Iceland’s Althingi parliament has voted in favour of sending the Icesave bill back to the parliamentary Budget Committee. After the committee’s amendments and approval, it will be able to return to parliament for its third and final reading.
The bill’s second reading has been a victim of opposition filibustering and has been held up for weeks. 32 government MPs voted for the bill accepting sovereign responsibility for British and Dutch savers’ Icesave losses. 29 MPs voted against.
Left Greens Ogmundur Jonasson and Lilja Mosesdottir were the only coalition members to vote with the opposition.
It is still not clear whether the bill can be passed into law before the New Year as promised (or if it will at all).
Next year in Jerusalem!
Bromley – Surely you remember the original Viking version:
I will not cease from Mental Fight,
Nor shall my Sword sleep in my hand:
Till we have built Icesave,
In Englands green & pleasant Land.
Hopefully a few of the 32 will recognise that honoring debts right or wrong, for some kind of overdeveloped sense of honor, will be destructive to Iceland, its sovereignty and the Icelandic people. If not, all will, in time, come to recognise this, and that the Scandinavian inclination to such an over-development of sense of honor was used deliberately by two nations with long histories of colonisation, who covet the values of Icelandic natural resources, to make Iceland a colonial fiefdom. It is better to repudiate debts incurred by foolish leaders’ mistakes than to sell one’s nation’s birthrights to wear the worthless laurel of an equally foolish reputation.
Icelanders should read Guy De Maupasant’s “The Necklace” to see what that sense of honor may bring them to twenty or so years on along.
>debts right or wrong, for some kind of overdeveloped sense of honor
Not being Icelandic I may be wrong, but I don’t think that a single one of those that have voted for Icesave in any of its iterations have voted because they feel honour-bound to do so.
They’ve voted that way because it’s apparent that the Nordics are unlikely to lend money if they don’t, because the IMF is unlikely to lend any more money if they don’t and because their membership of the EEA (and hence access to their current main market) would be put in jeopardy.
OK, someone smarter than me please explain: Icelandic banks were operating in UK and NED. They followed the local laws there. The fact that the deposit guarantee fund was not taken care of (money all spent and not put aside for the minimum guarantees) and this is ALL ONLY Iceland’s fault??? question 1: what were those UK and NED financial supervisory authorities doing all those years? didn’t the Icesave branches have to submit yearly papers to the authorities where local authorities could see the real situation? Question 2: because of this failure, is it ONLY Icelandic society’s fault now? how about 50/50 between Iceland and NED and UK? I understand that business people are not responsible for their mistakes by law (no one is liable with their own wealth for the companies failures unless special agreements made). But is there a law saying that people should pay for what they did not do?
appreciate any comments
regards.
Not claiming to be smarter than you, but some answers are:
1. Icesave was a branch of an Icelandic company, not a subsidiary. This is important because it meant that the Icelandic regulator was responsible for it, rather than say Kaupthing in the UK which was a subsidiary and which the UK FSA was responsible for.
The role of the UK & NL FSAs was, IIRC, to be happy that the Icelandic FSA was able to do its job. The role of the Icelandic FME was to do that job.
2. More importantly, it was the Icelandic deposit guarantee fund that was reponsible for meeting the minimum compensation payments in Landsbanki’s case.
3. This guarantee was always assumed to be backed by the Icelandic state (just as the other EU/EEA funds are backed by their states). There may be an argument that this is not the case, but frankly it would be impossible to prove or disprove here. If there’s one thing that I’ve learnt from watching this for over a year, it’s that anybody who claims to know for certain is lying (either to you or to themselves). The only certainty is that the EU/EEA countries have said that a state guarantee is required and Iceland has, unsurprisingly, said that it isn’t.
4. The UK & NL are taking some of the hit. I must confess that I don’t know how much by value each country is taking, but the UK is taking everything over EUR 20k per retail account and the NL everything between EUR 20k & EUR 100k, with Iceland taking everything below EUR 20k.
