

Vrijheid en solidariteit zijn voor ons perfect te combineren. Een conflict tussen beide ontstaat alleen wanneer de samenleving als een op zichzelf bestaand iets naast en dan meestal boven het individu wordt gesteld. Solidariteit vergt een investering van de mens in de samenleving en het opnemen van zijn verantwoordelijkheid tegenover de medemens.

Vrijheid verwijst ook naar de mate waarin mensen rechten van anderen respecteren. Een samenleving kan pas menswaardig genoemd worden wanneer zij een maximum aan keuzemogelijkheden aan haar leden kan garanderen. Die zelfbeschikkingsvrijheid en vrije keuze is voornamelijk belangrijk op het gebied van levensbeschouwing en levenshouding, die mensen zelf wensen op te bouwen. Liberales komt aldus op voor wederzijds respect.

Liberales richt zich tot iedereen die gelooft in de vrijheid, openheid en creativiteit van de mens als motor voor meer welvaart en welzijn.


Beste lezertjes, onthou vooral de eerste zin :.... is een onafhankelijke denktank binnen de liberale beweging. Nu gaan we naar de essays op deze leuke site en we vinden : http://www.liberales.be/essays/martens

Groen Keynesianisme: contradictie of kans?

essay vrijdag 07 november 2008

Bart Martens

Nu het effect van de financiële crisis in de reële economie duidelijker wordt, maken de klassieke Keynesiaanse redeneringen voor het voeren van een anticyclisch beleid terug opgang. Refererend naar het stimuleringsplan van Roosevelt in de jaren dertig, brak VN secretaris-generaal Ban Ki-Moon vorige week een lans voor een Groene New Deal (De Morgen van 23/10/2008). De contouren van zo’n groen stimuleringsbeleid legde de VN vorige week vast in het 'Initiatief Groene Economie'.

In Vlaanderen lanceerden Frank Vandenbroucke en Kathleen Van Brempt het plan om via een betere benutting van de beschikbare middelen, met snelle en slimme investeringen de impact van de financiële crisis in te perken. Overheidsinvesteringen kunnen de teruggevallen vraag van bedrijven en gezinnen deels compenseren. De overheid kan daarnaast ook kapitaal verstrekken dat de commerciële financiële instellingen ,die hun vergiftigde activa versneld moeten afschrijven en balansen moeten opkuisen, niet langer kunnen of durven aanbieden.

Hebben we zulke Keynesiaanse antwoorden niet al eens eerder gehoord? Jawel. Begin jaren ’90 pakte Europees commissievoorzitter Jacques Delors uit met een heus Witboek om met mega-infrastructuurwerken een economische relance op gang te brengen en zo miljoenen Europeanen aan de slag te helpen. De Keynesiaanse aanpak van het Witboek leverde echter niet op wat werd verwacht. Dat had zeker te maken met de onvolledige uitvoering, maar ook met de focus op grote (wegen)infrastructuurwerken.

De verbeterde infrastructuur stelde bedrijven namelijk in staat om hun productie- en distributiecentra geografisch te concentreren en te automatiseren. Tegelijk werd het productieproces in stukjes gekapt en ruimtelijk uiteengelegd, vaak met verschuiving van arbeidsintensieve activiteiten naar de lage loonlanden. De netto creatie van duurzame jobs viel hierdoor ondermaats uit. Bovendien gingen de investeringen gepaard met een belangrijke maatschappelijke kost op milieuvlak. Het ontstaan van Europese Distributiecentra van waaruit heel de Europese markt – per vrachtwagen just-in-time – moest worden bediend, zorgde er immers voor dat een zelfde handelsvolume met veel meer vrachtkilometers werd afgewikkeld. De bedrijfskosten van het voorraadbeheer namen af, terwijl de overheid de kosten van de nieuwe voorraadkamers (de wegen) voor haar rekening nam.

Vandaag hebben we nood aan een relancebeleid dat werkt vóór het milieu in plaats van ertegen. Waarom? Omdat het ongemoeid laten van de klimaatcrisis de economische en sociale crisis alleen maar erger zal maken. Investeren in schone technologieën en hernieuwbare energie voorkomt een veel hogere factuur later. Het gezaghebbende rapport Stern rekende ons voor dat de schadekost van de ernstige klimaatwijzigingen zo’n 10 keer hoger zal liggen dan de kost om deze te voorkomen.

Investeren in een koolstofarme economie verkleint bovendien onze afhankelijkheid van geïmporteerde fossiele brandstoffen. Juist die afhankelijkheid zorgde samen met de stijgende energieprijzen op de internationale markten voor een gigantische cashflow uit Europa naar de olieproducerende landen. Een ambitieus Europees energiebeleid dat investeert in schone technologie en zuinige producten kost uiteraard ook veel geld, maar het zijn wel miljarden die in de Europese economie worden geïnvesteerd.

Energiezuinige woningen, efficiënte voertuigen en jobs in sectoren die de producten van de toekomst leveren, maken onze gezinnen bovendien weerbaar tegen de bokkensprongen van de energieprijzen op de internationale markten en openen voor onze bedrijven gigantische exportmarkten. Zowel onze koopkracht als onze concurrentiekracht zullen dus wel varen bij een nieuw doortastend Europees gecoördineerd Keynesiaans beleid. Dat geldt ook voor België dat verhoudingsgewijs meer energie-intensieve industrie huisvest en waar het moeilijker is om hernieuwbare energie te produceren. Het Federaal Planbureau berekende onlangs dat de realisatie van de Europese klimaatdoelstellingen in ons land netto 25.000 extra jobs kan opleveren als we onder meer de opbrengsten van de veiling van emissierechten aanwenden om de loonlasten te verlagen.

Kortom: alleen een groene Keynes kan tegelijk een antwoord bieden aan de economische recessie, het jobtekort, de voedselschaarste, de stijgende energieprijzen, het verlies aan natuurlijk kapitaal en de klimaatopwarming. De Trans Europese Netwerken waar Europa vandaag in moet investeren, zijn de energienetwerken. Zo kan de aanleg van een hoogspanningsnet op de bodem van de zee de offshore windmolenparken verbinden met de Scandinavische waterkrachtcentrales. Hierdoor ontstaat één gigantische elektriciteitscentrale waaruit stabiele hernieuwbare elektriciteit kan afgenomen worden en waarbij de Scandinavische waterkrachtcentrales dienst doen als back-up (in windstille periodes) en opslag (bij overaanbod van windstroom).

In Vlaanderen moet het elektriciteitsnet een ‘internetstructuur’ krijgen zodat gebruikers niet alleen energie kunnen afnemen, maar ze er ook kunnen opzetten. In een slim netwerk zullen gezinnen en bedrijven grotendeels zelf hun stroom en warmte produceren en via het net overschotten en tekorten uitwisselen. ‘Slimme meters’ moeten straks slimme toestellen kunnen sturen zodat ze bij piekvraag energie opwekken (warmtekrachtinstallaties) en in dalperiodes stroom afnemen (wasmachines, diepvriezen, inplugwagens). Dat garandeert een netevenwicht met veel minder reservecapaciteit. In zo’n model wordt onze stroommarkt niet langer gedomineerd door enkele spelers. Onze ‘gedemocratiseerde’ energiemarkten zullen vele investeringen uitlokken in duurzame energieopwekking en -besparing (‘Negawatts’). Of hoe een groen investeringsbeleid niet alleen leidt tot de door Keynes gewilde actieve overheid op korte termijn, maar ook zorgt voor duurzaamheid op lange termijn.

De auteur is Vlaams volksvertegenwoordiger en senator voor sp.a

Bart Martens

Bart Martens

Links

mailto:martens.bart@vlaamsparlement.be

Misschien is dat wel de echte reden waarom men de liberalen niet meer nodig heeft in de Vlaamse regering men heeft de sp.a en dat is blijkbaar het zelfde aan het worden...Maar na deze pissige opmerking waarvan men makkelijk kan beweren dat ze weinig inhoud aan het debat toevoegt nodigen we onze punthoofdjes die ons dagelijks met plezier lezen uit om de laatste paragraag van dit hoogstaande en technisch onderbouwde essay van de energiespecialist van de sp.a te bestuderen.

In Vlaanderen moet het elektriciteitsnet een ‘internetstructuur’ krijgen zodat gebruikers niet alleen energie kunnen afnemen, maar ze er ook kunnen opzetten. In een slim netwerk zullen gezinnen en bedrijven grotendeels zelf hun stroom en warmte produceren en via het net overschotten en tekorten uitwisselen. ‘Slimme meters’ moeten straks slimme toestellen kunnen sturen zodat ze bij piekvraag energie opwekken (warmtekrachtinstallaties) en in dalperiodes stroom afnemen (wasmachines, diepvriezen, inplugwagens). Dat garandeert een netevenwicht met veel minder reservecapaciteit. In zo’n model wordt onze stroommarkt niet langer gedomineerd door enkele spelers. Onze ‘gedemocratiseerde’ energiemarkten zullen vele investeringen uitlokken in duurzame energieopwekking en -besparing (‘Negawatts’). Of hoe een groen investeringsbeleid niet alleen leidt tot de door Keynes gewilde actieve overheid op korte termijn, maar ook zorgt voor duurzaamheid op lange termijn.

Kijk beste lezertjes, dat is nu wartaal waarvan we echt kunnen van genieten. Een liberale sos die ons via de Keynesiaanse theorie komt uitleggen dat ons tante Wis met haar schamel overlevingspensioentje in haar tweekamerappartementje in de Seefhoek binnenkort haren eigen "ellentriek" zal maken en dat via een slim netwerk en een nog slimmere meter haar slim frigooke in dalperiodes zal in gang schieten. Bovendien zal ons Tante Wis met haar Negawatts (dat zijn de momenten dat hare frigo een temperatuur heeft gelijk aan die van haar kleerkast) stinkend rijk worden.

Gelukkig zal dat energiemodelleke beperkt blijven tot Vlaanderen want zoals iedereen wel weet stopt de ellentriek aan de taalgrens. Wat ons soske er ook vergat bij te vermelden is de kostprijs van al dat slim alaam. Maar dat is natuurlijk bijzaak voor een echte sos. Ons Tante Wis is al begonnen met bloem en niet gebrande koffie en vooral veel "bougies" te hamsteren tegen "den slechten tijd" die wel heel donker dreigt te worden...

21-06-2009 om 23:44 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

Hier zijn we dan weer met goed nieuws voor alle mensen die nu al moeite hebben met het betalen van hun energiefactuur...
We vonden deze leuke info op http://www.standaard.be/Artikel/Detail.aspx?artikelId=PD2BJS96
We melden hier eventjes ter verduidelijking dat die dingen heel wat mensen die nu nog de job uitoefenen van meteropnemer naar den dop zullen verwijzen en dat de enige partij die hier zeer erg bij gebaat zal zijn de stroomproducenten zelf zijn. Zij kunnen hiermee, zoals een slimme lezer ipv van meter schreef als reactie op dit artikel, hun peakload afvlakken en aldus hun winsten opdrijven.
De expert waarnaar hier verwezen wordt namelijk Luc Hujoel is niet meteen een man die zomaar iets uit zijn duimpje zuigt omdat hij niet of nauwelijks weet waarover hij praat zoals bij zoveel andere zogenaamdeexperts. Hij is namelijk niet alleen energieexpert zoals hieronder wordt geschreven en baas bij het Brusselse Sibelga  maar hij is ook baas bij BNO (Brussels Network Operator) en bij Metrix (Brussels bedrijf voor de opname van de meterstanden) en dus iemand die zeer goed weet waarover hij praat...
De toekomst ziet er dus weer heel erg rooskleurig uit voor de OCMW's ....

Slimme meter is niet gratis

• vrijdag 19 juni 2009
• 
  
• Auteur: (pse)

LEUVEN - Aan slimme energiemeters hangt een behoorlijk prijskaartje vast voor de verbruiker.

WAT ZIJN SLIMME METERS?

Onder een slimme meter verstaat de VREG een meter die het energieverbruik op het moment zelf (“real-time”) vaststelt en de mogelijkheid biedt om het verbruik zowel lokaal als van op afstand uit te lezen en die tevens kan gebruikt worden om van op afstand het energieverbruik te beperken of de verbruiker aan- en af te schakelen.

De term "slim" slaat - eerder dan op intelligentie van de meter zelf - vooral op de communicatiemogelijkheden (niet alleen wat betreft meterstanden en andere bijkomende informatie, maar ook bijvoorbeeld de mogelijkheid tot aan- of afschakelen van op afstand) en mogelijkheid tot latere upgrades van de meter van op afstand. De slimme meter en het communicatiesysteem moeten bovendien deel uitmaken van een intelligent systeem waarbij de gecommuniceerde gegevens zo efficiënt mogelijk gebruikt worden of ter beschikking gesteld worden, en waarbij de meter en meterfuncties snel en betrouwbaar kunnen worden aangesproken.

Het is duidelijk dat door de invoering van slimme meters geen fysieke meteropnames meer moeten gebeuren. Op alle belangrijke momenten (verhuizing, leverancierswissel) kan de meterstand van op afstand afgelezen worden. Slimme meters laten ook toe om afnemers meer informatie te geven over hun verbruik, zodat ze hun gedrag kunnen aanpassen. De facturatie kan sneller en correcter verlopen en dat leidt tot minder klachten en ongenoegen. Fraude kan ook sneller opgespoord worden. Er zijn nog heel wat andere voordelen. De belangrijkste voor- en nadelen van een massale invoering van slimme meters komen uitgebreider aan bod in de kosten-batenanalyse die de VREG liet opstellen.

SITUERING

In verschillende Europese landen werden al een aantal projecten van massale plaatsing van slimme meters opgestart en uitgevoerd. Italië wenst de invoering van slimme meters tegen 2012 te hebben afgerond en de overgrote meerderheid van de Italianen beschikt ondertussen al over een slimme meter. In Zweden is men volop bezig met de uitrol ervan. Ondermeer Nederland en Frankrijk bereiden een grootschalige invoering voor. Elk land heeft zijn eigen redenen voor de invoering van slimme meters. Met het in voege treden van de energie efficiëntierichtlijn en meer bepaald de verplichting tot frequente facturering op basis van reële verbruiken, is er wel een belangrijk argument voor de invoering van slimme meters.

Meestal speelde de overheid een belangrijke rol in het opstarten van deze projecten, soms zelfs door het verplichten van de invoering ervan (zoals Italië, Zweden, Spanje en Nederland). Uit meerdere studies in verband met de invoering van slimme meters blijkt dat het niet evident is om uit te pakken met een sterk positieve kosten-batenanalyse. Bovendien zijn de kosten en baten meestal niet gelijk verdeeld over de belanghebbenden en het is niet altijd duidelijk wie uiteindelijk de kosten van de invoering van slimme meters draagt.

WAT GEBEURT ER IN VLAANDEREN?

In de loop van 2007 heeft de VREG het overleg opgestart met de netbeheerders en leveranciers over de mogelijke invoering van slimme meters in het Vlaamse Gewest. Doel is om te bestuderen of de massale invoering van slimme meters wenselijk is vanuit technisch en financieel oogpunt.

In 2007 liet de VREG een eerste studie uitvoeren door de KUL waarin de communicatiemiddelen die gebruikt kunnen worden voor de gegevensoverdracht (communicatie over het elektriciteitsnet, communicatie over telefoon- en kabelnet en draadloze communicatie) onderling vergeleken worden qua kost en geschiktheid voor de vereiste functionaliteiten.

In 2008 werd door consultant KEMA een kosten-batenmodel ontwikkeld voor de Vlaamse markt, waarmee de kosten en baten van de invoering van de slimme meters kunnen worden geanalyseerd. Dit model gaat uit van een macro-economische benadering, maar de impact op de verschillende belanghebbenden (de netbeheerders, de leveranciers, de verbruikers, de overheid) kan eveneens worden onderzocht. Verschillende alternatieven kunnen worden bekeken (onder meer met betrekking tot de communicatiemedia en de functionaliteiten) binnen het kader van de huidige marktorganisatie. De lijst met functionaliteiten en de meeste gegevens voor het model werden aangeleverd door het Werktraject 4 van de Studie over het marktmodel die de VREG uitvoert. Een eerste rapport met resultaten werd in juli 2008 op de VREG-website geplaatst. Het model kan verder gebruikt worden als instrument om advies te verlenen en beslissingen over de invoering van slimme meters te onderbouwen.

20-06-2009 om 00:00 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

Wij bieden hier onze platste en meest welriekende excuses aan voor de tijdelijke inactiviteit op ons blogje. Wij ontkennen dat dit iets zou te maken hebben met interne afrekeningen binnen de verschillende redactieclans. Er is evenmin een verband met onze berichtgeving over Iran en de Mossad heeft ons nog steeds niet uitgeroeid noch met fosfor noch met slechte ballen in tomatensaus. We hadden een spijtige samenloop van omstandigheden, vanuit jullie oogpunt dan toch, namelijk enen technisch euvel dat wel vaker voorkomt met PC's, vervolgens enen belangrijk kaderlid-vorser-medewerker dat artistiek openbloeit  en daar nogal wat tijd pleegt in te steken, en uiteindelijk een andere drukdoener die enen ulktrageheime buitenlandsche missie heeft ondernomen om te overleggen met het  pas weer uit de doden opgestane genie der Karpaten en de nooit ondergaande zon van Roemenië ofte de leider der leiders, kameraad Ceauscescu himself. We willen onze lezertjes echter niet geheel in het ongewisse laten over deze ultra-geheime missie en een tipje van de sluier oplichten. Onze leider der leiders kon de eeuwige rust niet vinden omdat zijn geest geen rust vond wegens het tobben over de vraag welk product het best geschikt was voor de 3600 hectaren marmeren vloeren in het paleis. Was het Mister Proper met lentegeur of het witte huismerk van Delhaize met de geur van wilde seringen, speciaal voor badkamers?
We hebben echter een vrij verrassende conclusie moeten trekken uit dit tijdelijke intellectuele dieet waarop onze talrijke lezersscharen hebben overleefd: hoe minder we schrijven, hoe meer we gelezen worden. Intussen staan we zelfs weer op de eerste plaats in de top 20 van de bloggenblogs. This must be Flanders, my dear Watson!
Maar wee de vermetelen met de satanische grijns op het aangezicht die ons al dood en begraven waanden.
Wij beloven deze vileine benden en hormonale uitwassen te land, ter zee en vanuit de lucht te blijven bestoken met gortige schimpscheuten.
We'll never surrender!

