It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A story missing from our media: Iceland's on-going revolution

page: 1
26
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 03:50 PM
link   

A story missing from our media: Iceland's on-going revolution


www.newsnetscotland. com

Geir Haarde, the Prime Minister of a Social Democratic coalition government, negotiated a two million one hundred thousand dollar loan, to which the Nordic countries added another two and a half million. But the foreign financial community pressured Iceland to impose drastic measures. The FMI and the European Union wanted to take over its debt, claiming this was the only way for the country to pay back Holland and Great Britain, who had promised to reimburse their citizens.

Protests and riots continued, eventually forcing the government to resign. Elections were brought forward to April
(visit the link for the full news article)


edit on Thu Sep 1 2011 by DontTreadOnMe because: title must match source title



+2 more 
posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 03:50 PM
link   
This is a story about a small country kicking worthless politicians out of office, standing up to big corrupt banks, going after those at fault, refusing to pay for what someone else did, not giving into International demands, forming a new Constitution, making use of the Internet and live streaming video.

We should and could learn from Iceland, know that it is possible. This is some good news for a change! Go Iceland. =)

Surprise surprise, not one mention from the MSM. =/

www.newsnetscotland. com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 04:11 PM
link   
reply to post by oconnection
 


That sounds good to me,I hated to hear about the whole bank rip off and was ashamed to have been a UK citizen at the time,I am really glad to see Iceland are bouncing back.
I just hope Katla doesn't mess things up for you folks.
Maximum regards from Wales UK.



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by oconnection
 


No their banks failed, their banks sucked large amounts of peoples council tax's Paid by each British citizen, they owe us millions off pounds, it should be paid back. If they don't like it tough.


edit on 1-9-2011 by AnonymousFem because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by AnonymousFem
reply to post by oconnection
 


No their banks failed, their banks sucked large amounts of peoples council tax's Paid by each British citizen, they owe us millions off pounds, it should be paid back. If they don't like it tough.


edit on 1-9-2011 by AnonymousFem because: (no reason given)
The BANKS should pay you back. The PEOPLE of Iceland had little influence over what the banks did. Pursue the banks investors and former owners for recompense.



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 04:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by AnonymousFem
reply to post by oconnection
 


No their banks failed, their banks sucked large amounts of peoples council tax's Paid by each British citizen, they owe us millions off pounds, it should be paid back. If they don't like it tough.


edit on 1-9-2011 by AnonymousFem because: (no reason given)



... seriously? have you read about bankers? do you not know what is going on in the world? wake the ef up.



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 04:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by AnonymousFem
reply to post by oconnection
 


No their banks failed, their banks sucked large amounts of peoples council tax's Paid by each British citizen, they owe us millions off pounds, it should be paid back. If they don't like it tough.


Anonymous
might you have any figures on how much interest has already been paid on the loan?



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 05:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by AnonymousFem
reply to post by oconnection
 


No their banks failed, their banks sucked large amounts of peoples council tax's Paid by each British citizen, they owe us millions off pounds, it should be paid back. If they don't like it tough.


edit on 1-9-2011 by AnonymousFem because: (no reason given)


I'm not picking on you but, did the British citizens participate in the decision to "loan" this money? Or was that the Bank's decision?

The answer is not a trap... I really think that if you as a nation conducted a financial exchange with another nation, it should have been understood in terms of the risks, etc, of such "investment." In the end I think all loans are "investments" or there would be no need for interest other than the paltry sum of paying a handful of bankers.... unless those bankers demand payments in the billions, of course.

Good faith is important. But I think the people of England (at large) would never even have known of this transaction had it not failed.... just like the many other nations that participate in the baker's paradigm of monetary policy and mercantilism.



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 06:04 PM
link   
reply to post by sonofliberty1776
 


Then the Icelandic people should be forcing their banks to pay back each British council taxs payer instead of saying, it is not their problem.

The there would not problems what so ever.



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 06:06 PM
link   
reply to post by derickonfire
 


And why dont you do the exact same thing. The Icelandic people are crying foul over this, where they crying foul when the banks in Iceland were misleading and profiteering from the British Council Tax Payers ? No they were not.



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 06:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 


If the Icelandic people gained such things as infrastructure investment then yes, they should be held accountable, And if their Government knew this was going on and gave no inclination that, the investments/loans might fail then they are held to account.

Would you be saying the exact same thing or sticking up for them if it was you whom was affected by this? No you would not be.
edit on 1-9-2011 by AnonymousFem because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 06:12 PM
link   
reply to post by RedGolem
 


I am sure you can work it out for yourself after all it is calculated at £2.2 Billion.

Funny how would Americans react if this happened to them? Would they let it go no they would not. Iceland would have had sanctions slapped on them, maybe threats also.

edit on 1-9-2011 by AnonymousFem because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 06:25 PM
link   
reply to post by AnonymousFem
 


Allow me to give you a lesson on banks especially the federal reserve bank so you can grasp the better idea.