5. Regarding your final question, there is. The whole concept of a sovereign nation is that people regularly benefit or lose based on decisions by a government that they may not even have voted in and who may not even be following public opinion (although in that case you’d hope that it’s because they have access to more information and expertise).
Utlendingur said:
“They followed the local laws there. The fact that the deposit guarantee fund was not taken care of (money all spent and not put aside for the minimum guarantees) and this is ALL ONLY Iceland’s fault??? question 1: what were those UK and NED financial supervisory authorities doing all those years? didn’t the Icesave branches have to submit yearly papers to the authorities where local authorities could see the real situation? Question 2: because of this failure, is it ONLY Icelandic society’s fault now? ”
Icesave was regulated in Iceland and guaranteed by its depositors protection. EU countries could not stop these – already effectively bust – using the passport scheme to by pass EU regulators. NL authorities set conditions on Icesave that were thoroughly broken and this was allowed by the Icelandic regulator.
When the SHTF the UK tried to help, agreeing to allow the icesave depositors to move protection into the UK for a £200million one off payment. The Icelandic Central bank would not pay this, apparently preferring to see the banks go down.
So, Icesave is entirely Iceland’s responsibility, morally and legally.
You win some and you loose some. Those silly depositors in UK and NL should have known! Plus, not our fault some private bank went bust. Work out your own kreppa all you suckers! Banks are for losers!
Disagree with you Peter. The reason we KSFIOM depositors stand to lose cash is because of the casino-style management of KSFUK. The UK FSA should have been on top of that. And the UK FSA and government then kindly shut down all inter-regulator communication (which should have worked in accordance with a formal Memorandum of Understanding) so the UK government could ensure all the IOM savers’ cash remained in KSFUK rather than being returned to the IOM. That is, to benefit the UK government at the expense of individual British expat savers own life savings, the UK government set aside all usual international cooperation standards and expectations. OK – I can see they might want to say that they had to do this to protect UK interests (ie they couldn’t give IOM advance warning in case this blew the whole thing) but the UK should not compensate the IOM savers (via the KSFIOM Bank)on the basis that had usual rules been observed they would not have been prejudiced – ie the UK sacrificed them for the bigger picture and for a small price should now put it all right.
That should have said “now compensate” not “not compensate”
Peter – London said:
“When the SHTF the UK tried to help, agreeing to allow the icesave depositors to move protection into the UK for a £200million one off payment.”
That information is attributed to (the disgraced) Björgólfur Thór Björgólfsson, former owner of Landsbanki.
Is there any other link which would add some degree of substance to that claim?
steveservaes:
You are correct, the UK FSA had responsibility to stay on top of the situations in all banking in Britain. The Dutch FSA all in Netherlands. Neither could responsibly believe that a nation the size of Iceland could back the banking activities of Icelandic banks operating in Britain and Netherlands. The two FSA’s either failed to regulate financial activities per their responsibilities, or they deliberately allowed and or encouraged over-extensions, then pulled the plugs for national interests. In Britain there was also an element of incompetence and unpreparedness: The demise of Northern Rock revealed that Britain’s own banking guarantee, or insurance scheme was a shell. Words on paper with no funding, or mechanism for funding, in place to back the promises. Totally unprepared,, Britain screwed everyone it could as much as it could to save itself revealing it was unprepared and to shift its responsibilities off shore, to the Isle of Man, to Iceland, to anyone it thought it might bully.
Bromley86: Your testimony is that Iceland, and Icelanders are being blackmailed: “Accept a 300% of gdp debt per person, to be paid through foreign exploitation of youyr resources, or be cut-off, left to starve, abandoned by all who are respectable, Scandinavians, Europeans, the World and Dog.” If you are right it is the Global Corporatii, not Britain and Netherlands who engineered. Britain, Netherlands and Bank Governor Oddsson are all operators for World Corp.
