Gordon Brown claims that the expropriation was necessary because Iceland planned to default on British Icesave accounts. How he got this impression is a mystery. Iceland's finance minister made clear in meetings with the British authorities that depositors would be paid. The Prime Minister, Geir Haarde, said in public: “We will immediately review the matter together to find a mutually satisfactory solution. We are determined to make sure that the current financial crisis does not overshadow the important and longstanding friendship that we have with the UK.”
OK. So the Gorgon fucked up, even though there was ostensibly no reason to do so. Hm. But here's the bit that doesn't make sense and certainly didn't come out of the BBC's reportage:
Brown's response? To seize the UK assets, not of the bank that ran Icesave, but of a wholly unrelated bank, Kaupthing, thereby collapsing it.
Huh? Erm, what? No matter how I fucking look at that statement, it just doesn't make any sense. Everybody had their money in Icesave, run by Landsbanki. I had assumed that Kaupthing were a) in the shit and b) somehow related to this. But according to Hannan, they weren't.
And as big a cunt as I think the Gorgon is, I can't seem him destroying the last standing bank in a friendly country just to make himself look tough. And this is where it gets really weird. Ian Parker-Joseph, head of the Libertarian Party of the UK, has the threads of an astonishing theory:
Follow the money my mind keeps telling me, follow the money. Where does government money flow. It flows not only to Local Authorities, but to NGO's, to Quangos, and to the thousands of shady 'Charities' and 'Registered Companies' that NuLab have pumped taxpayers funds into.
And why has Brown gone for Nationalisation of Banks rather than just pumping in liquidity as the experts have advised?
Then on Wednesday of last week a single act added luminescence to that dust ball. The use of Terror legislation to seize the assets of foreign banks.
The questions have been asked, why? The press has been speculative, the government dismissive, the opposition parties silent.
I was quite astonished at how we went from having a private banking system to one which is largely state-controlled in the space of less than a year.
It was that single event that triggered a thought, that misuse of terror legislation that made me ask why? When terror legislation is used, the government can claim that it was invoked in the national interest, it can suggest that for 'security' reasons, we must never know the real truth.
What was the urgency within the Cabinet Office and the Treasury that an 8 man delegation needed to visit Iceland to put the strong arm on the Icelandic government.
What is the truth here? Well we dont know, but we will ask the question:
Is it possible that government or corrupt officials have been running for the past 10 years a massive money laundering scam with taxpayers funds through NGO's, Quango's, Local Authorities, Charities and 'Registered Companies', a scam so big that the financial crisis was going to scupper and expose it, that the beneficiaries were going to lose the money or even worse get found out, or was it that receivers and auditors would be able to unravel it, and that only Nationalisation and the use of terror legislation could keep it under wraps.
The mind boggles. If this is true, it explains why the UK taxpayer has been getting reamed harder and harder with less and less to show for it. If the government was in on this, it would explain why MPs have been given such a sweet deal with salaries, expenses and the John Lewis list, not to rock the boat. How the fuckety fuck could Bliar & co afford all these fucking posh houses they were buying up?
It's hard to imagine that even Tony Bliar and Gorgon Brownshirt could go along with such blatantly criminal behaviour, but I must admit that when I read these two posts in full, some stuff felt like it was clicking into place.
I don't mind admitting that my mind is boggling. Please go read the linked posts in full and make your own mind up.
I've taken the unprecedented step of cross-posting this on DK and my own blog because I'm hoping that someone, somewhere will show me where this theory is wrong.
3 comments:
"...the great masses of the people in the very bottom of their hearts tend to be corrupted rather than consciously and purposely evil, and that, therefore, in view of the primitive simplicity of their minds they more easily fall a victim to a big lie than to a little one, since they themselves lie in little things, but would be ashamed of lies that were too big. Such a falsehood will never enter their heads and they will not be able to believe in the possibility of such monstrous effrontery and infamous misrepresentation in others; yes, even when enlightened on the subject, they will long doubt and waver, and continue to accept at least one of these causes as true. Therefore, something of even the most insolent lie will always remain and stick-a fact which all the great lie-virtuosi and lying-clubs in this world know only too well and also make the most treacherous use of."
-Hitler, Mein Kampf (ch. 10)
'Independent' Audit Commission also lost £10m in Iceland
My hunch since before Blair's departure date was announced was that his leaving would be a sign that the credit bubble was about to unravel, because it would signal that his high level banking contacts had warned him and he'd pick that as the time to hand over to Gordon, give him what he'd been pining for just as the wheels were about to come off.
And lo, it came to pass..
Blair certainly didn't need to launder any taxpayers' money in such a complex manner to afford his houses. He just took out an enormous mortgages at multiples of over 10x he and his wife's joint income on the understanding that he'd be getting multiple 6 and 7 figure figure bank board memberships the minute he left office.
Which is exactly what has happened.
What are these banks paying him for, exactly? I don't know.
Post a Comment