19-06-2009 om 00:00 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

Last update - 00:16 14/06/2009

Report: Defeated Ahmadinejad rival arrested in Iran

By Yossi Melman, Haaretz Correspondent, and News Agencies

Tags: Israel News

Iranian presidential candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi was reportedly arrested Saturday following the reformist's defeat at the polls by hardliner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Supporters of Mousavi, the main challenger to Ahmadinejad, have responded to the election with the most serious unrest in Tehran in a decade and claim that the result was the work of a dictatorship. There have been a number of contradictory reports from Iran, in large part due to the heavy restrictions imposed on the media in the Islamic Republic and in particular on foreign reporters. Mousavi's arrest was reported by an unofficial source, who said that the presidential contender had been arrested en route to the home of Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Pro-reform Mousavi has denounced the election as rigged and vowed he will not accept defeat. He and key aides could not be reached by phone Saturday. Advertisement Several hundred demonstrators - many wearing the trademark green colors of Mousavi's campaign - chanted "the government lied to the people" and gathered near the Interior Ministry as the final count from Friday's presidential election was announced. As night fell Saturday, the rioting and fires continued on the streets of Tehran. The city's cell phone network appeared to be down Saturday night. When users tried to call cell phones, a message appeared saying error in connection. There were also reports of difficulties accessing social networking sites - used by Mousavi to rally supporters. There was no immediate comment from Iran's Telecommunications Ministry and it did not appear that cell phones were down throughout the country. Residents in several provinces say their service is working. The result gave 62.6 percent of the vote to Ahmadinejad and 33.75 to Mousavi - a former prime minister who has become the hero of a youth-driven movement seeking greater liberties and a gentler face for Iran abroad. Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, closed the door on any chance he could use his limitless powers to intervene in the disputes from the election. In a message on state TV, he urged the nation to unite behind Ahmadinejad, calling the result a "divine assessment." "I'm warning that I won't surrender to this manipulation," said a statement on Mousavi's Web site. "The outcome of what we've seen from the performance of officials ... is nothing but shaking the pillars of the Islamic Republic of Iran's sacred system and governance of lies and dictatorship," it added. Mousavi warned people won't respect those who take power through fraud. The headline on one of his Web sites read: "I won't give in to this dangerous manipulation." Mousavi appealed directly to Khamenei to intervene and stop what he said were violations of the law. Khamenei, who is not elected, holds ultimate political authority in Iran and controls all major policy decisions. It was also reported Saturday that former Iranian president Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, a Mousavi supporter, had resigned from all of his official positions in protest against the results of the election. 'Healthy election' Ahmadinejad, in a nationally televised victory speech, said that the election process had been "free and healthy," and accused the foreign media of coverage that harms the Iranian people. There was more rioting at night and fires continued to burn on the streets of Tehran. "People voted for my policies," the conservative president said in his first post-election comment. "It was a free and healthy election," he said, without making direct reference to electoral violation assertions by Mousavi. As he was speaking, supporters of Mousavi clashed with police in various places in Tehran, chanting anti-Ahmadinejad slogans, witnesses said. "Everybody should respect people's vote ... we need a calm atmosphere to build the country," Ahmadinejad said. He also took a swipe at his opponents in the election, which was marked by unprecedented mudslinging. Ahmadinejad, who swept to power in 2005 pledging to revive the values of the 1979 Islamic revolution, accused his opponents of corruption during the campaign. They accused him of lying about the economy, which is suffering from high inflation. "I named some people during the campaign. I was accused of insulting them, but it is not an insult," he said, referring to his comments about Rafsanjani. "Those who have revolutionary background are not allowed to have extravagant demands," he said. "All political and propaganda machines abroad and sections inside the country have been mobilized against the nation," he said. "They have launched the heaviest propaganda and psychological war against the Iranian nation. Many global networks continuously worked, employing very complicated methods, that work against our nation and arranged a full-fledged battle against us." Without mentioning the unrest on the streets, Ahmadinejad proclaimed that a new era has begun in the history of the Iranian nation. "A bright and glorious future is ahead for the Iranian nation. ... I invite everyone to join me in constructing Iran," he said. Street battles in Tehran The clashes in central Tehran were the more serious disturbances in the capital since student-led protests in 1999. They showed the potential for the showdown to spill over into further violence and challenges to the Islamic establishment. The demonstrations began Saturday morning shortly before the government announced the final results. Protesters set fire to tires outside the Interior Ministry and anti-riot police fought back with clubs and smashed cars. Helmeted police on foot and others on buzzing motorcycles chased bands of protesters roaming the streets pumping their fists in the air. Officers beat protesters with swift blows from their truncheons and kicks with their boots. Some of the demonstrators grouped together to charge back at police, hurling stones. Plumes of dark smoke streaked over the city, as burning barricades of tires and garbage bins glowed orange in the streets. Protesters also torched an empty bus, engulfing it in flames on a Tehran street. An Associated Press photographer saw a plainclothes security official beating a woman with his truncheon. Italian state TV RAI said one of its crews was caught in the clashes in front Mousavi's headquarters. Their Iranian interpreter was beaten with clubs by riot police and officers confiscated the cameraman's tapes, the station said. In another main street of Tehran, some 300 young people blocked the avenue by forming a human chain and chanted Ahmadi, shame on you. Leave the government alone. There was no word on any casualties from the unrest. There were also protests by Mousavi supporers in the southern city of Ahvaz in the oil-rich province of Khuzestan who shouted, "Mousavi, take our votes back!" witnesses said. It was not clear how many Iranians were even aware of Mousavi's claims of fraud. Communications disruptions began in the later hours of voting Friday - suggesting an information clampdown. State television and radio only broadcast the Interior Ministry's vote count and not Mousavi's midnight news conference. Mousavi's campaign headquarters urged people to show restraint. Interior Minister Sadeq Mahsouli, who supervised the elections and heads the nation's police forces, warned people not to join any unauthorized gatherings. The powerful Revolutionary Guard cautioned Wednesday it would crush any revolution against the Islamic regime by Mousavi's green movement. The Revolutionary Guard is directly under the control of the ruling clerics and has vast influence in every corner of the country through a network of volunteer militias. Police stormed the headquarters of Iran's largest reformist party and arrested several top reformist leaders, said political activists close to the party. There was no immediate confirmation from authorities of the raid on the party, the Islamic Iran Participation Front. The activists spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the situation. Even before the vote counting began, Mousavi declared himself definitely the winner based on all indications from all over Iran. He accused the government of manipulating the people's vote to keep Ahmadinejad in power and suggested the reformist camp would stand up to challenge the results. It is our duty to defend people's votes. There is no turning back, he said, alleging widespread irregularities. Mousavi's backers were stunned at the Interior Ministry's claim that Ahmadinejad won after widespread predictions of a close race - or even a slight edge for the reformist candidate. Turnout was a record 85 percent of the 46.2 million eligible voters. "Many Iranians went to the people because they wanted to bring change," said Mousavi supporter Nasser Amiri, a hospital clerk in Tehran. "Almost everybody I know voted for Mousavi but Ahmadinejad is being declared the winner. The government announcement is nothing but widespread fraud. It is very, very disappointing. I'll never ever again vote in Iran."

Ahmadinejad: Anyone who strikes Iran will regret it

By Haaretz Service and News Agencies

Tags: Iran, Iran election

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Sunday said any country that dared to attack Iran would "deeply regret" such a move, dashing hopes that his re-election Saturday would temper his confrontational stance toward the world. "Who dares to attack Iran? Who even dares to think about it?" Ahmadinejad said at a news conference in response to a question. Iran's refusal to halt nuclear work the West suspects is aimed at making bombs, a charge Tehran denies, has sparked persistent speculation that Israel or the United States might strike at the country's nuclear facilities. Advertisement Ahmadinejad added that Iran's nuclear issue "belongs in the past," indicating there would be no change in nuclear policy during his second term in office. Meanwhile, defeated presidential candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi formally appealed against Iran's election result on Sunday to the legislative body, the Guardian Council, a statement on his website said. "Today, I have submitted my official formal request to the council to cancel the election result," Mousavi said in the statement. "I urge you Iranian nation to continue your nationwide protests in a peaceful and legal way." Iranian police again clashed on Sunday with demonstrators protesting in Tehran against his re-election. Supporters of defeated reformist Mir Hossein Mousavi, who has dismissed Ahmadinejad's victory in Friday's election as a "dangerous charade", gathered in the city centre, chanted his name and threw stones at police, a Reuters witness said. Police on motorcycles drove through the crowd to disperse the protesters. At least one person, a woman, was injured. Police briefly detained journalists filming the violence. In Sunday's news conference, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad also defended his re-election as "clean and healthy," dismissing complaints by defeated candidates as sour grapes. "They may be upset by their failure," he said. "They spent lot of money to make propaganda [and] expected to win so it is natural they are disappointed and upset." "The margin between my votes and the others is too much and no one can question it." Reports: Iran rounds up Mousavi, 100 reformists Sunday's clashes came after reports that more than 100 Iranian reformists, including Mousavi, were arrested on Saturday night. Mohammad Ali Abtahi, a leading reformist, said that the brother of former president Mohammad Khatami was among the detainees. The L.A. Times reported Sunday that Mousavi, the main challenger to Ahmadinejad, had been put under house arrest. "They were taken from their homes last night," Abtahi said. He said more arrests were expected. A judiciary spokesman said they had not been arrested but that they were summoned and "warned not to increase tension." They were later released, he said. Authorities released Khatami's brother on Sunday, his wife, Zahra Eshraghi, told The Associated Press. She said at least two other top leaders of Iran's largest reformist party, the Islamic Iran Participation Front, including the party's secretary-general, were also released early Sunday after they were arrested when police stormed the party's headquarters on Saturday. Several others remained in custody, she said. The arrests seemed aimed at avoiding a repeat of the chaos that lasted past midnight Saturday. Opponents of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad set buses and cars ablaze in the capital and threw rocks at police to protest what they viewed as his illegitimate victory. Iran filters Internet in apparent bit to undercut liberal voices Iran restored cell phone service that had been down in the capital since Saturday. But Iranians could not send text messages from their phones, and the government increased its Internet filtering in an apparent bit to undercut liberal voices. Web sites linked to Mousavi, who declared himself the true winner of Friday's presidential race and urged backers to resist the government, were down. Social networking sites including Facebook and Twitter were also not working. The restrictions were likely intended to prevent Mousavi's supporters from organizing large-scale protests. But several small groups took to the streets, according to witnesses. About 300 Mousavi supporters gathered outside Sharif University, chanting "Where are our votes?" About a dozen riot police descended upon a crowd of some 50 Mousavi supporters standing outside his campaign quarters, beating them with batons and causing them to disperse. Reports that Mousavi was under house arrest could not be confirmed, but the 67-year-old former prime minister has not been seen in public since he gave a late night press conference Friday where he accused the government of voter fraud. On Saturday, Mousavi released a Web message saying he would not surrender to this manipulation. Tehran deputy prosecutor, Mahmoud Slarkia, told the semi-official ISNA news agency that less than 10 people were arrested on the charge of disturbing public opinion through their false reports on Web sites after the election. He did not mention any names. Iran's deputy police chief Ahmad Reza Radan said some of Saturday's protesters were detained and police used tear gas to stop the demonstrations. He said the situation was under control and accused the foreign media of exaggerating the protests to show unrest in Tehran. Police will not allow protesters to disturb the peace and calmness of the people under the influence of foreign media, Radan said on state television, which showed footage of the protests for the first time Sunday. Ahmadinejad: Foreign media coverage harming Iranian people Ahmadinejad also accused the foreign media of producing coverage that harmed the Iranian people in an address to the country broadcast on state TV late Saturday, saying "a large number of foreign media ... organized a full-fledged fight against our people." He did not mention the unrest, saying only a new era has begun in the history of the Iranian nation. Ahmadinejad is scheduled to hold a massive rally with supporters Sunday afternoon in central Tehran. Slarkia, the deputy prosecutor, confirmed that Iran was blocking five pro-Mousavi Web sites because of election violations. The U.S. has refused to accept Ahmadinejad's claim of a landslide re-election victory said it was looking into allegations of election fraud. There are no independent election monitors in Iran. U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said Saturday she hoped the outcome reflects "the genuine will and desire of Iranian voters." The European Union also said it was concerned about alleged irregularities during Friday's vote. Past Iranian elections were considered generally fair. In 2005, when Ahmadinejad was first elected, the losing candidates claimed irregularities at the polls, but the charges were never investigated. Mousavi called on his backers to avoid violence, but he is still talking tough about pressing his claims of election fraud. He charges the polls closed early but has not fully outlined all of his fraud allegations. There also have been no hints of any new policy shifts on key international issues such as Iran's standoff over its nuclear program and the offer by President Barack Obama to open dialogue after a nearly 30-year diplomatic estrangement. All high-level decisions are controlled by the ruling theocracy.

ANALYSIS / Ahmadinejad win actually preferable for Israel

By Amos Harel and Avi Issacharoff, Haaretz Correspondent

Tags: Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

Any early bets about the results of Iran's presidential elections bordered on stupidity. Israeli intelligence can predict with certainty only the results of election campaigns in the pseudo-democracies of the Arab world, such as Egypt and Syria, in which the ruler will never drop below a threshold of 99 percent of the voters. When it comes to countries or entities in which the process is closer to genuine democracy, there is a greater chance for forecasts to fail. That is what happened under Israel's nose during the Palestinian Authority parliamentary election three and a half years ago, when the intelligence community did not foresee the victory of Hamas (the Shin Bet security service cunningly covered itself in advance with a prediction of "both this and that"). That is probably what happened at the beginning of last week, when Israeli intelligence - like every other pundit in the region - did not foresee that the moderate pro-Western alliance would actually defeat Hezbollah in the Lebanese election. Advertisement And if that was the case in Lebanon, it's all the more so in Iran: 1,000 kilometers from us, over 70 million inhabitants, 46 million voters and a process in which certain aspects, at least, are surprising in their openness. When it comes to Iran, there is no escaping the old cliche about the elephant and the Jewish problem. And in this case, paradoxically, it seems that from Israel's point of view the victory of incumbent President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is actually preferable. Not only because "better the devil you know," but because the victory of the pro-reform candidate will paste an attractive mask on the face of Iranian nuclear ambitions. Western experts now agree that even during the tenure of moderate president Mohammad Khatami (1997-2005), the nuclear program continued to advance. And in any case, the person who really decides on the nuclear issue is not the president but the spiritual leader. One of the president's advisers even made it clear recently, in an interview with Reuters, that the spiritual leader will continue to shape his country's nuclear policy, regardless of the election results. Ahmadinejad, with his Holocaust denial and his long series of provocations, drew most of the attention, but apparently had less influence on the nuclear program. There are even senior members of the Israeli defense establishment who share the public stance of former Mossad chief Ephraim Halevy, who claimed that the Iranian president's behavior, perceived in the West as quasi-lunatic, advanced Israel's security interests. To judge by the Obama administration's behavior so far in its first campaign, against the North Korean nuclear program, it would seem that Israel should not nurture too many hopes for American toughness in the dialogue with Iran. Pyongyang added to the anti-Western incitement this week, to the point of a threat to launch nuclear missiles. Washington's reaction was limited, at this stage, to a declaration by Secretary of Defense Robert Gates regarding America's ability to intercept missiles, and talk about intensifying UN Security Council sanctions. The first reports from the Barack Obama-Benjamin Netanyahu summit last month conveyed satisfaction on the part of Israel's prime minister at the U.S. president's stance on the nuclear issue. In its optimistic moments Israel mentions Iran's vulnerability to economic sanctions and Obama's presumed ability to enlist support from Russia and China. But an American failure to stop the Iranian program will affect not only the extent of the threat to Israel. It will also symbolize the beginning of a regional arms race, at the end of which several Arab countries will also acquire nuclear weapons, in a desperate attempt to achieve a balance in the face of Iranian hegemony. A new language A week after Obama's historic speech at Cairo University, it is still too early to determine its long-term influence. Meanwhile, Washington can be pleased with the results of the Lebanese elections, and can be impressed by the fact that various leaders in the region, among them even terror activists, are making an blatant effort to demonstrate that they have internalized the conceptual world of the American president. The head of the moderate coalition in Lebanon, Saad al-Hariri, declared that his country will adhere to the Arab peace initiative vis-a-vis Israel and made a point of flattering the Americans. "The significant turning point depends on what the U.S. does. It has a decisive role in the game. If it plays the game right, we'll have peace in the region," said Hariri. Even Khaled Meshal of Hamas, a well-known peace advocate, said this week during a visit to Cairo that his organization will be "a positive factor in the peace process and will support a fair solution for the Palestinian people." Obama, added Meshal, is speaking in a "new language." He praised the U.S. administration for its pressure on Israel to halt construction in the settlements, and once again described Israel as "an obstacle to peace, as everyone knows." Hamas is making an effort, from time to time, to voice more moderate messages to Western ears. Their importance lies mainly in the reactions they will arouse: When Washington is conducting a widely-publicized quarrel with Jerusalem, the international community tends to have a positive attitude toward Meshal's ostensibly pragmatic declarations. At least in the centrist and left-leaning wing of the Netanyahu government there is an increasing realization that the prime minister erred when he did not announce early on that the commitments of previous governments - and by implication the idea of two states for two peoples - are acceptable to him. In his speech at Bar Ilan University we will discover how well Netanyahu succeeds in extricating himself from the trap into which he marched with such determination. Security first Last week Netanyahu and his defense minister, Ehud Barak, went down to the Negev to observe a concluding exercise of the officers' course at Training Base One. The tanks and helicopters were a somewhat strange backdrop for peace declarations, and Netanyahu did in fact choose to focus, as a substitute, on somewhat forced nostalgia for the smell of high explosives. Truly, there's nothing like the smell of napalm in the morning. To observers from the sidelines in the south, Netanyahu looked more pressured than usual. It is doubtful that this is the way he pictured his first months in the job that he tried so hard to retrieve for 10 years. But at the moment he is stuck with an almost unprecedented crisis vis-a-vis the U.S. administration, with a non-functioning Prime Minister's Office and under blatant threats by the settlers. Barak, who has managed for two months to restrain himself and be forgiving toward the prime minister, explained this week to members of the Council for Peace and Security that Israel must welcome and participate in efforts for a regional agreement, and that it still enjoys profound American support on security matters. If Netanyahu decides to surprise everyone and begin significant diplomatic negotiations with the Palestinians, and mainly with the Syrians, he will find not only Barak at his side, but the general staff of the Israel Defense Forces as well. The professional opinion of the general staff is quite clear, and was conveyed to the prime minister when he assumed the position: The threats against Israel are worrisome, but at the present time specifically, opportunities are being created as well. There is a short time frame in which the interests of Israel and the moderate Arab countries in the region are coalescing, and may even enable the promotion of peace initiatives. Now it is Israel that must decide where its real security interest lies, and act accordingly.

