Corporate Media Gatekeepers Protect Western 1% From Panama Leak 797


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 The dirty secrets of western corporations will remain unpublished.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?

UPDATE

Hundreds of thousands of people have read this post in the 11 hours since it was published – despite it being overnight here in the UK. There are 235,918 “impressions” on twitter (as twitter calls them) and over 3,700 people have “shared” so far on Facebook, bringing scores of new readers each.

I would remind you that this blog is produced free for the public good and you are welcome to republish or re-use this article or any other material freely anywhere without requesting further permission.


Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

797 thoughts on “Corporate Media Gatekeepers Protect Western 1% From Panama Leak

1 11 12 13 14 15 17
  • Yazdy Rusi Palia

    Let us analyze these leaked information. What exactly is the act?
    1. A large number of affluent people have invested in companies in Panama, an area where people are free to invest.
    2. A lot of people who have invested the money they have not declared as their income.
    3. In a free society, the role of the government is to protect individual rights, the only, moral justification for a government.
    4. If the government, which should ideally be protectors of individual rights, wish to become bigger and start ruling over the lives of the people, become unjust and start legally looting the generators of wealth, is it a crime to protect their hard earned money?
    5. In a free society, where the government is playing its morally justified role, the people are free to live their lives as they wish, do what they want, with their hard earned money, this act of hiding their surplus, would never be needed.
    6. Having said that, are the democracies , really free societies? Far from it, it is a collectivist society, part fascist, part socialists, where the individual is a slave of society.
    In short, the act of hiding their income is not an immoral act. Taxation is nothing but legalized looting. Redistribution is a con-act to generate public opinion.

  • Michael

    the person or persons who leaked the info coupd certainly export it around to say Wilileaks and other outlets so my Questin is why don;t they?

  • Joshua Allen

    Quick who has Anonymous’s cell number, they claim to be a hacker group should this be their shining stat?

  • John M Pepperdine

    It should all be open to the public. No just selected “enemies” of the state.

  • John Toppong

    So as far as I can tell, you are speculating that the “1%” are being protected. With no access to the docs how certain are you?

  • Che

    It’s true. I can’t repost stories on Facebook. Unbelievable. The system is a lie.

  • Koolkat beeshat

    Excellent expose. Well written and true beyond a reasonable doubt. Hate mongers can not win the day, or we all lose as a direct
    Result.

  • Steven

    A remedy to this would be for whom this advantageous to, hire Anonymous by means of a back channel to see what is there

  • Lance Chambers

    The docs need to be made available to anyone who wishes to access them I would have thought.

    A secure server, much like the ones used by Wikileaks, would be a viable first step.

  • lori

    Why can’t we see the data? Shoudn’t the FBI or the CPFB be able to see this data? I realize I sound like I was born yesterday. Very discouraging.

    • Jack

      Why majority of thkse using offshore accounts will be perfectly within the law…

  • Wayne McQueen

    The corporately owned media won’t be able to protect the 1% Club Members once their names are released in May.

  • tanya robinson

    watch ‘patriocracy’, 2 hr. documentary on free speech tv now!! shows an american history kept secret from majority of americans!! you’ll be shocked! great article! thank you for sharing!

  • Fei Fai

    What kind of impact this will have on real estates for the super rich? They always use shells or some kind of fronts to control those estates, so they can live in multiple expensive locations while paying next to zero tax.
    And MF is only ranked 4th, what about the top 3? Who are their clients?

    • Fei Fai

      An after thought, do you think those super rich who have mansions, expensive apartments in Great Britain ever pay poll tax?

  • Gerry Coogan

    This is an issue which should have been central in the independence referendum debate. It didn’t take the leak of these papers to reveal that the entire purpose of the British Crown’s various tax evasion territories is to ensure that the stinking rich can stash away their plunder while the rest of us are taxed senseless to give them even more loot.
    I’m not being wise after the event; I said as much at the time. Indeed, the fact that these issues were never raised makes me sceptical about the resolve of any independent Scottish government to tackle this central issue.
    Nevertheless and sad to say, we don’t have an independent Scottish government. We have a Unionist government, based in the City of London and that is where the pressure should be focused. I don’t give a damn about Putin’s tax affairs, far less his cellist buddy. I would be immensely interested to learn about the tax arrangements of Blair, Brown, Darling, Cameron and Osborne, to name but a few.
    I don’t expect the BBC or the press to volunteer that information but I hope that we, the general public, will exert unceasing pressure on them to focus closer to home in their reporting. The media are currently in full, defensive, fire-fighting position already. They’ve made their intentions clear from the off by promoting the ‘Panama Papers’ description of this Crown scam. It’s not about Panama. It’s about the British Crown, the British Establishment and the City of London.
    We’ll find out now whether ‘The National’ is worth its salt. This stroy could and should destroy the Union and if ‘The National’ can’t lead the way, its credibility is dead in the water.

