Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Corporate Media Gatekeepers Protect Western 1% From Panama Leak
Whoever leaked the Mossack Fonseca papers appears motivated by a genuine desire to expose the system that enables the ultra wealthy to hide their massive stashes, often corruptly obtained and all involved in tax avoidance. These Panamanian lawyers hide the wealth of a significant proportion of the 1%, and the massive leak of their documents ought to be a wonderful thing.
Unfortunately the leaker has made the dreadful mistake of turning to the western corporate media to publicise the results. In consequence the first major story, published today by the Guardian, is all about Vladimir Putin and a cellist on the fiddle. As it happens I believe the story and have no doubt Putin is bent.
But why focus on Russia? Russian wealth is only a tiny minority of the money hidden away with the aid of Mossack Fonseca. In fact, it soon becomes obvious that the selective reporting is going to stink.
The Suddeutsche Zeitung, which received the leak, gives a detailed explanation of the methodology the corporate media used to search the files. The main search they have done is for names associated with breaking UN sanctions regimes. The Guardian reports this too and helpfully lists those countries as Zimbabwe, North Korea, Russia and Syria. The filtering of this Mossack Fonseca information by the corporate media follows a direct western governmental agenda. There is no mention at all of use of Mossack Fonseca by massive western corporations or western billionaires – the main customers. And the Guardian is quick to reassure that “much of the leaked material will remain private.”
What do you expect? The leak is being managed by the grandly but laughably named “International Consortium of Investigative Journalists”, which is funded and organised entirely by the USA’s Center for Public Integrity. Their funders include
Ford Foundation
Carnegie Endowment
Rockefeller Family Fund
W K Kellogg Foundation
Open Society Foundation (Soros)
among many others. Do not expect a genuine expose of western capitalism. The dirty secrets of western corporations will remain unpublished.
Expect hits at Russia, Iran and Syria and some tiny “balancing” western country like Iceland. A superannuated UK peer or two will be sacrificed – someone already with dementia.
The corporate media – the Guardian and BBC in the UK – have exclusive access to the database which you and I cannot see. They are protecting themselves from even seeing western corporations’ sensitive information by only looking at those documents which are brought up by specific searches such as UN sanctions busters. Never forget the Guardian smashed its copies of the Snowden files on the instruction of MI6.
What if they did Mossack Fonseca database searches on the owners of all the corporate media and their companies, and all the editors and senior corporate media journalists? What if they did Mossack Fonseca searches on all the most senior people at the BBC? What if they did Mossack Fonseca searches on every donor to the Center for Public Integrity and their companies?
What if they did Mossack Fonseca searches on every listed company in the western stock exchanges, and on every western millionaire they could trace?
That would be much more interesting. I know Russia and China are corrupt, you don’t have to tell me that. What if you look at things that we might, here in the west, be able to rise up and do something about?
And what if you corporate lapdogs let the people see the actual data?
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
Kilkrazy wrote: Obviously these documents are in digital format, which means they are searchable, however it isn't just enough to highlight the (speculation: 231 mentions of Politician X) because having located them you have to read the documents and see how they string out into a rational narrative.
That will take some time.
However every country in the world will be interested in the names of their own people, so the work will be shared out.
The data was leaked over a year ago and has been analysed by some kind of international investigative journalism 'guild'. The leak containz all kinds of data as well, from text messages to contracts.
Kilkrazy wrote: Obviously these documents are in digital format, which means they are searchable, however it isn't just enough to highlight the (speculation: 231 mentions of Politician X) because having located them you have to read the documents and see how they string out into a rational narrative.
That will take some time.
However every country in the world will be interested in the names of their own people, so the work will be shared out.
The data was leaked over a year ago and has been analysed by some kind of international investigative journalism 'guild'. The leak containz all kinds of data as well, from text messages to contracts.
Yeah, but as the article above points out - who are these gatekeepers?
