Polish Business News Magazine

I am now offering historical tours to the places which can be seen on my you tube channel :  www.youtube.com/alanheath

Tours can be based from Warsaw, Gdańsk, Kraków, Prague or Berlin.  You will get transport to the site with expert commentary en route and whilst there.  Accommodation can also be arranged if required.

I take care of transport for up to four people. You have to take care of all other expenses (food, accommodation etc..)
Visits can be arranged to the following places:

1. The Nazi infrastructure for the invasion of the USSR - the place where Hitler spent most of WW2 - Rastenburg, Pozezdrze and more.  One day from Warsaw or Gdańsk.

2. Treblinka

3. Warsaw to include sites from the battles of 1939 and 1944, the Warsaw ghetto and Nazi infrastructure
4. Lublin including both the Nazi and Communist infrastructure. Sobibór
5. Bełzec

6. Auschwitz - Birkenau

7. Austerlitz (Czech Republic)

8. Theresienstadt (Terezin) (Czech Republic).  A visit here can also take in Prague although I am not a very good guide for the Czech capital.

9.  Free City of Gdańsk (Danzig), including visits to the places where WW1 started and battles for the Hel peninsula and places where the mass murder of citizens took place such as Stutthof and Piasnica Wielka.

10. Berlin and the Battles of Seelow Heights.  Can also include the former German defence line on its eastern border and trips into the tunnels for those who are fit enough.

Tailor made for you!

What are you interested in?  Give me a ring and discuss it on +48 502 159080.  Then we can work out a suitable itinery!
Conditions

The cost of the guide plus car including as many km as we can travel is EUR200 per day.  A deposit of 35% needs to be received at the time of booking.  No booking is final until the deposit is paid. The deposit is not refundable!  The remainder needs to be paid at the beginning of the first day.
Tours are for up to four people.  More than four people can travel but in this case the cost of hiring a larger vehicle is at the cost of the person making the booking.
Accommodation if necessary needs to be paid by the hirer.

Tours may start and finish in Berlin or Prague but need to be for at least three days in total duration.

EUR200 per day is for historical tours only and not for business consultancy which is charged totally separately!

Findings from a survey of European prostate cancer patients, presented at the 2nd European Multidisciplinary Meeting on Urological Cancers (EMUC) in Barcelona, Spain, highlight the need for further sources of information about the disease.
It found that only 44 per cent of patients felt the information given to them on the likely outcome of their disease at the time of diagnosis was very informative. The critically important role of the physician in providing information about prostate cancer was strongly recognised with over three quarters of those surveyed identifying their specialist as the most important source.
Experts consider the provision of information post-consultation to be vitally important in enabling those affected to understand their situation and work with their physician to combat their disease, even though 40 per cent of respondents indicated they preferred to let their physician decide what is best in terms of treatment. Nearly 60 per cent of respondents stated they prefer to discuss options with their physician and decide together on the best way forward.
The survey discovered that many patients had not discussed key issues with their physician. For example, maintenance of a normal lifestyle during treatment of prostate cancer was considered as important by patients (40 per cent) as concerns about side effects (42 per cent), but many had not talked about lifestyle with their specialist.
To help aid understanding and communication, people across Europe affected by the disease can for the first time access a new online resource, UnitedAgainstProstateCancer.com, designed to particularly inform men affected by prostate cancer, through novel and comprehensive educational resources and links to patient organisations across Europe. The survey and website have been commissioned as an educational initiative by Astellas Pharma Europe Ltd.
Professor Bertrand Tombal, Chairman of Urology Services at Universitaires Saint-Luc, Belgium, who reviewed the information available on the website said: “The survey shows us the pivotal role of the specialist physician in educating and informing patients about prostate cancer following diagnosis. The key question is what happens after the consultation. A diagnosis and subsequent treatment plan is a lot of information to take in and consider, so resources are required to help refresh the memory and continue to promote and enhance understanding away from the consultation room.”
He added, “UnitedAgainstProstateCancer.com is a highly welcome and valuable resource which helps to fill information gaps not only for patients but men, their families and anyone touched by prostate cancer. It recognises that it is not just patients who are affected, and that the need for ongoing learning and education about the disease among all those touched by it is high.”
UnitedAgainstProstateCancer.com aims to help demystify prostate cancer by offering a range of straightforward visual representations of the condition and its impact on the body. It also provides up to date information on treatment options and contact information to organisations across Europe who are united in supporting patients.

