Svet

[Prospero]

da, to traže.

 

indijci kažu, koliko sam razumeo, da je taj uslov bio u originalnom rfp-u koji je daso prihvatio. prosto hoće da eventualne troškove prebace na daso, a daso je valjda tražio od francuske države da stoji iza njih kao garantor što su ovi odbili.

 

edit:

skoro je indijski kongres dobio izveštaj o lošem stanju u rv, gde je operativno sposobno 2/3 skvadrona, i gde se tek očekuje udar kad krene ubrzano izbacivanje ostataka mig-21 i 27. tu su naravno uek rusi da kažu da se su-30 baš dobro pokazao i da je zbog pada rublje idealna prilika za indijce da završe priču oko rafala (za koji očigledno nisu sigurni da su tehnološki sposobni da ga prave/održavaju) i ostanu na modernim su-27 derivatima koji im svakako završavaju posao. navodno, vojska i dalje hoće rafal ali novi ministar odbrane je dobar sa rusima...

Edited February 13, 2015 by Prospero

[Dagmar]

Bus plus u Malmeu
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=he28ZxCxD20

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PuSmRbU59lM

[bigvlada]

I’ve seen the secrets of TTIP, and it is built for corporations not citizens
Molly Scott Cato

As an MEP I’m party to the transatlantic trade deal’s inner workings. I’m sworn to secrecy, but this much I can say: TTIP is undemocratic

 

US chief trade negotiator Dan Mullaney, left, and his EU couterpart Ignacio Garcia Bercero, prior to talks on the TTIP. Photograph: Virginia Mayo/AP

Wednesday 4 February 2015 16.07 GMT

It appears that, even though I am past 50, my opportunities to become a spy have not expired. This is because, as an MEP, I have now been granted privileged access to the European parliament restricted reading room to explore documents relating to the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) deal. But before I had the right to see such “top secret” documents, which are restricted from the gaze of most EU citizens, I was required to sign a document of some 14 pages, reminding me that “EU institutions are a valuable target” and of the dangers of espionage. Crucially, I had to agree not to share any of the contents with those I represent.

The delightful parliamentary staff required me to leave even the smallest of my personal items in a locked cupboard, as they informed me how tiny cameras can be these days. Like a scene from a James Bond film, they then took me through the security door into a room with secure cabinets from which the documents were retrieved. I was not at any point left alone.

This week hundreds of protesters against TTIP have descended on the European parliament. They are quite rightly concerned about the threat that this treaty poses to the British government’s ability to conduct its affairs in their interests. On a range of issues, from food safety standards and animal welfare to public services and financial regulation, there are deep concerns that the harmonisation of standards across the Atlantic really means a reduction of standards on both sides.

But how are we to know for certain? All discussions about TTIP have been hypothetical, since the negotiations are taking place in secret. In order to read even brief notes of what has been discussed I have to be reminded of my duties not to undertake espionage for foreign powers. Repeated complaints about secrecy from my fellow Green members have resulted in our being admitted to the restricted reading room but we are still not able to share what we discover there with our constituents or with journalists. What we do know is that 92% of those involved in the consultations have been corporate lobbyists. Of the 560 lobby encounters that the commission had, 520 were with business lobbyists and only 26 (4.6%) were with public interest groups. This means that, for every encounter with a trade union or consumer group, there were 20 with companies and industry federations.
This transatlantic trade deal is a full-frontal assault on democracy
George Monbiot


Read more

What I am able to reveal from my visit to the library is that I left without any sense of reassurance either that the process of negotiating this trade deal is democratic, or that the negotiators are operating on behalf of citizens. The whole process, from the implicit accusation of industrial espionage, to the recognition about who is actually engaged in the negotiations, makes it clear that this is a corporate discussion, not a democratic one. I picture a room full of bureaucrats trying to find ways to facilitate the business of the world’s most powerful companies, many of which have a turnover larger than the economic activity of some EU member states.

So why would anyone want a world that contains a giant trading area stretching from Alaska to the Black Sea? I think the vision arises from a sense of the need to order and control; the sense that uniformity is equivalent to security. But it is also clear that the decisions about what this uniform system of regulation and trade would look like are devised by corporations whose very DNA is the profit motive, and which are legally required to serve shareholders at the expense of all others.

Culturally, as a Green, I would always be opposed to this vision and therefore this treaty. However, looking kindly on the impulse to create such standardisation, I try to imagine that the rules were ones I would be happy to see: high standards of animal welfare, bans on dangerous pesticides, financial regulation designed to achieve stability, to name a few.