I've been following the coverage in the Guardian, Telegraph, et al, and there is a clear anti-Putin agenda. Now, I couldn't give two hoots for Putin, but news of his corruption isn't exactly news to me, or anybody else for that matter.
Not having a go at you, but why aren't they shingling a spotlight on Western interests?
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
Corporate Media Gatekeepers Protect Western 1% From Panama Leak
Whoever leaked the Mossack Fonseca papers appears motivated by a genuine desire to expose the system that enables the ultra wealthy to hide their massive stashes, often corruptly obtained and all involved in tax avoidance. These Panamanian lawyers hide the wealth of a significant proportion of the 1%, and the massive leak of their documents ought to be a wonderful thing.
Unfortunately the leaker has made the dreadful mistake of turning to the western corporate media to publicise the results. In consequence the first major story, published today by the Guardian, is all about Vladimir Putin and a cellist on the fiddle. As it happens I believe the story and have no doubt Putin is bent.
But why focus on Russia? Russian wealth is only a tiny minority of the money hidden away with the aid of Mossack Fonseca. In fact, it soon becomes obvious that the selective reporting is going to stink.
The Suddeutsche Zeitung, which received the leak, gives a detailed explanation of the methodology the corporate media used to search the files. The main search they have done is for names associated with breaking UN sanctions regimes. The Guardian reports this too and helpfully lists those countries as Zimbabwe, North Korea, Russia and Syria. The filtering of this Mossack Fonseca information by the corporate media follows a direct western governmental agenda. There is no mention at all of use of Mossack Fonseca by massive western corporations or western billionaires – the main customers. And the Guardian is quick to reassure that “much of the leaked material will remain private.”
What do you expect? The leak is being managed by the grandly but laughably named “International Consortium of Investigative Journalists”, which is funded and organised entirely by the USA’s Center for Public Integrity. Their funders include
Ford Foundation
Carnegie Endowment
Rockefeller Family Fund
W K Kellogg Foundation
Open Society Foundation (Soros)
among many others. Do not expect a genuine expose of western capitalism. The dirty secrets of western corporations will remain unpublished.
Expect hits at Russia, Iran and Syria and some tiny “balancing” western country like Iceland. A superannuated UK peer or two will be sacrificed – someone already with dementia.
The corporate media – the Guardian and BBC in the UK – have exclusive access to the database which you and I cannot see. They are protecting themselves from even seeing western corporations’ sensitive information by only looking at those documents which are brought up by specific searches such as UN sanctions busters. Never forget the Guardian smashed its copies of the Snowden files on the instruction of MI6.
What if they did Mossack Fonseca database searches on the owners of all the corporate media and their companies, and all the editors and senior corporate media journalists? What if they did Mossack Fonseca searches on all the most senior people at the BBC? What if they did Mossack Fonseca searches on every donor to the Center for Public Integrity and their companies?
What if they did Mossack Fonseca searches on every listed company in the western stock exchanges, and on every western millionaire they could trace?
That would be much more interesting. I know Russia and China are corrupt, you don’t have to tell me that. What if you look at things that we might, here in the west, be able to rise up and do something about?
And what if you corporate lapdogs let the people see the actual data?
I think his agenda is quite clear. That reads like a conspiracy theorist. "Ah yes, but what are they hiding. Who are they protecting".
And honestly, companies using this for tax avoidance or evasion is a foot note compared to world leaders and people breching international sanctions.
insaniak wrote: Sometimes, Exterminatus is the only option.
And sometimes, it's just a case of too much scotch combined with too many buttons...
News have been saying over 800 Australians are being investigated for tax evasion because of the leak. Im actually surprised there were that many Australians rich enough to potentially tax evade!
Our nobhead Prime Minister has been pushing for higher taxes of the lower and middle class and spouting a "live within your means" slogan as this all unfolded. I wouldnt be surprised if his name came up.
