We have to be optimistic, yes, but you said it yourself just then. "What if?" We shouldn't be dealing with 'what ifs', although you have raised a good point there. Your example has highlighted that if indirect impact indeed can be defined, then there will also potentially be both positives and negatives to any such impact. We then though have the question of whether the positives outweigh the negatives and if so, does one negative mean the whole thing is to be frowned upon, or is that ok? Is it a heavy negative or a very light one? Lol.
It could go on indefinitely. See what I mean Chute?
Whereas, if we know the specific concerns, we can address them. It's that simple. If we only receive vague generalisations (and in my view that is unacceptable) because perhaps those themselves who raised the issue don't know, then, and I personally believe this may be the plan, we will not be moving much further along, and therefore only marginally nearer to a decision.
That's why Kurt's response is so important. He must somehow bring matters to a head now if he can, so that Åsa has to make this decision.
lbjj thank you, mate for your recognition of my modest attempts to make clear what is really going on with the Beowulf. I felt quite often that you are amongst the few people on this board сapable of critical thinking. And now again you are absolutely right. The last time when Kurt refused to comment on the CAB's opinion, he proved himself very strong. And if he now will concede and starts playing their game, he will lose all his former dignity and become a puppet in the hands of the Swedish authorities. I am sure that MI will again not make any decision and leave it to the government's discretion. So, if Kurt does not play any double game, the most important thing now is to prepare such a bullet prove justification for immediate granting a license that even to the last idiot in the government should be clear that either it makes a positive decision preserving the face. Or it will be forced to do so by the decision of the International commercial court and being disgraced in front of the whole world. I have not seen any other solution before and I do not see it now. My best wishes to you and have a think about to join me in Petro Matad which as I am sure has a huge growing potential.
Fair posts there. Yes, what about the mining eh? Have they forgotten about the benefits from it and therefore the protection afforded to it? Who would think that the Swedes have a history of mining going back over 1000 years?
Maybe though, it's these existing mines that have taken over 1000 years to each gain their exploitation permit. Lol.
I know Chute. But what is indirect impact? How is it measured, moreover, if something is so far away? It's a tricky one, because usually there is impact or not. If there is no direct impact on animal life, can there be indirect impact? I feel matters are being fudged. With specifics of what the concerns are, these can then be addressed. Without specifics, particularly if they are not known, how can they be addressed? Hence, we must stick to a rigid criteria. If those with concerns are generalising, that isn't good enough. The 'what ifs?' could also be seen as 'what if nots'. Could Kurt simply say there will be no indirect impact, if nobody knows what indirect impact entails? Lol. The whole thing is completely one-sided at the moment, so we need to see what Kurt and the SAB come back with.
Datafeed and UK data supplied by NBTrader and Digital Look.
While London South East do their best to maintain the high quality of the information displayed on this site,
we cannot be held responsible for any loss due to incorrect information found here. All information is provided free of charge, 'as-is', and you use it at your own risk.
The contents of all 'Chat' messages should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Limited, or its affiliates.
London South East does not authorise or approve this content, and reserves the right to remove items at its discretion.