15-06-2009 om 00:47 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

Groene stroom kost 80 euro extra

• vrijdag 12 juni 2009
• 
  
• Auteur: (pse)

BRUSSEL - Om de Kyoto-doelstellingen te halen, moeten we de portefeuille opentrekken.

Nog meer tegenwind voor Belgisch windenergiepark

• vrijdag 12 juni 2009
• 
  
• Auteur: (pse)

BRUSSEL - Ook de Creg heeft problemen met de huidige begrenzing van de windenergiezone op zee.

12-06-2009 om 22:59 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

De zeven verspillingen van de deelstaatoverheden

• donderdag 11 juni 2009
• 
  
• Auteur: Guy Tegenbos

BRUSSEL - Deelstaten verspillen ook; en ze kunnen dat vermijden door een beter beleid te voeren. Dat toont denktank Itinera aan.

De Antwerpse haven laat nu toch zonnepanelen toe

11-06-2009 om 23:41 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

Volgend jaar 200.000 werklozen meer

• woensdag 10 juni 2009
• 
  
• Auteur: (lc)

Volgend jaar 200.000 werklozen meer

rr

BRUSSEL - Bedrijven hebben de crisis tot nu toe vooral opgevangen door meer tijdelijk werk en economische werkloosheid. Toch zullen er volgend jaar ruim 200.000 werklozen bijkomen.

California's Wipeout Economy

LOS ANGELES The sun is shining less brightly these days in sunny Southern California.

The recession hit here earlier and harder than the rest of the country -- the statewide unemployment rate topped 10 percent last month -- and chances are it will linger here longer.

The severe downturn reflects the region's central role in the Bubble Economy.

As the headquarters for Countrywide Financial, Washington Mutual, New Century Financial and IndyMac, along with several of the nation's largest home builders, Southern California is ground zero for the mortgage crisis and the residential real estate bust.

As the capital of conspicuous consumption, its heavy reliance on auto sales, fashion, electronics and entertainment is now out of sync with the country's new frugality.

And as the gateway through which a majority of the country's imports flowed from Asia to American homes and businesses, its ports, warehouses and distribution channels, which once strained to keep up with the volume, now find themselves with large amounts of unused capacity.

More significantly, the receding economic tide has revealed serious structural problems and challenges in key sectors. The music, entertainment and electronic gaming industries are being turned upside down by the Internet. The real estate industry is bumping up against the limits of population growth and exurban sprawl. And state and local governments that have long financed themselves by pushing costs off into the future have finally met their day of reckoning.

"People here used to feel that because of the weather and the lifestyle, we were immune," said Robbin Itkin, a lawyer with a suddenly booming corporate workout and bankruptcy practice at the Los Angeles office of Steptoe & Johnson. "They don't think that now. There is a somberness I've not seen before."

Indeed, the most recent poll by the Field Research found that only about 40 percent of Southern California residents view the state as one of the best places to live. Back in the Beach Boy days, it was more than 70 percent.

I got the most vivid picture of how dramatically things have slowed at the Port of Los Angeles. Two years ago, ships lined up out to the horizon waiting to unload containers; unionized longshoreman routinely worked double shifts; and on any day there was usually work for a thousand or more nonunionized "casual" workers. But on a recent morning, the cranes on many terminals were idle, few if any casual workers were needed, and the few ships moving through the port's channel looked to be only partially loaded.

The ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach are, far and away, the biggest economic drivers in Southern California, directly employing 280,000 workers, indirectly supporting nearly 900,000 jobs in the region and handling $350 billion in goods. But last month volume at the bigger Los Angeles port was off by nearly a third, and executive director Geraldine Knatz said she and her crew were scrambling to preserve their market share. Already the port has cut fees by 10 percent on "intermodal" cargo bound for points north and east and is considering a reduction of 50 percent on new business.

It's not just the economic slowdown Knatz worries about, but also the longer-term prospect of losing business to other western ports with lower labor and environmental costs, or East Coast ports that will become her competition once the Panama Canal is widened to accommodate the biggest cargo ships.

"We're going to come back to a new normal," she predicts, with annual growth rates of less than half the average 7 percent rate of the previous decade, and a fraction of the torrid 14 percent rate in 2006.

The port's fortunes are reflected elsewhere in the region's sizable manufacturing sector -- in particular the toy, electronics and clothing companies that have long since moved the bulk of their production to Asia but retain much of their design, marketing and distribution functions in Southern California.

Last fall, Lonnie Kane had to lay off several hundred workers at the women's clothing company he and his wife have operated for decades. They import fabric from Europe and Asia, use high-tech equipment to cut the patterns and then ship the pieces out to local shops staffed by low-wage immigrant workers for the final sewing.

The small department stores that once formed the base of Kane's business are now gone, his small-store customers cannot get credit and the big department stores that buy his blouses and sweaters are constantly on the phone delaying or canceling their orders. His sales are off by more than 25 percent.

As Kane sees it, Southern California is no longer the "middle-class paradise" it fancies itself, with steady growth of good-paying manufacturing jobs. Like the rest of the country, the region is now uncomfortably divided between the haves and have-nots. Although some of that was inevitable, he also blames state and local governments whose attitude toward business has always been that if firms failed or left the area, there would always be plenty of others to take their place.

"People think that when this is all over, it will go back to the way it always was, " Kane says. "That's a fantasy."

It is hard to overstate how reliant the Southern California economy has always been on population growth to drive its economic growth -- in oversimplified terms, building houses for the next wave of home builders. In the beginning, the early developers could be pretty confident that if they built it, they would come -- from the Northeast and Midwest, and then from all corners of the globe. But in recent years, this perpetual growth machine has pretty much run out of steam as residents old and new confronted the realities of two-hour commutes, bad air, a shortage of water and a backlash against illegal immigration.

Moreover, without the steady growth in tax revenue that came with population growth, the Ponzi scheme that passes for public finance in California was suddenly and painfully revealed. Much of the blame lies with public employee unions and a handful of other special-interest groups that have essentially hijacked political control of state and local governments. Now, despite decades of high taxes and rapid growth, state and local governments find that they not only don't have the revenue to provide even basic services, but are saddled with hundreds of billions of dollars in unfunded pension liabilities and infrastructure needs.

"L.A. is becoming a Third World city," says Rick Caruso, a successful developer who has considered running for mayor.

Although Caruso's upscale new development, the Grove, has been a smashing success, he's putting most of his new projects on hold, figuring that for the moment, there's more money to be made with lower risk by buying up financially distressed properties at deeply discounted prices. There should soon be plenty for him to choose from. The shakeout in commercial real estate, which is now in full swing in suburban Orange and Riverside counties, has made its way to the tonier areas of the city. There are numerous "For Rent" signs on Melrose Avenue in West Hollywood and along Montana Avenue in Santa Monica. Lack of financing has stalled the $3 billion, Frank Gehry-designed hotel and residential project on Grand Avenue downtown and a $400 million luxury condo tower in Century City.

"It's clear to me that we will have a lot of reinventing to do here over the next few years," Jim Thomas, a prominent local developer, told me.

What's less clear is whether Southern California is ready to embrace that challenge.

Next time: Hollywood and the entertainment industry.

en meer leuks uit de Golden State

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1884956,00.html

Mario Anzuoni / Reuters / Corbis

Could marijuana be the answer to the economic misery facing California? Democratic state assemblyman Tom Ammiano thinks so. Ammiano introduced legislation last month that would legalize pot and allow the state to regulate and tax its sale — a move that could mean billions of dollars for the cash-strapped state. Pot is, after all, California's biggest cash crop, responsible for $14 billion a year in sales, dwarfing the state's second largest agricultural commodity — milk and cream — which brings in $7.3 billion a year, according to the most recent USDA statistics. The state's tax collectors estimate the bill would bring in about $1.3 billion a year in much needed revenue, offsetting some of the billions of dollars in service cuts and spending reductions outlined in the recently approved state budget.

"The state of California is in a very, very precipitous economic plight. It's in the toilet," says Ammiano. "It looks very, very bleak, with layoffs and foreclosures, and schools closing or trying to operate four days a week. We have one of the highest rates of unemployment we've ever had. With any revenue ideas, people say you have to think outside the box, you have to be creative, and I feel that the issue of the decriminalization, regulation and taxation of marijuana fits that bill. It's not new, the idea has been around, and the political will may in fact be there to make something happen." (See pictures of stoner cinema.)

Ammiano may be right. A few days after he introduced the bill, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder announced that states should be able to make their own rules for medical marijuana and that federal raids on pot dispensaries in California would cease. The move signaled a softening of the hard-line approach to medicinal pot use previous Administrations have taken. The nomination of Gil Kerlikowske as the head of the Office of National Drug Control Policy may also signal a softer federal line on marijuana. If he is confirmed as the so-called drug czar, Kerlikowske will take with him experience as police chief of Seattle, where he made it clear that going after people for possessing marijuana was not a priority for his force. (See a story about the grass-roots marijuana war in California.)

In 1996 California became one of the first states in the nation to legalize medical marijuana. Currently, $200 million in medical-marijuana sales are subject to sales tax. If passed, the Marijuana Control, Regulation and Education Act (AB 390) would give California control of pot in a manner similar to that of alcohol while prohibiting its purchase by citizens under age 21. (The bill has been referred to the California state assembly's public-safety and health committees; Ammiano says it could take up to a year before it comes to a vote for passage.) State revenues would be derived from a $50-per-oz. levy on retail sales of marijuana and sales taxes. By adopting the law, California could become a model for other states. As Ammiano put it, "How California goes, the country goes."

Despite the need for the projected revenue, opponents say legalizing pot would only add to social woes. "The last thing we need is yet another mind-altering substance to be legalized," says John Lovell, lobbyist for the California Peace Officers' Association. "We have enough problems with alcohol and abuse of pharmaceutical products. Do we really need to add yet another mind-altering substance to the array?" Lovell says the easy availability of the drug would lead to a surge in its use, much as happened when alcohol was allowed to be sold in venues other than liquor stores in some states. (Read why Dr. Sanjay Gupta is against decriminalizing pot.)

Joel W. Hay, professor of pharmaceutical economics at USC, also foresees harm if the bill passes. "Marijuana is a drug that clouds people's judgment. It affects their ability to concentrate and react, and it certainly has impacts on third parties," says Hay, who has written on the societal costs of drug abuse. "It's one more drug that will add to the toll on society. All we have to do is look at the two legalized drugs, tobacco and alcohol, and look at the carnage that they've caused. [Marijuana] is a dangerous drug, and it causes bad outcomes for both the people who use it and for the people who are in their way at work or other activities." He adds, "There are probably some responsible people who can handle marijuana, but there are lots of people who can't, and it has an enormous negative impact on them, their family and loved ones." (See pictures of Mexico's drug wars.)

In response, retired Orange County Superior Court Judge James Gray, a longtime proponent of legalization, estimates that legalizing pot and thus ceasing to arrest, prosecute and imprison nonviolent offenders could save the state $1 billion a year. "We couldn't make this drug any more available if we tried," he says. "Not only do we have those problems, along with glamorizing it by making it illegal, but we also have the crime and corruption that go along with it." He adds, "Unfortunately, every society in the history of mankind has had some form of mind-altering, sometimes addictive substances to use, to misuse, abuse or get addicted to. Get used to it. They're here to stay. So let's try to reduce those harms, and right now we couldn't do it worse if we tried."

Armlastig Californië riskeert ontwikkelingsland te worden

• woensdag 10 juni 2009
• 
  
• Auteur: (esn)

Armlastig Californië riskeert ontwikkelingsland te worden

ap

BRUSSEL - De drastische besparingen dreigen de economische ontwikkeling van Californië af te remmen.

10-06-2009 om 23:34 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

Stop aub de PS gijzeling!
Vanavond vlieg ik naar Edinburgh. Morgen neem ik er deel aan het driedaags internationaal PIME-congres. PIME staat voor “Public Information Materials Exchange” en wordt jaarlijks door de “European Nuclear Society” georganiseerd. Mij valt de eer te beurt het congres toe te spreken over het bevorderen van de publieke aanvaarding van nucleaire industrie. Natuurlijk ligt de ervaring die we in Dessel gedurende tien jaar opbouwden aan de basis daarvan. We lukten erin een maatschappelijk draagvlak te creëren om het laag en kortlevend radioactief afval in onze gemeente te bergen. Dit in samenspraak en samenwerking met de bevolking. We zijn daar, denk ik, terecht fier op. Ik heb onze ervaringen al mogen vertellen in Zweden, Catalonië, Slowakije, Zwitserland, Frankrijk, Luxemburg en Engeland. Maar op zich is dat niet zo belangrijk. We doen gewoon ons werk. Wel belangrijk is wat ik de laatste dagen via verschillende bronnen mocht vernemen…
De laatste weken heeft de nucleaire sector in België van zich laten horen. Het Nucleair Forum kwam met een sterke mediacampagne en daagt de mensen uit kritisch na te denken over energie, elektriciteit en de rol van nucleaire energie daarin. De woordvoerder van Greenpeace wist er niet goed weg mee. Hij haalde uit naar de woekerwinsten van Electrabel, maar een antwoord op de vraag van waar we straks onze elektriciteit zullen halen, gepaard met een strijd tegen de opwarming van de aarde en het verminderen van de CO2-uitstoot, hoorde ik niet uit zijn mond. Dat we spaarzamer moeten zijn zal niemand tegenspreken, maar de mensen wijsmaken dat we het straks met heel wat minder zullen kunnen doen, is hen op z’n minst gezegd een rad voor de ogen draaien.
Het Nucleair Forum werd opgericht in 1972 en verenigt het merendeel van de ondernemingen en instellingen die zich in België inzetten voor de vreedzame toepassingen van kernenergie. Zij zijn actief in de reactorontwerp en –bouw, engineering, splijtstofbehandeling, elektriciteitsproductie, nucleaire diensten, kernafvalbeheer, nucleaire transporten, medische toepassingen en onderzoek en ontwikkeling. Natuurlijk zijn de Desselse bedrijven AREVA-FBFC en Belgoprocess, evenals het in Mol gevestigde SCK, prominent lid.
Minister eist ontslag
Wat mij nu geweldig tegen het hoofd stoot, is dat de Belgische minister van Klimaat en Energie, de PS’er Paul Magnette, het zo niet begrepen heeft. Hij is naar aanleiding van de aangehaalde mediacampagne in een Waalse colère geschoten en heeft zowel NIRAS, SCK als Belgoprocess op het matje geroepen. Hij eist daarbij dat de twee laatsten stante pede uit het Forum stappen. Ze moeten ontslag nemen.
Je moet het maar durven: voogdijminister zijn en het niet nemen dat de bewuste instellingen of bedrijven hun eigen sector verdedigen. Tegenwerken zelfs. Het tegenovergestelde is zijn plicht. Hij moest hen danken voor de maatschappelijke uitdaging die ze aangaan. Voor de handschoen die ze opnemen. Hij moest hun bondgenoot zijn. Hen aanmoedigen.
Bovendien is het vreemd dat wanneer ik namens GMF (Group of European Municipalities with nuclear Facilities) deelneem aan de werkzaamheden van de werkgroep “Transparency” van het directoraat-generaal Energie en Transport van de Europese Commissie die de lidstaten wil aanmanen zich ernstig te buigen over hun energiepolitiek en het nucleaire er duidelijk bij naar voor schuift, ik daar wel op zijn federale ambtenaren bots. Wat is het nu, mijnheer de minister? Eieren of jong? Meewerken of saboteren?
Laat het duidelijk zijn dat wij in de Kempen deze schizofrenie niet langer nemen. Die gijzeling door de PS van de nucleaire sector in Vlaanderen, met name in de Kempen, moet onmiddellijk ophouden. Wij gaan voor onze ondernemingen. Voor de toekomstkansen van de sector. In Vlaanderen. In de Kempen. En als de PS dat niet ziet zitten? Pech!
Overhevelen die materie. Punt aan de lijn!

Kris Van Dijck

Want overhevelen is blijkbaar een mirakeloplossing voor alles maar wij hebben het grote genoegen daar niet altijd de zin van te snappen...

en dat oeverloos gelul over een tweede telenetoperatie voor de energiesector...leg dat ook maar eens uit want ons pummeltjesverstand kan er echt niet bij hoor, Friedaake!

Op het vlak van energie is het bestaande monopolie niet doorbroken (27/05/09 - Knack)

België hinkt serieus achterop wat de liberalisering van de markt betreft "waardoor de voordelen van de vrijmaking dreigen uit te blijven", zo stelt Frieda brepoels. Zij verwijst naar de energiemarkt als voorbeeld.

