A new Icelandic website has been launched to protest the use of terrorist legislation against Iceland by the British government of Gordon Brown in regard to the collapse of Icelandic banks.
The ‘In Defence’ website comes across as a well-designed and serious political protest – but one with a sense of humour as well. The site is in Icelandic and English and encourages visitors to sign a petition giving support for the declaration “Icelanders are not terrorists”, which may be presented to the British government in the future.
Visitors are also invited to send in funny or interesting photographs of themselves with a sign bearing a message to the British government written in English.
MBL.is reports that the website was created by a group of Icelanders who have made it their goal to improve the image of Iceland in the UK.
Organisers hope the website will gain attention in the UK and promote discussion and renewed understanding between the two nations.
It’s just a smokescreen. Nobody accused Icelander’s of being terrorists. Sad to see that so many people fall for the propaganda of the Haarde administration. They should better spend their time demonstrating against the governement and demanding new elections.
For goodness sake… we don’t think you are terrorists. The British authorities used a clause from the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 to invoke a freezing order on Landsbanki UK. This was done to protect British deposits in Icesave, the UK offshoot of Landsbanki. Plain and simple: the Icelandic authorities froze the deposits of British savers whilst allowing the Icelandic people to withdraw money from Landsbanki – a despicable action.
I repeat – we don’t think you are terrorists.
I wish your country and its people health and prosperity for the future.
Get over it. The UK government has not called any Icelander a terrorist.
Would it make you feel better if we introduced a “We’re seizing your bank’s assets before you can run with the money” act? Because, just because we like you so much, we’ll do it if it will make you happy.
The UK used the crime and economic security part of the the Bill against Iceland. If you prefer to draw attention to the fact that UK classified Iceland as a criminal, economic threat instead of a terrorist threat, then go ahead and make an issue of it.
Personally I’d keep quiet about it and get on with life.
if you dumb Brits think that your bully tactics and your stupid web side will help you,you are kidding yourselves why should we negotiate with bullies,guess what we are not you are now on the bottom of our list
Why has this descended into a slanging match?
The reasons why Brown’s government imposed the terrorism order were wrong, we all know that. And we all know that Icelanders are NOT terrorists.
All I know is I don’t want Iceland’s money, I don’t want Guernsey’s money, I don’t want the UK’s money.
I simply want MY MONEY that is with Landsbanki Guernsey.
No, Icelanders are not terrorists – but their banks were owned by greedy billionaire crooks and their failure will be at the expense of UK taxpayers as well as the Icelandic people.
The clause used just happened to be in an Act of Parliament related to terrorism. If we’d had a different Act we’d have used that.
The Icelandic authorities brought this all on themselves by saying they were not going to compensate British savers! I for one am glad our government didn’t roll over and meekly accept it.
I never expected to see such a behaviour from a Nordic country.
And Anna, get yourself some decent politicians who don’t think that the theft of British savers money is acceptable!
If Icelanders are not terrorists then why was Landsbanki put on the list with such men as BIN LADIN. I think it’s HORRIBLE and discusting
I am from Iceland AND I KNOW WE ARE NOT TERRORISTS.
Is it entirely unreasonable that the UK used whatever laws at their disposal to lock down some value when they saw Iceland was about to default on its obligations?
If these people spent this energy they used building this website writing to Geir Haarde instead asking him to publically answer the questions raised here: http://landsbankiguernseysavers.co.uk/GeirHaarde.html they may do better at improving Iceland’s credibility in the world.
We don’t want to laugh about it, we just want our Landsbanki money Mr Haarde.
“If Icelanders are not terrorists then why was Landsbanki put on the list with such men as BIN LADIN. I think it’s HORRIBLE and discusting”
Well the names of millions of totally innocent people are on the US no fly list, too, next to real terrorists. But, ok, I see the point and support the demand for a second list that is dealing with international finance fraud!
No British citizen wishes to cause the Icelandic people any embarrasment, nor feels that they are terrorists.
