Pure statistical fraud from the Economist

Confirmation bias and outright liars at the Economist Magazine.

Its main policy rate reached 2% in July 2011, while rates in most other rich economies stayed near zero. Yet the Riksbank seems to have got out too far over its cross-country skis. By the end of 2011 inflation was sinking rapidly while the crisis in the euro zone deepened.

Look at the graph folks, Inflation rose right after the rate hike. Why did the Economist put this data up and not explain why rates rose and inflation rose? Why do they deliberately lie right in from of the reader? Why do they bother to even exist?
The Swedish Bank uses an interest rate corridor:

What is the interest-rate corridor?The banks can deposit money overnight with the Riksbank at the deposit rate. The lending rate is the interest rate that the banks must pay when, against collateral, they borrow money overnight from the Riksbank. In this way the deposit rate forms the floor and the lending rate the ceiling for how low or how high the overnight rate can be.

So they have the tools to lower and raise rates without excessive market intervention. What caused the inflation? A one time price adjustment because oil prices shot up and Swedish oil imports had risen by 50%, at the same time.  Here:

2000's	27	19	15	11	29	26	30	25	25	15
2010's	15	25	9	4

Note the rise in raw oil imports in 2010 to 2011. At that time, oil prices rose about 40%, here:
 http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?g=PZU
Obviously the economy was heating up faster than they could pay for oil, the Swedish bank likely responded simultaneously with the economy in cooling things off.

The Keynesians  do not do the homework, they simply quote from the Book.  I rarely find any of this crowd actually doing the work.