The TTIP negotiations are taking up a great deal of time at a moment when the European project seems threatened on numerous fronts: the debt crisis, climate change, and the war in Ukraine, to name but three. I would question this investment of resources at this time in a treaty that seems doomed never to achieve the political support it will require. It is also costing a considerable amount of money. The question of the costs associated with the TTIP deal was an issue I raised with the commission, and something I am at liberty to disclose. Since July 2013, there have been seven rounds of negotiations, alternating between Brussels and Washington. The costs incurred so far range from €60,000 for a round in Brussels to up to €180,000 for a round in Washington.

My visit to the parliamentary library was an interesting reminder of the limitations of democratic accountability in the globalised, corporatised world of 2015, where the citizen is sidelined. Even as a representative of 5 million, my role is mainly to be a consultee; a stakeholder.

We hear much criticism of the “nanny state”, but the world according to TTIP is more like Big Brother Corporation, where individual preferences are swept aside in the onward march of progress and order. It is the disturbing and unsettling worldview that David Korten envisaged in his 1995 book, When Corporations Rule the World. At the time the title seemed rhetorical; outlandish even. It seems considerably less so today.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/feb/04/secrets-ttip-corporations-not-citizens-transatlantic-trade-deal

[akibono]

Neviđeno je koliko ovih dana rusi kroz medije troluju ove probleme između indije i francuske oko konačnog dogovora za Rafale...
Red 'puca rafal poso garant' pa red 'evo spremnih suhoja u garaži, ključ u ruke' 
Trolovanje je naravno mnogo više vezano za rusko-francuske odnose i Mistral nosače nego za konkretne avione.
 
Sa druge strane izgleda da će da legnu pare za Egipat i njihovo nabavljanje Rafala, seča glava na plaži onim nesretnicima i naknadno bombardovanje druge zemlje su im odlično upali... win-win situacija, taman i Indija da se malo pogura... Ljudska prava nisu uvek bitna, naročito ako si 'faktor stabilnosti' u regionu  <_< 
 

Egypt, France to conclude €5.2 billion deal for Rafale jets

French Defence Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian arrived in Cairo on Monday to sign a €5.2 billion contract for the sale of 24 Rafale fighter jets to Egypt, a move that will finalise the first foreign order of the French-built warplanes.

The deal comes despite concerns over France’s decision to sell arms to a government accused of multiple human rights abuses.

Le Drian arrived in Egypt’s capital Cairo to sign the contract, which France hopes will lead to further sales of its premier combat jet.

The deal is a boon to cash-strapped France, which is diverting three jets away from its own air force for the delivery due later this year.

French President François Hollande said the agreement – clinched in only three months of negotiation – provided Cairo with "a quality aircraft" and was important for Egypt "taking into account the threats existing around the country."

With Libya wracked by instability to the west and the threat from Islamic State group-linked militants to the east, Egypt plays a key role in providing stability in a troubled region, French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said on Sunday.

France is also hoping the deal will act as a catalyst to unblock hoped-for sales to other countries.

Eric Trappier, chief executive of Dassault Aviation, which manufactures the jet, said he was "very confident" that three years of exclusive talks with India on the sale of 126 Rafale jets worth 12 billion euros would soon result in a deal.

http://www.france24.com/en/20150216-france-egypt-sign-deal-sale-rafale-fighter-jets/

 

Edited February 17, 2015 by akibono

[borris_]

Izgleda da ce ova prodaja Egiptu odblokirati i druge.

Sledeci je Qatar (36 aviona) i pregovori su pri kraju. 

Tu je i Malezija (16 aviona) ali tu je i konkurenija sa Eurofighterom.

I na kraju tu je Vuiev brat (60 aviona) za zamjenu za Mirage 2000.

Edited February 17, 2015 by borris_

[Shan Jan]

Ili su im to samo porasle nade.

[Muwan]

Francuska ima reputaciju da joj nije problem da zarad dnevne politike ne isporuči uredno plaćeno naoružanje, tako da ako svi ti potencijalni kupci hoće da se kockaju samo napred

[bigvlada]

Francuska ima reputaciju da joj nije problem da zarad dnevne politike ne isporuči uredno plaćeno naoružanje, tako da ako svi ti potencijalni kupci hoće da se kockaju samo napred

 

Nije ni Britaniji to strana rabota, istina nešto ranije, ali sa daleko gorim posledicama.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Agincourt_(1913)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Erin

[bigvlada]

In Memory Of The Liberties Lost In The War on Piracy
By Rick Falkvinge
on February 2, 2015

In order to prevent us from discussing and sharing interesting things, the copyright industry has successfully eliminated civil liberties online. But it was all down to a wrong and stupid business assumption in the first place.

There are a couple of things we of the net generation knew all along in the so-called piracy debate that started.

The first of those things is that the copyright industry had a medical case of severe rectocranial inversion when they made the sloppy business assumption that an unlicensed copy of a movie or a piece of music was equivalent to a lost sale.

The second of those things is that it wouldn’t have mattered even if it were true (which it wasn’t), because no industry gets to eliminate fundamental civil liberties like the private letter, completely regardless of whether the continued existence of civil liberties means they can make money or not.