But kindly take the trouble to understand, Kaupthing HF were withdrawing depositors’ funds from the Isle of Man. This was a criminal act, which ultimately led to the downfall of the bank. And many expatriates’ hard-earned savings went with it.
This was solely because of Icelandic bankers’ criminal acts, so please take the trouble to understand the detail. This is what they did, and they caused us to lose our life savings.
Terrorists or not Mr Haarde has hijacked a lot of hard earned and saved money from Landsbanki Guernsey savers.
What positive steps is he going to take to make amends for this?
Iceland’s leaders have made clear,
that Iceland will not keep Iceland-state- promise towards the foreign depositors,
to pay back first 20887€ for one depositor in a Icelandic bank.
“Economic behaviour disorder a la Iceland” is not terrorism, laws were intended against “real” murdering.
However, the denial to keep it’s promises to to depositors,
Iceland-government may cause deaths!
Laws has allways used to justify, what is necessary.
“why was Landsbanki put on the list with such men as BIN LADIN”
Because they froze British savers money, said they were going to default on their obligations and this was convenient legislation to use. Normally the British government roll over, BUT NOT THIS TIME!
Both kaupthing and icelandic government have started preperation to take UK to court, the damages will be billions of pounds should they win,
lets wait and see how this goes, im pretty confident some people on this thread will be forced to eat their words,
High amounts of money were transfered from Iceland to UK, not the other way,
for example the Icelandic central bank gave Kaupthing 500 bn kr loan less than a week before it went int admission, we were sure kb would survive this up til the point it was atacked by british government and put out of busyness.
Well, this petition has to do with the filling from people from Iceland that they are sigled out and held collectively responsible for the mess with the Icelandic banks. I believe we have to blame the icelandic bankers and goverment, not the people. And the responsibility is broader in the sense it is market deregulation that allowed all this to happen. And as far as I know European Economic Area is not an Icelandic invention.
Strictly speaking the British government didn’t say that Icelanders are terrorists, but it no doubt abused and manipulated the antiterror law. This shows us that, when a government acquires extra, non-democratic power this power is easy to be used at will.
Anyway, we have to bear in mind that common icelandic are those suffering the most in this crisis.
“Normally the British government roll over”
What do you mean by that? the British government always attacks when it sees an oppertunity to do so. England is historically one of the most aggressive countries in Europe, so what’s your point really?
As a neutral (Irish) person with no deposits in any Icelandic bank I can’t believe how many of you believe the propaganda that Britain confiscated Icelandic funds using anti-terrorist legislation. The truth is that the act of parliament in question was multi-purpose. The fact that a company (the subsidiary of an Icelandic parent) tried to move assets out of the UK’s jurisdiction is something no government could or should tolerate. It’s truly terrible that ordinary people in Iceland will bear the cost of the incompetence of a small minority but blaming Britain is bizarre. All this website does is distract attention from those responsible.
I spend equal amounts of time in both England and Iceland and I have to say that the coverage of this whole issue by the Icelandic media has been to say the least one sided. I think once the dust settles and Icelanders are made aware of just what has gone on they will be deeply embarrassed by the way they have portrayed the British in all this. The British are not the people responsible for this it is the Icelandic government and its sloppy rules governing banking. As usual when things go wrong in Iceland the British get the blame!!, what next? “British blamed for Volcanic explosion!”, British blamed for earthquake!”, “British blamed for bad weather!”. The majority of the views expressed by Icelanders on this site are NOT the views expressed to me by Icelanders.
You ignorant people should read this.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4d74e1aa-a163-11dd-82fd-000077b07658.html?nclick_check=1
Nobody ever said the Icelanders were not going to compensate British savers. Your PM and your chancellor only did what they did to save their sorry political lifes.
Bullying a small nation like Iceland is discraseful and Mr. Brown and Mr. Darling should be ashamed of themselves. Their actions have had devestating affects on the icelandic public. It is very sad that many british people have lost their savings but a lot of icelandic people have lost their savings as well.
