Sunday, January 3, 2010

The dilemma for Iceland's President

 I got to say the guy is between a rock and a hard place.

Angry Icelanders are petitioning their president, putting pressure on him not to sign a controversial bill that has divided the North Atlantic island.
Tens of thousands of signatures opposing the so-called Icesave legislation were delivered to his official residence.
They are aimed at convincing President Olafur Ragnar Grimsson to reject a deal under which Reykjavik would have to repay 3.8 billion euros lost by British and Dutch savers when Icelandic banks went under during the financial crisis.

I am wondering if the label of terrorism weighs on their minds. And will the name be wielded at them again if they reject the repayment, this time with repercussions?
Remember when?

UK uses Anti-Terrorism Legislation to Seize £4 Billion from Iceland

A question?

What is terrorism, really, if anti-terror laws can be invoked in favour of the banks?


  1. I like it when people use the words, "terrorism" and "what is it?" in the same sentence, because it draws home what terrorism actually is;

    Terrorism - the use of fear to intimidate people, especially for political purposes.

    So working backwards from that logic, lets start with:

    Political Purposes - the president of Iceland is worried about making a political decision because;
    Intimidated People - ... both he and his countrymen feel that they're being intimidated;
    Cause they're fearful - of subjecting themselves to generational debt.

    So in this instance, the terrorists would be the parties trying to secure that debt. It's still terrorism.

  2. Ah, edo you get where I was going with the question...

    I asked intentionally, because I was thinking, the common interpretation of a terrorist is, well, the underwear bomber.

    but how is it that Iceland and it's people can be "terrorists" and deemed to be committing "terrorism"

    They did nothing wrong, the banks and all their shenanigans are the problem.

    But, it is not the banks being held to task.

    Which begs the question what the hell is this terrorism, really?

    And are these terrorism laws in place to terrorize everyone and anyone?

  3. "..are these terrorism laws in place to terrorize everyone and anyone?"


  4. The subject of Iceland is one that I find fascinating. In the area where I live I am virtually surrounded by Icelanders,I mean really. For twenty miles in three directions virtually all of my neighbors are Icelandic, they even have their own cemetery,called
    you guessed it "The Icelandic Cemetery". They are a clannish bunch, but having said that what I find fascinating is that when asked how things are going in Iceland, yuh know for family and such back in the old country, not one of them is even aware that there is a problem,that Iceland is broke, not one. And when you tell them about what is going on in Iceland they just give you the deer caught in the headlights stare, as if to say "your kidding, if this was really happening it would have been on the news.

    The power of ignorance is truly a wondrous thing. Control the peoples ignorance and you control the peoples purse, control the peoples purse and you control the press, control the press and you control the ignorance of the people. And the rest as they say is history.

  5. I'm liking the fact that the Icelandic president is putting this to a referendum, and I'll like it even more when the population votes to block it...

    In fact, I'll be pissing my pants.

    And, before you ask, I won't feel sorry (not in the slightest) for the 320,000 people in the UK and Holland that are left out of pocket. Serves them right. It's about time speculators and money-men started feeling the pinch.

  6. silverfish:
    I didn't think there were many Icelanders in these parts of the country, well your part of the country anyway.

    How is it they are so unaware?

    Do they not maintain contact with family?

    I know the msm hasn't touched the news so I can see that angle of it, but beyond that I do not understand the ignorance?

  7. A referendum?
    This should be interesting.
    If the people vote to not pay it back, will the gov defy the wishes of the people?

  8. Hey Penny,

    parliament proposed the bill, which needs the presidents authorisation. As per the constitution, he put it to a referendum.

    That said, we all know what sort of spin EU can put on referendums...

  9. Go Iceland ! Don't pay them back ! It was your labour that built your country, not worthless debt notes !

    Why should you replace that paper with your sweat equity ? Only one reason: the Crown has a big gun pointed your way and this is forced slavery.