    • Jack

      None of them are on the list (apparently Camerons father was but like that’s hardly his fault) km fairly sure most of our government are probably clean In this respect I mean thru haven’t needed to bother have they? Until recently many mps were abusing the expenses thing why bother with hassle of offshore accounts. Most people involved will also be operating completely legally if not morally. Even those with offshore stuff worth large sums of money will still probably a hell of a lot of tax aswell… Even if it’s not as much as they ought to.

      • Dave

        These loop holes have been created by MP’s for the benefit of the wealthy – you really think they’re not going to make use of the same loop holes, even though they’ve proved with the expenses scam that they’re quite happy to exploit their position given the chance. Maybe not all, but you would have to expect a few. As for Cameron, he’s not responsible for the actions of his father, but he’s definitely benefited from them, and possibly still is – refusing to answer questions as to whether he still benefits from offshore accounts doesn’t fill you with confidence. We’re seeing the truth in the saying: absolute power corrupts absolutely.

  • Richard Voyce

    The BBC is not ‘Corporate media’. It isn’t driven br profit. You’re being paranoid.

  • Michael Wakabi

    Spot on. This is a continuation of the war against Putin by the west. After sanctions and the MH370 frame failed to stop him in Ukraine, and he beat them in Syria by resetting the conflict, this is another desperate attempt to bring down Putin. Unfortunately for the authors, western sensibilities are just that, they make sense to westerners and don’t matter much elsewhere. Putin will have his way and the lessons from Iraq, Libya and Tunisia will rally his people around him.

  • James Miller

    Thanks for the wake up call. I had not considered the selective nature of the BBC as its a brand I just trust! See in another blog of yours that Australia’s Four Corners did a better job, so will have a look there.

    Very useful blog Craig. Once took tea with you at the British embassy in Uzbekistan, will continue to follow.

  • Graham

    I notice the Guardian is not allowing comments on any of the Panama Papers articles, and like most of the western media has put it’s fingers in its ears regarding Unaoil.

  • Poul Martin Jen

    Starting all too well to fit with some of the government reactions we see as well. The Danish (right-wing) one refuses to investigate the papers, and the police has not been put on the case either…

  • Glenn Hall

    Papers publish what will attract readers and what can be quantifiable considered corruption i. e. Putin moving billions or any head of state for that matter. A corporate wonk moving a couple of million over the course of ten or twenty years by a means for all its unfairness is actually legal remember, is just not going to attract the same level of interest. With that interest comes the possibility of change.to shut down these loop holes. I think you are way off the mark criticizing the media outlets for this they have broke the story and brought the issue front and centre into the zeitgeist. David Cameron called it “morally offensive” to hide money offshore and made it one of the cornerstones of his election pledges, he was, perhaps still is due a host a G7 meeting about that very subject next month…how do the revelations his father was doing that very same thing for year sit?. You have to pick and choose your battles. This stance is just not a very positive one in relation to this overall story.

  • fwl (which way is the wind blowing)

    Front page City AM story is of LSE’s boss’s comments on US ICE having raised £10 billion to mount a hostile take over of the LSE.

    LSEs preferred route is a deal with Deutsche Boerse.

    LSE boss Says that the US co iCEs subsidiary Euronext has been going around French Government and some regulators saying side with ICE and they can break up the LSE.

    I’m beginning to revaluate some of my views on Brexit. Does the US want us out?

  • Andrew F

    If the “gatekeepers” won’t release/publish the names of these 1% Filth Pigs then WILL THEY ATLEAST INFORM AUTHORITIES LIKE FBI OR IRS so they can prosecute for tax evasion/money laundering???
    Also, WHY DOESN’T AN ALTERNATE SOURCE (Anonymous or any else, I don’t give a frog) translate & leak it for us???
    *not a rhetorical question, please SOMEONE explain*

  • Nobody

    Completely absurd opinion piece based entirely on speculation.

    Not to mention that one important fact has been left out. The “Western Media” are not the only ones in possession of the documents.

  • Martin Hall-Kenny

    Do not expect to learn anything that might make a difference. That ‘1%’ have it all stitched up and stitched up it will remain. Anything else might result in the ‘peasants’ revolting rather than being revolting.

1 11 12 13 14 15 17

Comments are closed.