Now, after you watch this, you may ask "What does this have to do with Iceland?" well it is simple, the root of the Federal Reserve is the same root as the bank that is or was in Iceland. Meaning they operate the same way. Any Banks that have this root has control over any country it has it's grasp on. Now Tracing back to the root of the problem, you find those who are truly responsible and they are the british empire /Rockefeller's/bilderbergers /Rothschild.

Btw, what was the first thing they established in libya after the bombing? yup a new central bank controlled by the Rothschild's.
edit on 1-9-2011 by RisenAngel77 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 06:32 PM
link   
reply to post by RisenAngel77
 


So I give my opinion and everyone jumps on me? Fine perfect.

If it was the USA Owed this money would you all be saying the same thing? Or if it was your own tax payer, within your own country, owed this money, would you be saying the exact same thing. Answer NO You would not be.

If it was the USA they would have slapped sanctions on them by now, or sent a carrier group as a threat. As they have done in the past. So look out your back door before criticizing me for my opinions.

And another thing we are paying for our banks failures. So why shouldn't they in Iceland?
edit on 1-9-2011 by AnonymousFem because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 06:48 PM
link   
reply to post by AnonymousFem
 


It isn't that we are jumping on you, we are simply trying to open your mind a bit more. Here is an example I will give you.

Person A break a window or property of Person B. However person B thinks Person C (who had nothing to do with said window) should be held responsible. Why should Person C pay for something Person A breaks?

Now that I gave that example, are you saying that we should pay for something someone else did when we were against it in the first place? No, you are sadly mistaken, I am responsible for MY own actions, not someone elses, I refuse to pay for someone else s mistakes, that is why revolutions take place. and anyone who says otherwise is just trolling or simply being biast.



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 06:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by AnonymousFem
reply to post by sonofliberty1776
 


Then the Icelandic people should be forcing their banks to pay back each British council taxs payer instead of saying, it is not their problem.


when you invest there is risk - if the investment collapses then it is the investors who should carry the risk - they demand payment for the risk after all!

Other countries decided to bail out their banks & the bank investors - Iceland decided to let the risk stay where it lay.

Then the countries who's banks had lent to Iceland decided to bail out the banks decided that they wanted Iceland to pay for hte bailout.

but Iceland is under no obligation to do so whatsoever - the British Govt decided to pay a fortune to it's banks & citizens rather than let them lose money when Icelands banks collapsed - that is the British Govt's decision - not Icelands.

Both approaches have worked - the British banks did not have massive losses to pass onto their customers, and the Icelandic taxpayer has not had to pick up the tab from Brtish (and other foreign) banks who wanted the high returns from Iceland, but none of the risk.

Surehte british tax payer is picking up the bill - but that is not the choice of the Icelandic govt - that is the choice of het British Govt.

worldwide, IMO, the main problem is twofold:

1/ Organisations (banks, finance firms, etc) looked at profits that could be made without bothering to accurately assess the risks involved - in some cases there was deception involved - liek teh sub-prime loans "packaged" with good loans into CDC's in the USA, but basically everythong thought hte high returns could go on without risk. And

2/ Payment for the resulting crash has been seen to be spread unfairly - the high flyers at the banks etc might have had a year or 2 without bonuses & many lost their jobs at institutions that did collapse - but "they" are right back to paying millions across what remains of the industry and being fithy rich in the first place didn't suffer much pain from their losses - there is no sense that any great penalty has been paid by those seen as guilty.

People should not kid themselves that allowing the big banks to collapse would have made things any better - far from it - it would have been a total disaster instead of "just" a major one - but the sight of many of the "players" back to wallowing in massive paychecks is pretty sickening!


edit on 1-9-2011 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 06:52 PM
link   
reply to post by RisenAngel77
 


Are you accusing me of being a Troll and Biased?


So if you were forced to bail our your banks over another bank in another country, which failed and you were threatened to loose your investments whom would you hold accountable for it. And if the government and the people of that country refused to pay it back. How would you react/

And do not hit me with the crap, you would not worry or be angry about it,. Because then you are the one whom is biased and trolling.



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 06:57 PM
link   
reply to post by AnonymousFem
 


Simple I would hold the bank owners responsible since they were the ones that made that decision in the first place. They own around 80% of the worlds wealth, do you have any idea how much gold the Rothschild have stored in their private vaults?

More than Enough to pay their own debt.
Speaking of Debt, it is nothing but an illusion to spread control and steal Gold. It is thievery and it is also treasonous. There is a reason why JFK was assassinated, and that was because JFK wanted to get rid of debt. Debt =slavery to the system.



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 07:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


You do not have to tell me that, that is why most of us taxpayers in the UK had to bail out the banks altogether which will affect the next generation and the next one after that.

So Should we just write off and Icelandic bank since it failed and its people are refusing to pay for it?

I do not think so.

I will add also it was not Just the UK it was Germany and the Dutch also whom they owe money to, and whom were invovled in this



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 07:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by oconnection
Surprise surprise, not one mention from the MSM. =/



And each time people make this claim, a simple search finds that it IS reported in the MSM for anyone who actually bothers to look...

Wa shington Post

Deutsche Welle

Reuters

BBC

Sydney Morning herald, via AFP



new topics

top topics



 
26
<<   2 >>

log in

join