Corporate Media Gatekeepers Protect Western 1% From Panama Leak
Whoever leaked the Mossack Fonseca papers appears motivated by a genuine desire to expose the system that enables the ultra wealthy to hide their massive stashes, often corruptly obtained and all involved in tax avoidance. These Panamanian lawyers hide the wealth of a significant proportion of the 1%, and the massive leak of their documents ought to be a wonderful thing.
Unfortunately the leaker has made the dreadful mistake of turning to the western corporate media to publicise the results. In consequence the first major story, published today by the Guardian, is all about Vladimir Putin and a cellist on the fiddle. As it happens I believe the story and have no doubt Putin is bent.
But why focus on Russia? Russian wealth is only a tiny minority of the money hidden away with the aid of Mossack Fonseca. In fact, it soon becomes obvious that the selective reporting is going to stink.
The Suddeutsche Zeitung, which received the leak, gives a detailed explanation of the methodology the corporate media used to search the files. The main search they have done is for names associated with breaking UN sanctions regimes. The Guardian reports this too and helpfully lists those countries as Zimbabwe, North Korea, Russia and Syria. The filtering of this Mossack Fonseca information by the corporate media follows a direct western governmental agenda. There is no mention at all of use of Mossack Fonseca by massive western corporations or western billionaires – the main customers. And the Guardian is quick to reassure that “much of the leaked material will remain private.”
What do you expect? The leak is being managed by the grandly but laughably named “International Consortium of Investigative Journalists”, which is funded and organised entirely by the USA’s Center for Public Integrity. Their funders include
Ford Foundation
Carnegie Endowment
Rockefeller Family Fund
W K Kellogg Foundation
Open Society Foundation (Soros)
among many others. Do not expect a genuine expose of western capitalism. The dirty secrets of western corporations will remain unpublished.
Expect hits at Russia, Iran and Syria and some tiny “balancing” western country like Iceland. A superannuated UK peer or two will be sacrificed – someone already with dementia.
The corporate media – the Guardian and BBC in the UK – have exclusive access to the database which you and I cannot see. They are protecting themselves from even seeing western corporations’ sensitive information by only looking at those documents which are brought up by specific searches such as UN sanctions busters. Never forget the Guardian smashed its copies of the Snowden files on the instruction of MI6.
What if they did Mossack Fonseca database searches on the owners of all the corporate media and their companies, and all the editors and senior corporate media journalists? What if they did Mossack Fonseca searches on all the most senior people at the BBC? What if they did Mossack Fonseca searches on every donor to the Center for Public Integrity and their companies?
What if they did Mossack Fonseca searches on every listed company in the western stock exchanges, and on every western millionaire they could trace?
That would be much more interesting. I know Russia and China are corrupt, you don’t have to tell me that. What if you look at things that we might, here in the west, be able to rise up and do something about?
And what if you corporate lapdogs let the people see the actual data?
I think his agenda is quite clear. That reads like a conspiracy theorist. "Ah yes, but what are they hiding. Who are they protecting".
And honestly, companies using this for tax avoidance or evasion is a foot note compared to world leaders and people breching international sanctions.
Putin is a crook? Well, you can knock me over with a feather! I'm shocked, really shocked!
Point is, we know these rogue regimes are rogue, but the 'moral' guardians of the West need to be investigated as well. There are a number of former donors to the Tory party on this list, but is is getting half the coverage of Putin? No.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dropbear Victim wrote: News have been saying over 800 Australians are being investigated for tax evasion because of the leak. Im actually surprised there were that many Australians rich enough to potentially tax evade!
Our nobhead Prime Minister has been pushing for higher taxes of the lower and middle class and spouting a "live within your means" slogan as this all unfolded. I wouldnt be surprised if his name came up.
The guy that owns Fosters lager must be one of Australia's richest
Let's hope he's on the list for crimes against alcoholic beverages
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/04/04 13:08:46
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
Actually, this is old news in the UK, and sadly, the British people didn't give two hoots at the time, because they re-elected Dave.
