Hi! Gordon Brown says i am a terrorist!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/7662027.stm

Curse the British, and curse Brown. This is nothing short of abusing power.

Because of this, people over here at Iceland are loosing there jobs and money. Sure greed existed in the banks, but how does that make it ok to punish us? The normal people that don't have anything to do with the banks?

Also, as a side effect of this, i can't shop online anymore until this is changed :(

I'm pretty sure the Icelandic banks were fucked already and this is just an additional consequence. The UK government is simply trying to make sure the banks don't piss away any more money that doesn't actually belong to them, but to UK savers. I should imagine the government there is taking similar measures to secure the savings of people who got caught up in all this.

Although I've heard a possible issue might be that the economy of Iceland can't afford to bail out the banks in the same way other countries have been doing. If that's true, then it's quite possible some people there are going to get screwed over.

hardcore_gamer said:

Curse the British,

Hey, it's not our fault your country sucks.

TheDarkArchon said:

Hey, it's not our fault your country sucks.

Your acting like we are the assholes here. I don't think you understand why we are upset about this, it's not just because you froze our assets, it the fact that decided to abuse your anti-terrorist laws by using them on us even though we don't represent any terrorist threats at all simply because you deemed it convenient.

And people call America a bully!

And oh yea! There are people within the UK them self's that agree with me!

See this forum: (EDIT: Is it ok to show links to other forums?)

The collapse of the banks has caused many UK citizens pain, and that's very bad and all. But you are not exactly improving your image by pulling of crap like this. Our county has been put on the same black list as Al qaeda and the Taliban!

What could we possibly do to threaten you? Arm the Taliban with poisonous fish to throw at you?

Arm the Taliban with poisonous fish to throw at you

thats a very serious threat and the UK secret service will promptly be at your door. not to mention the al-qaeda will hold you hostage for your poisonous fish, as they are WMD's.

As a Brit, I strongly disapprove of the (ab)use of anti-terrorist legislation. It's clearly not what the law was intended for, and it's a slippery slope from here to further casual abuses.

If it means anything, Gordon Brown has a very low approval rating and it's likely he won't be around for much longer. You say it's not fair for you to be punished for what the banks did; in the same way, please don't curse all British people because of what Gordon Brown did. We never voted for him to be our leader.

Didn't the Americans post-war involvement do something similar to the Japanese?

Iceland VERSUS Britain tonight, only on PAY-PER-VIEW!!!!

If I remember correctly, the Icelandic financial system was worth something like 10 times the national GDP. That's just... wrong. It was just a handful of people responsible for most of it as well.

Anyway, this move seems very sleezy and can only pile on to your horrible situation. From what I understand not even scandinavia is doing anything to help you out there.

Have you noticed day-to-day life change in anyway?

There have been concerns about Iceland's banks for some time now but for many investors the lure of a higher interest rate was too good to pass up. Using anti-terror laws to freeze assets does seem a little excessive but it might have been the only legislative mechanism available to the government that could do the job apart from a declaration of war.

I'd be more concerned about the increasing invasion of privacy going on over there. It's the number one reason I won't travel to the Britain/EU.

Patrick Pineda said:

Iceland VERSUS Britain tonight, only on PAY-PER-VIEW!!!!

IN the ring, to the left... iceman! IN the ring, to the right... suck-ass Gordon Brown! I guess brown will lose again since Hulk Hogan whipped the shit out of him last week [/random offtop].
returning to the topic: it must suck for you guys in UK really

Planky said:

I'd be more concerned about the increasing invasion of privacy going on over there. It's the number one reason I won't travel to the Britain/EU.

I assume you're referring to CCTV? Can you explain why you think filming a public place constitutes an invasion of privacy?

They should go to war with each other. It would be like the Falklands War, but even more pointless.

Read this:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/oct/13/iceland-banking?commentpage=1

fraggle said:

I assume you're referring to CCTV? Can you explain why you think filming a public place constitutes an invasion of privacy?

It's more of a chink in the habeas corpus. The problem stems from repeated offenders piling up.

If anything the British PM's attitude is bound to add to the sense of insecurity which prompts people to remove their money from banks or sell stocks.

fraggle said:

Can you explain why you think filming a public place constitutes an invasion of privacy?

It must be karma - my stumbling across this post so soon after searching for quotes from George Orwell's "1984".

The term "terrorist" means the opposite of "sheep".

fraggle said:

As a Brit, I strongly disapprove of the (ab)use of anti-terrorist legislation. It's clearly not what the law was intended for, and it's a slippery slope from here to further casual abuses.

Since when were anti-terrorist laws used to stop terrorists anyway?

fraggle said:

I assume you're referring to CCTV? Can you explain why you think filming a public place constitutes an invasion of privacy?

When it contains phone lines and internet cables.

fraggle said:

If it means anything, Gordon Brown has a very low approval rating and it's likely he won't be around for much longer.

On the contrary, I don't think he'll lose the election come 2010 when the new Great Depression is in full swing and the country is in multiple crises (all stemming from the fact that everyone except the rich are poor) that would make a change of government unworkable.

I miss fodders.

hardcore_gamer said:

Read this:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/oct/13/iceland-banking?commentpage=1

Talk about over reacting. The comments underneath the article were far more balanced and informative (well, some of them anyway) than the article itself. I expected better from The Guardian, really.

hardcore_gamer said:

Read this:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/oct/13/iceland-banking?commentpage=1

I see a lot of people saying exactly the same thing that I said in my previous post.