Researchers using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to study brain activation have found that men and women respond differently to positive and negative stimuli, according to a study presented today at the annual meeting of the Radiological Society of North America (RSNA).
“Men may direct more attention to sensory aspects of emotional stimuli and tend to process them in terms of implications for required action, whereas women direct more attention to the feelings engendered by emotional stimuli,” said Andrzej Urbanik, M.D., Ph.D., chair of Radiology at Jagiellonian University Hospital in Krakow, Poland.
For the study, Dr. Urbanik and colleagues recruited 40 right-handed volunteers, 21 men and 19 women, between the ages of 18 and 36. The volunteers underwent fMRI while viewing pictures from the International Affective Picture System (IAPS), a widely used, standardized testing system comprised of several thousand slides of various objects and images from ordinary life designed to evoke defined emotional states. The images were displayed in two runs. For the first run, only negative pictures were shown. For the second run, only positive pictures were shown.
While viewing the negative images, women showed decidedly stronger and more extensive activation in the left thalamus, which relays sensory information to and from the cerebral cortex, including the pain and pleasure centers. Men exhibited more activation in the left insula, which gauges the physiological state of the entire body and then generates subjective feelings that can bring about actions. Information from the insula is relayed to other brain structures involved in decision making.
“The brain activation seen in the women might indicate stronger involvement of the neural circuit, which is associated with identification of emotional stimuli,” Dr. Urbanik said. “The more pronounced activation of the insular cortex in the men might be related to the autonomic components, such as elevated heart rate or increased sweating, that accompany watching emotional material.”
The autonomic nervous system controls involuntary functions, including respiration, heart rate and digestion, and helps to adjust certain functions in response to stress or other environmental stimuli. It is responsible for the body’s “fight or flight” response to threatening situations.
“In men, the negative images on the slides were more potent in driving their autonomic system,” Dr. Urbanik said. “This might signal that when confronted with dangerous situations, men are more likely than women to take action.”
While viewing positive images, women showed stronger and more extensive activation in the right superior temporal gyrus, which is involved in auditory processing and memory. Men exhibited stronger activation in the bilateral occipital lobes, which are associated with visual processing.
Dr. Urbanik believes these differences indicate that women may analyze positive stimuli in a broader social context and associate the positive images with a particular memory. Viewing a picture of a smiling toddler might evoke memories of a woman’s own child at this age. Conversely, male responses are more perceptual.
“Positive images are devoured by mens’ visual and motivational systems,” Dr. Urbanik said.

„The average dwell time on publisher websites is significantly higher than on freemailing portals. This results in a higher perception rate of advertisment on the publishers’ websites and a better ad effectiveness”, that is the quintessence of the new study ‚Q.E.D. – Quality – Efficency – Display’.

For this study, the users’ reading and internet behaviour was analyzed comparing the ad effectiveness of several online display campaigns in different environments - websites of leading magazine and newspaper publishers and freemailing portals.

The study focused on the impact of the advertising environment and the intensity of usage on the ad effectiveness of online display campaigns and was commissioned by the Association of German Magazine Publishers (VDZ - Verband Deutscher Zeitschriftenverleger).

The study was conducted by the market research institute eye square GmbH in Berlin in cooperation with meetrics GmbH Berlin and d.core GmbH, Munich.

Together with Alexander von Reibnitz and Wolfgang Dittrich, Michael Schiessl, managing director at eye square, will present the results of the study which was conducted using the eye square server technology to track the users’ behaviour and vary the delivery of online advertising experimentally.