Ignore the flag, I'm in the UK. And this is the first I've heard of Cameron Senior dodging tax with shady central American lawyers who also help out good ol' Vlad.
Actually, this is old news in the UK, and sadly, the British people didn't give two hoots at the time, because they re-elected Dave.
Ignore the flag, I'm in the UK. And this is the first I've heard of Cameron Senior dodging tax with shady central American lawyers who also help out good ol' Vlad.
But isn't Cameron's father dead? And in answer to your other point, there's been question marks over Cameron Snr's finances for years. Never done his son any harm, and is unlikely to now.
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
Ustrello wrote: RT's version is hilarious as it left dear leader and russia out of the names
As it should have been, because Putin is not in the papers at all. It is just a clear example of Western propaganda: Many people from across the entire world, including the prime minister of Iceland and President Poroshenko of Ukraine and many others. The list also includes two friends of Putin and suddenly the Western media is all over Putin, even though Putin is not on the list, is not responsible for and does not control the acts of his friends, and has no further link to this list at all. Meanwhile, they barely as much as mention the other people on the list.
The Western media's version is hilarious as it twists and distorts facts just to be able to take a shot at Putin. If Western media were truly independent and impartial, they would go after Poroshenko, Messi or someone else who is actually on the list. Now however they have shown themselves once more to be nothing but empty propaganda outlets, some more so than others.
"Your society's broken, so who should we blame? Should we blame the rich, powerful people who caused it? No, lets blame the people with no power and no money and those immigrants who don't even have the vote. Yea, it must be their fething fault." - Iain M Banks
-----
"The language of modern British politics is meant to sound benign. But words do not mean what they seem to mean. 'Reform' actually means 'cut' or 'end'. 'Flexibility' really means 'exploit'. 'Prudence' really means 'don't invest'. And 'efficient'? That means whatever you want it to mean, usually 'cut'. All really mean 'keep wages low for the masses, taxes low for the rich, profits high for the corporations, and accept the decline in public services and amenities this will cause'." - Robin McAlpine from Common Weal
Ustrello wrote: RT's version is hilarious as it left dear leader and russia out of the names
As it should have been, because Putin is not in the papers at all. It is just a clear example of Western propaganda: Many people from across the entire world, including the prime minister of Iceland and President Poroshenko of Ukraine and many others. The list also includes two friends of Putin and suddenly the Western media is all over Putin, even though Putin is not on the list, is not responsible for and does not control the acts of his friends, and has no further link to this list at all. Meanwhile, they barely as much as mention the other people on the list.
The Western media's version is hilarious as it twists and distorts facts just to be able to take a shot at Putin. If Western media were truly independent and impartial, they would go after Poroshenko, Messi or someone else who is actually on the list. Now however they have shown themselves once more to be nothing but empty propaganda outlets, some more so than others.
Implying that his friends who all of a sudden became super rich aren't laundering money for putin through a bank under sanctions
Yeah, we can see Putin and Assad hate everywhere on the internet now, however they aren't even on the list !
Are they responsible for what others people, friends or not, did ?
But Porochenko, elected after a Putsch against a democratically elected president, and helped by the EU, not even a mention...
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
godardc wrote: Yeah, we can see Putin and Assad hate everywhere on the internet now, however they aren't even on the list !
Are they responsible for what others people, friends or not, did ?
But Porochenko, elected after a Putsch against a democratically elected president, and helped by the EU, not even a mention...
Maybe because it was reported? Also putin and his country are under sanctions for a war in Ukraine and Crimea and we'll assad doesn't need explaining either.
Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet is covering Putin, al-Assad, the Prime Minister of Iceland, Jackie Chan, the King of Saudi Arabia, every major Swedish bank, Poroshenko, and many more. Could we please stop pretending that all western media is homogenous in order to justify RussiaToday as a news source? It's blatant Whataboutism and intellectually dishonest. There ought to be enough issues on which to criticise media for without pretending that one's political opponents are a homogenous blob.