Heeft de liberalisering in de transportsector tot goede resultaten geleid? Frieda Brepoels: De liberalisering van de luchtvaartsector was een succes, maar dat geldt niet voor alle sectoren. Denk bijvoorbeeld aan het goederenverkeer per spoor. Daar steunen we de vrijmaking van de exploitatie, die werd ingevoerd op 1 januari 2007. Maar de infrastructuur moet voor ons in overheidshanden blijven, en dan liever in Vlaamse dan in Belgische handen. Liberalisering kan het spoorvervoer immers een concurrentievoordeel opleveren ten aanzien van het wegtransport, met een positieve impact op de file-, milieu- en veiligheidsproblemen. Maar precies zoals we dat ook zien bij de vrijmaking van de energiemarkt, faalt de marktwerking door het federale non-beleid. De Rail Liberalisation Index van 2007 kan dat alleen maar bevestigen: België bengelt in Europa aan de staart. De overheid geeft onvoldoende impulsen, opdat nieuwkomers echt zouden kunnen participeren. Nochtans zouden nieuwe spelers op het spoor betekenen dat onze ondernemingen kennis zouden kunnen maken met nieuwe, innovatieve producten en diensten op het spoor. Maar zover staan we nog niet in België. Gaat de liberalisering voor u vandaag al te ver, of is het toch aangewezen om ook andere sectoren vrij te maken of om te vormen? Brepoels: Europa is niet te ver gegaan bij het liberaliseren. Het koppelt immers steeds de vrijmaking van de markt per sector aan een betere dienstverlening, aan lagere prijzen en aan meer keuzevrijheid voor de consument. Maar het loopt fout bij de omzetting daarvan in België. Ons land hinkt wat dat betreft serieus achterop, waardoor de voordelen van de vrijmaking dreigen uit te blijven. Op het vlak van energie bijvoorbeeld is men er niet in geslaagd het bestaande monopolie te doorbreken, onder meer doordat de federale overheid bijzonder slecht heeft toegezien op de marktwerking. Wij als N-VA zouden dat willen counteren met een Vlaamse Energiemaatschappij, naar analogie met de Telenetoperatie uit de jaren 1990, die overigens veel geld heeft opgebracht. Ook voor de vrijmaking van de postmarkt in 2011 stellen we vast dat De Post alles in het werk stelt om haar monopolie af te schermen. Zo rekent ze de kosten voor universele dienstverlening zo hoog aan dat ze zichzelf van bij de start als het ware een bonus uitreikt. In die omstandigheden pleiten voor verdere liberaliseringen, zal wellicht niemand doen....

Frieda Brepoels

LEEUW? WIE LEEUW? WAAR LEEUW? WELKE LEEUW?

Een beetje sfeerbeelden bij de verkiezingsstrijd….Met een beetje achtergrond-informatie, als U wilt.

Tekent verantwoordelijk voor deze bijkomende informatie: het ‘Campagnedagboek’ van het E-Magazine van het Vlaams Belang, gedateerd zaterdag jl., dat nu maar pas (dinsdagmiddag) binnendwarrelde. De feestneuzen, ook! Verlengd Pinkster weekeinde? Goed voor ene keer!

Ik neem dit stukje hier over met het doel het te bewaren voor de eeuwigheid…

Kijk, bij mijn verblijf in Vlaanderen zal ik voor die dagen de GPS van mijn lieve eega meekrijgen. Zal broodnodig zijn! Stond al gepland: Stekene (Erepark Oosfronters: moet een ervaring zijn) Bormshuis (Volksstraat, Antwerpen), het Cyriel Verschaeve-museum (Alveringhem: wat heeft de N-VA er als conservators van gebakken?, Groeninghe-luseum (Kortrijk, met daarnaast een aanrader: restaurant De Heren van Groeninghe) en Brugge (Groenighe-museum Karel de Stoute en Maria van Bourgondië) Nu komt daar nog ‘Leeuw’ bij, waarover dit artikel van Bart Laeremans. Ik wil dat soort Vlaams Belangers leren kennen, minstens de leefomgeving waarin ze wonen en werken. Om daar misschien een zeupe (=dronk) Vlaams bloed op te doen! ’t Zal nodig zijn!

De avond van de verkiezing denk ik door te brengen bij de plaatselijke afdeling van het Vlaams Belang – Kortrijk, alhoewel ik daar niemand persoonlijk ken. Van daar naar de hoofdkwartieren van de Tjeven en van de Nieuwe Vlaamse Allianters is het maar “per pedes apostolorum’ een boogscheutje ver. Ook daar wil ik de sfeer gaan opsnuiven; bij de eerste mij gaan verlustigen in de trieste gezichten, en bij de tweede mij gaan verwonderen over hun onverhoopte resultaten….Gewapend met de geestdrift van de mensen van Leeuw in het achterhoofd, en gesteund door de schitterende verkiezingsuitslag van het Vlaams Belang (landelijk) zal dat een zegetocht worden. En als ik mij uitgeef voor een aanhangsel van Carolientje Geneert-U-niet, zal geen enkele Kortrijkse flik mij doen overnachten in den amigo. Zelfs niet als ik om middernacht op de Grote Markt, met kameraden loop te zingen van “Mie Katoen komt morgennoen”, of tegen de vroege ochtend de Vlaamse Leeuw sta te brullen, onder het motto: Zingen is tweemaal bidden!

09-06-2009 om 23:14 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

Veel verbruikers kunnen energie niet meer betalen

• maandag 08 juni 2009
• 
  
• Auteur: Pascal Sertyn

Veel verbruikers kunnen energie niet meer betalen

BRUSSEL - Het aantal gezinnen dat hun elektriciteits- en/of gasfactuur niet meer kan betalen, is sinds begin 2009 sterk aan het stijgen. Dat blijkt uit cijfers van de netbedrijven Eandis en Infrax. De combinatie van de crisis en de lange en koude winter is zijn tol aan het eisen.

Reacties

do 28/05/2009 - 15:21 De N-VA wil een eigen Vlaamse energiemaatschappij om het Franse monopolie in de Belgische energiesector te doorbreken. De partij voerde donderdag actie bij de Electrabelcentrale in Genk en ontvouwde er de Franse vlag.

3. Vlaams energiebeleid

De hoge energieprijzen zijn een gevolg van een slecht werkende energiemarkt. Naar analogie met de Telenet-operatie breken we de markt open met een eigen Vlaamse energiemaatschappij die bovendien investeert in groene, hernieuwbare energie.

Een stabiele en betaalbare energiebevoorrading is een cruciale factor voor een moderne economie. De N-VA streeft naar een evenwichtige energiemix die maximaal rekening houdt met het milieu, zekerheid biedt inzake bevoorrading, ons minder afhankelijk maakt van buitenlandse leveranciers en betaalbaar is voor gezinnen en bedrijven. Om die doelstellingen te bereiken, stuiten we echter op een federaal non-beleid dat verantwoordelijk is voor een slechte marktwerking, niet planmatig werkt en nog steeds geen uitsluitsel heeft gegeven over de vraag of de kernuitstap nu al dan niet wordt teruggedraaid.

Daartegenover staan de Vlaamse initiatieven om werk te maken van rationeel energiegebruik en hernieuwbare energie. De N-VA meent dat het energiebeleid best naar de gewesten gaat om de keuzes te maken die op Belgisch niveau niet meer mogelijk zijn.

Op Vlaams niveau wil de N-VA dat meer inspanningen worden geleverd voor de ontwikkeling van rationeel energiegebruik. Door voorop te lopen verankeren we een belangrijke strategische sector en creëren we een competitief kader voor andere bedrijven. In dat verband is de Telenet-operatie in de jaren ‘90 nog altijd een belangrijk referentiepunt. De N-VA wil deze operatie herhalen en in samenwerking met de Vlaamse kenniscentra – universiteiten en hogescholen – werk maken van de Vlaamse energiemaatschappij “VLENERGIE”, die zich toelegt en concentreert op de ontwikkeling van hernieuwbare energie. Met “VLENERGIE” kan het monopolie van Electrabel in de energiesector worden doorbroken: meer concurrentie uit zich dan ook in lagere elektriciteitsprijzen voor de consument.

Gespierde taal zoals we dit van de gestaalde Vlaams-nationalisten mogen verwachten maar wat betekent dit geblaat nu concreet?

Men is boos omdat de Fransen 90% controleren van onze Electriciteitsproductie. We moeten die politiekers ook eens vragen duidelijk te willen zijn in hun taalgebruik want het is niet altijd zo simpel om als argeloze lezer te weten te komen of ze het nu hebben over de elektriciteit of de gas of energie in het algemeen. Voor zover wij weten is de elektriciteitsproductie inderdaad voor 90% in Franse handen. Gas daarentegen is grotendeels nu in handen gekomen van het Italiaanse ENI dat eigenaar is geworden van Distrigas. De rest van de firma's zoals Eandis, Infrax, Elia, Fluxys en Ores zijn transportbedrijven en voor het overgrote gedeelte in handen van de gemeenten.

We gaan er dus vanuit dat de fiere Vlamen het hier enkel en alleen hebben over de Elektriciteitsproductie. En wat dachten ze nu te doen via VLENERGIE? Rationeel energieverbruik dus minder consumeren. Ok, maar daarmee is het probleem van de armen niet meteen opgelost want die doen al jaren aan minder verbruik doodgewoon wegens geen sollen. En daar zullen alle energiescans van Vlaanderen geen reet aan verhelpen. Ho, maar daar komt de hernieuwbare energie ...de oplossing voor het probleem yek yek yek. We gaan hier weer niet voor de zoveelste keer uitleggen dat wij ook voor hernieuwbare energie zijn maar dat indien we niet goed uit onze dopjes kijken gans dat hernieuwbaar boeltje er alleen zal zijn voor de rijken. We leggen nogmaals oppervlakkig uit wat we hiermee bedoelen. We hebben het hier dus niet over de fameuse idiote zonnepanelen maar oger grote investeringen zoals windenergie op zee en op land. Buiten de toenemende investeringskost voor de transporteurs qua bijkomende aansluitingen en versterkingen van hun bestaande installaties die zij natuurlijk graag zullen doorrekenen in hun deel van de factuur komen daar bovenop de zeer dure terugkoopprijzen van de groene stroomcertificaten die wettelijk verplicht moeten worden aangekocht door Elia die deze eveneens zal doorrekenen aan de consument. En dat allemaal in een markt waar de Fransen spotgoedkoop via de interconnecties van ons net grote hoeveelheden kernenergie kunnen leveren. En als wij Fransen zeggen dan bedoelen wij niet meteen Suez-Electrabel maar evenzeer EDF-Gaz de France.

Dus wij maar geld uit onze zakken laten kloppen om deze Franse goedkope energie te bekampen? Idioter kan moeilijk lijkt ons....Tenzij men de prijs van de eigen in België geproduceerde kernenergie (Doel en Tihange) en de ingevoerde kernenergie drastisch omhoog gaat drijven via allerlei taksen en belastingen dat de alternatieve (en voorlopig nog niet beschikbare) energieën concurrentieel worden, Dat zal dus de armen evenmin veel vooruit helpen. Integendeel het effect op de totaalprijs van de factuur lijkt ons nogal duidelijk.

Misschien moeten we dan maar buitenlandse investeerders aantrekken om eigen productie op te starten. Wie kiezen we? Duitsers, Russen, Chinezen?

Omdat die hier allemaal zullen moeten opboksen tegen dat Franse monopolie van spotgoedkope kernenergie (spotgoedkoop in productie en niet in verkoop natuurlijk) zal Vlaanderen diep in het subsidiepotteke moeten graaien anders komen die brave investeerders niet tot hier. Wie zal dat betalen? Daar hadden we even graag een antwoord op. Maar we vermoeden dat dit ook niet meteen de oplossing betekent voor ons probleem.

Sterker wij menen dat het energievraagstuk niet langer meer kan opgelost worden op Belgisch vlak, laat staan op Vlaams heimatniveau. Dit is absurd en volledig achterhaald. Iedereen met een minimale kennis van de energiesector merkt een internationalisering op en de oprichting van energiemarkten die de landsgrenzen zeer snel zullen overstijgen. Kijk maar naar de oprichting van de energiebeurzen zoals Belpex, Powernext, APX....

Op het niveau van het transport en de regelzones spreekt men meer en meer over één grote regelzone namelijk de CWE (Central-West-Europe) zone. Deze zou bestaan uit Frankrijk, Benelux en het vroegere West-Duitsland met Engeland en Ierland daar ergens net naast of juist er in.

Wat bedoeld dan Bart "de slimste mens ter wereld" met VLENERGIE?

Hij mag het hier allemaal komen uitleggen. We stellen ons blogje open voor zijn deskundige uitleg over het grote energievraagstuk en zijn Vlaamse oplossingen. Wij zijn benieuwd en jullie toch ook en vooral die 115.000 verbruikers die nu al niet meer kunnen betalen....

08-06-2009 om 22:45 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

07-06-2009 om 23:36 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

Obama, Elie Wiesel Buchenwald Speech (TEXT, VIDEO)

digg Huffpost - Obama, Elie Wiesel Buchenwald Speech (TEXT, VIDEO) stumble reddit del.ico.us ShareThis

G

---------------------------

REMARKS BY PRESIDENT OBAMA,

GERMAN CHANCELLOR MERKEL, AND ELIE WIESEL

AT BUCHENWALD CONCENTRATION CAMP

CHANCELLOR MERKEL: (As translated.) Mr. President, ladies and gentlemen. Here in this place a concentration camp was established in 1937. Not far from here lies Weimar, a place where Germans created wonderful works of art, thereby contributing to European culture and civilization. Not far from that place where once artists, poets, and great minds met, terror, violence, and tyranny reigned over this camp.

At the beginning of our joint visit to the Buchenwald memorial the American President and I stood in front of a plaque commemorating all the victims. When you put your hand on the memorial you can feel that it has warmed up -- it is kept at a temperature of 37 degrees, the body temperature of a living human being. This, however, was not a place for living, but a place for dying.

Unimaginable horror, shock -- there are no words to adequately describe what we feel when we look at the suffering inflicted so cruelly upon so many people here and in other concentration and extermination camps under National Socialist terror. I bow my head before the victims.

We, the Germans, are faced with the agonizing question how and why -- how could this happen? How could Germany wreak such havoc in Europe and the world? It is therefore incumbent upon us Germans to show an unshakeable resolve to do everything we can so that something like this never happens again.

On the 25th of January, the presidents of the associations of former inmates at the concentration camps presented their request to the public, and this request closes with the following words: "The last eyewitness appeal to Germany, to all European states, and to the international community to continue preserving and honoring the human gift of remembrance and commemoration into the future. We ask young people to carry on our struggle against Nazi ideology, and for a just, peaceful and tolerant world; a world that has no place for anti-Semitism, racism, xenophobia, and right-wing extremism."

This appeal of the survivors clearly defines the very special responsibility we Germans have to shoulder with regard to our history. And for me, therefore, there are three messages that are important today. First, let me emphasize, we Germans see it as past of our country's raison d'être to keep the everlasting memory alive of the break with civilization that was the Shoah. Only in this way will we be able to shape our future.

I am therefore very grateful that the Buchenwald memorial has always placed great emphasis on the dialogue with younger people, to conversations with eyewitnesses, to documentation, and a broad-based educational program.

Second, it is most important to keep the memory of the great sacrifices alive that had to be made to put an end to the terror of National Socialism and to liberate its victims and to rid all people of its yoke.

This is why I want to say a particular word of gratitude to the President of the United States of America, Barack Obama, for visiting this particular memorial. It gives me an opportunity to align yet again that we Germans shall never forget, and we owe the fact that we were given the opportunity after the war to start anew, to enjoy peace and freedom to the resolve, the strenuous efforts, and indeed to a sacrifice made in blood of the United States of America and of all those who stood by your side as allies or fighters in the resistance.

We were able to find our place again as members of the international community through a forward-looking partnership. And this partnership was finally key to enabling us to overcome the painful division of our country in 1989, and the division also of our continent. Today we remember the victims of this place. This includes remembering the victims of the so-called Special Camp 2, a detention camp run by the Soviet military administration from 1945 to 1950. Thousands of people perished due to the inhumane conditions of their detention.

Third, here in Buchenwald I would like to highlight an obligation placed on us Germans as a consequence of our past: to stand up for human rights, to stand up for rule of law, and for democracy. We shall fight against terror, extremism, and anti-Semitism. And in the awareness of our responsibility we shall strive for peace and freedom, together with our friends and partners in the United States and all over the world.

Thank you.

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Chancellor Merkel and I have just finished our tour here at Buchenwald. I want to thank Dr. Volkhard Knigge, who gave an outstanding account of what we were witnessing. I am particularly grateful to be accompanied by my friend Elie Wiesel, as well as Mr. Bertrand Herz, both of whom are survivors of this place.

We saw the area known as Little Camp where Elie and Bertrand were sent as boys. In fact, at the place that commemorates this camp, there is a photograph in which we can see a 16-year-old Elie in one of the bunks along with the others. We saw the ovens of the crematorium, the guard towers, the barbed wire fences, the foundations of barracks that once held people in the most unimaginable conditions.

We saw the memorial to all the survivors -- a steel plate, as Chancellor Merkel said, that is heated to 37 degrees Celsius, the temperature of the human body; a reminder -- where people were deemed inhuman because of their differences -- of the mark that we all share.

Now these sights have not lost their horror with the passage of time. As we were walking up, Elie said, "if these trees could talk." And there's a certain irony about the beauty of the landscape and the horror that took place here.

More than half a century later, our grief and our outrage over what happened have not diminished. I will not forget what I've seen here today.

I've known about this place since I was a boy, hearing stories about my great uncle, who was a very young man serving in World War II. He was part of the 89th Infantry Division, the first Americans to reach a concentration camp. They liberated Ohrdruf, one of Buchenwald's sub-camps.

And I told this story, he returned from his service in a state of shock saying little and isolating himself for months on end from family and friends, alone with the painful memories that would not leave his head. And as we see -- as we saw some of the images here, it's understandable that someone who witnessed what had taken place here would be in a state of shock.

