New Terrorist State Emerges

[N320]

UK defends itself against terrorist Vikings! It is a good thing those terrorist laws are in place, you just never know who is going to be a terrorist next! Hell, if we NZ'ers piss off the banks we may be terrorists too! After all, we are borrowing 40 million a week to keep up with all the socialist policies of Natlab.

Nordic Terror: UK Puts Iceland on Terrorist List
By: Ian Welsh Saturday October 25, 2008 12:30 pm

Evidence of a terrorist explosion

One of the casualties of the financial crisis which has gotten little notice in the US is Icleand, and it went down in a particularly ugly fashion. Gordon Brown, the UK’s fantastically unpopular Prime Minister, said that Icelandic banks had threatened to not honor obligations to British account holders, so he declared Iceland a terrorist country and seized the banks assets. This caused the banks to go under and the Icelandic economy to implode to the extent that if Russia hadn’t sent them billions of dollars, they would have literally starved, since they need to import food.

Yes, they asked the US and their friends in the EU for money first, but apparently only Vladimir Putin cared enough about Iceland’s impending famine to do anything about it. It’s times like these when you find out who your friends are. I imagine the Icelanders are feeling a lot warmer towards Russia these days. Perhaps Putin would like a nice naval base there?

Leaving aside, for just a moment, the absurdity of labeling Iceland a terrorist country, the problem is this: Icelanders are saying "prove it" with respect to the allegation that they threatened to not honor account withdrawals, and so far Gordon Brown hasn’t come up with proof.

The thing about Icelandic banks is that they were offshore banks. As a friend of mine in the industry said "this is where the City sent stuff that was too dubious even for them". Iceland made money by doing the deals that were, not dirt exactly, but highly highly speculative and leveraged and in some cases shady. (People go to offshore havens to dodge taxes and keep money private, after all.) Which is to say, the Brits knew these banks were shaky, because they were an extension of the city. So odds are, they just decided to preemptively seize the assets and shut them down, without even giving them a chance (or help.) This is also why Icelanders paid almost no tax, and lived well for years, because huge amounts of money were going into the country. Laissez faire stupidity works when you’re an island with a small population and huge amounts of money churn from foreigners.

Back to the "terrorism" charge. The side effect of the terrorism charge for a country is that a lot of people don’t want to, or can’t do business with you. They know it’s a BS charge, but, legally, you are on the damn list. So not only is Iceland’s economy in free fall, but they’re now partially cut off from cutting deals and doing business.

The British terrorism law is, in this respect, no worse than the US one or those of many other countries. You get on these lists by administrative or executive fiat, there is no way off the lists except political intervention, the criteria is completely arbitrary and opaque. Sort of like the no-fly list in the US, for ordinary people.

These laws were never meant to be used this way, of course. Gordon Brown did something with the law that its writers would have never intended. But that’s the problem—when you give someone a power, they will use it as they see fit, to the widest extent they can. Such laws are extremely dangerous and both the UK and US have a large number of them: laws that allow the executive to hold anyone without charge, to go to war without a declaration of war, to spy on whoever they want without a court reviewing the decision, and so on.

[N320]

It is a good thing all those laws will only be used against bad people. You have nothing to fear if you are innocent, Comrade!

If this were just a joke it would be funny. If it were a joke, no one would believe it though, because it is so absurd.


Gordon Brown, not Iceland, acted like a terrorist

By Daniel Hannan Politics Last updated: October 24th, 2008

Check out this website, run by Icelanders who could not believe that the leader of a country they admired would use anti-terrorist laws against them. Good on you, Iceland. We were as shocked as you.

It cannot be emphasised too often that, Gordon Brown used anti-terrorist legislation, not to seize the assets of Landsbanki, the bank which he accused of being about to default on its obligations to British depositors, but of a wholly unrelated bank, Kaupthing, whose only connection with Landsbanki was that both are headquartered in Iceland.

In doing so, the Broon provoked a run on the parent company, collapsed the bank, impoverished Iceland and made it much harder for Reykjavik to meet its obligations. In other words, for the sake of giving himself what Labour MPs called “his Falklands moment”, he made it less likely that British depositors would get their money back in the short term (there has never been any question that it will be returned in due course).

To put it another way, the PM has collapsed the economy of a Nato ally and damaged British interests into the bargain. It is he, not the Icelanders, who has failed to observe the norms of behaviour among civilised states.

[NZPumpkin]

which brings me back to one of my favourite points.

politicians are all only out for number one and have way to much power for their own good.

guy fawks had the right idea

[pox]

Gordon Brown, the UK’s fantastically unpopular Prime Minister,

And he is still Prime Minister because......??

(Rhetorical question, really. What means do us peasants have to chuck the King from the throne that won't get us imprisoned or executed?)

[mde]

Gordon Brown, the UK’s fantastically unpopular Prime Minister,

And he is still Prime Minister because......??

(Rhetorical question, really. What means do us peasants have to chuck the King from the throne that won't get us imprisoned or executed?)

He is still Prime Minister because despite several attempts, nobody in the Labour Party has triggered the mechanism to replace him and he has not stepped down from his position.

As to the second question, it is what all unpopular polititicans fear in a democracy, the general election, which will happen this year.

[pox]

Gordon Brown, the UK’s fantastically unpopular Prime Minister,

And he is still Prime Minister because......??

(Rhetorical question, really. What means do us peasants have to chuck the King from the throne that won't get us imprisoned or executed?)

He is still Prime Minister because despite several attempts, nobody in the Labour Party has triggered the mechanism to replace him and he has not stepped down from his position.

As to the second question, it is what all unpopular polititicans fear in a democracy, the general election, which will happen this year.

I quite like what Mr. Churchill said: "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others." You could not pay me enough to live in England, they seem to be using 1984 as a play book over there.

[N320]

Some assembly may be required.

[Perana]

Seconded

[N320]

Look out for a new wave of terrorism to come from the UK. Goldfish dealers! Yep, gotta keep those grannies locked up when an undercover sting operation proves she sold a goldfish to an underage boy.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/family/pets/ ... r-old.html

This is serious stuff here so no jokes! It's for the children ya know! It starts with a goldfish but then moves on to harder pets like lizards and then, gasp, mammals!