For thirteen years I had a dog with fur the darkest black. For thirteen years he was my friend, oh how I want him back.
Aye. The Irish Times is mostly focused on Irish aspects of the case with an overview on the main international players. They have not gone hell for leather after Putin.
The Grauniad has though, and it is pretty silly too. But what do we expect from them?
godardc wrote: Yeah, we can see Putin and Assad hate everywhere on the internet now, however they aren't even on the list !
Are they responsible for what others people, friends or not, did ?
But Porochenko, elected after a Putsch against a democratically elected president, and helped by the EU, not even a mention...
]
I've seen several mentions of Poroshenko.
I've also seen coverage of the Icelandic premier, an American author, the children of the premier of Azerbaijan, several Brazilian politicians, the Argentinian premier (apparently), President Xi Jinpings brother in law, and so on. I'm really not seeing where all the accusations of 'one sided reporting' are coming from. 11 million documents were leaked, it takes time to get through them all.
What's more, I daresay if there was any real coverup here, it would last about five minutes as whoever leaked them to begin with would be shooting a quick email over to Julian Assange or Snowden about five minutes later. For every newspaper owner who'll ignore the fact they have their fingers ina tax evasion pie, there's always an opposing paper with a grudge willing to publish. We've seen that with the likes of the Independent (hah!) and the Mail for years.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/04/04 16:42:16
Implying that his friends who all of a sudden became super rich aren't laundering money for putin through a bank under sanctions
To be fair, there could be a number of reasons for those names being there, and not all of them are illegal. It seems people need reminding of what Sebster pointed out on page one; this tax evasion stuff is often sleazy as feth, but it's not automatically illegal. Putin and his friends have been accused of cronyism and nepotism, but having your names show up in 11 million documents doesn't actually amount to much. It's 11 million documents, and is apparently not limited to just official office memos and paper work. All kinds of names could be in those files that have nothing to do with anything. I think someone would have to actually make an effort not to mentioned every rich person on the planet in 11 million + pages.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet is covering Putin, al-Assad, the Prime Minister of Iceland, Jackie Chan, the King of Saudi Arabia, every major Swedish bank, Poroshenko, and many more. Could we please stop pretending that all western media is homogenous in order to justify RussiaToday as a news source? It's blatant Whataboutism and intellectually dishonest. There ought to be enough issues on which to criticise media for without pretending that one's political opponents are a homogenous blob.
1. Why is Aftonbladet covering Putin? Putin isn't on the list nor does he have anything to do with it. Nor is Assad on the list, for that matter. The rest is about people who are actually on the list, so why throw in two people that aren't on there at all? That is pure propaganda. 2. Western media is homogeneous enough in order to be grouped together into a single group (or a couple of groups depending on political viewpoints if you want to be more detailed). 3. Why are you throwing RT into here? RT is not more or less valid than any other news source, why would it need justifying? 4. You should really stop throwing the word 'whataboutism' around needlessly. It seems like you are just using it as a tool to shut down criticism and valid discussion (which is the whole point of the term in the first place, so I think it shouldn't be used at all in a proper discussion). 5. Maybe you should start explaining what you mean with "homogenous", because you use that word a lot and I am not sure what you mean by it.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/04/04 16:41:32
What we will shortly see is many politicians saying that what they are doing is legal. Which will be true. And then next week an aeroplane will crash, or Georger Osborne will have a photo taken of him eating a doughnut at a funny angle and nobody will care anymore, because we all knew they were at it anyway. There's a reason companies like KPMG which advise on how to evade tax conveniently advise the Government on how to close loopholes as well. 'We're all in it together' was ludicrous fiction from the word go.
The lower classes pay little tax because they have nothing to take, the middle classes get squeezed to the hilt as the most productive wealth generators, and the rich types hide all their money in Swiss bank accounts and trust funds. It's one of the reasons I was against Europe interfering in Ukraine to begin with, 'Oh look, a clique of corrupt rich people have ousted another clique of corrupt rich people. And oh look, now another country run by a clique of especially corrupt and rich people are interfering'. Nothing changes, here comes new boss, same as old boss, etc.
