Sweden -- Yes, Sweden -- Leads Anti-Immigration Shift
155 replies, posted
[QUOTE=gastyne;46658241]Having a reasonable immigration policy is not extreme right wing.[/QUOTE]
Yeah sure, but a really strict one is.
You can't disagree with a "reasonable" policy, everything else is by definition unreasonable. SD is for much stricter immigration laws, whether that's reasonable or not can be debated (it's not though).
[QUOTE=Impact1986;46652148]All that I read is that they want to limit immigration to their country, not outright banning it. For me this isn't an Anti-Immigration policy. And it is not a far right policy at all. Otherwise every country would be far right, including the USA, Germany, Switzerland etc etc etc...
It is all just bashing people who have different opnions than the far left by labeling them racist and Nazis, immediately bringing people who are undecided to not listen to them because they don't want to be labeled racist or Nazis themselves. It is a big mockery of democracy, where one side silents the other passively.[/QUOTE]
Their policies look good on paper. Lowered immigration is something we really need to look into, we ARE letting too many people in here and that is exactly what SD "wants" to fix - but that doesn't eliminate the fact that their politicians are[I] fucking scumbags.[/I]
[url]http://nyheter24.se/maktkamp24/776458-24-vidriga-asikter-som-sd-star-for-och-som-du-bor-kanna-till-innan-riksdagsvalet[/url]
(In Swedish, but these are actual things that the party members have said, with the context they said it in. Google Translate is pretty terrible).
The party itself might not stand for racism, islamophobia or homophobia, but their members sure as hell preach it. And I wouldn't want obvious hypocrisy to have any kind of say in politics.
Hell, it's one thing for a politicican to flipflop and be a bit off, but this is just pure blatant black and white clear as crystal hypocrisy.
[QUOTE=Coyoteze;46659407]Their policies look good on paper. Lowered immigration is something we really need to look into, we ARE letting too many people in here and that is exactly what SD "wants" to fix - but that doesn't eliminate the fact that their politicians are[I] fucking scumbags.[/I]
[URL]http://nyheter24.se/maktkamp24/776458-24-vidriga-asikter-som-sd-star-for-och-som-du-bor-kanna-till-innan-riksdagsvalet[/URL]
(In Swedish, but these are actual things that the party members have said, with the context they said it in. Google Translate is pretty terrible).
[B]The party itself might not stand for racism, islamophobia or homophobia,[/B] but their members sure as hell preach it. And I wouldn't want obvious hypocrisy to have any kind of say in politics.
Hell, it's one thing for a politicican to flipflop and be a bit off, but this is just pure blatant black and white clear as crystal hypocrisy.[/QUOTE]
To be honest, there's plenty of that.
[video=youtube;2CpIy26x-MI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CpIy26x-MI[/video]
and
[URL]http://www.interasistmen.se/irm-listar-sd/[/URL]
[QUOTE=Coyoteze;46659515]Well this just kinda confirms what I said. What Jimmie is saying here is pretty logical (at least for the first bit, then he gradually lost it). Lower immigration in general, help those who are already here instead of creating segregation and ghettos. That is what the SD [I]policies [/I]are. And that's fine with me.
It's just that their [I]members [/I]don't at all seem to support their own views.[/QUOTE]
The link shows numerous politicians displaying their brown views. Many have seats in parliament and municipality councils. A fancy paper of policies means jack shit when homophobia and racism runs rampant.
[QUOTE=VikCreamCake;46659488]To be honest, there's plenty of that.
[video=youtube;2CpIy26x-MI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CpIy26x-MI[/video]
and
[URL]http://www.interasistmen.se/irm-listar-sd/[/URL][/QUOTE]
Well this just kinda confirms what I said. What Jimmie is saying here is pretty logical (at least for the first bit, then he gradually lost it). Lower immigration in general, help those who are already here instead of creating segregation and ghettos. That is what the SD [I]policies [/I]are. And that's fine with me.
It's just that their [I]members [/I]don't at all seem to support their own views.
[QUOTE=Swebonny;46653157]Okay, say it was as easy as deporting every immigrant that commits a crime. Do you think this solves the issue of segregation in society?
No it doesn't. It's clearly up to the politicians to do things. Sure you can fault the individual, but omitting the politicians from the blame is wrong I think.[/QUOTE]
it's probably equally as wrong as omitting the individual from the blame. but the point was that the answer for everything isn't for the politicians to try to integrate communities, because that would still leave plenty of immigrants that are problematic to the country they live in. politicians do need to take action, but different people warrant different actions.
[QUOTE=Folstream;46656257]Honestly I don't know how accurate "far-right" is to describe SD. In many ways they are more of a center-party with right leaning views on harsher sentences for crimes, increased defence spending and restrictions on immigration. [B]They have left leaning views on the walfare state with decreased senior citizen taxes and increased unemployment benefits just to give a few examples[/B].[/QUOTE]
and did they even try to fulfill that commitment? no, they voted down the social democrats proposition on doing exactly this and instead forced the government for re-election. get real for fuck sakes
[QUOTE=Mooe94;46659793]and did they even try to fulfill that commitment? no, they voted down the social democrats proposition on doing exactly this and instead forced the government for re-election. get real for fuck sakes[/QUOTE]
I think they did that because they were sick of being constantly ignored.
I think the thing that really worries the most people when it comes to SD is not the fact that they want to cut down on immigration due to economical reasons. Economical reasons are at least reasons that you can look upon and see why they think it is a legit reason to do so. Though studies conducted on the subject actually shows, depending on the immigrated people, that economic growth can occur as a result of immigration ([url]http://www.migrationsinfo.se/[/url]). Granted, the website that compiles this data lables themselves as "green and liberal", the data comes from sites like [url]http://www.scb.se/[/url], [url]http://www.migrationsverket.se/[/url], and [url]http://www.socialstyrelsen.se/[/url]. It is true that integration it is not a lightning quick process, and it is not always successful, it is a known issue, even since before SD.
The thing of concern is that SD is a xenophobic party. Denying that is denying the very definition of xenophobia, and also denying the writings of SD themselves ([url]http://sverigedemokraterna.se/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/principprogrammet2014_webb.pdf[/url]). They believe that people native to Sweden carries some sort of innate "swedish" identity that has to be preserved. They fear for the swedish cultural heritage, whatever that might be. They want to strengthen a nationalistic character in people. There is just such an overwhelming amount of evidence that speaks for their xenophobia and nationalistic ways, not only in their official manifesto, but also from the party members themselves ([url]http://www.interasistmen.se/irm-listar-sd/[/url]).
For me the whole creation of a nationalistic, typical "swede" is not only racist, but dangerous. If SD wants to cut down immigration to an absolute minimum, and at the same time create a strong nationcalistic "swedish" culture built on oppressing other peoples cultures, religions, and even languages it will surely lead to strong racism. Slippery slope argument, I know, though I'd like to argue it is sort of a natural effect of this kind of behaviour. Creating a group that is seen as being superior automatically creates the inferiour group. Personally I think this is objectionable beyond belief.
It is important however, to point out that SD is not a "one topic" party, even though immigration is their biggest topic of address. Their political agenda covers as much as any other party's might. They have opinions about things that for instance I agree with. Animal rights and better animal husbandry for example ([url]http://sverigedemokraterna.se/var-politik/djurskydd/[/url]).
It is also important to acknowledge the fact that the other major parties in Sweden treats SD in an objectional manner. Like excluding them from meetings, and refusing to debate immigration and integration with them in a democratic, civilized manner. I can understand why the other parties refuse to collaborate with SD, however I don't understand why they refuse to have the debate with them. It's not the democratic way to just ignore them.
As a conclusion, my personal opinion is that SD's beliefs and opinions about immigration, nationalism, culture, religion, e.t.c. are objectionable. Not because of the economic reasons they might provide (although I do question those as well), but because of the ethical and humanitarian issues that follow with racism, class construcion, and exclusion of people. Again, I stress how this is my personal opinion, but I urge people to not close their eyes to what is actually written and recorded about this party and it's members.
[editline]7th December 2014[/editline]
Also, sorry about most links being on swedish :/
Im okay with this
[QUOTE=Joffy;46657752]This pretty much.
I've been unemployed for 1 and a half year now. I'm not gonna pretend I'm a good job hunter(I'm really not) but I really did try to get a job and I still really want to get one.
I went to the unemployment office last year and they didn't really help me in any way whatsoever. They suggested some jobs which I had for the most part already written to, but that was about it. The only way to get any money from being unemployed(for me atleast) was to sign up for a programm where you basically went to the unemployment office and searched for jobs from 9 in the morning to 4 in the afternoon every weekday.
You also had to search all over Sweden. If you refused a job because the job was in say Stockholm for example and you lived in Halmstad, they would most likely refuse to pay you. The same could happen if you also didn't search enough jobs. After about a little more than half a year I gave up and just started studying some basic math to get ready for university.
It still feels really bad though, since I have to leech of my mother at the age of 20.[/QUOTE]
Ok, here's my position over this as a (prospective) immigrant.
University is free for you, dude. Like, to be perfectly honest, there is no reason whatsoever why you shouldn't be studying already, there's 3 year degrees in Sweden and that's more than enough to land you a job anywhere, like literally anywhere, anywhere in the EU and anywhere in the world probably. It is VERY unlikely that you'll be self sufficient with the first job you ever get, that's something that holds true in any country, but having a degree makes you more competitive and thus more likely to get a job.
The immigrants per se aren't really a competition to you, immigrants mostly work low wage jobs, and mostly in things where being fluent in Swedish is not really relevant, they're your dishwashers, cooks, janitors, maids, gardeners. They work minimum wage, full time, to make ends meet. As a Swede, there are very, very few immigrants that actually compete with you in terms of jobs, those are mostly skilled workers from third world countries, people who left their country for an X reason and are just looking for a place that appreciates their skills more. Even then, you have an advantage over them that they never will have. They're not from around there, they tend to have basically no referrals to vouch for them when they're going to apply for a job, they need to learn the language, they need to work more to make ends meet.
[QUOTE=Mooe94;46659793]and did they even try to fulfill that commitment? no, they voted down the social democrats proposition on doing exactly this and instead forced the government for re-election. get real for fuck sakes[/QUOTE]
Woah man calm down. You should know that SD didn't vote for the opposition budget because it was any better but because they are sick and tired of being treated like shit by all the other parties. They even said themselves that if an Alliance government pops up they would bring it down if it wouldn't restrict immigration.
Everyone is whining about SD letting their voters down on senior citizens tax and increased unemployment benefits but if they had let the government budget through people would have whined about SD not delivering on their right-wing promises such as decreased tax for labor, nuclear power and RUT.
From that perspective it's a lose-lose situation but they weren't voting for what they thought was the "best" budget here.
Hårt mot hårt.
[QUOTE=Chili Banan;46659829]For me the whole creation of a nationalistic, typical "swede" is not only racist, but dangerous. If SD wants to cut down immigration to an absolute minimum, and at the same time create a strong nationcalistic "swedish" culture built on oppressing other peoples cultures, religions, and even languages it will surely lead to strong racism. Slippery slope argument, I know, though I'd like to argue it is sort of a natural effect of this kind of behaviour. Creating a group that is seen as being superior automatically creates the inferiour group. Personally I think this is objectionable beyond belief.[/QUOTE]
honestly have the swedish ever in their history done this
the british and belgians went and colonized a bunch of black people, but the swedish haven't done anything besides invading a few countries prior to the 19th century.
there won't be a slippery slope of descent into racism and xenophobia if you cut immigration
[QUOTE=Deng;46660575]honestly have the swedish ever in their history done this
the british and belgians went and colonized a bunch of black people, but the swedish haven't done anything besides invading a few countries prior to the 19th century.
there won't be a slippery slope of descent into racism and xenophobia if you cut immigration[/QUOTE]
First off, I'm not sure if this is what you mean, but Sweden did engage in slavery ([url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_slave_trade[/url]), so we do have a history of racism and what is deemed as "swedish" and what is not.
Second, I think you are missing the point and not reading fully what I wrote. If we cut down on immigration we are going to have a small amount of immigrated people coming in. Then, simultaneously SD wants to - in lack of a better expression - reinstate nationalism. This would be, I assume, by reforming the education program and changing the curriculums and all that.
What is going to happen, is that they want to create this "normal, good" norm-ish culture of the swede. Like for instance, a swede is christian.
If we have immigration, which we will still have if SD in their current form hypothetically comes to power, then there is going to be one clear majority and a - in their eyes - superior group. The "swede group". The norm. When you have one superior group, an inferior group is, unintentionally or not, created.
I realise I may have worded this quite poorly, but I am in a hurry. If this is not what you meant, please elaborate.
[QUOTE=Chili Banan;46660727]First off, I'm not sure if this is what you mean, but Sweden did engage in slavery ([url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_slave_trade[/url]), so we do have a history of racism and what is deemed as "swedish" and what is not.
[/QUOTE]
We also pretty much invented eugenics and racial biology on an institutional level. The State Institute for Racial Biology of Sweden performed forced sterilization into the 70s.
[QUOTE=Chili Banan;46660727]Then, simultaneously SD wants to - in lack of a better expression - reinstate nationalism. This would be, I assume, by reforming the education program and changing the curriculums and all that.
What is going to happen, is that they want to create this "normal, good" norm-ish culture of the swede. Like for instance, a swede is christian.
If we have immigration, which we will still have if SD in their current form hypothetically comes to power, then there is going to be one clear majority and a - in their eyes - superior group. The "swede group". The norm. When you have one superior group, an inferior group is, unintentionally or not, created.
I realise I may have worded this quite poorly, but I am in a hurry. If this is not what you meant, please elaborate.[/QUOTE]
Where is all this slippery slope regarding SD coming from though? How is SD going to brainwash kids in school to hate foreigners?
I honestly don't understand why everyone is so afraid of SD. Some of their members have said some quite disturbing stuff, but do people honestly fear such ideas actually going into parliament? Not to mention that there are a lot of immigrants who support SD, t.ex. the Assyrians... As far as I can tell, most of SD doesn't want immigrants to be removed. They just want proper integration and a plan to reduce the current large intake because it is not sustainable.
Many younger people with xenophobic ideals who aren't just edgy teens carry their beliefs on the premise that many immigrants do not make a good effort to integrate into society. How I see it, being able to provide better help to the immigrants that Sweden already has (+ a reasonable number of new immigrants -- not the current rate) should, in the end, only reduce the amount of xenophobia and "racism". An immigrant trying to assimilate into Swedish society should find themselves being treated with more respect.
[QUOTE=Big Bang;46660166]Ok, here's my position over this as a (prospective) immigrant.
University is free for you, dude. Like, to be perfectly honest, there is no reason whatsoever why you shouldn't be studying already, there's 3 year degrees in Sweden and that's more than enough to land you a job anywhere, like literally anywhere, anywhere in the EU and anywhere in the world probably. It is VERY unlikely that you'll be self sufficient with the first job you ever get, that's something that holds true in any country, but having a degree makes you more competitive and thus more likely to get a job.
The immigrants per se aren't really a competition to you, immigrants mostly work low wage jobs, and mostly in things where being fluent in Swedish is not really relevant, they're your dishwashers, cooks, janitors, maids, gardeners. They work minimum wage, full time, to make ends meet. As a Swede, there are very, very few immigrants that actually compete with you in terms of jobs, those are mostly skilled workers from third world countries, people who left their country for an X reason and are just looking for a place that appreciates their skills more. Even then, you have an advantage over them that they never will have. They're not from around there, they tend to have basically no referrals to vouch for them when they're going to apply for a job, they need to learn the language, they need to work more to make ends meet.[/QUOTE]
True, I'm probably just being over dramatic because of the situation I'm in, but how is it a good idea to say that all swedes should get high paying jobs that require a university degree and that all immigrants should be happy with doing all the dirty work?
I know several people who do jobs that would be considered easy and dirty, but they are pretty happy with doing it. I would be aswell, atleast for a couple of years.
Wouldn't this way of doing things would just create an underclass consisting of only people from differing ethnicities? That hardly seems like a good or moral way of doing things.
[QUOTE=Garrot;46660799]We also pretty much invented eugenics and racial biology on an institutional level. The State Institute for Racial Biology of Sweden performed forced sterilization into the 70s.[/QUOTE]
As far as I know, Sweden [I]still[/I] had mandatory sterilization for transgender people just a few years ago.
[QUOTE=HarryHy;46660935]Where is all this slippery slope regarding SD coming from though? How is SD going to brainwash kids in school to hate foreigners?
I honestly don't understand why everyone is so afraid of SD. Some of their members have said some quite disturbing stuff, but do people honestly fear such ideas actually going into parliament? Not to mention that there are a lot of immigrants who support SD, t.ex. the Assyrians... As far as I can tell, most of SD doesn't want immigrants to be removed. They just want proper integration and a plan to reduce the current large intake because it is not sustainable.
Many younger people with xenophobic ideals who aren't just edgy teens carry their beliefs on the premise that many immigrants do not make a good effort to integrate into society. How I see it, being able to provide better help to the immigrants that Sweden already has (+ a reasonable number of new immigrants -- not the current rate) should, in the end, only reduce the amount of xenophobia and "racism". An immigrant trying to assimilate into Swedish society should find themselves being treated with more respect.[/QUOTE]
As I said, I am aware that a slippery slope argument is being made, though it was more fot illustrating purposes rather than a prophecy.
They are not going to brainwash any kids, don't put words in my mouth. What I said is that, if they would make this change into reinstating a nationalistic culture, the school would probably be a good place to start. Passing on values and norms through school is not brainwashing. Not today, not tomorrow, if this change occurs. What it is, is just a shift in what is deemed as right and "normal" and what is not on a governmental level. Same as with all schools everywhere today.
People are afraid of SD because of their values. Yes people do fear such ideology and ideals having power in our government and society. If you cannot understand that people might be afraid of something that is what SD is, I'm not sure you're entirely educated about SD. Read their manifesto, or Wikipedia, or visit interasistmen.se and read what they want and what ideals and values they stand for.
Also, they DO want to send already integrated people away, if they deem that these people got their citizenship in a "false" manner. They do not approve of dual-citizenship either.
I understand how you may be thinking with the integration bit, if fewer get in, we can integrate them better. It's a fair argument, though I get the feeling you aren't fully reading what I wrote. This small portion of immigrants would clash with the "how should a swede be" norm that they are preaching. I'm going to repeat this again, having a norm - a set of values - automatically creates a counter-norm, whether intentionally or not.
Say the norm is "it's normal to like apples", this creates an exclusion from the norm, the people who don't like apples.
In the same way, the creation of the "non-swede" occurs when you define what being swedish is. SD more or less wants to greatly narrow the window that allows people to be part of our society.
As I've also said before, it is not the democratic way how SD is being excluded in debates and such.
I apologise for any spelling errors or lack of structure, I'm on my phone and it is constantly trying to correct me.
[QUOTE=gastyne;46658241]Having a reasonable immigration policy is not extreme right wing.[/QUOTE]
What is far right-wing is constantly changing the goalposts. Britain has the strictest immigration in the EU by far, and yet we still have mainstream political parties arguing that it should be even stricter- to the point where UKIP, until a few years ago, wanted a total ban on any and all immigration for 5 whole years (an entire term in Parliament). If Sweden makes its process stricter, the right-wing parties will argue for it to be even stricter.
[QUOTE=ROFLBURGER;46656981]gosh you guys need to lighten up
[editline]40[/editline]
but really I don't care what language you speak, far left wing or far right wing is always bad[/QUOTE]
Why is the far-left wing always bad?
[QUOTE=Explosions;46661451]Why is the far-left wing always bad?[/QUOTE]
Communism
[QUOTE=Explosions;46661451]Why is the far-left wing always bad?[/QUOTE]
You don't need to look far, ANTIFA for example, bombing houses of SD politicians, constantly disrupting peacefull protests etc etc.
Infact, left wing extremists have done far more terrorist acts than any right one, and is also considered one of the largest threats to state security by SÄPO, the Swedish Security Police tasked with counter-terrorism amongst other things.
[QUOTE=Explosions;46661451]Why is the far-left wing always bad?[/QUOTE]
same reason the far-right wing is
[QUOTE=The fox;46661495]You don't need to look far, ANTIFA for example, bombing houses of SD politicians, constantly disrupting peacefull protests etc etc.
Infact, left wing extremists have done far more terrorist acts than any right one, and is also considered one of the largest threats to state security by SÄPO, the Swedish Security Police tasked with counter-terrorism amongst other things.[/QUOTE]
No violent extremist behaviour is advocated by non-violent extremists.
ANTIFA (AFA) never bombed SD politicians houses, at least not with explosives. Paint perhaps ([url]http://sv.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antifascistisk_aktion_i_Sverige[/url]).
Also, AFA at least is not considered as a threat against democracy. A threat to individuals however.
Again, I stress how important the difference between violent and non-violent is. Those are two different categories.
[QUOTE=Explosions;46661451]Why is the far-left wing always bad?[/QUOTE]
Because you eventually run out of other peoples money to spend.
[QUOTE=Chili Banan;46661722]No violent extremist behaviour is advocated by non-violent extremists.
ANTIFA (AFA) never bombed SD politicians houses, at least not with explosives. Paint perhaps ([url]http://sv.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antifascistisk_aktion_i_Sverige[/url]).
Also, AFA at least is not considered as a threat against democracy. A threat to individuals however.
Again, I stress how important the difference between violent and non-violent is. Those are two different categories.[/QUOTE]
Their platform literally advocates violence against their ideological enemies.
They set fire to the Tråvad spinnery in 2005, attacked an immigration office in 2006, threatened and attacked a judge in 2007, have a reputation for threatening people, and attempted to murder somebody too:
[url]http://www.expressen.se/nyheter/afa-tar-pa-sig-vald-mot-nd-politiker/[/url]
AFA are practically a group of thugs with fascist organization, and bigots who can't stand hearing the opinions of others and see to eradicate them. Their name is a joke, because they are themselves effectively acting like fascists.
[QUOTE=Explosions;46661451]Why is the far-left wing always bad?[/QUOTE]
There was a documentary SVT made that investigated the far left violence. A journalist interviewed by SVT claimed that around 90% of all the Violence by extremists was done by left extremists. This violence included raiding houses, destroying veichles and just beating down random people because they looked like "Facists" or wore a shirt they believed was Facist.
[QUOTE=Deng;46661827]Their platform literally advocates violence against their ideological enemies.
They set fire to the Tråvad spinnery in 2005, attacked an immigration office in 2006, threatened and attacked a judge in 2007, have a reputation for threatening people, and attempted to murder somebody too:
[url]http://www.expressen.se/nyheter/afa-tar-pa-sig-vald-mot-nd-politiker/[/url]
AFA are practically a group of thugs with fascist organization, and bigots who can't stand hearing the opinions of others and see to eradicate them. Their name is a joke, because they are themselves effectively acting like fascists.[/QUOTE]
I never said AFA weren't voilent? In fact, I used them as an example of what a violent extremist movement might look like. I merely said that non-violent extremist organisations do not advocate violence.
I also answered on AFA bombing SD politicians houses, which according to wikis list of AFA actions is just not true, or not listed.
If my previous post came off as "AFA is not a violent organisation" it was not my intention. I blame auto correct, my phone is set to Swedish and doesn't like it when I write in English.
[QUOTE=Explosions;46661451]Why is the far-left wing always bad?[/QUOTE]
Why is the far-right wing always bad?
[editline]7th December 2014[/editline]
Goes both ways.
[QUOTE=Explosions;46661451]Why is the far-left wing always bad?[/QUOTE]
Imo its biggest issue is the disregard for personal property.
The confiscation of property gave a big boost to people's morale in the first decades of communism, east of the iron curtain. The biggest construction works in terms of housing(commie-style appt. blocks), roadways, railroads, ports, industry were made back then.USSR held the nr1 spot as the world's biggest economy afaik. After a while though, independent people realised there wasn't much for personal gain in any of those endevours; so their productivity plummeted.After the 70's, it became common knowledge that the upper echlon of the commie party was using that confiscated property for their personal interest and gain.Corruption became endemic.When that realisation seeped into the society, it only became a matter of time before the economy collapsed.
It has a resemblance to modernity though;there is a general discontent that although economies expand, workers' incomes do not necessarly keep the pace; or they even fall.If it weren't for the possibility and dream of getting rich, and if there was a lack of competition(wich the communist world abbounded in), we'd probably face a simmilar collapse as in the 90's,but as it is now, individuals can't afford lagging behind at work when they know there's an unemployed person waiting to take his job.
Luckily, the developed world is close to achieving a tipping point of replacement of human labour and productivity with machinery and robots, but perhaps then, the masses of unemployed and income-less people will want to seize the means of production again?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.