So we of the net generation knew all along that the copyright industry was not only wrong and stupid, but also that their assertion was – or should have been – irrelevant in the first place.

However, the copyright industry was absolutely determined to prevent people from discussing and sharing interesting things (which is what file-sharing amounts to), damn the consequences to civil liberties and society at large to hell. If you put it this way – what kind of measures would it take to physically and legally prevent people from discussing the things they want in private? – you should arrive at conclusions which make hairs rise on your arms. The measures required would amount to something beyond Orwellian, and that’s exactly what the copyright industry demanded.

Unfortunately and tragically, the politicians didn’t understand what the copyright monopoly was asking for. They regarded the Internet as some kind of novel and regulatable toy, and not as the space for private correspondence that it is. When you mistake a private conversation arena for something completely different, and regulate it like any ordinary commercial toy, disaster to civil liberties is just around the corner.

That’s exactly what happened. But what would you expect when lawmakers get their e-mail printed for them by their secretaries (yes, really), and still think they understand what the internet is.

Last week, we saw that the entire initial business assumption – that unlicensed manufacturing of music and movies had been the root cause of the collapse of profit – was utterly wrong. With unlicensed file-sharing reduced to a mere 4% in Norway, without a significant effect on revenues, it’s trivial to observe that file-sharing was never a business problem in the first place. To the contrary, we of the net generation assert confidently that sharing has a positive – not negative – correlation with sales.

So the copyright industry has successfully lobbied for laws that ban people from sharing and discussing interesting things in private, and done so from the sloppiest conceivable of false business assumptions. As a result of this dimwitted business sense combined with diehard foolhardiness, we’re left with nowhere to talk or walk in private.

It’s helpful to remember what rights have been lost to this dumb crusade, when you compare to the analog equivalent:

The right to communicate anonymously has been lost, due to the copyright industry’s lobbying. This was so fundamental a right – putting up anonymous posters – that the United States would not exist without it (see the Federalist Papers which were anonymously posted everywhere).

We no longer have the right to modify, rebuild, and repurpose our own possessions, because we may do so with an intent of discussing interesting things with our friends.

Mail carriers no longer have messenger immunity, something that had otherwise been a sacred constant between the Roman Empire and the Dimwitted Copyright Industry.

We no longer have the legal right to point at or give directions to interesting places if what happens in that location breaks a law somewhere. (Just to illustrate the special treatment of the copyright industry here, compare this to the fact that Wikipedia has a helpful page on nuclear weapons design.)

The copyright industry has been given the right to write its own laws thanks to an intentional legal loophole that prohibits us from circumventing digital restriction measures, even when those measures prevent still-legal uses of our own possessions.

The right to send private letters is being lost, due to a long-standing tirade. The copyright industry has successfully lobbied the largest correspondence carriers today – Facebook and the like – to just ban anything they don’t like. Not long ago, if you posted a link to The Pirate Bay on Facebook, you would be interrupted by a message saying that you had discussed a forbidden subject. Imagine that happening in an old-fashioned phonecall or a conversation in the street, and you’ll realize what a horrifying development it is.

A diary has extensive protection in law against search and seizure in most legislations. However, a computer – which is far more sensitive – does not. After all, it may contain a copy of a bad movie.

The right to be presumed innocent has been lost, thanks to the copyright industry’s lobbying for things like Data Retention – laws that log all our conversations pre-emptively, whom we talk to and from where and when and how, just in case it was found out later that the copyright industry didn’t like what we discussed.

The right to have laws enforced by dedicated law enforcement has been lost – the copyright industry has successfully lobbied for laws that give them a fast lane past the slow judiciary with its irritating “due process” and other nonsense, when it comes to forcefully enforcing their commercial monopolies against dangerous single mothers. The copyright industry specifically intended to use this in combination with Data Retention above.

Did you know the copyright industry has even sued Internet Service Providers with the demand to install wiretapping-and-censorship equipment in the deepest of their switches, effectively demanding to wiretap and censor an entire country? We’re not talking about the NSA or GCHQ here, but a private dimwitted industry that are going on a crusade against its evil customers?

This is just a short list of examples. There are many more.

And these civil liberties – vital, fundamental civil liberties that aren’t passing from our parents to our children – were lost because of a damn dimwitted sloppy business assumption that turned out to be 180 degrees wrong. It’s beyond depressing. It’s enraging.

 

http://torrentfreak.com/in-memory-of-the-liberties-lost-in-the-war-on-piracy-150202/

[x500]

Francuska ima reputaciju da joj nije problem da zarad dnevne politike ne isporuči uredno plaćeno naoružanje, tako da ako svi ti potencijalni kupci hoće da se kockaju samo napred

Beowl,

"Ko umije njemu dvije", ima primera da su narucioci sami uzimali robu bez otpremnice ;)

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherbourg_Project

 

Pozdrav,

X500

[Eraserhead]

"Caracas (AFP) - Masked intelligence service agents arrested the mayor of Caracas on Thursday, his wife and opposition figures said, in what appears to be the latest crackdown on criticism of the socialist government..."

 

http://www.businessinsider.com/afp-venezuela-arrests-caracas-opposition-mayor-2015-2

 

Izgleda da se Maduru blizi kraj.

[Budja]

"Caracas (AFP) - Masked intelligence service agents arrested the mayor of Caracas on Thursday, his wife and opposition figures said, in what appears to be the latest crackdown on criticism of the socialist government..."

 

http://www.businessinsider.com/afp-venezuela-arrests-caracas-opposition-mayor-2015-2

 

Izgleda da se Maduru blizi kraj.

 

Slazem se.

Ni sudjenje Lopezu, nakon 9 meseci hapsenja nisu poceli a sada hapsi sa imbecilnim objasnjenjima. 

Sto bi rekao Anduril, hapsenje gradonacelnika delegitimise rezim koji sada moze da padne i na ulici jer za drugo nije.

[Eraserhead]

Da, sto je najgore ni on sam nema nikakvu strategiju i ovo ce verovatno da se zavrsi nekim drzavnim udarim ili gradjanskim ratom u kome ce da budalu skrate za glavu. Scenario gde on odlazi na izborima je malo verovatan.

[Zaz_pi]

SAD su nezadovoljne sa Nemcima:

 

Poverty in Germany ‘at Record High’

Poverty in Germany is at its highest since the reunification of the country in 1990, with 12.5 million residents now classified as ‘poor’, according to a study by a German welfare organisation.

[bigvlada]

Short on machine guns, German army armed turrets with broomsticks
After big-ticket drone program, others fall flat, Bundeswehr is short on basics.

by Sean Gallagher - Feb 20, 2015 5:30am CET

None of the GTK Boxer armored combat vehicles Germany sent to a Norwegian exercise for NATO's new rapid reaction force had machine guns on their remotely-controlled turrets. Instead, they had broomsticks painted to resemble gun barrels.
Heldt

Late last year, as the German Bundeswehr was considering rebooting its expensive, failed Euro Hawk drone program, the army of the country with the fourth largest economy in the world fielded its newest armored vehicles in a major military exercise in Norway with broomsticks painted black and lashed in place of missing machine gun barrels. That detail was part of a German Defense Ministry report leaked to Germany's public television network ARD that exposed widespread shortages of basic combat equipment.

According to the report, the Bundeswehr units deployed as part of a test of NATO's Rapid Response Force in September were far from combat-ready: they deployed with less than a quarter of the night vision gear required. The units were also missing 41 percent of the P8 pistols and 31 percent of the MG3 man-portable machine guns they were supposed to deploy with. And none of the GTK Boxer armored vehicles that deployed were equipped with their primary armament—the 12.7 mm M3M heavy machine gun.

The NATO Rapid Reaction Force is supposed to be made up of 4,000 troops and related equipment that can be deployed in times of crisis within 48 hours. The force was assembled as a response to the growing crisis in Eastern Ukraine, where rebels alleged to be receiving material and perhaps even direct military support from Russia pushed back the Ukrainian military even as a cease-fire was supposed to begin.

According to a Defense Ministry spokesperson, Germany's contingent for the reaction force was fully equipped two weeks ago, and the vehicles that the Bundeswehr deployed to Norway didn't need to be armed—they were serving only as mobile command center vehicles. The spokesman told the German English-language news site The Local, "Why the soldiers still simulated a weapons system is professionally incomprehensible."

But the German military as a whole suffers both from a shortage of equipment and general disrepair. Germany spends less than most European countries as a percentage of its gross domestic product on defense, and as the chairman of Germany's Green Party, Cem Özdemir, noted in September, most of the Bundeswehr's equipment "could come from the junkyard," according to an article in Neue Osnabrücker Zeitung—and that is more from poor management of spending, he insisted, than underfunding.

The Euro Hawk is perhaps the most high-technology manifestation of that failure of management. The drone system, developed by Northrop Grumman from an older version of the US military's Global Hawk unmanned aerial system (UAS), cost Germany nearly a billion dollars before its cancellation in 2013, after it was determined that Euro Hawk would not have the anti-collision capabilities required to get airworthiness certification from European Union aviation officials.

In an effort to get a benefit out of the sensor system that made up nearly a third of that cost, the Defense Ministry tried adapting it to other manned aircraft, but the effort failed. Now that the Obama administration is moving for the sale of US drone systems overseas, Germany may instead buy a newer version of the Global Hawk to carry the system.

 

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/02/short-on-machine-guns-german-army-armed-turrets-with-broomsticks/