It is always appropriate to tell blackmailers to sod off. It is especially appropriate when the blackmailers’ demand is for peonage (indenture) of your people and their children and their children, and your and their birthright of exploitable natural resources. There is in the laws of civilised nations a category of “unconscionable”. Unconscionable imposition obviates obligation. Both Britain and Netherlands would claim the imposition they would impose unconscionable if they were in the Iceland role.
Icelanders can look to where Britain and Netherlands colonised before to see what acquiescing to blackmail, for any reason, will bring them.
Hello Bromley86 – or should I say young Brumley : )
>The UK & NL are taking some of the hit. I must confess that I don’t know how much by value each country is taking, but the UK is taking everything over EUR 20k per retail account
I was having a look around to see if I could find anything definitive about the alleged claim that Landsbanki was offered deposit protection via UK scheme for a one off fee of £200 million – couldn’t find anything substantive.
http://www.icenews.is/index.php/2009/12/08/icesave-back-to-committee-before-third-and-final-reading/#comment-105264
However, I revisited Wiki Iceland Dispute which seen to be amended since I last looked.
It states:
“Talks began almost immediately in Brussels with the mediation of France, which held the rotating Presidency of the European Council. An outline agreement was reached on 16 November, with the Icelandic government accepting to guarantee the liabilities of the Tryggingarsjóður.[78] On 18 November, once the IMF Board had approved its emergency loan, the UK agreed to loan £2.2 billion (€2.6bn) to Iceland. The Netherlands agreed to loan €1.3 billion and Germany agreed to loan €1.1 billion. The repayment conditions were still the subject of negotiation with EU involvement. The Dutch government confirmed on 20 November that its loan to Iceland had been finalised.[79]”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icesave_dispute
However, the £2.2 billion figure doesn’t correlate with press reports. The Times put a figure of £800 million on the cost of reimbursing to total amount deposited by retail customers. So where does the other £1.2 billion fit in….?
Additionally – to make things even more confusing – the Wiki article also states.
“the UK Treasury has exceptionally guaranteed retail deposits in excess of £50,000 which were held in Icelandic-owned banks in the UK at the time of the crisis, at a cost of some £1.4 billion (€1.7bn).”
Finally this section of the Wiki article could be amusing if money were not involved!
“The dispute over deposit insurance is not without some irony. In April 2008, Landsbanki launched a scathing attack on the UK Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS) after the FSCS had implied on its website (without specifically mentioning Icesave) that depositors guaranteed under the “passport system” might have to wait longer for their money in the event of a bank failure than depositors with banks which were completely under the FSCS. Landsbanki went as far as accusing the FSCS of breaching European law “by letting savers believe this falsehood”.[65] A second irony is that FSCS had raised its guarantee level from £35,000 to £50,000 on the very day that Landsbanki went into default, a move that doesn’t affect the liability of the Tryggingarsjóður under the “passport system” but which has considerably increased the cost to British banks and building societies (independently of any action by the Icelandic authorities).”
Ooops
Link to Times report!
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/banking_and_finance/article5102162.ece
Hello Silvia
>You win some and you loose some. Those silly depositors in UK and NL should have known! Plus, not our fault some private bank went bust. Work out your own kreppa all you suckers! Banks are for losers!
Seasonal greetings to you also : )
Hello Giova Bocca
You said
>”used deliberately by two nations with long histories of colonisation, who covet the values of Icelandic natural resources, to make Iceland a colonial fiefdom.”
Well said, I am still experiencing PTSD as a consequence of the Romans, those pesky Vikings – raping and pillaging, and I can’t bring myself to talk about 1066.
Shouldn’t you be throwing rocks at a G20 summit?
Effectively you are correct. Assume for the moment that the guarantee without doubt required state support. Then assume that a member of the club says that they don’t feel like honouring that. The only option left is to withdraw privileges and sieze what you can.
Now the only part of that chain that may not be true is the first part. And, even then, even Icelands best friends within the EU have told them that it is, otherwise the Swedes would have okayed their loan. Likewise Norway in the EEA.