Meanwhile, the rest of us get on with our lives and hope that tomorrow goes on much the same as today, because things usually get worse instead of better on the governmental front. They might all be corrupt feckers, but at least we can pick which snout goes in the trough today.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/04/04 16:46:46
He uses it so much because the only criticism anyone ever seems to be able to fall on for "western media" is that it is "western" and that somehow means they're all a massive conspiracy. Which of course ignores that's not even remotely true, and news sources from different countries are always reporting different things even about the same general story as a few members have pointed out in regards to these documents.
Of course, at the same time there's probably some justification for the belief that news sources will never publish a detailed analysis of the story, but rather than jump to cover up, I'd point out laziness. Shuffling through 11 million documents would take years. Hell, those kinds of things are Historians wet dream, because such a collection could provide data for hundreds of monographs for decades. Its too much information. Expecting some "ultimate reveal of the truth" is expecting far to much, especially when media sources generally drop a subject after it ceases to be a ratings machine.
Implying that his friends who all of a sudden became super rich aren't laundering money for putin through a bank under sanctions
To be fair, there could be a number of reasons for those names being there, and not all of them are illegal. It seems people need reminding of what Sebster pointed out on page one; this tax evasion stuff is often sleazy as feth, but it's not automatically illegal. Putin and his friends have been accused of cronyism and nepotism, but having your names show up in 11 million documents doesn't actually amount to much. It's 11 million documents, and is apparently not limited to just official office memos and paper work. All kinds of names could be in those files that have nothing to do with anything. I think someone would have to actually make an effort not to mentioned every rich person on the planet in 11 million + pages.
Sure it's not illegal. But it is illegal when dealing with sanctioned entities, which is what I was pointing out for the Russian side.
Ketara wrote: What we will shortly see is many politicians saying that what they are doing is legal. Which will be true. And then next week an aeroplane will crash, or Georger Osborne will have a photo taken of him eating a doughnut at a funny angle and nobody will care anymore, because we all knew they were at it anyway. There's a reason companies like KPMG which advise on how to evade tax conveniently advise the Government on how to close loopholes as well. 'We're all in it together' was ludicrous fiction from the word go.
The lower classes pay little tax because they have nothing to take, the middle classes get squeezed to the hilt as the most productive wealth generators, and the rich types hide all their money in Swiss bank accounts and trust funds. It's one of the reasons I was against Europe interfering in Ukraine to begin with, 'Oh look, a clique of corrupt rich people have ousted another clique of corrupt rich people. And oh look, now another country run by a clique of especially corrupt and rich people are interfering'. Nothing changes, here comes new boss, same as old boss, etc.
Meanwhile, the rest of us get on with our lives and hope that tomorrow goes on much the same as today, because things usually get worse instead of better on the governmental front. They might all be corrupt feckers, but at least we can pick which snout goes in the trough today.
Point of order, but you've a leader of the opposition who took less than a tenner in expenses last time anyone checked, and he's villified by your media. They're not ALL corrupt, but the ones that aren't sometimes seem to get a rough deal.
Ketara wrote: What we will shortly see is many politicians saying that what they are doing is legal. Which will be true. And then next week an aeroplane will crash, or Georger Osborne will have a photo taken of him eating a doughnut at a funny angle and nobody will care anymore, because we all knew they were at it anyway. There's a reason companies like KPMG which advise on how to evade tax conveniently advise the Government on how to close loopholes as well. 'We're all in it together' was ludicrous fiction from the word go.
The lower classes pay little tax because they have nothing to take, the middle classes get squeezed to the hilt as the most productive wealth generators, and the rich types hide all their money in Swiss bank accounts and trust funds. It's one of the reasons I was against Europe interfering in Ukraine to begin with, 'Oh look, a clique of corrupt rich people have ousted another clique of corrupt rich people. And oh look, now another country run by a clique of especially corrupt and rich people are interfering'. Nothing changes, here comes new boss, same as old boss, etc.