My great uncle's commander, General Eisenhower, understood this impulse to silence. He had seen the piles of bodies and starving survivors and deplorable conditions that the American soldiers found when they arrived, and he knew that those who witnessed these things might be too stunned to speak about them or be able -- be unable to find the words to describe them; that they might be rendered mute in the way my great uncle had. And he knew that what had happened here was so unthinkable that after the bodies had been taken away, that perhaps no one would believe it.

And that's why he ordered American troops and Germans from the nearby town to tour the camp. He invited congressmen and journalists to bear witness and ordered photographs and films to be made. And he insisted on viewing every corner of these camps so that -- and I quote -- he could "be in a position to give first-hand evidence of these things if ever in the future there develops a tendency to charge these allegations merely to propaganda."

We are here today because we know this work is not yet finished. To this day, there are those who insist that the Holocaust never happened -- a denial of fact and truth that is baseless and ignorant and hateful. This place is the ultimate rebuke to such thoughts; a reminder of our duty to confront those who would tell lies about our history.

Also to this day, there are those who perpetuate every form of intolerance -- racism, anti-Semitism, homophobia, xenophobia, sexism, and more -- hatred that degrades its victims and diminishes us all. In this century, we've seen genocide. We've seen mass graves and the ashes of villages burned to the ground; children used as soldiers and rape used as a weapon of war. This places teaches us that we must be ever vigilant about the spread of evil in our own time, that we must reject the false comfort that others' suffering is not our problem and commit ourselves to resisting those who would subjugate others to serve their own interests.

But as we reflect today on the human capacity for evil and our shared obligation to defy it, we're also reminded of the human capacity for good. For amidst the countless acts of cruelty that took place here, we know that there were many acts of courage and kindness, as well. The Jews who insisted on fasting on Yom Kippur. The camp cook who hid potatoes in the lining of his prison uniform and distributed them to his fellow inmates, risking his own life to help save theirs. The prisoners who organized a special effort to protect the children here, sheltering them from work and giving them extra food. They set up secret classrooms, some of the inmates, and taught history and math and urged the children to think about their future professions. And we were just hearing about the resistance that formed and the irony that the base for the resistance was in the latrine areas because the guards found it so offensive that they wouldn't go there. And so out of the filth, that became a space in which small freedoms could thrive.

When the American GIs arrived they were astonished to find more than 900 children still alive, and the youngest was just three years old. And I'm told that a couple of the prisoners even wrote a Buchenwald song that many here sang. Among the lyrics were these: "...whatever our fate, we will say yes to life, for the day will come when we are free...in our blood we carry the will to live and in our hearts, in our hearts -- faith."

These individuals never could have known the world would one day speak of this place. They could not have known that some of them would live to have children and grandchildren who would grow up hearing their stories and would return here so many years later to find a museum and memorials and the clock tower set permanently to 3:15, the moment of liberation.

They could not have known how the nation of Israel would rise out of the destruction of the Holocaust and the strong, enduring bonds between that great nation and my own. And they could not have known that one day an American President would visit this place and speak of them and that he would do so standing side by side with the German Chancellor in a Germany that is now a vibrant democracy and a valued American ally.

They could not have known these things. But still surrounded by death they willed themselves to hold fast to life. In their hearts they still had faith that evil would not triumph in the end, that while history is unknowable it arches towards progress, and that the world would one day remember them. And it is now up to us, the living, in our work, wherever we are, to resist injustice and intolerance and indifference in whatever forms they may take, and ensure that those who were lost here did not go in vain. It is up to us to redeem that faith. It is up to us to bear witness; to ensure that the world continues to note what happened here; to remember all those who survived and all those who perished, and to remember them not just as victims, but also as individuals who hoped and loved and dreamed just like us.

And just as we identify with the victims, it's also important for us I think to remember that the perpetrators of such evil were human, as well, and that we have to guard against cruelty in ourselves. And I want to express particular thanks to Chancellor Merkel and the German people, because it's not easy to look into the past in this way and acknowledge it and make something of it, make a determination that they will stand guard against acts like this happening again.

Rather than have me end with my remarks I thought it was appropriate to have Elie Wiesel provide some reflection and some thought as he returns here so many years later to the place where his father died.

MR. WIESEL: Mr. President, Chancellor Merkel, Bertrand, ladies and gentlemen. As I came here today it was actually a way of coming and visit my father's grave -- but he had no grave. His grave is somewhere in the sky. This has become in those years the largest cemetery of the Jewish people.

The day he died was one of the darkest in my life. He became sick, weak, and I was there. I was there when he suffered. I was there when he asked for help, for water. I was there to receive his last words. But I was not there when he called for me, although we were in the same block; he on the upper bed and I on the lower bed. He called my name, and I was too afraid to move. All of us were. And then he died. I was there, but I was not there.

And I thought one day I will come back and speak to him, and tell him of the world that has become mine. I speak to him of times in which memory has become a sacred duty of all people of good will -- in America, where I live, or in Europe or in Germany, where you, Chancellor Merkel, are a leader with great courage and moral aspirations.

What can I tell him that the world has learned? I am not so sure. Mr. President, we have such high hopes for you because you, with your moral vision of history, will be able and compelled to change this world into a better place, where people will stop waging war -- every war is absurd and meaningless; where people will stop hating one another; where people will hate the otherness of the other rather than respect it.

But the world hasn't learned. When I was liberated in 1945, April 11, by the American army, somehow many of us were convinced that at least one lesson will have been learned -- that never again will there be war; that hatred is not an option, that racism is stupid; and the will to conquer other people's minds or territories or aspirations, that will is meaningless.

I was so hopeful. Paradoxically, I was so hopeful then. Many of us were, although we had the right to give up on humanity, to give up on culture, to give up on education, to give up on the possibility of living one's life with dignity in a world that has no place for dignity.

We rejected that possibility and we said, no, we must continue believing in a future, because the world has learned. But again, the world hasn't. Had the world learned, there would have been no Cambodia and no Rwanda and no Darfur and no Bosnia.

Will the world ever learn? I think that is why Buchenwald is so important -- as important, of course, but differently as Auschwitz. It's important because here the large -- the big camp was a kind of international community. People came there from all horizons -- political, economic, culture. The first globalization essay, experiment, were made in Buchenwald. And all that was meant to diminish the humanity of human beings.

You spoke of humanity, Mr. President. Though unto us, in those times, it was human to be inhuman. And now the world has learned, I hope. And of course this hope includes so many of what now would be your vision for the future, Mr. President. A sense of security for Israel, a sense of security for its neighbors, to bring peace in that place. The time must come. It's enough -- enough to go to cemeteries, enough to weep for oceans. It's enough. There must come a moment -- a moment of bringing people together.

And therefore we say anyone who comes here should go back with that resolution. Memory must bring people together rather than set them apart. Memories here not to sow anger in our hearts, but on the contrary, a sense of solidarity that all those who need us. What else can we do except invoke that memory so that people everywhere who say the 21st century is a century of new beginnings, filled with promise and infinite hope, and at times profound gratitude to all those who believe in our task, which is to improve the human condition.

A great man, Camus, wrote at the end of his marvelous novel, The Plague: "After all," he said, "after the tragedy, never the rest...there is more in the human being to celebrate than to denigrate." Even that can be found as truth -- painful as it is -- in Buchenwald.

Thank you, Mr. President, for allowing me to come back to my father's grave, which is still in my heart.