Why should the icelandi public pay for what a few greedy men did? Well the greedy men are not suffering we (the public) are, big time.
Nobody forced anyone to put their money into the icelandic banks but people did because of the high intrest rates. Who´s fault is that?
Does anyone else in Iceland agree with this article?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/oct/25/iceland-creditcrunch?commentpage=1
When these problems first broke in early October I had every sympathy for the normal icelander (see my earlier posts).
But since following events on this and other websites I get the impression that individuals are just losing the plot and blaming the british or icelanic citizens depending on either where they live or what their viewpoint is.
All politicians, governments, bankers, social elite and regulatory authories have made mistakes which are now costing people dear.
Let’s not slag off each other and instead take steps to resolve each other’s difficulties
“Nobody ever said the Icelanders were not going to compensate British savers.”
Except for Haarde (who refused to answer direct questions about it), Oddsson (in that Icelandic interview) and Mathiesen in his conversation with Darling.
Not one of them said, “Of course the Icelandic government will honour the 20k euro guarantee.”
From your own link:
AD: “So the entitlements the people have which I think is about £16,000, they will be paid that?”
ÁM: “Well, I hope that will be the case. I cannot state that or guarantee that now . . .”
Real Talk, Those British folks that kept their stacks in Icesave account are trying to run away from the tax they will pay. I wonder if they Know that the crisis happened in a chain reaction,and that it started from the USA. The British Prime Minister sounds as if he intends to abuse power talking about ‘ the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 ‘, that is just lame.
We Germans do not think Icelanders to be terrorists. However, some 30000 of us -customers of Kaupthing Bank- are cut off from the access to their accounts. We are in great despair. Different to what happened in the UK, we have no information, neither from our government, nor from Kaupthing Bank, if or when we will get our money back. Most of us do not have their account reports. We cannot apply to
the Icelandic Guarantee Fund until German Kaupthing is declared bankrupt.
Icelanders are not thieves but iceland banks and govt are thieves. Why allow icelanders to draw money while UK citizen not allowed to. Why did iceland banks tries to siphon UK assets to iceland. Bankers and govt indulged in misappropiation. IF iceland banks involved in double standards for british savers and iceland savers they deserved to branded as terrorist. Financial terrorism is greater than bommbers.
You a silly person satish,
we only have 3 banks in Iceland
try freezing all the banks of Britain at the same time and see what happens
Fergus wrote, “The truth is that the act of parliament in question was multi-purpose.”
And wasn’t that so convenient? I’m sure all the people in Britain who’ve been spied upon by different government agencies for all sorts of petty reasons all welcome multi-purpose legislation introduced to combat the “terrorist threat” and it being used to keep track of their daily movements.
Bromley86 wrote, “Would it make you feel better if we introduced a “We’re seizing your bank’s assets before you can run with the money” act?”
There are probably several acts of that very nature on the books, although they all probably require a bit more judicial oversight than the various anti-terrorism acts. Maybe a renaming of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act might be in order – perhaps the cheerleaders who welcome such “smart” use of legislation might wake up if it were called something like the Government Spying on Individuals Act.
As for whether the Icelandic authorities were irresponsible in letting the banking sector grow too large, I’m sure that the British authorities didn’t do anyone a great service by precipitating a liquidity crisis amongst those banks, knowing that the Icelandic central bank wasn’t going to be able to issue sufficiently large loans/guarantees to keep everyone happy.
Congratulations are not exactly due to the Chancellor of the Exchequer given the situation he and others have managed to provoke. Maybe in the end, the only hope the various charities and local authorities now affected by this crisis may have is in the Nordic countries injecting the necessary liquidity to restart the Icelandic financial system – it’ll be no thanks to Darling and Brown.
I see that people do not understand how serious this Terrorist stamp is the UK gave us.
Because of this terrorist freezing wee can not pay for imports or getting payed for export all over the world
My son is student in Germany and I can not send him money because Icelanders are now on list for terrorists world wide
and all money transfer freeze and the money seems to disappear
This is turning in to WAR
Poppycock Gunnar. You cannot send money because your banking system is in tatters, not because the UK government have labeled you terrorists (which they haven’t, not that you’ll take that on board).
You are not on the UK terror list. You are not on the US terror list. You might be on the Minke terror list, but I haven’t seen theirs :) .
Bromley86
You can dress it up in what ever way you like. The British government used terrorist laws against Iceland and that is a fact.
The consequences are devastating for Icelandic citizens not only in Iceland but all over the world.
We can not send money over seas because of restrictions on foreign exchange transactions with the Icelandic krona. These restriction are a direct result of what your government did, believe it or not.
The Icelandic public had little or nothing to do with how the banks worked here before all this happened, but we are the ones who are taking all the blame. And to make matters worse we now have the terrorist stamp on us thanks to your government.
G:”You can dress it up in what ever way you like. The British government used terrorist laws against Iceland and that is a fact.”
No, they didn’t. They used the Crime and Security bill against Iceland. It also had terror in the title, but that’s irrelevant.
Do NOT blame the UK for the fact that Iceland’s currency is not exchangeable, the Icelandic government has fixed the exchange rate at 1/3 of the free market rate. Consequently the Krona is un-exchange. Until the Krona is allowed to float, nobody will be willing to accept it in exchange for goods.
“The Icelandic public had little or nothing to do with how the banks worked here”
The Icelandic public elected the politicians who ran, administered and legalised the banks actions. Icelandic Banks are the direct responsibility of the Central Bank of Iceland.
Icesave had a least 5billion euro’s that were directly guaranteed by the Icelandic government and now refused to honour that guarantee.
Icelandic citizens are responsible for the actions of their government; that’s self-evidently true.
G, you say:
“We can not send money over seas because of restrictions on foreign exchange transactions with the Icelandic krona. These restriction are a direct result of what your government did, believe it or not.”
No, you are wrong. You cannot do foreign exchange transaction because you, as a country, are bankrupt. Nobody wants to buy Icelandic krona, and therefore, the foreign currency reserves are dissapearing with every day. There is no market for ISK now and the exchange rate (for us outside iceland) is nonexistent. I am toying with the idea of visiting iceland next year, I am prepared to pay it now using credit card directly to reykjavik hotel and icelandair, but, there is no way of knowing, what credit card processor will charge me for my hotel reservation and the plane tickets. Will it be 150 ISK per EUR or 305? Or 340, or even 1500?
Please do not blame that “we have been placed on antiterrorist list and we cannot obtain funds” mantra, because it is stupid, as witnessed with anyone trying to obtain reliable ISK quote abroad. Simply, no one wants to touch your krona with ten foot pole, and therefore, the international trade has stopped. It has nothing to do with being on the “terrorist list” (and, if you read the explanations above you will find that actually nobody has been labelled as terrorist!)
It is really a pity that, despite awful things that are going on, you delude yourselves that everything would be good “if only we were not on the terrorist list”. IT WOULD NOT. Nobody is on the terrorist list, it is simply a fact of international trade, that your financial system and economy are in such bad shape, that no one is willing to take your currency, and no one is willing to give Iceland any credit (with exception of IMF, and the consortium of banks, which are connected with IMF-sponsored loan).
And, coincidentally, that distrust was also behind seizing of Kaupthing – the collapse of icelandic financial system is not the consequence of seizing of kaupthing (although it made it worse – admittedly, since funds that kaupthing had, were seized, they will be used to repay UK councils, not iceland citizents, as your disgraced politicians initially planned).
So, please, finally, put your blame where it fits: with your government, which bankrupted you.
And yes, pray that ISK really does not start trading at 1500/EUR – I will have really cheap holidays, but you will be transformed to 3rd world country instantly if this happens, which by no means I could wish to the people of iceland…
Peter – London,
besides what you wrote, it is a sad thing that icelanders, as difficult is for them to admit this, did profit from banking operations. The quality of life in iceland was staggering, their tycoons were on shopping spree around the world (and UK), people went for shopping to UK, Norway and Sweden, because of unrealistically strong krona. They mortgaged themselves to the hilt for SUVs, designer goods and (too expensive)houses, many of them in foreign currency.
Of course, this was the kind of living that cannot last on a small island of 300.000 people, which exports mainly aluminium and fish product. The concentration of banking business (120 bn EUR) in such small population gave them really high benefits – ultimately, whole population was living on leverage, and leverage was supplied by the ever expanding banking sector.
Now leverage is working in reverse – not only on banks, but also on ordinary population, precisely because they did profit from that extreme concentration of banking business in such small country.
I too am considering booking a holiday to Iceland, but the uncertainty on the exchange rate is blocking that. Obviously there is going to be a revaluation and repricing to the new exchange rate. I don’t want to end up paying twice the price when Iceland is already a ridiculously expensive destination.
Today’s price (at Yahoo) is 280Kr to the Euro. The UK banks are showing 150kr – no way would I visit at that exchange rate, You may as well spend a week in Monaco or Switzerland.
Then please go to Monaco or Switzerland.
We just make more money than you do
for exaple ships on herring are now paying up to 23.335,99 GBP for 30 days per sailor
the Captain gets 68.947,23 GBP
link to news in Icelandic (you can use babelfish to translate)
http://visir.is/article/20081027/FRETTIR01/252594080
no one here made any profit from the banking
industy
the public payed more taxes than all the Icelandic companys put to gether last year, its easy to confirm this if any one wants to see the truth,
This meltdown will slow us down for a year or two
then we will be back stronger than ever
First of all Iceland is not bankrupt. You should get your facts straight.
Second of all it is not irrelevant that the British used the Crime and Security bill against Iceland it is very relevant. You people have no idea how that has affected the people of Iceland and will do for years to come. And the fact that it has terror in the title is even more relevant.
Leaders all over the world have said that using these laws against Iceland was wrong and that the brits should be ashamed of themselves. The Icelandic nation agrees and so do many other people.
I find it quite funny and actually very british to not be able to admit that you did something wrong. Bulliying a little nation like Iceland, i mean what is that, destroying their name all over the world for years to come, that is nothing to you.
What is happening here is not the fault of the British govenment, but their actions against Iceland made the the problem we facing a hell of a lot worse and that is a fact.
Ive said it before and ill say it again, it is very sad that all these people in Britain have lost their money. Many Icelanders have lost their money as well and some of them have lost everything they had.
Nobody forced anyone to put their money into the Icelandic banks but people did because of the high intrest rates. Is that the fault of the Icelandic public?
The standard of living here for the ordinary people is no diffrent and has been no diffrent from your standard of living. Yes there has been a small % of the nation that has made a lot of money for the last few years and lived like tycoons. But the ordinary people here (myself included) still have a hard time making ends meet at the end of every month.
I lived in Britain for a few years and decided to return to Iceland 3 years ago. My standard of living was actually higher when i was living in Britain than it has been here for the last 3 years.
I am very proud to be Icelandic and I resent being called a terrorist by a nation that i have alway´s loved and cared for.
G said:
>>I find it quite funny and actually very british to not be able to admit that you did something wrong.
Sorry.. that’s where I have to start laughing. Iceland steals tens of Billions of Euro’s from European depositors, refuses to honour its written, legal guarantee and blames everything on Britain .. and the BRITISH have a problem with admitting they have done something wrong.
I tell you want, pay back the billions of money (deposited in your banks) and we’ll apologise. Not that Britain called Iceland a terrorist country, just criminal.
First of all Peter we will honour our obligations and we have never said anything else.
It is you and your government that needs to start listening.
On the other hand i dont think the day will ever come that the British will apologise to Iceland for calling us a terroris country, which you did indeed, but cant admit to.
But that is ok, you can deny it until your blue in the face, we and the rest of the world know what you did.
Tell you what. You point to the news article where someone in the UK government called Iceland a terrorist nation.
And try to do it without talking about the use of a terrorist law. Whether that law was misused or not is of no relevance you your assertion that Britain has called Iceland a terrorist country, especially as it was applied against a corporate entity.
To get this started, I’ll go first and point to the article where your FM DID NOT say that the 20k euro obligation was guaranteed.
http://www.icelandreview.com/icelandreview/daily_news/?cat_id=28304&ew_0_a_id=314205
Horse wrote: “And wasn’t that so convenient? I’m sure all the people in Britain who’ve been spied upon by different government agencies for all sorts of petty reasons all welcome multi-purpose legislation introduced to combat the “terrorist threat” and it being used to keep track of their daily movements.”
‘Spying’ on banks (or to use a more accurate phrase, government oversight) is a-ok by me, they’ve proved that it’s warranted time and time again and all over the world, not just in Iceland. I agree civil liberties in Britain is a serious issue right now but how is that relevant??
G said: “I find it quite funny and actually very british to not be able to admit that you did something wrong. Bulliying a little nation like Iceland, i mean what is that, destroying their name all over the world for years to come, that is nothing to you.”
Again, just to point out that I’m Irish…nobody is more willing to call British bullying when I see it but this is just not the case. Bullying would have been to seize other Icelandic assets or send in the Royal Navy. Refusing the repatriation of funds is just sound national oversight. Iceland’s name is mud because your economy was shockingly mismanaged. However, because of your excellent education system and close ties to the EU I’m sure you’ll bounce back in a couple of years. It would be nice to hear some responsibility for your actions though!
On Oct 27, 2008, Peter – London wrote:
>>G:”You can dress it up in what ever way you like. The British government used terrorist laws against
>>Iceland and that is a fact.”
>
>No, they didn’t. They used the Crime and Security bill against Iceland. It also had terror in the
>title, but that’s irrelevant.
Peter, dear Peter. Your grasp and knowledge of UK law and legislation seems as tenuous as your understanding of cause and effect, i.e. that Brown and Darling cause the freezing of IceSave funds and Kaupthing also, and the effect is the end of Kaupthing and the Icelandic economy for the foreseeable future.
Of course G is right. It is called the *Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001*. It has Parts, but that’s it. The ‘Crime and Security bill’ exists only in your imagination.
Go and actually read the Act. It is the abomination passed much like the US PATRIOT Act in late 2001, that caused the UK to opt-out of Article Five of the European Convention on Human Rights, and which had its detention without charge aspects (part 4) dismantled in 2004 and replaced with a new act in 2005 that is itself no material improvement.
Parts 1 to 3 of the Act refer to Terrorist finances and apply to the finances of suspected terrorist organizations. These relate to the seizure of suspected terrorist assets, specify how bank accounts can be frozen, and authorize the disclosure of financial information relating to any criminal investigation. Concerns were raised when it was passed that these sections were too broadly written and could be abused outside their intended scope of usage.
The Privy Council, in its 2003 review stated in their summary on Part 2 of the Act:
“Part 2 (Freezing Orders)
…
Part 2 repealed and replaced legislation that provided for the freezing of the UK assets
of foreign governments and certain foreign individuals in times of serious emergency.
These had their origin in measures passed early in the Second World War.
Previously the powers could be used only where action to the detriment of the UK
economy had been taken or was likely. In practice this meant the outbreak of armed
hostilities. Part 2 also allows asset freezing in cases where action constituting a threat to
the life or property of UK nationals has been taken or is likely. In principle, such action
might include:
a. a terrorist threat,
b. actions by governments which fall short of war but which nevertheless constitute a
threat against specific UK nationals or property.
…
Our View
The circumstances in which assets might be frozen are broad. There is no mechanism in the legislation for appeal or independent review of any such order once approved. The Government has argued that:
a. international commercial agreements would act as a check on their use outside genuine emergencies;
…
These safeguards may be adequate for truly emergency powers to be exercised in time of war, but their adequacy remains untested outside those very particular circumstances.
