RSS Feed
April 28th, 2012 
FAKE NEWS for the Zionist agenda
And, in his first interview with a British newspaper since the end of the
trial, Mr Haarde said he felt vindicated by the process – despite the
verdict.
“I think it’s clear that I have won a big victory. It’s a triumph for me,”
said Mr Haarde, who will receive no punishment for the one guilty verdict.
The other three charges all carried a possible prison sentence of two years. “I
think you could describe the one guilty count as a slap on my wrist.
“The proceedings were initiated with a lot of political anger and the
people in power at the time wanted to make a big hit, and put all of the
blame for what happened on the party and the person in charge. It was a
purely politically-motivated trial. They went out to get a big prize, and
they ended up with something that was very small.”
Yet the financial storm which ravaged Iceland in 2008 was anything but small.
Mr Haarde, who was elected prime minister in 2006, presided over an
unprecedented boom in the country. The volcanic island was transformed from
a remote, isolated fishing community into a roaring financial powerhouse.
Money poured into the country, and the country’s 320,000 citizens enjoyed a
wave of prosperity. In 2007 the country was declared the world’s best place
to live by the UN, in their annual human development index.
But, of course, the bubble burst in spectacular fashion. In October 2008 all
three of Iceland’s main banks – Kaupthing, Landsbanki and Glitnir –
collapsed as investors baulked at the scale of the multi-billion dollar
borrowings they had built up over the previous decade. Riots broke out as
the country’s financial system fell, and effigies of politicians were
burned. Tear gas was used in the country for the first time since 1949.
All three banks were nationalised and Iceland was forced to go to the
International Monetary Fund to seek a $10bn (£6.2bn) bail-out package to
stabilise its finances – making it the first Western country in 30 years to
take an emergency loan. Mr Haarde’s government all resigned in spring 2009.
It also sparked a bitter diplomatic spat with Britain. Iceland had ring-fenced
the banks’ domestic operations, letting their international operations go
bankrupt. Some economists have praised Iceland for letting the banks go
under, though it remains in a dispute with Britain and the Netherlands over
refunds for depositors. Almost 230,000 British savers had invested in the
collapsed banks, and the British government was forced to guarantee the
first £50,000 that individuals had in their accounts.
“What has happened in Iceland is completely unacceptable,” said
Gordon Brown, who was prime minister at the time. “They have failed not
only the people of Iceland, they have failed the people of Britain.”
Britain’s response – freezing the bank’s British assets under terrorism
legislation – still rankles with Mr Haarde. In October 2008 the government
used anti-terrorism laws to effectively prevent Iceland, or anyone else,
from touching the money Landsbanki held in the UK. Their cash, shares, bonds
and credit notes were all “frozen” and therefore untouchable by an
Icelandic government which had nationalised the bank, and wanted to access
the funds.
“The actions of the Brown government were shameful and totally
unnecessary,” Mr Haarde said. “They put a friendly country like
Iceland on a list of terrorist organisations – we were there alongside al
Qaeda, the Taliban, North Korea. Now that’s not friendly at all.”
The freeze was lifted eight months later, after negotiations had begun over
how to pay back Iceland’s creditors.
Mr Haarde is also angry that a politician has been put on trial for the
decisions he made.
“As a principle I do not think we should be taking politicians to court.
Gordon Brown lost the election, so in that sense he was dealt with. If the
people are not happy they can vote their politicians out,” he said.
“They shouldn’t be put in prison – that’s what they do in Ukraine. And we
don’t want to emulate that.”
But surely he should have known that the big-rolling banks were playing with
fire?
“Of course I think so now when I know how things have developed,” he
said. “But these were private companies. And part of the responsibility
was to downsize the banking system. But I didn’t have the means to do that;
I didn’t have the authority, and I didn’t have the insight.
“The banks were very popular at the time; they were hiring a lot of
talented people, paying high salaries, and paying a lot in taxes. So they
looked like they would do really well.
“We didn’t know that the financial foundations were not solid, and the
financial regulators did not see that.
“The main responsibility for what happened to the banks lies with
themselves. They have been irresponsible. They have not taken sufficient
precautions. And they had not followed good banking practices.”
The collapse of the banks had a huge impact on Iceland. Unemployment rose from
under two per cent in September 2008 to 10 per cent by the spring of 2009,
and many people left the country for good. A nation accustomed to calm
prosperity found itself staring into the abyss.
And yet in the intervening years, Iceland seems to have quietly turned itself
around. While still locked in debate over repaying the British government,
it has paid back some of its others lenders – including the British local
authorities. More than 50 local councils lost £186m when Glitnir failed, and
universities and charities also lost money, but now that is being repaid
after an Icelandic court ruling that the British were “preferred
creditors” and would have priority.
However, the money spent by the British government to compensate savers who
lost money at Icesave has not been repaid by Iceland, whose voters have
twice rejected a plan to refund the €3.9 billion to the UK and the
Netherlands, which is similarly out of pocket.
In April last year the two countries began a court action against Iceland to
get the money back, a process that is still continuing. They have also
hinted that they could trip up the country’s bid to join the European
Union,.
Yet despite these sticking points, the overall picture is positive. GDP
increased by a relatively healthy 2.7 per cent in 2011, and government debt
is projected to fall to 80 per cent of GDP in 2016.
Could it be a model for other struggling countries, such as Greece and
Portugal? Mr Haarde, who is against the single currency, thinks not.
“My feeling is that the countries struggling now were not prepared for
the discipline required within a fixed exchange regime,” he said. “They
are in a straight jacket now, and are unable to take the measures that we
could.
“I’m proud of the way we handled the crisis. We did not guarantee the
external obligations of the banks, which made us unpopular with creditors,
and there are lots of court cases currently taking place. But we protected
individuals, and we protected our domestic banking system.”
And what about prosecuting other world leaders for their role in the crisis?
Should Gordon Brown, his old foe, be brought before a judge?
Mr Haarde laughed. “It’s not for me to say. I’ll leave that to the
judgment of British people,” he said. “But this has been a
terrible experience for me. I wouldn’t wish it on anyone.”
Related posts:
Views: 0
Posted in 
Tags: 