The Department of Justice has initiated removal proceedings against a Troy, Mich., resident based on his participation in violent acts of persecution while serving as an armed member of the Nazi-sponsored Ukrainian Auxiliary Police (UAP) in occupied L’viv, Ukraine, during World War II, Assistant Attorney General Lanny A. Breuer of the Criminal Division announced today.
The charging document, filed Aug. 27, 2009, in U.S. Immigration Court in Detroit, alleges that John (originally Iwan) Kalymon served as a member of the UAP from at least May 1942 to March 1944; that he personally shot Jews while serving, killing at least one; and that he participated in violent anti-Jewish operations in which Jews were forcibly deported to be murdered in gas chambers and to serve as slave laborers.
“These charges once again demonstrate the resolve of the Department of Justice to deny safe haven in this country to human rights violators, no matter how long ago they committed their heinous acts,” said Assistant Attorney General Lanny A. Breuer. “The ultimate removal of John Kalymon will close a very painful chapter and provide a measure of justice to his victims and their families.”
As the government established in prior federal court litigation that resulted in a court order revoking Kalymon’s naturalized U.S. citizenship, during the German occupation of L’viv, which had been part of Poland before the war, Nazi German forces assisted by the UAP confined more than 100,000 Jews to a ghetto in the city and carried out periodic operations to reduce the ghetto’s population. In these violent operations, German forces and the UAP rounded up Jews, beating and shooting those who showed any sign of resistance, and sent most of them to be murdered in the gas chambers at the Belzec extermination center. Some were shot or selected to be worked to death in forced labor camps.
Kalymon, 88, admitted in court proceedings that he fled with retreating German forces in 1944. He immigrated to the United States from Germany in May 1949, concealing his UAP service from U.S. immigration officials and obtained U.S. citizenship in Detroit in October 1955. A federal judge in Detroit revoked his citizenship in March 2007, concluding that Kalymon assisted in the wartime persecution of Jews by, “taking part in sweeps of the ghetto during periodic reduction actions; manning cordon posts around the city to prevent Jews from escaping before and during such actions; and hunting for Jews who attempted to hide or flee.” The court noted that World War II-era documents, including a handwritten Aug. 14, 1942, report prepared by Kalymon in which he accounted to his UAP superiors for ammunition he had expended that day in shooting Jews, proved that Kalymon personally killed at least one Jew and wounded at least one other. The actions were part of the so-called “Great Operation,” which resulted in the removal of 40,000 Jews from the L’viv Ghetto in August 1942.
“With the active assistance of collaborators like John Kalymon, the Nazis annihilated some 100,000 innocent Jewish men, women and children in L’viv,” noted Eli M. Rosenbaum, Director of the Criminal Division’s Office of Special Operations (OSI). “Participants in such crimes have forfeited any right to enjoy the precious privilege of U.S. citizenship or to continue residing in the United States.”
The proceedings to denaturalize Kalymon were initiated in 2004 by OSI and the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Detroit. The case is a result of OSI’s ongoing efforts to identify, investigate and take legal action against former participants in Nazi crimes of persecution who reside in the United States. Since OSI began operations in 1979, it has won cases against 107 individuals who participated in Nazi-sponsored persecution. In addition, more than 180 suspected participants in Nazi crimes who sought to enter the United States in recent years have been blocked from doing so as a result of OSI’s “Watchlist” program, which is enforced in cooperation with the Departments of State and Homeland Security.
The removal case against Kalymon is being litigated by OSI Senior Trial Attorney William H. Kenety. The Detroit office of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has provided assistance. Members of the public are reminded that the charging document contains only allegations and that the government will be required to prove its case before an immigration judge.

Rynek żywności ekologicznej (zwanej też organiczną lub bio), którego wartość w Polsce szacuje się już na 300 mln zł rocznie, a na świecie aż na 40 mld  USD, jest dziś jednym z najszybciej rosnących segmentów rynku rolno-spożywczego. Miliony konsumentów dały się przekonać, że żywność ekologiczna (produkowana tradycyjnymi metodami, bez użycia nawozów sztucznych) jest lepsza i zdrowsza od konwencjonalnej, przez co płacą za nią średnio o 30-60 proc. więcej niż za zwykłą. Okazuje się jednak, że zdrowo za nią przepłacają.