05-06-2009 om 22:55 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

Full text: Obama's Cairo speech

Obama's speech in Egypt aimed at healing a rift with the Muslim world [AFP] I am honoured to be in the timeless city of Cairo, and to be hosted by two remarkable institutions. For over 1,000 years, Al-Azhar has stood as a beacon of Islamic learning, and for over a century, Cairo University has been a source of Egypt's advancement. Together, you represent the harmony between tradition and progress. I am grateful for your hospitality, and the hospitality of the people of Egypt. I am also proud to carry with me the goodwill of the American people, and a greeting of peace from Muslim communities in my country: assalaamu alaykum. "We meet at a time of tension between the United States and Muslims around the world, tension rooted in historical forces that go beyond any current policy debate. "The relationship between Islam and the West includes centuries of co-existence and co-operation, but also conflict and religious wars. More recently, tension has been fed by colonialism that denied rights and opportunities to many Muslims, and a Cold War in which Muslim-majority countries were too often treated as proxies without regard to their own aspirations. Moreover, the sweeping change brought by modernity and globalisation led many Muslims to view the West as hostile to the traditions of Islam. Violent extremists have exploited these tensions in a small but potent minority of Muslims. The attacks of September 11th, 2001, and the continued efforts of these extremists to engage in violence against civilians has led some in my country to view Islam as inevitably hostile not only to America and Western countries, but also to human rights. This has bred more fear and mistrust. So long as our relationship is defined by our differences, we will empower those who sow hatred rather than peace, and who promote conflict rather than the co-operation that can help all of our people achieve justice and prosperity. This cycle of suspicion and discord must end. I have come here to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world; one based upon mutual interest and mutual respect; and one based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive, and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings. I do so recognising that change cannot happen overnight. No single speech can eradicate years of mistrust, nor can I answer in the time that I have all the complex questions that brought us to this point. But I am convinced that in order to move forward, we must say openly the things we hold in our hearts, and that too often are said only behind closed doors. There must be a sustained effort to listen to each other; to learn from each other; to respect one another; and to seek common ground. As the Holy Quran tells us: "Be conscious of God and speak always the truth." That is what I will try to do, to speak the truth as best I can, humbled by the task before us, and firm in my belief that the interests we share as human beings are far more powerful than the forces that drive us apart. Part of this conviction is rooted in my own experience. I am a Christian, but my father came from a Kenyan family that includes generations of Muslims. As a boy, I spent several years in Indonesia and heard the call of the azaan at the break of dawn and the fall of dusk. As a young man, I worked in Chicago communities where many found dignity and peace in their Muslim faith. As a student of history, I also know civilization's debt to Islam. It was Islam at places like Al-Azhar University that carried the light of learning through so many centuries, paving the way for Europe's Renaissance and Enlightenment. It was innovation in Muslim communities that developed the order of algebra; our magnetic compass and tools of navigation; our mastery of pens and printing; our understanding of how disease spreads and how it can be healed. Islamic culture has given us majestic arches and soaring spires; timeless poetry and cherished music; elegant calligraphy and places of peaceful contemplation. And throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality. I know, too, that Islam has always been a part of America's story. The first nation to recognise my country was Morocco. In signing the Treaty of Tripoli in 1796, our second President John Adams wrote: "The United States has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Muslims." And since our founding, American Muslims have enriched the United States. They have fought in our wars, served in government, stood for civil rights, started businesses, taught at our universities, excelled in our sports arenas, won Nobel Prizes, built our tallest building, and lit the Olympic Torch. And when the first Muslim-American was recently elected to Congress, he took the oath to defend our Constitution using the same Holy Quran that one of our Founding Fathers Thomas Jefferson kept in his personal library. So I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed. That experience guides my conviction that partnership between America and Islam must be based on what Islam is, not what it isn't. And I consider it part of my responsibility as president of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear. But that same principle must apply to Muslim perceptions of America. Just as Muslims do not fit a crude stereotype, America is not the crude stereotype of a self-interested empire. The United States has been one of the greatest sources of progress that the world has ever known. We were born out of revolution against an empire. We were founded upon the ideal that all are created equal, and we have shed blood and struggled for centuries to give meaning to those words within our borders, and around the world. We are shaped by every culture, drawn from every end of the Earth, and dedicated to a simple concept: Epluribus unum: "Out of many, one." Much has been made of the fact that an African-American with the name Barack Hussein Obama could be elected president. But my personal story is not so unique. The dream of opportunity for all people has not come true for everyone in America, but its promise exists for all who come to our shores - that includes nearly seven million American Muslims in our country today who enjoy incomes and education that are higher than average. Moreover, freedom in America is indivisible from the freedom to practice one's religion. That is why there is a mosque in every state of our union, and over 1,200 mosques within our borders. That is why the US government has gone to court to protect the right of women and girls to wear the hijab, and to punish those who would deny it. So let there be no doubt: Islam is a part of America. And I believe that America holds within her the truth that regardless of race, religion, or station in life, all of us share common aspirations to live in peace and security; to get an education and to work with dignity; to love our families, our communities, and our God. These things we share. This is the hope of all humanity. Of course, recognising our common humanity is only the beginning of our task. Words alone cannot meet the needs of our people. These needs will be met only if we act boldly in the years ahead; and if we understand that the challenges we face are shared, and our failure to meet them will hurt us all. For we have learned from recent experience that when a financial system weakens in one country, prosperity is hurt everywhere. When a new flu infects one human being, all are at risk. When one nation pursues a nuclear weapon, the risk of nuclear attack rises for all nations. When violent extremists operate in one stretch of mountains, people are endangered across an ocean. And when innocents in Bosnia and Darfur are slaughtered, that is a stain on our collective conscience. That is what it means to share this world in the 21st century. That is the responsibility we have to one another as human beings. This is a difficult responsibility to embrace. For human history has often been a record of nations and tribes subjugating one another to serve their own interests. Yet in this new age, such attitudes are self-defeating. Given our interdependence, any world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will inevitably fail. So whatever we think of the past, we must not be prisoners of it. Our problems must be dealt with through partnership; progress must be shared. That does not mean we should ignore sources of tension. Indeed, it suggests the opposite: we must face these tensions squarely. And so in that spirit, let me speak as clearly and plainly as I can about some specific issues that I believe we must finally confront together. The first issue that we have to confront is violent extremism in all of its forms. In Ankara, I made clear that America is not and never will be at war with Islam. We will, however, relentlessly confront violent extremists who pose a grave threat to our security. Because we reject the same thing that people of all faiths reject: the killing of innocent men, women, and children. And it is my first duty as president to protect the American people. The situation in Afghanistan demonstrates America's goals, and our need to work together. Over seven years ago, the United States pursued al-Qaeda and the Taliban with broad international support. We did not go by choice, we went because of necessity. I am aware that some question or justify the events of 9/11. But let us be clear: al-Qaeda killed nearly 3,000 people on that day. The victims were innocent men, women and children from America and many other nations who had done nothing to harm anybody. And yet al-Qaeda chose to ruthlessly murder these people, claimed credit for the attack, and even now states their determination to kill on a massive scale. They have affiliates in many countries and are trying to expand their reach. These are not opinions to be debated; these are facts to be dealt with. Make no mistake: We do not want to keep our troops in Afghanistan. We seek no military bases there. It is agonising for America to lose our young men and women. It is costly and politically difficult to continue this conflict. We would gladly bring every single one of our troops home if we could be confident that there were not violent extremists in Afghanistan and Pakistan determined to kill as many Americans as they possibly can. But that is not yet the case. That's why we're partnering with a coalition of 46 countries. And despite the costs involved, America's commitment will not weaken. Indeed, none of us should tolerate these extremists. They have killed in many countries. They have killed people of different faiths more than any other, they have killed Muslims. Their actions are irreconcilable with the rights of human beings, the progress of nations, and with Islam. The Holy Quran teaches that whoever kills an innocent, it is as if he has killed all mankind; and whoever saves a person, it is as if he has saved all mankind. The enduring faith of over a billion people is so much bigger than the narrow hatred of a few. Islam is not part of the problem in combating violent extremism it is an important part of promoting peace. We also know that military power alone is not going to solve the problems in Afghanistan and Pakistan. That is why we plan to invest $1.5 billion each year over the next five years to partner with Pakistanis to build schools and hospitals, roads and businesses, and hundreds of millions to help those who have been displaced. And that is why we are providing more than $2.8 billion to help Afghans develop their economy and deliver services that people depend upon. Let me also address the issue of Iraq. Unlike Afghanistan, Iraq was a war of choice that provoked strong differences in my country and around the world. Although I believe that the Iraqi people are ultimately better off without the tyranny of Saddam Hussein, I also believe that events in Iraq have reminded America of the need to use diplomacy and build international consensus to resolve our problems whenever possible. Indeed, we can recall the words of Thomas Jefferson, who said: "I hope that our wisdom will grow with our power, and teach us that the less we use our power the greater it will be." Today, America has a dual responsibility: to help Iraq forge a better future - and to leave Iraq to Iraqis. I have made it clear to the Iraqi people that we pursue no bases, and no claim on their territory or resources. Iraq's sovereignty is its own. That is why I ordered the removal of our combat brigades by next August. That is why we will honour our agreement with Iraq's democratically elected government to remove combat troops from Iraqi cities by July, and to remove all our troops from Iraq by 2012. We will help Iraq train its security forces and develop its economy. But we will support a secure and united Iraq as a partner, and never as a patron. And finally, just as America can never tolerate violence by extremists, we must never alter our principles. 9/11 was an enormous trauma to our country. The fear and anger that it provoked was understandable, but in some cases, it led us to act contrary to our ideals. We are taking concrete actions to change course. I have unequivocally prohibited the use of torture by the United States, and I have ordered the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed by early next year. So America will defend itself respectful of the sovereignty of nations and the rule of law. And we will do so in partnership with Muslim communities which are also threatened. The sooner the extremists are isolated and unwelcome in Muslim communities, the sooner we will all be safer. The second major source of tension that we need to discuss is the situation between Israelis, Palestinians and the Arab world. America's strong bonds with Israel are well known. This bond is unbreakable. It is based upon cultural and historical ties, and the recognition that the aspiration for a Jewish homeland is rooted in a tragic history that cannot be denied. Around the world, the Jewish people were persecuted for centuries, and anti-Semitism in Europe culminated in an unprecedented Holocaust. Tomorrow, I will visit Buchenwald, which was part of a network of camps where Jews were enslaved, tortured, shot and gassed to death by the Third Reich. Six million Jews were killed more than the entire Jewish population of Israel today. Denying that fact is baseless, ignorant, and hateful. Threatening Israel with destruction or repeating vile stereotypes about Jews is deeply wrong, and only serves to evoke in the minds of Israelis this most painful of memories while preventing the peace that the people of this region deserve. On the other hand, it is also undeniable that the Palestinian people, Muslims and Christians, have suffered in pursuit of a homeland. For more than 60 years they have endured the pain of dislocation. Many wait in refugee camps in the West Bank, Gaza, and neighbouring lands for a life of peace and security that they have never been able to lead. They endure the daily humiliations large and small that come with occupation. So let there be no doubt: the situation for the Palestinian people is intolerable. America will not turn our backs on the legitimate Palestinian aspiration for dignity, opportunity, and a state of their own. For decades, there has been a stalemate: two peoples with legitimate aspirations, each with a painful history that makes compromise elusive. It is easy to point fingers for Palestinians to point to the displacement brought by Israel's founding, and for Israelis to point to the constant hostility and attacks throughout its history from within its borders as well as beyond. But if we see this conflict only from one side or the other, then we will be blind to the truth: the only resolution is for the aspirations of both sides to be met through two states, where Israelis and Palestinians each live in peace and security. That is in Israel's interest, Palestine's interest, America's interest, and the world's interest. That is why I intend to personally pursue this outcome with all the patience that the task requires. The obligations that the parties have agreed to under the road map are clear. For peace to come, it is time for them and all of us to live up to our responsibilities. Palestinians must abandon violence. Resistance through violence and killing is wrong and does not succeed. For centuries, black people in America suffered the lash of the whip as slaves and the humiliation of segregation. But it was not violence that won full and equal rights. It was a peaceful and determined insistence upon the ideals at the centre of America's founding. This same story can be told by people from South Africa to South Asia; from Eastern Europe to Indonesia. It's a story with a simple truth: that violence is a dead end. It is a sign of neither courage nor power to shoot rockets at sleeping children, or to blow up old women on a bus. That is not how moral authority is claimed; that is how it is surrendered. Now is the time for Palestinians to focus on what they can build. The Palestinian Authority must develop its capacity to govern, with institutions that serve the needs of its people. Hamas does have support among some Palestinians, but they also have responsibilities. To play a role in fulfilling Palestinian aspirations, and to unify the Palestinian people, Hamas must put an end to violence, recognise past agreements, and recognise Israel's right to exist. At the same time, Israelis must acknowledge that just as Israel's right to exist cannot be denied, neither can Palestine's. The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements. This construction violates previous agreements and undermines efforts to achieve peace. It is time for these settlements to stop. Israel must also live up to its obligations to ensure that Palestinians can live, and work, and develop their society. And just as it devastates Palestinian families, the continuing humanitarian crisis in Gaza does not serve Israel's security; neither does the continuing lack of opportunity in the West Bank. Progress in the daily lives of the Palestinian people must be part of a road to peace, and Israel must take concrete steps to enable such progress. Finally, the Arab states must recognise that the Arab Peace Initiative was an important beginning, but not the end of their responsibilities. The Arab-Israeli conflict should no longer be used to distract the people of Arab nations from other problems. Instead, it must be a cause for action to help the Palestinian people develop the institutions that will sustain their state; to recognise Israel's legitimacy; and to choose progress over a self-defeating focus on the past. America will align our policies with those who pursue peace, and say in public what we say in private to Israelis and Palestinians and Arabs. We cannot impose peace. But privately, many Muslims recognise that Israel will not go away. Likewise, many Israelis recognise the need for a Palestinian state. It is time for us to act on what everyone knows to be true. Too many tears have flowed. Too much blood has been shed. All of us have a responsibility to work for the day when the mothers of Israelis and Palestinians can see their children grow up without fear; when the Holy Land of three great faiths is the place of peace that God intended it to be; when Jerusalem is a secure and lasting home for Jews and Christians and Muslims, and a place for all of the children of Abraham to mingle peacefully together as in the story of Isra, when Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad (peace be upon them) joined in prayer. The third source of tension is our shared interest in the rights and responsibilities of nations on nuclear weapons. This issue has been a source of tension between the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran. For many years, Iran has defined itself in part by its opposition to my country, and there is indeed a tumultuous history between us. In the middle of the Cold War, the United States played a role in the overthrow of a democratically elected Iranian government. Since the Islamic Revolution, Iran has played a role in acts of hostage-taking and violence against US troops and civilians. This history is well known. Rather than remain trapped in the past, I have made it clear to Iran's leaders and people that my country is prepared to move forward. The question, now, is not what Iran is against, but rather what future it wants to build. It will be hard to overcome decades of mistrust, but we will proceed with courage, rectitude and resolve. There will be many issues to discuss between our two countries, and we are willing to move forward without preconditions on the basis of mutual respect. But it is clear to all concerned that when it comes to nuclear weapons, we have reached a decisive point. This is not simply about America's interests. It is about preventing a nuclear arms race in the Middle East that could lead this region and the world down a hugely dangerous path. I understand those who protest that some countries have weapons that others do not. No single nation should pick and choose which nations hold nuclear weapons. That is why I strongly reaffirmed America's commitment to seek a world in which no nations hold nuclear weapons. And any nation - including Iran - should have the right to access peaceful nuclear power if it complies with its responsibilities under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. That commitment is at the core of the treaty, and it must be kept for all who fully abide by it. And I am hopeful that all countries in the region can share in this goal. The fourth issue that I will address is democracy. I know there has been controversy about the promotion of democracy in recent years, and much of this controversy is connected to the war in Iraq. So let me be clear: no system of government can or should be imposed upon one nation by any other. That does not lessen my commitment, however, to governments that reflect the will of the people. Each nation gives life to this principle in its own way, grounded in the traditions of its own people. America does not presume to know what is best for everyone, just as we would not presume to pick the outcome of a peaceful election. But I do have an unyielding belief that all people yearn for certain things: the ability to speak your mind and have a say in how you are governed; confidence in the rule of law and the equal administration of justice; government that is transparent and doesn't steal from the people; the freedom to live as you choose. Those are not just American ideas, they are human rights, and that is why we will support them everywhere. There is no straight line to realise this promise. But this much is clear: governments that protect these rights are ultimately more stable, successful and secure. Suppressing ideas never succeeds in making them go away. America respects the right of all peaceful and law-abiding voices to be heard around the world, even if we disagree with them. And we will welcome all elected, peaceful governments provided they govern with respect for all their people. This last point is important because there are some who advocate for democracy only when they are out of power; once in power, they are ruthless in suppressing the rights of others. No matter where it takes hold, government of the people and by the people sets a single standard for all who hold power: you must maintain your power through consent, not coercion; you must respect the rights of minorities, and participate with a spirit of tolerance and compromise; you must place the interests of your people and the legitimate workings of the political process above your party. Without these ingredients, elections alone do not make true democracy. The fifth issue that we must address together is religious freedom. Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance. We see it in the history of Andalusia and Cordoba during the Inquisition. I saw it firsthand as a child in Indonesia, where devout Christians worshipped freely in an overwhelmingly Muslim country. That is the spirit we need today. People in every country should be free to choose and live their faith based upon the persuasion of the mind, heart, and soul. This tolerance is essential for religion to thrive, but it is being challenged in many different ways. Among some Muslims, there is a disturbing tendency to measure one's own faith by the rejection of another's. The richness of religious diversity must be upheld whether it is for Maronites in Lebanon or the Copts in Egypt. And faultlines must be closed among Muslims as well, as the divisions between Sunni and Shia have led to tragic violence, particularly in Iraq. Freedom of religion is central to the ability of peoples to live together. We must always examine the ways in which we protect it. For instance, in the United States, rules on charitable giving have made it harder for Muslims to fulfil their religious obligation. That is why I am committed to working with American Muslims to ensure that they can fulfil zakat. Likewise, it is important for Western countries to avoid impeding Muslim citizens from practicing religion as they see fit for instance, by dictating what clothes a Muslim woman should wear. We cannot disguise hostility towards any religion behind the pretence of liberalism. Indeed, faith should bring us together. That is why we are forging service projects in America that bring together Christians, Muslims, and Jews. That is why we welcome efforts like Saudi Arabian King Abdullah's interfaith dialogue and Turkey's leadership in the Alliance of Civilisations. Around the world, we can turn dialogue into interfaith service, so bridges between peoples lead to action whether it is combating malaria in Africa, or providing relief after a natural disaster. The sixth issue that I want to address is women's rights. I know there is debate about this issue. I reject the view of some in the West that a woman who chooses to cover her hair is somehow less equal, but I do believe that a woman who is denied an education is denied equality. And it is no coincidence that countries where women are well-educated are far more likely to be prosperous. Now let me be clear: issues of women's equality are by no means simply an issue for Islam. In Turkey, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Indonesia, we have seen Muslim-majority countries elect a woman to lead. Meanwhile, the struggle for women's equality continues in many aspects of American life, and in countries around the world. Our daughters can contribute just as much to society as our sons, and our common prosperity will be advanced by allowing all humanity, men and women, to reach their full potential. I do not believe that women must make the same choices as men in order to be equal, and I respect those women who choose to live their lives in traditional roles. But it should be their choice. That is why the United States will partner with any Muslim-majority country to support expanded literacy for girls, and to help young women pursue employment through micro-financing that helps people live their dreams. Finally, I want to discuss economic development and opportunity. I know that for many, the face of globalisation is contradictory. The internet and television can bring knowledge and information, but also offensive sexuality and mindless violence. Trade can bring new wealth and opportunities, but also huge disruptions and changing communities. In all nations, including my own, this change can bring fear. Fear that because of modernity we will lose control over our economic choices, our politics, and most importantly our identities - those things we most cherish about our communities, our families, our traditions, and our faith. But I also know that human progress cannot be denied. There need not be contradiction between development and tradition. Countries like Japan and South Korea grew their economies while maintaining distinct cultures. The same is true for the astonishing progress within Muslim-majority countries from Kuala Lumpur to Dubai. In ancient times and in our times, Muslim communities have been at the forefront of innovation and education. This is important because no development strategy can be based only upon what comes out of the ground, nor can it be sustained while young people are out of work. Many Gulf states have enjoyed great wealth as a consequence of oil, and some are beginning to focus it on broader development. But all of us must recognise that education and innovation will be the currency of the 21st century, and in too many Muslim communities there remains under-investment in these areas. I am emphasising such investments within my country. And while America in the past has focused on oil and gas in this part of the world, we now seek a broader engagement. On education, we will expand exchange programmes, and increase scholarships, like the one that brought my father to America, while encouraging more Americans to study in Muslim communities. And we will match promising Muslim students with internships in America; invest in online learning for teachers and children around the world; and create a new online network, so a teenager in Kansas can communicate instantly with a teenager in Cairo. On economic development, we will create a new corps of business volunteers to partner with counterparts in Muslim-majority countries. And I will host a Summit on Entrepreneurship this year to identify how we can deepen ties between business leaders, foundations and social entrepreneurs in the United States and Muslim communities around the world. On science and technology, we will launch a new fund to support technological development in Muslim-majority countries, and to help transfer ideas to the marketplace so they can create jobs. We will open centres of scientific excellence in Africa, the Middle East and Southeast Asia, and appoint new Science Envoys to collaborate on programmes that develop new sources of energy, create green jobs, digitise records, clean water, and grow new crops. And today I am announcing a new global effort with the Organisation of the Islamic Conference to eradicate polio. And we will also expand partnerships with Muslim communities to promote child and maternal health. All these things must be done in partnership. Americans are ready to join with citizens and governments; community organisations, religious leaders, and businesses in Muslim communities around the world to help our people pursue a better life. The issues that I have described will not be easy to address. But we have a responsibility to join together on behalf of the world we seek - a world where extremists no longer threaten our people, and American troops have come home; a world where Israelis and Palestinians are each secure in a state of their own, and nuclear energy is used for peaceful purposes; a world where governments serve their citizens, and the rights of all God's children are respected. Those are mutual interests. That is the world we seek. But we can only achieve it together. I know there are many, Muslim and non-Muslim, who question whether we can forge this new beginning. Some are eager to stoke the flames of division, and to stand in the way of progress. Some suggest that it isn't worth the effort that we are fated to disagree, and civilisations are doomed to clash. Many more are simply sceptical that real change can occur. There is so much fear, so much mistrust. But if we choose to be bound by the past, we will never move forward. And I want to particularly say this to young people of every faith, in every country, you, more than anyone, have the ability to remake this world. All of us share this world for but a brief moment in time. The question is whether we spend that time focused on what pushes us apart, or whether we commit ourselves to an effort, a sustained effort, to find common ground, to focus on the future we seek for our children, and to respect the dignity of all human beings. It is easier to start wars than to end them. It is easier to blame others than to look inward; to see what is different about someone than to find the things we share. But we should choose the right path, not just the easy path. There is also one rule that lies at the heart of every religion that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us. This truth transcends nations and peoples a belief that isn't new; that isn't black or white or brown; that isn't Christian, or Muslim or Jew. It's a belief that pulsed in the cradle of civilisation, and that still beats in the heart of billions. It's a faith in other people, and it's what brought me here today. We have the power to make the world we seek, but only if we have the courage to make a new beginning, keeping in mind what has been written. The Holy Quran tells us, "O mankind! We have created you male and a female; and we have made you into nations and tribes so that you may know one another." The Talmud tells us: "The whole of the Torah is for the purpose of promoting peace." The Holy Bible tells us, "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God." The people of the world can live together in peace. We know that is God's vision. Now, that must be our work here on Earth. Thank you and may God's peace be upon you.

05-06-2009 om 22:23 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

Le Soir (27/05/2009)

Et alors ? Rien.

Avons-nous reçu une réponse à cette mobilisation massive née des forces progressistes et sociales de ce pays ? Rien.

Aux chefs d’État, au monde politique, au président de la Commission européenne, nous souhaitons rappeler que le front syndical belge est plus uni que jamais pour redire que ce n’est pas aux travailleurs et aux allocataires sociaux de payer la crise, pour lancer aussi un avertissement : nous aurons une autre Europe, parce que nous n’acceptons pas la suprématie de l’économique – et de l’économie casino – sur le social.

Et si nous ne sommes pas entendus, nous passerons à la vitesse supérieure.
Parce que face à l’indifférence dans laquelle le monde du travail est manifestement plongé, nous comptons bien nous faire entendre et peser de tout notre poids dans les futures politiques qui seront menées.

Rappelons que depuis septembre dernier, les licenciements annoncés concernent plus de 25.000 travailleurs.
Que le Conseil supérieur de l’emploi prévoit quelque 60.000 pertes d’emploi d’ici à la fin de l’année, auxquelles viendront d’ajouter 40.000 jeunes nouveaux demandeurs d’emploi.

Les travailleurs ont peur. Peur pour leur emploi. Peur de ne plus pouvoir rembourser l’emprunt de leur maison, peur de ne plus pouvoir payer leurs factures ou encore les études de leurs enfants. Mais tout le monde n’est pas logé à la même enseigne… Un revenu du travail mensuel imposable de 1.700 euros est frappé d’un taux moyen d’environ 25 %, alors que les bénéfices d’une multinationale comme Electrabel-Suez (2,3 milliards en 2006) bénéficient d’un taux de taxation implicite de moins de 25 % à la suite du recours aux intérêts notionnels et autres constructions fiscales.

Et les inégalités de revenus augmentent : 30 % des Belges détiennent 70 % de la richesse du pays.

Et la fraude fiscale est estimée à 30 milliards par an. La banqueroute du néolibéralisme provoque une terrible récession, l’augmentation du chômage, une forte augmentation du déficit budgétaire et un accroissement du taux d’endettement (qui évolue de nouveau vers les 100 % du PIB). Les résultats des efforts budgétaires imposés aux travailleurs salariés dans le passé sont aujourd’hui annihilés par les adeptes de la dérégulation.

Les travailleurs payent la crise au prix fort : sauvetage des banques, plans de relance… Pacte des générations bis ? Pour le front commun syndical, il est hors de question que les travailleurs et les allocataires sociaux passent une nouvelle fois à la caisse en subissant une politique d’austérité qui les sanctionnerait à nouveau pour les politiques capitaliste et néolibérale irresponsables qui les ont menés dans le mur.

C’est la raison pour laquelle, forts des 50.000 manifestants présents dans les rues de Bruxelles le 15 mai, nous exigeons que change le climat de la campagne électorale belge !

Les travailleurs attendent une chose essentielle du politique : qu’il s’exprime clairement dans ses réponses aux revendications du monde du travail. Les capitalistes se cachent et n’investissent plus. Ce sont les travailleurs qui colmatent les brèches et sont, de fait, les premiers investisseurs du pays. À ce titre, ils ont le droit d’obtenir des retours (tant au niveau national qu’au niveau européen) sur les investissements qu’ils ont consentis à l’État.

Ainsi, les travailleurs réclament le maintien de services publics de qualité, des investissements massifs dans la création d’emplois durables dans des filières d’avenir, le maintien d’un pouvoir d’achat suffisant pour pouvoir faire face à la crise (cela signifie le maintien de l’indexation des salaires et de la liaison automatique des allocations sociales au bien-être) ainsi qu’une autre fiscalité. Par autre fiscalité, nous entendons une meilleure répartition des richesses.
Et cette fiscalité plus juste, qui doit aller de pair avec la suppression du secret bancaire pour tous et la fin des paradis fiscaux, devra trouver une harmonisation au niveau européen. Le front commun syndical ne laissera pas tomber les travailleurs et les allocataires sociaux.

Rudy de Leeuw Président de la FGTB - Luc Cortebeeck Président de la CSC - Anne Demelenne Secrétaire générale de la FGTB - Claude Rolin Secrétaire général de la CSC - Jan Vercamst Président de la CGSLB - Bernard Noël Secrétaire général de la CGSLB

Partij Geert Wilders wint Europese verkiezingen in Nederland

• donderdag 04 juni 2009
• Bron: anp
• Auteur: kld, ch

Partij Geert Wilders wint Europese verkiezingen in Nederland

afp

De rechtspopulistische Partij Voor de Vrijheid (PVV) van Geert Wilders heeft in Nederland de Europese verkiezingen gewonnen. Wilders rijft vanuit het niets 4 van de 25 zetels binnen. Het christendemocratische CDA van premier Jan-Peter Balkenende blijft de grootste partij.