Terry. Thanks for the wiki heads-up.
Do you think it would help if I said that 86 was my school number? And that I’m not from Birmingham? :)
Terry, well said!
@Giova Bocca,
You said:
“the UK FSA had responsibility to stay on top of the situations in all banking in Britain. The Dutch FSA all in Netherlands. Neither could responsibly believe that a nation the size of Iceland could back the banking activities of Icelandic banks operating in Britain and Netherlands. The two FSA’s either failed to regulate financial activities per their responsibilities, or they deliberately allowed and or encouraged over-extensions, then pulled the plugs for national interests.
”
This is not correct and it as been discussed a lot in previous threads. The facts in the Netherlands were as follows:
-in early 2008 when Icesave started operating in NL it was getting clear to the dutch FSA (De Nederlandse Bank) that Landsbanki and other icelandic banks were in a bad situation. However under EFTA law it was not possible to deny Icesave a banking license (this is a weakness in european laws).
-The dutch FSA decided to make a secret arrangement with Icesave (secret- in order not to harm the operations of Icesave as this- again- would be a violation of EU law). The following demands were made:
-Icesave would only attract a limited number of depositors
-Landsbanki (the parent company) would create a pool of liquididy, large enough to cover the first 20.000 euro of every account in Icesave (this also happens to be an EU law)
-Landsbanki failed to live up to both promesses.
-In NL nobody pulled the plug. When Landsbanki could not meet its obligations anymore the Icesave website was shut down and depositors could not access their account any longer.
-Landsbanki, or the icelandic state which had taken over all the banks, did not have enough liquidity to pay the 20.000 euro per account which it was legally obliged to cover.
-Therefore the UK, NL and Germany lent money to the icelandic government.
-This must be repaid and that is what the fuzz is about.
You also said:
”
Icelanders can look to where Britain and Netherlands colonised before to see what acquiescing to blackmail, for any reason, will bring them.
”
O, I feel soooooooooooo guilty about our colonial past, really I cannot sleep because of it.
I feel just as much guilty as the icelanders do about their viking past.
>Do you think it would help if I said that 86 was my school number? And that I’m not from Birmingham? :)
Brumely does have advantages – think of the cherished personal plate!
http://www.4qd.co.uk/evs/pics/brum.jpeg
“However under EFTA law it was not possible to deny Icesave a banking license (this is a weakness in european laws)”
Iceland could do nothing to stop this for the same reason”
The dutch FSA decided to make a secret arrangement with Icesave (secret- in order not to harm the operations of Icesave as this- again- would be a violation of EU law). The following demands were made:
-Icesave would only attract a limited number of depositors
-Landsbanki (the parent company) would create a pool of liquididy, large enough to cover the first 20.000 euro of every account in Icesave (this also happens to be an EU law)
Illegal secret deal, sounds dishonest to me, people of poor quality often make illegal secret deals and are always surprized when the counterpart (often of similar quality) does not live up to the illegal deal.
“-Landsbanki, or the icelandic state which had taken over all the banks, did not have enough liquidity to pay the 20.000 euro per account which it was legally obliged to cover”
No one has ever wanted to refuse to pay the 20k Euro, its just the way its done that is being discussed, the icesave deal as it was initially presented was just a pathetic atempt to colonize iceland, thats how i see it.
The current version is unacceptable,
no Dutch or Brits will ever take ownership of anything in Iceland trough any deal,
if they try they will fail, if you want to take that road im sure we can find a way to inflict pain also.
Iceland has not recieved any loan from UK/NL
the Icesave deal is the loan in question, it has not been granted state guarantee.
“O, I feel soooooooooooo guilty about our colonial past, really I cannot sleep because of it.
I feel just as much guilty as the icelanders do about their viking past.”
The reason you dont feel guilty about your history of genocide, drug production, murdering and theft in the past, usually involving defeceless people is that nothing has changed.