Kupujący ekożywność konsumenci w Wielkiej Brytanii i Stanach Zjednoczonych przeżyli w ostatnich dniach wielki szok, po tym jak renomowane pismo “The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition” opublikowało wyniki przekrojowego badania mającego na celu porównanie wartości odżywczych żywności ekologicznej oraz konwencjonalnej. Badanie przeprowadzili naukowcy z London School of Hygiene Tropical Medicine na zlecenie brytyjskiej rządowej agencji Food Standards Agency. Po przejrzeniu przez badaczy ponad 50 tys. publikacji naukowych i artykułów na ten temat z ostatnich 50 lat okazało się, że żywność ekologiczna wcale nie jest bogatsza pod względem wartości odżywczych od konwencjonalnej.

“Nie ma dowodów na występowanie istotnych różnic w wartości odżywczej między żywnością ekologiczną a konwencjonalną” — czytamy w konkluzji z badania.

Tim Smith, szef Food Standards Agency, zapewnia w liście otwartym opublikowanym na stronach internetowych agencji, że badanie jest wiarygodne. Przestrzega jednak przed wyciąganiem z niego skrajnych wniosków.

“Z tego badania nie wynika, że ludzie powinni przestać jeść żywność ekologiczną. Przekaz jest taki, że powinni stosować zdrową, zrównoważoną dietę pod względem wartości odżywczych i nie ma znaczenia, czy jej podstawą jest żywność ekologiczna czy konwencjonalna” — wyjaśnia Tim Smith.

Summary of the judgment of the German Federal Constitutional Court of 30 June 2009

On 30 June 2009, the German Federal Constitutional Court (the Court) considered the ratification by Germany of the Treaty of Lisbon. In its judgment, the Court examined the constitutionality of:
•    The Act Approving the Treaty of Lisbon;
•    The accompanying Act Amending the Basic Law; and
•    The accompanying Act Extending and Strengthening the Rights of the Bundestag and the Bundesrat in European Union Matters.

I. The legal principles identified by the Federal Constitutional Court

The complaints focused on an alleged infringement of the right to vote. This fundamental right has far reaching ramifications in the case law of the Court. It includes in particular the right to the “self-determination of the people” - the right to vote in order to determine the direction of government. According to the case law of the Court, the Basic Law cannot be modified in a way that would adversely affect the right to vote.

In the Maastricht-Urteil judgment of 1993, the Court determined that an action alleging an infringement of the right to vote by a German law ratifying the Treaty of Maastricht was admissible. The Court adopted the same approach in the present proceedings and considered itself empowered to examine the scope and modalities of the transfer of sovereign powers to the European Union by the Treaty of Lisbon.

The Basic Law contains a principle of openness to European integration , which authorises a far-reaching transfer of sovereign power to the European Union. However, the Basic Law does not permit Germany to become a member of a federal state. It allows only for participation in an association of sovereign states where the peoples of the Member States remain the subjects of democratic legitimisation.

To reconcile these two principles, the Court examined the relationship between the German State and the EU: “how the fundamental legal relation between the international organisation and the Member States and Contracting States which have created the organisation and have vested it with legal personality is elaborated” . In order to ensure that the right to vote is not infringed by the ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon, the Court subjects the transfer of sovereign powers to the European Union to a series of conditions related to the extent of democracy legitimacy of the European Union and to the scope of the competences transferred to the European Union.

II. The Treaty of Lisbon and democracy in the European Union

The Court notes that the European Union, after the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, will not possess a political decision making body which results from the “equal election of all citizens of the Union and which is able to uniformly represent the will of the people” . The Court criticises the allocation of seats in the European Parliament made by the Treaty of Lisbon (Art 14.2 TEU Lisbon), highlighting the discrepancy in the number of citizens represented by MEPs of different nationalities.  As a result, the Court the considers that, to a greater extent than the representative bodies of the Member States, there is no guarantee that a narrow majority in the European Parliament represents a majority of the votes of the citizens of the Union.

Despite the fact that discrimination on the basis of nationality is prohibited by the Union (Art 9 TEU Lisbon), the Court notes that the criterion of nationality is the guiding light of the composition of the European Council, the Council, the Commission and the Court of Justice.

The Court considers the various devices introduced by the Treaty of Lisbon to increase the standard of democracy in the European Union to be insufficient. The European citizens’ initiative (Art 11(4) TEU Lisbon), the rules on a qualified majority in the Council (Art 16(4) TEU Lisbon) and the institutional recognition of Member States’ Parliaments (Art 12 TEU Lisbon) are unable to compensate the absence of the principle of majority rule established by an election.

The Court explains these democratic shortcomings through the nature of the EU, which functions as an association of states and not as a federal state. Democratic legitimacy must be provide by the Member States who remain “Masters of the Treaties”.

III. The Treaty of Lisbon and the competences transferred to the European Union

The central role of Member States is guaranteed by the principle of the conferral of powers (Art 5(1)&(2) TEU Lisbon), linked to a strengthened principle of subsidiarity (Protocol No2 to the TEU Lisbon).

It is reflected in the 4 mechanisms for the modification of the Treaties. The Court deals with the (i) ordinary  and (ii) simplified  revision procedures succinctly, noting that both require the completion of national ratification procedures.

The Court also examines (iii) the “bridging procedures” such as Art 48(7) TEU Lisbon. Such provisions enable the European Council to adopt a decision authorising the Council to act by qualified majority where the Treaty provides for unanimity and/or in accordance with the normal legislative procedure where the Treaty stipulates that in principle the special legislative procedure should be used.  The court considers that the use of bridging clauses amounts to a modification of the Treaties since they lead to a loss of German influence in the Council.  Their operation in cases where they “are not sufficiently determined by the Treaty of Lisbon” must therefore be legitimised democratically. A law within the meaning of Art 23(1) of the Basic Law must be adopted by the Bundestag and the Bundesrat before the representative of the German government in the European Council may approve the relevant Decision.

The Court considers whether (iv) the “flexibility clause” provided for by Art 352 TFEU infringes the principle of Kompetenz-Kompetenz. Noting that, unlike the current Art 308 TEC, the use of Art 352 was not limited to the operation of the Common Market, the Court determines that “the newly worded provision makes it possible to substantially amend Treaty foundations of the European Union without the mandatory participation of legislative bodies beyond the Member States’ executive powers”.  It concludes that in order to ensure that the principle of Kompetenz-Kompetenz is respected, the use of Art 352 TFEU requires ratification by the Bundestag and the Bundesrat on the basis of Article 23(1) of the Basic Law.

The fact that the EU is an association of states is also confirmed by the possibility for a Member State to withdraw from the European Union. While this possibility flows from general international law, it is now mentioned explicitly in the Treaties.

Finally, returning to its previous case law, the Court analyses the principle of the primacy of EU law and confirms that “exceptionally and under special and narrow conditions, the Federal Constitutional Court [may declare] European Union law inapplicable in Germany” .

Noting that “the public perception of factual issues and of political leaders remains connected to a considerable extent to patterns of identification which are related to the nation-state, language, history and culture”  and that the Member States remained the Masters of the Treaties, the Court concluded that the Member States should maintain powers in key areas of policy: decisions on substantive criminal law, judicial cooperation in civil matters, the common commercial policy, the deployment of armed forces abroad and social policy.

In respect of the common commercial policy, the Court interprets Art 207(1) TFEU which confers competence to the Union in the area of foreign direct investment. The Court ruled that this term covered only “investment which serves to obtain a controlling interest in an enterprise. The consequence of this would be that exclusive competence only exists for investment of this type whereas investment protection agreements that go beyond this would have to be concluded as mixed agreements” .

As regards the use of force, the Court holds that the Treaty of Lisbon does not, under any circumstances, oblige Germany to deploy the Bundeswehr outside Germany . This is the case in particular because the bridging clauses that could allow a transition from unanimous voting to qualified majority voting do not apply to defence or military matters. The Court considers that the constitutional requirement to deploy the army only with the approval of parliament applies, also in the context of Art 42(7) TEU Lisbon on collective defence.

IV. Consequences for the ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon

The ruling should have a limited effect as regards the ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon. The Court found that of the disputed acts, only the Act Extending and Strengthening the Rights of the Bundestag and the Bundesrat in European Union Matters infringed the constitution. This act, which aims to integrate the rights of participation of the Bundestag and the Bundesrat in ordinary law failed to provide for the participation of these institutions in the use of bridging procedures and the flexibility clause. The Extending Act must be modified before Germany ratifies the Treaty of Lisbon. An extraordinary session of the Bundestag has been convened on 26 August 2009.

V. Consequences for European integration

The ruling will affect the functioning the European Union, with the use of Art 352 TFEU and of the bridging provisions becoming more cumbersome due to internal German procedures. The ruling could also have far-reaching consequences for the future of European integration. The thrust of the judgment is an analysis of the balance struck by the Treaty of Lisbon between the democratic credentials of the EU and the powers that have been transferred to it. The Court suggests that integration cannot be further deepened without stronger democratic legitimisation of the European Union . In terms of democracy, the European should move away from a logic of Member State equality and increase reliance on representative democracy. In terms of competences, the Treaty of Lisbon, in particular in the areas of substantive criminal law and the use of force, has reached the outer limits of the sovereign powers that can be entrusted to the EU by the Member States.

W lipcu przypadają tragiczne rocznice: mordu w Jedwabnem i mordu w Srebrenicy. Budujemy tradycję spotykania się, by uczcić pamięć ofiar, umocnić pragnienie, by nigdy więcej… Jedno z takich spotkań, to nasz wieczór przy świecy – nie dyskusja, lecz podjęcie refleksji nad tym, co nam przedstawią goście i co powiemy sobie nawzajem.

Goście spotkania:

*     Dr Karolina Wierczyńska, młoda prawniczka, absolwentka Szkoły Praw Człowieka, poświęciła swoją pracę doktorską zagadnieniu ludobójstwa. Pytamy ją, jak próbuje się tę zbrodnię pojmować i osądzać.

*     Konstanty Gebert patrzy na ludobójstwo jako doświadczenie krajów, w których przebywał (ostatnio w Ruandzie) i doświadczenie Zagłady, z którym obcujemy w Polsce.

Liczymy na wymianę myśli między gośćmi i na głosy z sali.

Przyjść może każdy, kto chce z nami uczestniczyć w akcie upamiętnienia przez namysł nad fundamentalnym problemem.

> PRZY ŚWIECY <

WIECZÓR UPAMIĘTNIENIA

OFIAR JEDWABNEGO I SREBRENICY

Poniedziałek 6 lipca 2009, godz. 18-20.30

zapraszamy do sali konferencyjnej Helsińskiej Fundacji Praw Człowieka

w Warszawie, ul. Zgoda 11, VI piętro.

PROGRAM

Halina Bortnowska – wprowadzenie.

 Współczesność ludobójstwa:

Dr Karolina Wierczyńska **  Konstanty Gebert.

            Głosy z sali

            Chwila muzyki

            Tekst ku pamięci

Składanie kamyków, które zostaną złożone w Jedwabnem.

Każdy może przynieść mały kamyczek, okruch żwiru na znak swojej pamięci.

“WIRYDARZ”

Więcej informacji sukcesywnie na stronie http://halinabortnowska.blox.pl [“Myślennik”];

http://klubczwartkowy.blox.pl

I see Hungary’s new prime minister, Gordon Bajnai, has agreed to work for a salary of a symbollic one florint. My advice to Hungarians would be that you get what you pay for.

Anyone who is fed up with the con tricks of RWE Stoen may find the following link useful although I am unable to say if other companies behave in the same shoddy manner:

http://www.eprad.pl/kat/04,01/

en