…
The provisions of Part 2 are intended for much wider use. In our view, freezing orders for specific use against terrorism should be addressed again in primary terrorism legislation, based on the well-tested provisions of the Terrorism (United Nations Measures) Order 2001.
Freezing orders for other emergency circumstances, and the safeguards which should accompany them, should be reconsidered on their own merits in the context of more appropriate legislation for emergencies; the present Part 2 powers should then lapse. The forthcoming Civil Contingencies Bill would seem to be a suitable opportunity.”
In summary, they said Part 2 of the Law should be repealed because it it too broad, and thus open to abuse.
In the case of Iceland and Landsbanki HM Treasury exercised the powers conferred by sections 4 and 14 of Part 2* and Schedule 3** of yes, the *Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001* to freeze Landsbanki’s assets but in which:
“3.—(1) The following are specified persons for the purposes of this Order—
(a) Landsbanki;
(b) the Authorities; and
(c) the Government of Iceland.”
Oh dear.
*http://www.opsi.gov.uk/Acts/acts2001/ukpga_20010024_en_2#pt2-pb1-l1g4
**http://www.opsi.gov.uk/Acts/acts2001/ukpga_20010024_en_16#sch3
What has made many across party lines (and career Mandarins at all levels) furious about the use of the Act is the casualness with which it was used, and that use justified.
But back to you Peter. Do not keep on trying to misdirect and misinform. You will be rebutted.
>Do NOT blame the UK for the fact that Iceland’s currency is not exchangeable,
I do not think that anyone blames ‘the UK’. People blame the actions of the current UK government administration, led by the sage Mr Brown, and in this matter by Chancellor A. ‘Honest’ Darling also.
Blame quite rightly directed, because when all three of your major banks are in receivership, and those are the main banks in the country used for international trade, through which the majority of monies flowed, and one of those banks has been placed on a list of regimes subjected to financial sanction by the British government, joining Al-Qaida, the Taliban, Belarus, Iran, and North Korea, might not that cause well, some problems for the country and its currency as well?
Icelanders did not imagine this:
http://www.indefence.is/News/News/~/NewsId/13
As “the Authorities; and the Government of Iceland” we specifically mentioned in the Freezing Order, perhaps it is reasonable to assume that Iceland itself was presumed to be the regime under sanction? And thus all of its financial institutions. Do you not understand the implications of this and just how cautious bankers are these years after 2001, let alone at a time when there is already massively lowered inter-bank trust?
Are you really that dense? I think not. You are being disengenious.
In particular when the biggest bank, and the largest company in Iceland is forced into receivership by the direct actions of the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, is it not hard to see the effect that might have on um, the currency of the country and its desirability in international markets?
At least until the reserve monies are bought in for use in making exchanges to buy the Krona out there in people’s hands.
>Icelandic citizens are responsible for the actions of their government; that’s self-evidently true.
But not of course your good self in the UK, and those who voted for… Wait a minute you haven’t yet voted for a Brown administration with him as Prime Minister have you?
But you did vote for Mr Blair and Mr Brown – the odd-couple – at the last election, did you not?
>Icesave had a least 5billion euro’s that were directly guaranteed by the Icelandic government
>and now refused to honour that guarantee.
Naughty, naughty. There you go again repeating that big lie about the Icelandic government not honouring its agreements again.
You are doing this professionally (or rather unprofessionally in actuality). No real person exhibits such an ability to persevere and persist spouting articulate disinformation as you and your colleagues do, in the face of such overwhelming evidence against, criticism and lack of acceptance by others for the lies and untruths you peddle.
William. Seeing as you’re in a talkative mood, what was your take on the part of the transcript that you didn’t address. You know, the part where Mathiesen says that he can’t guarantee the guarantee.
Peter, so is there anything you disagree with factually in my posts in this thread?
Remember, if you fail to respond then your silence can only be construed as agreement.
As an aside, you being an eminent armchair jurist, I am sure you are aware of the precedent of Pad?eld v MAFF (1968).
On Pad?eld grounds the use of the power in such a manner is arguably unlawful.