The reason Vikings went to England to kill Cristians was because the Cristians were killing people and burning because of religion (and to steal property),
as strange as it must sound to you the Vikings thougt they were doing them a favor, if you die in a fight you go to Valholl where you can fight and die for Odinn every day for eternity, not if you die of old age.
Really?
Anyhoo, if you want to feel proud of your rose-tinted, Disney version of your ancestors, then bully for you.
From the Darling-Mathiesen transcript:-
Darling: What I … I take it therefore that the promise Landsbanki gave us, that is was going to get 200 million pounds of liquidity back into it, has gone as well.
Mathiesen: Yes, they didn’t get that liquidity.
Presumably this was the £200 million that Björgólfur Thór Björgólfsson was referring to. I’m not aware of any other British Government reference to that £200 million other than this phone conversation between the 2 finance ministers, either in public or in leaked documents.
“Anyhoo, if you want to feel proud of your rose-tinted, Disney version of your ancestors, then bully for you”
The Vikings did their killings 1000 years ago,
Brits and Dutch have been murdering and robbing people to take over resources ever since,
the top predator nations now are USA and UK
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/dec/12/tony-blair-iraq-chilcot-inquiry?s
I guess Iran is next, it would not surprize me if Iran would put up one h*ll of a fight, they are at least twice as tough as Iraq and have also seen what happened to Iraq.
USA is on the brink of collapse, it cant print its way out of trouble forever, Uk isnt looking good either.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-UUBTASHHU
There is absolutely nothing of substance to suggest that the claim put forward here as fact, namely that for a “£200million one off payment” the UK would have taken over 100% the Icesave deposit guarantee, was anything more than a fantasy.
All the evidence points to that this claim was a devious card played by the Landsbanki owner Björgólfsson in Oct 2008, either to suck out more liquidity from the Iceland CB to string along the UK operation or a naive attempt to pass the buck to the Iceland CB.
@Axel
You said:
“Iceland could do nothing to stop this for the same reason”
Unfortunately you seem to lack understanding of some basic things. I could be nasty and attribute this to the icelandic school system, but let’s not get ad hominem.
Nobody forced Iceland to change its economic system, which had worked well for years, into the cowboy capitalism which led to the crash. Moreover, nobody forced the financial wizzards of Landsbanki to come up with Icesave.
“Illegal secret deal, sounds dishonest to me, people of poor quality often make illegal secret deals and are always surprized when the counterpart (often of similar quality) does not live up to the illegal deal.”
There was nothing illegal about these deals. Mind you that making these deals public would violate the operations of Icesave/ Landbanki which would violate EFTA/EU law.
The only thing one could criticize the dutch FSA for (and this has been done a lot here) is the fact that they placed too much trust in the icleandic side and failed to oversee things properly.
“Iceland has not recieved any loan from UK/NL”
Again you are totally wrong, form the wiki on the Icesave dispute:
“Talks began almost immediately in Brussels with the mediation of France, which held the rotating Presidency of the European Council. An outline agreement was reached on 16 November, with the Icelandic government accepting to guarantee the liabilities of the Tryggingarsjóður.[78] On 18 November, once the IMF Board had approved its emergency loan, the UK agreed to loan £2.2 billion (€2.6bn) to Iceland. The Netherlands agreed to loan €1.3 billion and Germany agreed to loan €1.1 billion. The repayment conditions were still the subject of negotiation with EU involvement. The Dutch government confirmed on 20 November that its loan to Iceland had been finalised.[79]”
source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icesave_dispute
Plenty of other sources available too.
You said:
“the icesave deal as it was initially presented was just a pathetic atempt to colonize iceland, thats how i see it.
The current version is unacceptable,”
I do not think the UK / NL want to colonize Iceland. They just want their money back. And I agree to the fact that conditions should be bearable for Iceland, but you must blame your own negotiators for the fact that they were unable to reach satisfactory conditions for Iceland, just like you must blame your own politicians and bussinesmen for the fact that they managed to bring down a country wich had a lot going for it.