Winst voor PVV en D66

Gepubliceerd: 4 juni 2009 21:13 | Gewijzigd: 4 juni 2009 22:37

Door een onzer redacteuren

Wilders brengt zijn stem uit voor de Europese Verkiezingen 2009. Foto WFA

De tweede winnaar is D66, die van de huidige één zetel naar drie zetels stijgt.

PVV

Wilders reageerde op televisie bij de NOS verheugd op zijn overwinning. „Dit is een fantastisch resultaat, mensen hebben hiermee duidelijk aangegeven dat we een ander Nederland in Europa tegemoet gaan.” Nederlanders hebben volgens Wilders niet alleen genoeg van de manier waarop Nederland en de Europese Unie werken, „maar ook van het Nederlandse kabinet van Balkenende en Bos”.

D66

D66-leider Alexander Pechtold zei in een reactie op zijn waarschijnlijke drie zetels: „We beschouwen dit als een succes dat mensen niet bang zijn voor Europa.” D66 had vooraf als doelstelling twee zetels.

PvdA

De Partij van de Arbeid (PvdA) is de grootste verliezer, volgens de prognose: die zakt van de huidige zeven zetels naar vier. Lijsttrekker Thijs Berman reageerde teleurgesteld: „Je wilt niet de grootste verliezer zijn. Maar we hebben ons gehandhaafd ten opzichte van de peilingen en we zijn de grootste linkse partij gebleven.”

CDA

Het CDA zakt waarschijnlijk van zeven naar vijf zetels, maar blijft de grootste Nederlandse partij in het parlement, nu dus met de PVV in plaats van de PvdA als tweede. De VVD verliest één zetel, Groenlinks blijft op twee zetels staan, evenals de SP. De kleinere Partij voor de Dieren heeft geen zetel weten te bemachtigen.

Opkomst

De opkomst wordt rond 40 procent geschat, iets hoger dan bij de Europese verkiezingen in 2004. Toen was de opkomst 39 procent.

Nederland is samen met Groot- Brittannië de eerste EU-lidstaat die naar de stembus ging voor het Europees parlement. Bij de Europese verkiezingen in 2004 lag het gemiddelde opkomstpercentage in de gehele EU op ruim 44 procent.

De uitslagen uit Groot-Brittannië komen overigens pas zondagavond binnen, nadat de stembussen in alle lidstaten zijn gesloten. Dat schrijft Europese regelgeving ook voor. Uitslagen uit andere lidstaten het stemgedrag zouden kunnen beïnvloeden, is de redenering.

Openbaar

In Nederland is het stemproces echter openbaar. De Kiesraad „is daarom ook van mening dat de uitslag ook meteen openbaar moet zijn”, aldus een woordvoerder. En dus komen de uitslagen nu al per gemeente binnen. Overigens maakt de Kiesraad ook pas volgende week, dus na zondag, de officiële uitslagen bekend.

Morgen stemmen Ierland en Tsjechië, waarna de rest van de lidstaten zaterdag en voornamelijk zondag volgt.

04-06-2009 om 23:23 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

China Censors: The Tiananmen Square Anniversary Will Not Be Tweeted

Twitter blocked in China

Twitter v. China's GFW

And... there we have it.

Michael Anti was right after all:

Danwei: In terms of new media, do you still feel that in China censors could control everything that's happening in this area － you once said that if they shut off twitter, for example, it would be very easy, and information will just not get out.
Michael Anti: Twitter is a new thing in China. The censors need time to figure out what it is. So enjoy the last happy days of twittering before the fate of Youtube descends on it one day. [Emphasis added]

By the way, I want to point out that the Chinese Twitterland is funnier than the English one, for a Chinese tweet can have three times the volume of an English tweet, thanks to the high information intensity of the Chinese language. 140 Chinese characters can make up all the full elements of a news piece with the "5 Ws" (Who, What, Where, When and HoW). But the joy of the Chinese Twitterland is more fragile, and I hope that it will live longer in this country.

The block seems to be a URL keyword filter. Googling for "twitter.com" resets the connection, as does including the string "twitter.com" in any other URL. Access to the service is fine through proxy or VPN.

Update: It seems that photo sharing website Flickr.com has been blocked.

Update 2: Bing.com (the new Microsoft search engine) is gone too, probably for autoplaying Youtube videos when you put your mouse over them.

Update 3: Live.com and Hotmail.com have gone under. But MSN messenger seems fine.

Blogspot and Youtube remain blocked.

Update 03.06.09: Hotmail.com is back, but Live.com is still be having problems loading.

Tiananmen 20th Anniversary Coming Up

Asia, General Amnesty, Individuals at Risk | Posted by: Bryna Subherwal, June 2, 2009 at 6:52 PM

© 1989 Hei Han Khiang

As I’m sure many of you know, June 3-4, 2009 marks the 20th anniversary of the 1989 military crackdown on pro-democracy demonstrations in Tiananmen Square.

Two decades after the crackdown, about 50 people who were involved in the demonstrations are believed to remain in prison. The Chinese authorities continue to refuse to carry out an open, independent and impartial inquiry into the events of 1989, and no one has been brought to justice for their role in the crackdown. Attempts to mark the anniversary of the crackdown have been suppressed, and public debate or discussion of the events is banned.

This Thursday, Amnesty International is co-sponsoring an event on Capitol Hill to commemorate the 20th anniversary. Speakers will include House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, as well as survivors of the Tiananmen crackdown and other prominent faith, government and human rights leaders, as well as Amnesty’s own T. Kumar.

If you’re not in the DC area, there are lots of other events happening around the country and around the world this week. Get involved–keep the memory of Tiananmen alive!

China Blocks Twitter Ahead Of Tiananmen Anniversary

di

Huffington Post | David Flumenbaum
First Posted: 06- 2-09 09:22 AM | Updated: 06- 2-09 03:38 PM

I Like ItI Don’t Like It

China is celebrating the 20th anniversary of the Tiananmen crackdown with another crackdown -- a massive block on Twitter and all those social media sites that pose a threat to China's government this week. The Chinese media site Danwei reported early Tuesday morning that Twitter, the popular microblogging site, has been disabled in mainland China. Thursday, June 4th marks the 20th anniversary of the pro-democracy protests in Tiananmen Square and the brutal response by the Chinese government that left hundreds dead.

As the morning moved on, China-based bloggers realized that YouTube, Flickr and Bing, Microsoft's new search engine, had also been blocked. Reuters reported this morning that China even blocked Hotmail and Windows Live, both sites owned by Microsoft. As the Shanghaiist put it, "Microsoft can't catch a break here, can they?

While it is common for the Chinese government to block websites deemed controversial before major events, like Thursday's Tiananmen anniversary, the massive block today is the first widespread censorship of social media -- a tacit acknowledgment of two things: Twitter's new power in mainland China, and how valuable Twitter would be as platform to publish original news out of mainland China on the Tiananmen anniversary. Now, or at least until the protests and noise surrounding the anniversary subside, Twitterers in China will not be able to tweet.

Other than Twitter, the list of sites currently blocked in mainland China includes YouTube, Blogspot, Tumblr, Livejournal, Flickr, Microsoft's Live.com and this one, the Huffington Post.

John Feffer

Co-director of Foreign Policy In Focus

Posted: June 2, 2009 10:52 AM

BIO Become a Fan

Get Email Alerts Bloggers' Index

Twenty Years Ago: Beijing, Warsaw, and History's Fork

On June 4, 1989, history forked.

In Poland, voters went to the polls to give the anti-communist opposition a sweeping victory in the country's first, partially free elections in ages. It was the first sign of the revolutionary changes that would sweep through Eastern Europe that year, knocking down the Berlin Wall and changing the face of the continent. On the other side of the world, on that same day, the Chinese government sent tanks and troops into Tiananmen Square and crushed the student-worker demonstrations. This was the anti-revolution of 1989. Communism collapsed in one place; communism continued in the other.

Twenty years later, it seems as though both countries took different paths to the same economic endpoint. Poland has become a member of the European Union (EU) and NATO. And China, after its own long march to capitalism, has become the largest holder of U.S. treasury securities.

In both countries, the populations live better on average today than 20 years ago. But increasing inequality suggests that the two movements -- the Solidarity trade union in Poland and the Communist party in China -- ultimately betrayed their core constituencies of workers and peasants. At the same time, the fervor for democracy that animated Polish voters and Chinese protestors in 1989 has subsided as corruption and commercialism has driven people away from politics and into IKEA. Nationalism has become more important as a unifying ideology in both countries, expressed either in the form of the clericalism and anti-German sentiments of the Kaczynski twins in Poland or the Han chauvinism and anti-Japanese sentiments so prevalent in Chinese chat rooms.

We don't, of course, live in a flat world leveled by technology and driven by the market. There are still important differences between the paths taken by Poland and China, between the social market of the EU and the market socialism of the "Beijing consensus," between the corrupt but functioning democracy in Poland and the corrupt but functioning oligarchy in China.

The sharpest contrast between the two countries, however, lies beneath their routine proclamations of a desire to improve relations with Washington. The Polish government has campaigned hard for a U.S. military base that would be part of the missile defense network. Fearful that the Obama administration might change its mind, Poland is lobbying for Patriot missiles stationed outside Warsaw by the end of the year. China, on the other hand, is distressed about U.S. missile defense plans, so much so that it is reportedly undertaking the largest increase in its nuclear-tipped ballistic missile program since the late 1980s.

So, in 20 years, we really haven't fully escaped the shadow of the Cold War. Poles and Chinese can suck down frappuccinos as they trade funny videos on Facebook. But nuclear weapons still hang over us all like a guillotine blade. And we have yet to escape, fully, our global bipolar disorder. "Even if China and the United States make nice in bilateral meetings, they are spending as if a new Cold War is just around the corner," I write in The G-2 Paradox.

There will be many commemorations of June 4, some joyous, some sorrowful. Many courageous people sacrificed so much to change the world. And much did change. But 20 years later, I'm still waiting for my invitation to the Cold War's funeral.

To Shut Off Tiananmen Talk, China Disrupts Sites

BEIJING — China’s government censors have begun to block access to the Internet services Twitter, Flickr, Hotmail and Microsoft’s live.com, broadening an already extraordinary effort to shield its citizens from any hint of Thursday’s 20th anniversary of the military crackdown that ended the 1989 Tiananmen Square pro-democracy movement.

People in China who tried to gain access to the blocked Web sites on Tuesday instead encountered an error message saying the sites’ servers had unexpectedly dropped the Internet connection — a standard indicator that access has been blocked.

Weeks earlier, censors blocked Chinese users from viewing all videos on YouTube, and in recent days some television viewers have reported that BBC World News reports related to the Tiananmen anniversary were being selectively blacked out of broadcast programs.

Government censorship of political material on Internet bulletin boards and Web sites is common in China, but this is the first time Twitter has been blocked. Some well-known political activists, unable to post comments on Chinese blogs or chat sites, had switched to Twitter in recent months as an uncensored outlet for their views.

A number of foreign-based sites that have hosted Chinese bloggers, including blogspot.com and the Chinese-language version of wordpress.com, have also been blocked in recent weeks.

The South China Morning Post, an English-language newspaper based in Hong Kong that has frequently featured articles on Tiananmen and other sensitive issues, has also seen its distribution on the Chinese mainland curbed in advance of the anniversary on Thursday. And some Beijing readers of last weekend’s edition of The International Herald Tribune discovered that an inside page of the newspaper with an article on the Dalai Lama, the Tibetan religious leader, was missing.

The anniversary of the Tiananmen crackdown, in which army troops killed hundreds of student demonstrators, workers and ordinary citizens, is one of a series of politically sensitive dates this year that have provoked sweeping security measures by Chinese officials.

In recent days, the government has detained a number of political dissidents seen as threats to public order during the anniversary period, including one who had released an open letter complaining about economic hardship visited on former Tiananmen demonstrators who were jailed after the crackdown.

The dissident, Wu Gaoxing, was seized Saturday at his home in Taizhou, a coastal city south of Shanghai, according to the New York advocacy group Human Rights in China. Mr. Wu was among five men, all once jailed for their roles in the Tiananmen movement, who released a letter last weekend charging that former prisoners have been singled out for economic hardship long after their prison terms ended.

Human Rights in China said Mr. Wu was taken away and his computer confiscated about an hour after the letter, addressed to President Hu Jintao and other senior leaders, became public.

Mr. Wu, a writer and former educator, was taken into custody in 1989 and imprisoned for two years after he joined protests in his home province of Zhejiang against the military crackdown on Tiananmen demonstrators. “In this society that claims to be harmonious, we have become ‘citizens of the three have-nots waiting to die’: we have no regular jobs, no pensions, and no health insurance; if we get sick, we can only wait to die, and all this just because 20 years ago we were sentenced for political reasons,” the letter says.

The men, among them a former Communist Party member and a factory worker, said they had been denied pensions, health care and regular employment since taking part in local rallies that were inspired by the protests in Beijing. One of the signers, Mao Guoliang, said he had been fired from 17 schools since he served a four-year term for “counterrevolutionary activities.”

03-06-2009 om 23:44 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

Toename werkloosheid in Vlaanderen versnelt nog

• dinsdag 02 juni 2009
• Bron: belga
• Auteur: svh

De toename van de werkloosheid in Vlaanderen versnelt nog. Dat blijkt uit de maandelijkse cijfers die de Vlaamse minister van Werk, Frank Vandenbroucke, dinsdag bekend maakte. In mei waren er 23,2 procent meer werklozen dan in mei vorig jaar. Het gaat om een stijging met 35.000 werklozen.

02-06-2009 om 00:00 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

Ryan Grim

ryan@huffingtonpost.com | HuffPost Reporting

Former Interrogator Rebukes Cheney For Torture Speech (VIDEO)

digg Huffpost - Former Interrogator Rebukes Cheney For Torture Speech (VIDEO) stumble reddit del.ico.us ShareThis

A former top interrogator is responding forcefully to the case Dick Cheney made on Thursday in favor of torture (what the former VP and his allies refer to as "enhanced interrogation methods.")

Brave New Films released a short video Tuesday of Matthew Alexander taking apart Cheney's argument piece by piece. Alexander, who uses a pseudonym for security reasons, was a 14-year military interrogator who oversaw more than a thousand interrogations and conducted more than 300 in Iraq himself. He led the interrogation team that scored one of the United States' most high-profile captures, that of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, and he did it using traditional methods.

Alexander easily takes down Cheney's arguments. The most immediate blow Alexander strikes is, of course, his obvious success, which undercuts Cheney's case for more brutal techniques. Alexander also engages on the level of principle. For Cheney, the suggestion that torture is a poor strategy because it aids terrorist recruitment is nothing more than old-fashioned blame-America-first cowardice.

"After a familiar fashion, it excuses the violent and blames America for the evil that others do," said Cheney.

The president and others who have condemned torture don't say that it "excuses the violent." Rather, they say it makes a violent reaction more likely -- and Alexander backed them up.

"At the prison where I conducted interrogations," responded Alexander, "we heard day in and day out, foreign fighters who had been captured state that the number one reason that they had come to fight in Iraq was because of torture and abuse, what had happened at Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib."

Alexander put the number making this claim at 90 percent.

Alexander, however, made a broader point at the end of his interview, one that would certainly evade Cheney's grasp, convinced as he is that Al Qaeda recruits "hate us for our freedoms."

Story continues below

Cheney, said Alexander, fundamentally misunderstands the way America is viewed around the world. The American principles of freedom and democracy are cherished in the Muslim world and the idea, at least, of America is still a seductive one. But it is the behavior of the Bush administration at Guantanamo Bay, Abu Ghraib and secret prisons around the globe that undercuts that image, allowing Al Qaeda to make the argument that America isn't what it stands for.

"Remember," said Alexander, "one of Al Qaeda's goals, it's not just to attack the United States, it's to prove that we're hypocrites, that we don't live up to American principles. So when we use torture and abuse, we're playing directly into one of their stated goals."

The video is at once an effective rebuke of the former vice president and a sign of how the changing media landscape can flatten the field of political debate. In an earlier era, Alexander would likely lack the opportunity to respond to the vice president because he has already written on op-ed for the Washington Post about his opposition to torture and done the media rounds promoting his book "How to Break a Terrorist: The U.S. Interrogators Who Used Brains, Not Brutality, to Take Down the Deadliest Man in Iraq." The BNF video, and a rejoinder posted here over the weekend, reinserts a critic with deep credibility back into the debate.

Kijk, dat zijn argumenten die we graag door onze Landuyt hadden horen zehhe. Niet dat we vermoeden dat hij enige ervaring zou hebben met ondervragingstechnieken. Hoeft eigenlijk niet: gelijk welke gevangene is bereid alles te bekennen als hij verplicht zou worden een half uur lang naar het Brugs algemeen beschaafd te luisteren van onze Renaat. Neen, het kan voor een linkse jongen toch niet zo moeilijk zijn om gans die Guntanamotoestand wat in een ander daglicht te stellen ipv van daar weer een typisch Belgistaans debat over te voeren. Nog eventjes en het communautaire speelt ook nog een rol. Waar zullen we die twee uit te leveren "terroristen" opsluiten? Eén in Brugge en de andere in Lantin en misschien nog een, derde in Vorst? iedereen content. Maar geen twee in Brugge want dan is Vlaanderen te klein!

We geven nog wat ideeën .... want onze Amerikaanse vrienden hebben het onder Bush en zijn akolieten behoorlijk bont gemaakt en daar hadden we graag wat duidelijkere standpunten rond verwacht vanwege...tja, vanwege iemand anders dan De Gucht die blijkbaar linkser is dan de rooie pretbende van Gennez.

The Abu Ghraib Photos Surface—Slowly but Surely

^{(AP Photo)}

Abuse Photos Include Images Of Rape And Sexual Assault: Repor

|

The Pentagon on Thursday denied the Daily Telegraph report that photographs of Iraqi prisoner abuse, whose release U.S. President Obama wants to block, include images of apparent rape and sexual abuse.

Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said the newspaper had shown "an inability to get the facts right."

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs also dismissed the report.

"I want to speak generally about some reports I've witnessed over the past few years in the British media. And in some ways, I'm surprised it filtered down," Gibbs said. "Let's just say if I wanted to look up -- if I wanted to read a writeup today of how Manchester United fared last night in the Champion's League cup, I might open up a British newspaper. If I was looking for something that bordered on truthful news, I'm not entirely sure it'd be in the first pack of clips I'd pick up."

* * * * *

LONDON (AP) -- A former U.S. general said graphic images of rape and torture are among the photos of Iraqi prisoner abuse that President Obama's administration does not want released.

Retired Major Gen. Antonio Taguba, who oversaw the U.S. investigation into the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison, told Britain's Daily Telegraph in an article published Wednesday that he agreed with Obama's decision not to release the pictures.

"I am not sure what purpose their release would serve other than a legal one and the consequence would be to imperil our troops, the only protectors of our foreign policy, when we most need them," Taguba was quoted by the Daily Telegraph. "The mere description of these pictures is horrendous enough, take my word for it."

Two Obama administration officials didn't immediately respond to e-mail requests for comment Wednesday night.

Story continues below

The prisoner abuse scandal at Abu Ghraib exploded after photos taken by soldiers appeared in 2004.

According to the Telegraph, the new photos depicted much more serious abuses than previously documented.

One photo reportedly showed an American soldier apparently raping a female prisoner and another was said to show a male translator raping a male detainee, the Telegraph reported.

It was not immediately clear from the report who had seen the photos or how they might have been obtained.

The Telegraph said the photos relate to 400 cases of alleged abuse between 2001 and 2005 at Abu Ghraib and six other prisons.

The newspaper said the images in the photos were backed up by statements from Taguba's report into prisoner abuses at Abu Ghraib obtained under the U.S. Freedom of Information Act.

Pentagon denies report Iraq prison photos show rape

Thu May 28, 2009 2:59pm E

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Pentagon on Thursday denied a British newspaper report that photographs of Iraqi prisoner abuse, whose release U.S. President Barack Obama wants to block, include images of apparent rape and sexual abuse.

Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said the Daily Telegraph newspaper had shown "an inability to get the facts right".

"That news organization has completely mischaracterized the images," Whitman told reporters. "None of the photos in question depict the images that are described in that article."

Thursday's Telegraph quoted retired U.S. Army Major General Antonio Taguba, who conducted a 2004 investigation into abuse at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison, as saying the pictures showed "torture, abuse, rape and every indecency."

The newspaper said at least one picture showed an American soldier apparently raping a female prisoner while another is said to show a male translator raping a male detainee.

Others were said to depict sexual assaults with objects including a truncheon, wire and a phosphorescent tube.

In an interview with the New Yorker magazine published in 2007, Taguba was quoted as saying that he saw a video of a male American soldier in uniform sodomizing a female detainee.

Photographs of abuse at the jail outside Baghdad that were published in 2004 damaged the image of the United States as it fought an escalating war against insurgents in Iraq that caused deep resentment throughout the Muslim world.

Whitman said he did not know if the Telegraph had quoted Taguba accurately. But he said he was not aware that any such photographs had been uncovered as part of the investigation into Abu Ghraib or abuses at other prisons.

OBAMA BLOCKING PICTURES' RELEASE

He said the Telegraph also wrongly reported earlier this month that some of the images whose release Obama is trying to block had previously been aired on Australian television.

"I would caution you whenever you see a subsequent story on photos in this particular publication," he told reporters. "They now have, at least on two occasions, demonstrated an inability to get the facts right."

Taguba, who retired in January 2007, included allegations of rape and sexual abuse in his report.

Earlier this month, the Obama administration reversed course and decided it would fight the release of the photographs, which the American Civil Liberties Union is seeking to obtain through legal action.

In April, the administration said it would comply with a court order to release the pictures. But Obama changed course after military commanders warned of a backlash in Iraq and Afghanistan that could add to the danger facing U.S. troops.

28-05-2009 om 22:54 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

Clinton tevreden over Guantanamo-voorstel

22/05/2009 19:15

Als de Amerikaanse terreurgevangenis Guantanamo Bay gesloten wordt, is de Belgische regering volgens minister van Buitenlandse Zaken Karel De Gucht (Open VLD) bereid om te bekijken of een aantal vrijgelaten gevangenen naar ons land kunnen komen.

De Gucht heeft dat voorstel vrijdag in Washington gedaan aan de Amerikaanse minister van Buitenlandse Zaken Hillary Clinton. Zij is blij met het voorstel.

Clinton zei na het gesprek met haar Belgische ambtgenoot dat ze erkentelijk is voor de hulp die België en andere landen willen bieden als president Barack Obama overgaat tot een sluiting van Guantanamo. Ze zei dat een en ander zeker zal besproken worden.

'Twee of drie gevangenen'

De Gucht zei na afloop van zijn onderhoud met Clinton dat België bereid is twee of drie gedetineerden op te vangen.

Volgens de minister is het evenwel niet de bedoeling dat België onbehoorlijke risico's zou nemen. 'De haalbaarheid moet zeker worden geëvalueerd.'

In een mededeling benadrukte De Gucht vrijdagavond dat zijn voorstel betrekking heeft op mensen die momenteel in Guantanamo vastgehouden worden, maar van wie op basis van hun dossier blijkt dat ze vrijgelaten moeten worden.

Gerepatrieerd naar hun eigen land kunnen ze volgens De Gucht niet omdat ze daar gemarteld en misschien zelfs gedood dreigen te worden.

In het detentiekamp op Guantanamo verblijven er volgens Amerikaanse cijfers momenteel nog 240 gedetineerden.

President Obama wil Guantanamo nog dit jaar sluiten, maar stuit op een njet van het het Congres om daar 80 miljoen dollar voor vrij te maken. Zowel Democraten als Republikeinen vragen zich af wat er met de terreurverdachten gaat gebeuren.

'We zijn bereid ernstig te bekijken of wij enkele van deze gevangenen kunnen opvangen in België, en dat appreciëren de Amerikanen ook', zegt De Gucht.

Het gaat in ieder geval om een beperkt aantal gevangen en er gelden voorwaarden. 'Het gaat om het principe', aldus de minister.

'In Europa gaat het er ook om in welke mate die mensen zich vrij kunnen bewegen, want anders ga je nooit weten hoeveel van die gevangenen zich op je grondgebied bevinden'.

Kritiek oppositie

Kamerlid Renaat Landuyt (SP.A) heeft het voorstel van De Gucht al meteen afgedaan als 'gênante grootspraak'. "We kampen zelf met overbevolking in onze gevangenissen. En vele veroordeelden geraken niet eens opgesloten bij gebrek aan plaats", zegt Landuyt.

"Ik kan niet begrijpen dat De Gucht dit zou hebben overlegd met zijn collega's in de regering, voor zover die nog bestaat. Hij moet dringend eens met zijn collega van Justitie praten", aldus Landuyt.

Ook andere oppositiepartijen hebben bedenkingen. Groen! vindt een vraag om Guantanamo-gevangenen op te nemen het overwegen waard, maar wil dat er eerst duidelijkheid wordt verschaft over hoeveel gevangenen het gaat en over hoe en waar die opgevangen en berecht worden.

De N-VA noemt het voorstel van De Gucht ondoordacht en niet uitvoerbaar. Volgens de partij is het onduidelijk of de betrokken personen vrijgelaten zijn dan wel verder gevangen blijven.

'Als de gevangenen vrijgelaten zijn: op welke grond gaat De Gucht ze dan verplichten om hier te verblijven en hun bewegingsvrijheid beperken, terwijl ze formeel althans uiterst gevaarlijk zijn?'

'Als het de bedoeling is er hier enkelen in de gevangenis op te sluiten, kan dat niet zomaar. Welke rechtsgrond zal de Belgische staat daarvoor inroepen als ze nog niet veroordeeld zijn?'

'Maar ook als ze door een Amerikaanse uitzonderingsrechtbank veroordeeld zijn, zal de wettigheid van de veroordeling moeten onderzocht worden', aldus Geert Bourgeois en Els De Rammelaere.

Volgens het Vlaams Belang is België nauwelijks in staat om Guantanamo gevangenen op te vangen. De partij meent ook dat het geen zin heeft om de veiligheid van het land in gevaar te brengen om de Amerikaanse president ter wille te zijn.

Premier wil concrete informatie

Premier Herman Van Rompuy (CD&V) stapt niet zomaar mee in het scenario. Hij liet vrijdag voor het gesprek van De Gucht met Clinton weten dat hij eerst meer concrete informatie wil vooraleer ons land kan overgaan tot de opvang van Guantanamo-gevangenen.

Van Rompuy wil weten over wie het gaat en wat de voorwaarden zijn. Eens die gegevens in zijn bezit is de premier bereid de zaak in de schoot van de regering te bespreken.

"Voorstel De Gucht over Guantanamo is gênante grootspraak"

Over cafépraat en mensenrechten

• woensdag 27 mei 2009
• 
  
• Auteur:

WAAROM WIJ VRIJGELATENEN UIT GUANTANAMO MOETEN OPVANGEN — Karel De Gucht verdedigt zijn stelling dat België vrijgelaten gedetineerden uit Guantanamo moet opvangen. 'Want mensenrechten en veiligheid zijn te belangrijk om aan toogstrategen over te laten. Of aan politici wiens blik alleen op 7 juni gericht is.'

27-05-2009 om 23:23 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

Hoeveel geld heeft een gezin nodig om te leven?

• donderdag 14 mei 2009
• Bron: vrt, belga
• Auteur: sdg

Welk budget heeft een gezin nodig om te kunnen leven? Met die vraag gingen onderzoekers van de Katholieke Hogeschool Kempen drie jaar geleden aan de slag, en ze berekenden een budget voor zestien gezinstypen.

Gent - Sp.a-kopstuk Louis Tobback haalt uit naar partijgenoten die nu al openlijk hengelen naar een ministerportefeuille, zoals Freya Van den Bossche. "Lomp en dom", zei hij maandagmorgen op Radio 1 (VRT).

• 

Louis Tobback. (foto: Belga)

Aftredend Vlaams minister-president Frank Vandenbroucke liet al verschillende keren blijken voort te willen besturen. Freya Van den Bossche en Patrick Janssens stelden dan weer dat hun provincie - Oost-Vlaanderen en Antwerpen - straks over een minister moeten beschikken. Volgens Janssens is dat voor Antwerpen best opnieuw Kathleen Van Brempt.
Eerder, en ook maandag in De Morgen, liet sp.a-voorzitster Caroline Gennez verstaan dat dit niet zo verstandig is. "De regering wordt pas na de verkiezingen gevormd en pas daarna worden de ministers aangeduid. Ik raad mijn partijgenoten aan om hard te werken en stemmen te halen, anders krijgen we een rechtse regering", dixit Gennez.
Tobback haalde veel scherper uit naar zijn collega-socialisten. "Het is niet onfatsoenlijk om ambities te hebben, maar ik ben voor het standpunt van Stevaert, die altijd zei: wie kandidaat is, zal het nooit worden".
Mocht het van de burgemeester van Leuven afhangen, zou Freya Van den Bossche geen minister mogen worden. "Dit is niet alleen een kwestie van fatsoen. Het is lomp van de mensen te zeggen: stem en dan word ik minister. Het is dom van dat te doen"./.

Dus ruzie maken welke provincie nu al dan niet een rooie minister moet leveren en hoeveel % denken die pipo's zoal te halen bij de verkiezingen ? Denken die omhooggevallen rooie bonobo's nu echt dat ze nog in een regering zullen mogen zitten?

Gelukkig is Van Bremt de rooie lijsttrekster voor Europa er ook nog met een duidelijke en flink uitgewerkte versie van een armoedeplan en leest u met ons mee :

7 juni: Kathleen Van Brempt (SP-a)

We hebben Kathleen Van Brempt in de studio; lijsttrekker EU-parlement voorSP-a , lijstduwer op de Antwerpse lijst en Vlaams minister Mobiliteit, Sociale Economie en Gelijke Kansen.

Deel 1: Mobiliteit/ Doel
Deel 2: de achteruitgang van de sociaaldemocratie
Deel3: sociaal beleid (in Europa en Belgie)
Deel 4: Turkije, hoe democratisch is Europa en Verhofstadt

Deel 1: Mobiliteit / Doel
Kathleen Van Brempt geeft een repliek op de kritiek die Annick De Ridder (VLD) vorige week gaf in onze uitzending.”Vlaanderen heeft het dichtste wegennet van de EU. We willen de mensen alternatieven geven met openbaar vervoer. Heel bizar dat VLD de aanleg van een tramlijn in Mechelen niet steunt.”
“ Er is wel degelijk een duidelijke stijging van het aantal pasagiers van De Lijn. Maar het klopt dat we nog niet de omslag verwezenlijkt hebben voor woon-werk verkeer. Maar we hebben wel de stijging van de mobiliteit opgevangen met openbaar vervoer: in Holland is het aantal auto’s op de wegen de laatste jaren blijven stijgen, in Vlaanderen niet. “
“ Mijn beleid is niet aanbodgericht. Annick De Ridder zou er beter eens naar kijken, ik heb alleen vraaggericht gewerkt.”

Over Doel, waar de Vlaamse regering waarvan Kathleen Van Brempt deel van uitmaakt gewoon doorging met de afbraak (ondanks een eerder verleend woonrecht tot september 2009). De illegale afbraak werd 10 dagen geleden door de rechter verboden:
Kathleen Van Brempt zegt dat er verkeerde beslisingen genomen zijn in het verleden maar ontwijkt de verantwoordelijkheid van de regering waarvan ze deel uitmaakt en verwijst de zaak door naar de volgende legislatuur.
“De SP-a is geen grote voorstander van mega-projecten zoals het Saeftinghedok. Er moet eerst een consensus gevonden worden over wat er met het Saeftinghedok gebeurt vooraleer we verder gaan met afbreken“.

Deel 2: de achteruitgang van de sociaaldemocratie
“De socialisten hebben veel gedaan om het liberal beleid af te remmen maar zijn er ook een stuk in meegegaan en we brachten niet echt een alternatief. Nu doen we dat wel . We zijn de enige fractie in het Europees parlement die een herstelplan op tafel liggen heeft. Mijn bijdrage aan dat zogenaamde PES-manifesto ging over de Noordzeering. Dat is een groot plan om voor de noordzeekusten een band van windmolenparken aan te leggen die met elkaar verbonden zouden zijn. Men kan daarmee Europa tegen 2050 energie onafhankelijk maken. Dat is economisch ongelooflijk belangrijk ,maar bijna ogenblikkelijk vond VLD minister Ceysens het nodig om dat als onhaalbaar te bestempelen (zie ook Deel 4).”

Over de opkomst van het populisme: “Je moet van mij niet verwachten dat ik de weg op ga van LDD om stemmen te ronselen. Als we maar 13% halen bij de komende verkiezingen dan krijgen we niet alleen een rechtse coalitie, maar vooral een onbestuurbaar Vlaanderen. Ik kan mij niet inbeelden dat CD&V samen kan besturen met LDD. LDD is niet alleen rechts en populistisch, er scheelt toch ook iets mee. “

Deel 3: sociaal Europa en sociale politiek in Belgie
“We zijn voorstander van nationale sociale zekerheidssystemen; maar we willen ook een Europese richtlijn over een minumumloon. Dat moet geen bedrag in cijfer zijn (daarvoor verschilt de rijkdom en levensduurte van de lidstaten te veel) maar een percentage van het gemiddeld inkomen.”
“Europa heeft een leidersrol opgenomen in de strijd tegen de klimaatwijziging, maar om echt geloofwaardig te zijn moet ze hetzelfde doen in de strijd tegen de armoede.”
In verband met het werkloosheidsbeleid: “ik vind dat in principe een jonge gast moet werken als hij van school komt en dat hij geen uitkering moet krijgen tot het einde van zijn dagen. Dat is het beste voor hem en ook de beste manier om solidariteit te organiseren. Maar er zijn jongeren die niet in staat zijn om werk te vinden als ze van school komen. Ook een alleenstaande moeder moet je niet dwingen om een job aan te nemen waardoor ze amper meer verdient en haar kinderen bijna niet ziet. Voor hen moet je een kansenbeleid voeren. En dat doen we door bijvoorbeeld kinderopvang (bijna) kostenloos te maken.”.
“Er waren wrijvingen tussen SP-a en de vakbonden na het afsluiten van het generatiepakt, maar nu zijn de plooien gladgestreken.”

Deel 4: Turkije, democratisch gehalte van de Europese instellingen en Verhofstadt
“In verband met Turkije zeg ik ‘ja, maar’. In principe ben ik voor maar er moet nog aan een aantal voorwaarden voldaan worden. Het landbouwbeleid kan geen reden zijn om Turkije toegang te weigeren, het Europees landbouwbeleid is de afgelopen 10 jaar veel verbeterd. Het feit dat Turkije aan de rand van Europa ligt en bijvoorbeeld grenst aan Irak is wel een valabel argument.”

“Europa is absoluut niet ondemocratisch. Er is geen democratischer parlement in Europa dan het Europees. Maar het is bizar om te zien dat, hoe machtiger het Europees parlement wordt, hoe minder mensen gaan stemmen bij de Europese verkiezingen. “

“Wat Verhofstadt zegt over de investringen die in Europa moeten gebeuren zeggen wij al lang. Maar hij zegt niet genoeg: Hij zegt niets over armoede, niets over sociale zekerheid.”
“Verhofstadt is misschien wel geloofwaardig. maar de VLD is dat absoluut niet. Als ik zeg dat er moet geinvesteerd worden in de Noordzeering dan zegt Patricia Ceysens, mijn VLD -collega in de Vlaamse regering, onmidellijk dat Van Brempt zot is en dat het plan niet realistisch is.” “
Het is wel realistisch, ik zeg het al lang en Guy Verhofstadt zegt het nu ook.”

26-05-2009 om 23:29 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever