Search

Niko A. Kauko pondered what would happen to the EU-Finland's support for Ukraine and the cooperation agreements between the countries if Ukraine were to hold elections, choose a new president, and the war were to end. He estimated that with a change in presidency, relations between Ukraine and Russia could also improve. Kauko asked whether Finland's support for Ukraine had ultimately been directed more towards Zelensky and the war than towards Ukraine itself. He referred to Stubbs' statement that the war was "his war," and wondered if Finland's "unwavering Ukraine first" line would fade as the war receded. Kauko described the war fundamentally as a great power conflict and believed that neither side had clean hands. According to him, Finland should not have participated in the conflict other than through diplomacy and mediation. He considered such an approach wise, which, in his assessment, was no longer visible in Finland's stance. #Ukraina #EU #sota (translated)

Maria Rautanen questioned the transportation of foreign waste to Finland for energy production. She referred to information from Kaleva, which indicated that nearly 50,000 tons of waste had been brought to Oulu for incineration at Oulu Energy and Syklon facilities since 2021. According to her, waste had even been transported from the outskirts of a landfill in Rome and from the shores of the Arctic Ocean. Rautanen wrote that according to Kaleva, nearly a third of the imports had occurred with figures that had been mistakenly approved by the Finnish Environment Institute. She demanded a transparent investigation into the permit errors. Rautanen criticized the downsizing of Finland's domestic energy production, particularly the reduction of peat use due to taxation and emissions trading costs. According to her, Finnish contractors and energy entrepreneurs had ceased operations, machines had been sold, and expertise in the sector was disappearing as energy was produced by importing waste from thousands of kilometers away. Rautanen called for open life cycle assessments to justify the import of foreign waste, taking into account transport by road and sea, combustion emissions, ash, waste impurities, and domestic fuels replaced by imported waste. She also demanded information about the quality of the waste brought to Finland, its monitoring, and the effects of combustion on flue gases, heavy metals, and fine particles. Rautanen believed that Finland's energy supply should fundamentally rely on domestic raw materials, local labor, and supply security. She found it difficult to accept that waste transported from Rome was used for energy production while the use of domestic peat had been reduced, and she questioned whether this constituted sensible circular economy practices. https://t.co/2CjRydkxAO #ilmasto #energia #kiertotalous (translated)

Elina Hiltunen wrote that she had a positive attitude towards the discussion, but questioned what kind of issues her discussion partner promoted. She said she understood that this person was advocating for their own and Islam's interests, but asked whether such should be acceptable in Finland, especially from the ruling party. Additionally, Hiltunen inquired whether the discussion partner supported sharia law. #keskustelu #Suomi #islam (translated)

Leena Pihanurmi criticized a multi-page interview published in Seura magazine, in which Demokraatti journalist Susanna Luikku interviewed Vertti Kiukas from Soste ry. According to Pihanurmi, Kiukas expected the leftist government to continue supporting 700 social and health organizations with hundreds of millions of tax euros. Pihanurmi wrote that the number of organization workers and volunteers varied in different Soste sources. He stated that Kiukas announced the number as 1.5 million, whereas earlier it had been reported as 550,000 and 204,271. Pihanurmi characterized the content of the interview as threats and baseless complaints. He claimed it aimed to secure the financing of the bloated sector and its jobs, which he believed were funded by Veikkaus. According to Pihanurmi, the article did not mention that the sector had grown over decades by misleading the poor and those with gambling problems. https://t.co/Inulcjd4lX #politiikka #järjestö #sote (translated)

Mika Merano criticized the reported proposals to raise the retirement age to over 70 years and described the idea as extremely senseless. According to him, the proposals were based on the view that people would have an invisible debt to the state and that their role would be to produce tax revenue by working nearly until the end of their lives. Merano called for a reform of the pension system in the opposite direction. He argued that the state should provide only a small minimum safety net and shift more responsibility to the individuals themselves. He suggested a large-scale reduction in mandatory pension contributions so that people would have more money left from their salaries and could save for their retirement if they wanted. Merano justified his stance by emphasizing individual freedom and personal responsibility. He stated that the state should not dictate how long people should work or how they should use their money. #eläke #yksilönvapaudet #valtiopolitiikka (translated)

Korson Jussi wrote that the Kokoomus-led HVA had hired a temporary personnel manager for 170,000 a year without a competition. According to him, the request for proposals was sent only to one person. He estimated that nothing would likely come of the issue: the National Audit Office could make a remark about the procedure, but otherwise the activities would continue. He described it as the way things are done in the country. https://t.co/lkvKf2hV54 #politiikka #hallinto #korruptio (translated)

Yaron Nadbornik wrote that from the articles in Helsingin Sanomat covering the foreign elections, there might have been an impression that the victory of the right-wing candidate was portrayed as a coincidence, a surge of extremist groups, or the result of foolish decisions. In contrast, the success of the left-wing candidate appeared to him as a return of the world to the right track and a relief for journalists after years of injustices or foolishness. He attached to his writing an article about the second round of the Brazilian presidential elections, where the headline indicated that the right-wing Bolsonaro was in the lead. https://t.co/qKugJcZYuv #politiikka #vaalit #medianäkyvyys (translated)

Hakki K asked where the commenters were who had, according to him, loudly spoken about the Ukrainian bioweapons laboratories. He claimed that the Russians were causing a possible pneumonic plague epidemic and used a derogatory term for them. He attached the hashtags Irkutsk and pneumonic plague to his post. https://t.co/0WvgUvGXJ8 #Ukraina #Bioaseet #Epidemia (translated)

Jari Mäkäräinen criticized Yle for what he perceived as giving Timo R. Stewart, whom he describes as a Hamas activist, an unchallenged platform to present his book. According to Mäkäräinen, the article adopted Stewart's view regarding the destruction of Gaza, genocide, and Finland's responsibility due to trade with Israel, without hearing the opposing side. Mäkäräinen emphasized that, in his opinion, genocide does not equate to heavy war. He wrote that the International Court of Justice had not ruled on the case against Israel and that interim measures were not a judgment. In his view, civilian casualties can occur in urban warfare where Hamas places rockets, command centers, and tunnels among civilians without the intent of destroying the group. He compared this to the battles of Mosul, Raqqa, and Fallujah, claiming that Stewart began using the term genocide after Israel succeeded in its war against Hamas. According to Mäkäräinen, the Yle article also lacked the starting point of the war: the attack on October 7, in which he claims over 1,200 people died, and which involved rapes and kidnappings. He wrote that Hamas aims for the end of Israel instead of a Palestinian state. He criticized the figures presented by the Palestinian Ministry of Health in the article—over 21,600 by December 2023 and over 1,400 after ceasefires—and claimed that the ministry was subordinate to Hamas and that its figures did not differentiate between fighters and civilians. In his view, the article also lacked Israel's perspective that a significant portion of the dead were fighters. Regarding the two-state model, Mäkäräinen wrote that its failure was not solely due to Israel. He claimed that Hamas had rejected the model multiple times and that the Palestinian Authority had turned down offers, such as at Camp David in 2000 and Annapolis in 2008. He added that according to polls, the majority of both Palestinians and Israelis had abandoned the model. He described the cessation of support for UNRWA as a reaction to an organization that, according to him, had ample evidence of connections between its facilities and personnel to Hamas. Mäkäräinen believed that Yle, as a publicly funded media, should not advertise a single essayist as an expert. According to him, the article could have included opposing researchers, Israel's official stance, or addressed Hamas's responsibility for hostages and the use of civilians as shields. He concluded by asking why this had not been done. https://t.co/sHriNitmMo #Gaza #Israel #Hamas (translated)

Yaron Nadbornik asked why the United States did not label the events in Gaza as genocide, even though some researchers did. He estimated that the difference might be due to the U.S. military leadership having access to real-time military intelligence, such as satellite imagery and intelligence cooperation, which civilian researchers, according to him, did not have. He also noted that many researchers specialized in other topics. Nadbornik argued that criticism cited organizations and institutions as needed, which had expanded the interpretation of the concept of international genocide so that Israel's actions fit within it. He mentioned examples like Amnesty's report on page 101, B'Tselem's output, and a UN committee. Finally, Nadbornik described the media as a new Pravda and wrote that those who did not accept it deserved to be canceled. He compared political correctness to the Soviet Union and sarcastically noted that no researcher should be upset. https://t.co/2MNmZd6ulU #kansanmurha #Gazassa #politiikka (translated)

Lucia described the typical reader of Helsingin Sanomat as a 25–40-year-old, highly educated urban woman who lived in neighborhoods like Kallio, Käpylä, Kumpula, Pakila, Kalasatama, Töölö, or Lauttasaari. She noted that this woman would usually vote for the Greens, the Left Alliance, or the SDP and would frequent brunches, bars, and the Flow festival. According to Lucia, the woman she described might be in a relationship, live in a community garden cabin, and be the mother of one or two children. She listed names like Alvar, Oliver, Ariel, Kuura, and Kaura for the children. Lucia mentioned that the woman preferred public transportation but accepted her partner's expensive car, even if she suffered from climate anxiety and flying shame. The woman might also have a small dog. The author claimed that such a reader did not know any voters of the Finns Party and might consider her rural uncle, who had voted for the party at times, to be peculiar. She speculated that the woman worked in a field where she could aim to make the world a better place. Lucia called this a reader profile and target group for Helsingin Sanomat, whose interests and views, according to her, the paper's journalists anticipated. She wrote that HS did not aim for objective or neutral reporting, nor was it an agenda-driven media outlet. According to her, the paper's target group did not encompass all people regardless of their background, lifestyle, or viewpoints. She compared HS to a mirror held up by journalists so that the reader could be satisfied with what they saw, and concluded that the reader of the described profile was not the same as the writer of the piece. #Helsinki #ilmastoahdistus #lukijaprofiili (translated)

Pjotr Debatt suggested that many under 30 are currently not subscribing to HS, as otherwise the campaign would clearly be loss-making in his view. He interpreted the situation as a sign of a small panic in the newspaper. https://t.co/Xmk8Gq29kk #uutiset #media #nuoriso (translated)

For a change, another organizational rant article in HS. Both the Mannerheim League for Child Welfare mentioned by the author and the Niilo Mäki Foundation, which finances the Niilo Mäki Institute, are both organizations bloated with gambling loss funds. In both, there is plenty to cut besides guiding volunteer activities. For instance, from research, project and material manufacturing, lobbying, and administration. Mervi Viteli-Hietanen, who is concerned about the Reading Granny and Grandpa activities, has otherwise worked as a journalist and has written at least for the Pirkanmaa Left's Vasen kaista online magazine. https://t.co/SGzlbE6OyK #järjestöt #näkökulma #yhteiskunta (translated)

You mentioned that @SuomenPoliisi prohibited you from discussing matters related to the investigation. Did the police explain what this prohibition is based on? According to Section 5 of Chapter 11 of the Preliminary Investigation Act, a prohibition must be given in writing and formally communicated. It must specify the subject of the prohibition, the duration of the prohibition, and the potential penalties. The prohibition can only relate to matters that have come to light in the investigation, which do not concern the prohibited person themselves and which they did not previously know. Moreover, their disclosure must additionally be able to complicate the investigation or cause harm or disadvantage to someone. What was such a matter in this case? The investigation concerns a message that has already been published. The suspect's own suspicion of a crime, their own message, and what the police have reported regarding their status concern the suspect themselves. The prohibition does not extend to them, nor does Paragraph 2 of Section 23 of the Publicity Act, which only pertains to confidential information regarding other individuals obtained as parties involved. The police must also clarify the content of the confidentiality obligation (ETL 11:6). Was that done? If the police prohibited the recording of the interrogation or the publication of its content, what is the legal basis for the restriction, and what information does it pertain to? If the suspect cannot record, will the police record it themselves? The interrogation must be recorded when the method of its conduct should be able to be verified later (ETL 9:3). In this matter, the basis is evident. The suspect has the right to remain silent. You can refuse to answer until the binding nature, basis, and scope of the prohibition have been clarified (and, of course, otherwise as well). You do not have to guess the limits of an ambiguous prohibition. The police do not need to allow the publication of all material in advance. But if an authority claims that revealing information is punishable, the basis and subject of the prohibition must be specified. If it was a request, it should not be presented as an obligation, and such a request can always be met with a mocking belly laugh. #Suomi #oikeus #poliisi (translated)

A journalist from HS found out the exact reason for the preliminary investigation of my incitement against a population group. Only the police and the prosecutor knew about the matter, as the case is not public. This will be an exciting story – whatever happens! By the way, where did the HS journalist get the information; who knows? #journalismi #uutiset #suomi (translated)

This is no longer just a political blunder, but probably the most humiliating national failure in the history of Finland's industry. This analysis reveals black on white how totally and blindly the Finnish state leadership has sold the interests of its own citizens in front of the marketing department of Silicon Valley. Let's break down this "sleight of hand" into three devastating facts that make the government's actions completely inexcusable. First of all, despite all the prime minister-level hype, promises, and the liturgy of the green transition, the outcome is harsh. As a result of Google's massive investments, no new electricity production is being built in Finland—zero megawatts. The company's marketing department worded it so cleverly that the government, desperately thirsty for economic growth, swallowed the bait completely baffled. The leadership was smilingly taken in front of cameras as a guarantor for a project that will not bring a single new watt to the Finnish grid. The second issue is the hijacking of national base power. This is the real, chilling bomb of the news. Since no new electricity will come, where will these massive data centers draw their power? The answer: from our nuclear power. The analysis reveals that as much as 500 megawatts of Finland's nuclear power capacity is dedicated exclusively to Google until 2050. This nuclear power is not just any electricity. It is precisely that stable, weather-independent base power that is vital for Finland's price stability and security of supply. The government is thus surrendering half a gigawatt of infrastructure intended to safeguard Finnish citizens during cold days to a multinational monopoly for the next quarter century. Thirdly, the master has definitively become a servant. When 500 megawatts of stable nuclear power is tied to Google's inflexible use, and no new capacity is brought in, the mathematical equation is devastating for the Finnish consumer. When a calm cold spell strikes in January, our electricity grid will lack that 500-megawatt lifesaver. It is dedicated to AI computation, and the ordinary Finnish citizen will pay for it with horrendous spikes in market electricity prices and increased transmission fees from Fingrid. The Finnish government allowed a multinational company to blind itself with platitudes and let a foreign entity walk straight into the national switchboard. This is not an investment in Finland. This is a hostile resource grab, which the country's own leadership blessed with a smile, sacrificing the energy security and purchasing power of Finns at the altar of the company's marketing trick. In democracy, there is one simple and ruthless rule: if the highest leadership of the state cannot defend the interests of its own people, it must step aside. Looking at this chain of events and the facts revealed by Talouselämä, the demand for Prime Minister Orpo's resignation is no longer just political shouting. It is the only logical conclusion in a situation where the head of government has shown a total lack of judgment in securing national infrastructure and the economy. The prime minister's job is to be the master in his own country. His task is to sit at the negotiating table, look the world's richest companies in the eye, and say: "This is our grid, our nuclear power, and our nature. You will pay for the infrastructure, you will build the new electricity, and you will pay the royalties here. Otherwise, you can take your servers elsewhere." If the prime minister is not capable of this—if he is so desperate that he can be led by a marketing department's word games like a measuring cup—he does not have the backbone that leading Finland requires in this global squeeze. Then there is only one right action: hand the keys back to the people and resign. #Suomi #politiikka #energiapolitiikka (translated)

The media has not yet realized what juicy headlines can be made from this @flydubai hijacking, as is usually done with Israel 🙄 Maybe Hamas has not yet produced content for certain biased journalists 🤔. Let's help them and predict future juicy headlines here: "Israelis stormed the cockpit on an otherwise peaceful flight" "Jews covered in blood on the flight" "Arab co-pilot was beaten, Israelis guilty" "No Palestinians were allowed on the flight" "Outrageous behavior of Jewish passengers on the flight" "Israelis were bossy on the flight" "Israel forced the Saudis to help" "The plane to Israel was hijacked, no one is innocent so far" Here is a headline for now before the media gets inspired and wakes up: Aviation | Netanyahu: A passenger and crew member prevented a disaster when the pilot tried to crash the plane https://t.co/zXAggnWtAx https://t.co/zXAggnWtAx #mediakritiikki #lentokaappaus #Israelinpolitikka (translated)

Mitä helvettiä? Tämä on aikamoinen paljastus millainen moraali sinulla on @anttikaikkonen jos pitää paikkaansa ? Eikö sijaislapset ole olleet yhteinen päätös? Se on elinikäinen vastuu eikä siitä irtauduta ja heitetään kuin vanha rukkanen nurkkaa vaikka muuten tiet erkanevat. Nyt meni maku tähän kaveriin lopullisesti😑. https://t.co/YNfCTbO9LT #moraali #sijaislapset #vastuu

Katsoin A-studion ääriajatteluosion. Kiinnitin huomiota KRP:n haastatteluun, joka spiikattiin toimittajan toimesta näin: ”poliisi tiedotti toissaviikolla, että nuorten äärioikeistolainen väkivalta on ilmiö, josta pitäisi olla huolissaan, ja näin tilannetta kommentoi rikosylitarkastaja, tiedusteluyksikön päällikkö Jaakko Christensen KRP:stä” Ensinnäkin, poliisi ei valtakunnallisesti tiedottanut, vaan @SiSuPoliisi Ennalta estävä toiminto (hyvin pieni yksittäinen pulju) tiedotti. Mikään muu poliisilaitos tai Poliisihallitus ei yhtynyt viestiin. @paularisikko yritti kyllä tehdä aiheella politiikkaa siinä varsinaisesti onnistumatta. @krp_poliisi Christensenin haastattelussa taas puhutaan asioista tuon klipin perusteella paljon laajemmin, siinä ei mm. nimetä äärioikeistoa erikseen ja puhutaan mm. ääriryhmistä, järjestäytyneestä rikollisuudesta ja kyberrikosryhmistä rekrytoivina joukkoina. Jos tulkintani on väärä, KRP voi korjata. Voisi muutenkin tehdä lausunnon asiasta, että mistä on kyse. Omaan silmään ja korvaan tuon klipin perusteella vaikuttaa, että KRP ei nimenomaisesti puhu tässä äärioikeistolaisesta radikalisoitumisesta, vaan laajemmasta ilmiöstä. Jos/kun näin on, melkoinen rimanalitus Yleltä kehystää toimittajan toimesta KRP:n lausunto koskemaan vain äärioikeistolaista ajattelua. Minusta tuntuu, että Yleisradio on aloittanut eduskuntavaalikampanjansa. #ääriajattelu #poliisi #radikalisoituminen