“,
no Dutch or Brits will ever take ownership of anything in Iceland trough any deal,
if they try they will fail, if you want to take that road im sure we can find a way to inflict pain also.
”
I am not proud to say this since I like Iceland, but fact of the matter is that the UK/NL, the IMF and the EU can push Iceland around just the way they want it. The behaviour of the icelandic goberment and the icelandic negotiators clearly demonstrates this.
“The reason you dont feel guilty about your history of genocide, drug production, murdering and theft in the past, usually involving defeceless people is that nothing has changed.”
Axel, you forgot to mention prostitution.
“The reason Vikings went to England to kill Cristians was because the Cristians were killing people and burning because of religion (and to steal property),
as strange as it must sound to you the Vikings thougt they were doing them a favor, if you die in a fight you go to Valholl where you can fight and die for Odinn every day for eternity, not if you die of old age.”
As strange as it might sound to you, I am not surprised at all by this argument. In the past our forefathers thought they were doing well to the people they colonized because they were bringing christianity to them and thus were saving their souls.
Only difference between me and you is that I learned in school that this argument was false and hypocritical (since the only motivation of these raids was profit) and you obviously did not.
Interesting. So it’s alright to be proud of your raping and murdering (not to mention stealing) ancestors as long as it happened, what, more than 200 years ago? 300?
And Iceland was a member of the multinational force that went into Iraq. Whether you guys suppied troops or not I’m not sure, but it does make taking the moral high ground on that one tough.
Axel,
You reasoning is just plain wrong. First of all you seem to imply that crimes committed 1000 years ago are less severe than crimes committed , say, 800 years ago.
Next to this you have said:
“The reason Vikings went to England to kill Cristians was because the Cristians were killing people and burning because of religion (and to steal property),
”
What happened in Iceland when Iceland became christian? Didn’t christians kill pagans then?
And when Iceland became protestant, didn’t kill protestants catholics then?
This happened later than in Europe.
So you just don’t make sense.
Icelanders were running Kabul Airport in 2004. From http://www.nato.int/docu/update/2004/06-june/e0618b.htm
‘Jaap de Hoop Scheffer discussed Afghanistan and the Istanbul Summit agenda in talks with Prime Minister David Oddsson and Foreign Minister Halldor Asgrimsson. He thanked Iceland for its contribution to NATO’s missions in the Balkans and Afghanistan.
“Without Iceland, Kabul airport would not be operational, and without the airport the NAT0-led mission would not be possible,” the Secretary General told reporters during his visit.’
However, Kabul got a bit exciting for the Icelanders. From http://www.iceland.org/un/nyc/the-embassy/statements-news/nr/806
‘We strongly condemn vicious attacks on peacekeeping personnel such as the one last Saturday when a group of Icelandic peacekeepers was the target of a suicide bomber in Kabul. Three of the Icelanders were injured in the attack along with numerous bystanders, two of whom were killed in the attack along with the bomber.’
I recall there was some comment in Iceland at the time as to why the Icelanders in Kabul were carrying weapons.
Hello Niels and Axel
Axel said
“Illegal secret deal, sounds dishonest to me, people of poor quality often make illegal secret deals and are always surprized when the counterpart (often of similar quality) does not live up to the illegal deal.”
Niels said
“There was nothing illegal about these deals. Mind you that making these deals public would violate the operations of Icesave/ Landbanki which would violate EFTA/EU law.
The only thing one could criticize the dutch FSA for (and this has been done a lot here) is the fact that they placed too much trust in the icleandic side and failed to oversee things properly.”
To add a third dimension – the UK it would seem did not pursue such course, (and there was not requirement for them to do so – although saying this I am reminded of Fisy’s assertion that the Dutch were more ‘gentlemanly’).
Axel, you accuse the Dutch of secret deals, when perhaps it as kindly diplomacy.