As stated Lord Reid in that case:
“Parliament must have conferred the discretion
with the intention that it should be used to promote the policy and objects of the Act; the policy and objects of the Act must be determined by construing the Act as a whole and construction is always a matter of law for the Court.”
etc, etc.
“Bromley86 wrote, “Would it make you feel better if we introduced a “We’re seizing your bank’s assets before you can run with the money” act?”
There are probably several acts of that very nature on the books, although ..”
There is.
Its the act that was used to seize Kaputhings depositors funds – Banking (Special Provisions) Act 2008 – its the same act that was used to sieze Nothern Rock and Bradford & Bingley.
Reuters on non-terrorist website
http://www.reuters.com/news/video?videoId=92902
On Oct 29, 2008, Bromley86 said:
>William. Seeing as you’re in a talkative mood, what
>was your take on the part of the transcript that
>you didn’t address. You know, the part where
>Mathiesen says that he can’t guarantee the guarantee.
Now you Bromley86, are a higher class of disinformationalist.
Your posts in this thread are straight out of the disinfo playbook, a fairly nice attempt based on rules ”4. Use a straw man’, ’6. Hit and Run’, and ’7. Change the subject’.
There is no need for me to address your non-point, because it is, well, a non-point.
Darling himself, foolishly digging himself further into his purgerous hole, stated in the Channel 4 interview on 24th Oct that he took the entire conversation with Árni Mathiesen into account.
Of course this means that the letter sent to HM Treasury is going to sink him completely. He is in deep do do, and knows it. But he will try and cling on by his fingernails until Brown purges him.
Ah, sometimes karma comes quickly.
On Oct 29, 2008, Peter – London wrote:
>Its the act that was used to seize Kaputhings
>depositors funds – Banking (Special Provisions) Act 2008
At last! You actually posted something factually correct. Now if only you will continue to do the same here, and in your posts at FT.com…
But I know you won’t.
Eek, disinfo playbook? I seem to have been wrong about you William. I had thought that you were a knowledgable person who had an axe to grind.
Good comeback with the non-point thing though. I mean, why ask a question honestly asked when you can write an essay that avoids it?
Forgetting the spelling mistake, the second sentence makes a lot more sense if it reads “. . . why ANSWER a question . . .” :D .
On Oct 29, 2008, Bromley86 said:
>Good comeback with the non-point thing though. I mean, why [answer] a
>question honestly asked when you can write an essay that avoids it?
If you want to prove that you are not simply an agent of disinformation, the first step on that path is to first acknowledge the *possibility* – that when Darling made the following statement on October 8th:
“The Icelandic government, believe it or not, have told me yesterday they have no intention of honouring their obligations here.”
…taking the only sources of information on the Icelandic government’s position as being the transcript of his conversation with A. Mathiesen, and the letter sent to HM Treasury by the ministry…that Darling knew his statement to be false.
Oooh. Let me prove myself master :) . I’ll say “yes” and see where that takes you.
Note that, so far, that would not be my conclusion though and that the letter has not AFAIK been verified to be the one referred to in that transcript or even to be authentic. Lets’s assume that is though.
So, far so good. This is a good beginning to acknowledge the reality of this whole situation, and how serious it is going to be for the UK taxpayer, and the UK’s destination as a safe home for global capital.
This scandal now has a name BTW, ‘Geysergate’*.
So, given that we now have authentication of the letter, and given that we know that Darling and Brown’s actions were justified by them according to the conversation and letter, do you agree that if that is the case it is *possible* that Darling and Brown might not have acted with the good faith they claim?
*http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2008/10/28/17547/geysergate-the-mystery-letter/
BTW, there seems to be some confusion about the 200 million mentioned by the honorable Björgólfur Thor and also referenced in the Geysergate conversation, but that is irrelevant to this issue (although relevant to others). And the courts will also see it that way too.
(Those waiting with baited breath will see posts about that matter from me separately in the very near future.)
I’ve already said that it’s possible, although at the moment I’d assign a very low probability to that. The link adds nothing new.