Meanwhile, the rest of us get on with our lives and hope that tomorrow goes on much the same as today, because things usually get worse instead of better on the governmental front. They might all be corrupt feckers, but at least we can pick which snout goes in the trough today.
Point of order, but you've a leader of the opposition who took less than a tenner in expenses last time anyone checked, and he's villified by your media. They're not ALL corrupt, but the ones that aren't sometimes seem to get a rough deal.
Corbyn is villified because he's a throwback to the 1970's (and not in a good way), but I concede the point. You do get the occasional good 'un (Vince Cable was a pretty fair bloke when all was said and done). But even if they're not corrupt in the financial sense, you tend to find they're as morally corrupt as the next politician. Mr Corbyn specifically shines no brighter than the rest of them in that regard.
Kilkrazy wrote: Obviously these documents are in digital format, which means they are searchable, however it isn't just enough to highlight the (speculation: 231 mentions of Politician X) because having located them you have to read the documents and see how they string out into a rational narrative.
That will take some time.
However every country in the world will be interested in the names of their own people, so the work will be shared out.
The data was leaked over a year ago and has been analysed by some kind of international investigative journalism 'guild'. The leak containz all kinds of data as well, from text messages to contracts.
Yeah, but as the article above points out - who are these gatekeepers?
I've been following the coverage in the Guardian, Telegraph, et al, and there is a clear anti-Putin agenda. Now, I couldn't give two hoots for Putin, but news of his corruption isn't exactly news to me, or anybody else for that matter.
Not having a go at you, but why aren't they shingling a spotlight on Western interests?
Word.
Putin doesn't give a feth about our opinion anyway, and Russian media is government censored so the Russians won't hear too much about this.
Who is going to be revealed from the UK, that's what I want to know?
First one up is Cameron's father, and he's dead; that knocks that on the head. So far it's going down the way that Craig Murray predicted.
I was talking to my wife earlier and said I would be surprised if there was a single prosecution out of all of this.
I've also seen coverage of the Icelandic premier, an American author, the children of the premier of Azerbaijan, several Brazilian politicians, the Argentinian premier (apparently), President Xi Jinpings brother in law, and so on. I'm really not seeing where all the accusations of 'one sided reporting' are coming from. 11 million documents were leaked, it takes time to get through them all.
Iceland is not a big concession at all and few authors, American or otherwise, are political and/or economic powerhouses. I'll wait for something more substantial than that.
Iceland is not a big concession at all and few authors, American or otherwise, are political and/or economic powerhouses. I'll wait for something more substantial than that.
'concession'? You make it sound like Western Politicians must be so financially wealthy and profligate that they HAVE to be in this particular leak.
Remember a few things:-
-This is one company. For all we know, the people you want 'revealed' do their banking at another one.
-There doesn't tend to be the same absurd levels of wealth thrown around in Western corruption as you get in Russia or Saudi Arabia, or Brazil. Individual politicians aren't usually able to siphon off literally hundreds of millions into private swiss bank accounts, so they have less of a need to move money around on that scale. The people who do (large companies) aren't going to be the big 'names' that are being dug for right now, and they tend to have in-house arrangements for that sort of thing instead of contracting it out (see Starbucks avoidance of corporate tax for a good example there).
Western corruption tends to be more along the lines of 'I pass a piece of legislation' or 'I bend a rule' and get a cushy job as a 'consulting director' within six months of leaving office which pays me £80,000 a year for no real work. And ultimately, that sort of corruption is generally far less visible or relevant to these sorts of leaks, which revolve around extremely high net worth individuals. Cameron is well off, but he's not in the, 'I'm stealing £200 million from Government and stashing it away' league. Russian oligarchs, and South American/African/Arabic politicians and dictators are.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2016/04/04 18:05:12