Axel said
“the icesave deal as it was initially presented was just a pathetic atempt to colonize iceland, thats how i see it.
The current version is unacceptable,”
Niels responded
“I do not think the UK / NL want to colonize Iceland. They just want their money back. And I agree to the fact that conditions should be bearable for Iceland, but you must blame your own negotiators for the fact that they were unable to reach satisfactory conditions for Iceland, just like you must blame your own politicians and bussinesmen for the fact that they managed to bring down a country wich had a lot going for it.”
Axel said
“no Dutch or Brits will ever take ownership of anything in Iceland trough any deal,
if they try they will fail, if you want to take that road im sure we can find a way to inflict pain also.”
Well again Axel, I have to agree with Niels. With the problems on our joint Dutch/UK plate, perhaps the colonisation of Iceland and its resources is not a priority.
Vikings V Christians etc, as with colonisation – don’t see the relevance.
Axel said.
“No one has ever wanted to refuse to pay the 20k Euro, its just the way its done that is being discussed, the icesave deal as it was initially presented was just a pathetic atempt to colonize iceland, thats how i see it.”
Oh, Axel – I utterly agree with Niels where he said:
“I do not think the UK / NL want to colonize Iceland. They just want their money back. And I agree to the fact that conditions should be bearable for Iceland, but you must blame your own negotiators for the fact that they were unable to reach satisfactory conditions for Iceland, just like you must blame your own politicians and bussinesmen for the fact that they managed to bring down a country wich had a lot going for it.”
There seems to be paranoia within Iceland, relating to a retaliatory pillaging of your country and resources. I don’t for one moment think so.
The Vikings killed anything that moved, both here and all over the world, they even went to America long before any one else and killed some indians, the killings here in Iceland were so massive that parliament had to pass laws to make it illegal to kill 2 members of the same family, but the Vikings stopped killing a long time ago, they finally got tired of endless blood reveges and wars, one could say they grew up or evolved, if European countries could have done the same the world would be very different, but unfortunetly europeans like to be fooled by people working for the elite, like Blair, Brown, Mandelson etc.. so they are doomed to be slaves as they have always been, there is no difference between Brown and Cameron, both are working towards EU fully controling UK, that means the Euro instead of GBP and all major desicions come from Germany and France, Britain was deliberately ruined, there is no way im believing this was all by accident.
“And Iceland was a member of the multinational force that went into Iraq. Whether you guys suppied troops or not I’m not sure, but it does make taking the moral high ground on that one tough.”
That desicion was made without parliament approval by David Oddson and Halldor Asgrimsson, a illegal desicion whitch goes against the counstitution, the declaration of support has been withdrawn,
maybe thats why we dont have a US ambassador.
The decision to invade Iran has already been made, all that is needed now is a excuse that the general public will accept, at least while the invasion takes place, i think if the Brits are smart they should not take part in this, the surprize element in this could be that Iran already have nuclear weapons, other states in the region may support them, like Lybia and Pakistan for example, the west needs to invade Iran for oil, no one is buying USA debt anymore and the banker elite have sucked the country dry of money and resources, wars are a part of the US GDP, they see this as a source of income and have done that from the start, some people seem to think there is something noble about US war monging, one of the elements to keep this insanity going is that stupidity.
“Brown and Cameron, both are working towards EU fully controling UK, that means the Euro instead of GBP”
There is absolutely no way the UK will adopt the euro. Not in my lifetime. There are simply too many benefits for the UK in being able to set its own interest rates. We’re more likely to adopt Islamic law than the euro…
“There is absolutely no way the UK will adopt the euro. Not in my lifetime. There are simply too many benefits for the UK in being able to set its own interest rates”
I hope you are right but its seems unlikely,
i think 2010 is going to be tough.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yH8OBWv2_TY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cuOLhN9qcUI&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cuOLhN9qcUI&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIt-djh0xvk&feature=related