Try to bear in mind that a lot of UK savers have lost money over this. Even charities have lost money. It's understandable that some people are going to outraged over the situation.

I'm sure you're going through a hard time at the moment and I sympathise, but I also agree with what DoomAD said in his post: the banking collapse in Iceland would have happened regardless of what Britain did. Britain is not the cause. I disagree with the tactics Brown has used but he's really just trying to protect the investments of British citizens.

I can sympathise with the British as well, and i know that the banks collapses aren't England's fault, and i never said it was England's fault. But that's now what made me so angry. What made me angry was Brown putting my country's name on the same list as some of the most evil terrorist groups out there. Although i think i read it in the news that they were taking us of the list. So that's a big relief.

Also, aren't the British them self's worry'd about the fact that there own government just abused the same terrorist laws that they are suppose to use to protect people from terrorism for the own political gain? If people tolerate that then what is to prevent them from doing things like this sometime in the future? They could pull the same crap off with other country's as soon as they get into trouble!

hardcore_gamer said:

I can sympathise with the British as well, and i know that the banks collapses aren't England's fault, and i never said it was England's fault.

Well, your first post said: "Curse the British, and curse Brown. This is nothing short of abusing power. Because of this, people over here at Iceland are loosing there jobs and money". I assumed you meant that you thought Britain was responsible for your banking collapse. My bad.

But that's now what made me so angry. What made me angry was Brown putting my country's name on the same list as some of the most evil terrorist groups out there. Although i think i read it in the news that they were taking us of the list. So that's a big relief.

Also, aren't the British them self's worry'd about the fact that there own government just abused the same terrorist laws that they are suppose to use to protect people from terrorism for the own political gain? If people tolerate that then what is to prevent them from doing things like this sometime in the future? They could pull the same crap off with other country's as soon as they get into trouble!

It is rather worrying.

I rather wonder if Brown is trying to use the situation to "look tough" and appear serious about dealing with the worldwide economic problems that we're experiencing. Until around two months ago, he had been Prime Minister for a year, during which he suffered no end of embarrassing setbacks. When the economic crisis started in September, his reputation was almost completely destroyed, and it even looked as though he was about to have a mutiny in his own party. Since then, his reputation has improved somewhat due to his handling of the crisis. Time will tell if he has actually made good decisions, though.

Check out this video!

fraggle said:

I assume you're referring to CCTV? Can you explain why you think filming a public place constitutes an invasion of privacy?

"Outside in public area" and "privacy" effectively seem antagonistic; but when there are CCTV warnings and "Smile to the camera!" signs every twenty meters, it does make the place quite oppressive I think. Of course the Brits obviously disagree with me on this respect: the checklist of "things that all accommodations should have" included CCTV cameras in-between burglar alarms and fire blankets.

(The ambiance as a whole seems much more paranoid, about everything. Crime: There are public notice messages everywhere about watching out for thieves and burglars, always locking your doors, keeping valuables out of sight, and so on; domestic accidents: it is illegal not to have fire alarms set up in a house, there are fuses and switches in every single power sockets... Every interior door in public buildings is a "fire door: keep it shut" and in the library huge flatscreen monitors embedded in the walls remind you to change your password often. But people don't seem to be too affected as when I'm staying in the main library, complete strangers would ask me to watch over their laptops while they're going to the toilets or the printer or whatever, in clear defiance of the notice not to trust ever your friends to watch over your belongings.)

Now on topic, this is what happens when a country decide to put the major part of its economy in the hands of the most volatile sector there is, the financial one. Sure, it's by far the most profitable sector as well, as long as there is no crisis. But crises always happen -- they are absolutely unavoidable. And then all your wealth, your colossal, endless wealth, disappears suddenly. Without warning. (Well, except for the various Cassandres that were predicting it would happen, but they had been saying that for years and were always wrong. Until now, that is.)

Danarchy said:

They should go to war with each other.

Been there, done that.

hardcore_gamer said:
Also, aren't the British them self's worry'd about the fact that there own government just abused the same terrorist laws that they are suppose to use to protect people from terrorism for the own political gain?

These laws, which allow the manipulation of the financial market or banking systems, seem more usable (whether for good or bad) in this sort of situation than to combat terrorism or such. Incidentally, they were generated after a potential economic crisis had become apparent, during the tense period when the war against terrorism took flight because of the destruction of the WTC towers. Maybe without the terror scare they would have been hard to implement, but I think at least some of their proponents were thinking of more than just terrorism or financial attacks.

myk said:

These laws, which allow the manipulation of the financial market or banking systems, seem more usable (whether for good or bad) in this sort of situation than to combat terrorism or such. Incidentally, they were generated after a potential economic crisis had became apparent, during the tense period when the war against terrorism took flight because of the destruction of the WTC towers. Maybe without the terror scare they would have been hard to implement, but I think at least some of their proponents were thinking of more than just terrorism or financial attacks.

Why call some law "terrorist" law if they won't be used to fight terrorism?

hardcore_gamer said:

Why call some law "terrorist" law if they won't be used to fight terrorism?

Because if you call them "anti-terrorist laws", then anybody who opposes these laws is a terrorist and discredits himself. So the laws get voted with an overwhelming majority.