Why won't they release the full thing?
https://neurope.eu/article/panama-papers-wikileaks-calls-full-rather-selective-disclosure/WikiLeaks has been criticizing the management of the 2,4 terabytes of the so-called Panama Papers. The organization is particularly talking aim at the Washington-based International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ).
WikiLeaks would like to see all the documents known as the “Panama papers” cache online for everyone to see and search; the ICIJ wants to what its Director has called “responsible journalism.”
In a Tweet, WikiLeaks speaks about “censorship” of 99% of the documents and is calling for full disclosure.
ICIJ’s Director, Gerard Ryle, told US magazine “Wired” that he would not like to expose sensitive information of private individuals, arguing that “we’re trying to show that journalism can be done responsibly.” Ryle argues that there are “innocent private people” that should not be exposed and that it is not about going crazy but revealing what is “in the public interest.”
Speaking to RT, WikiLeaks spokesman, Kristinn Hrafnsson, made clear he disagreed with ICIJ’s. The main aim is taken against ICIJ’s slower than justified revelation of 441 US-based clients. Hrafnsson notes there is a difference between stalling a release and selective release.
WikiLeaks points the fingers towards ICIJ funders with the implicit question being if they are implicated in any way. The explicit question is who decides what is in the public interest and on what criteria. Sensitive information on “innocent people” may a different context be considered leverage against individuals, which is problematic. And it provides “market share” expansion opportunity to competing firms in the offshore business of the famous Mossack Fonseca firm.
But if they're rich it's because they earned every dollar.
Where did the ICIJ get the data from and why can't wiki leaks get the information from that source?
If I had thar data I'd release it on BT all in 1 go.
So America doesn't get exposed as not having a squeaky clean record when it comes to finance? :hmm:
from quote aboveSpeaking to RT, WikiLeaks spokesman, Kristinn Hrafnsson, made clear he disagreed with ICIJ’s. The main aim is taken against ICIJ’s slower than justified revelation of 441 US-based clients. Hrafnsson notes there is a difference between stalling a release and selective release.
Some one needs to hack Bermuda and the Cayman islands. You'd find a shit load of Americans there.
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
-snip-
The only people who've done much at all to curb the excesses has been the Obama Admin. Using the tools Congress allows, it's kinda like trying to kill the Hydra with a salad fork.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UBS_tax_evasion_controversyHillary Clinton, having been sworn in as Secretary of State in January, traveled to Geneva to meet with the Swiss Foreign Minister to discuss the IRS suit. Within a few months, Clinton had arranged a tentative settlement in which the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (FINMA) would reveal information on 4,450 of the 52,000 accounts sought by the IRS, preserving the anonymity of more than 90 percent of the United States customers of UBS's cross-border business.[25][26]
Meanwhile, UBS provided generous support of the Clinton Foundation, whose contributions from UBS grew from less than $60,000 through 2008, to a cumulative total of around $600,000 through 2014; and supported a Foundation program with loans totaling $32 million. UBS also paid former President Bill Clinton $1.5 million to participate in a series of question-and-answer sessions with UBS executives.[25][27]
On August 12, 2009, UBS announced a settlement deal that ended its litigation with the IRS.[28] U.S. Senator Carl Levin (D-MI), who conducted Senate hearings into the UBS tax evasion scandal, described the settlement agreement (known as the "Annex") "disappointing."
[T]he tortured wording and the many limitations in this Annex shows the Swiss Government trying to preserve as much bank secrecy as it can for the future, while pushing to conceal the names of tens of thousands of suspected U.S. tax cheats. It is disappointing that the U.S. government went along.[29]
Uh-oh looks like Clinton might have some unwelcome revelations.
http://observer.com/2016/04/panama-papers-reveal-clintons-kremlin-connection/
Uh-oh looks like Clinton might have some unwelcome revelations.
http://observer.com/2016/04/panama-papers-reveal-clintons-kremlin-connection/
Here comes the Hillary apologist, how much money do you make for each apology you make for her? If it's even just 10 cents you must be a millionaire.What a bullshit headline. The panama papers have revealed absolutely nothing about the relationship between the Podesta Group & Sberbank. That's always been a matter of public record as the article points out.
It's a hatchet job.
What a bullshit headline. The panama papers have revealed absolutely nothing about the relationship between the Podesta Group & Sberbank. That's always been a matter of public record as the article points out.
It's a hatchet job.
Here comes the Hillary apologist, how much money do you make for each apology you make for her? If it's even just 10 cents you must be a millionaire.
Like when I called out shit appointments of Obama and instead of an actual retort it was just a call out for bullshit with zero substance?Perhaps you can explain exactly what the Panama papers have to do with Podesta or Clinton? Where have either been mentioned at all?
Have at it.
Like when I called out shit appointments of Obama and instead of an actual retort it was just a call out for bullshit with zero substance?
I'll just take your route and just make claims that you are wrong and that is good enough just because. The Buffhhhnnnn tactic.
See, I knew your short term memory would fail as usual, read my edit.It was scattershot bullshit with zero substance or supporting evidence. Deal with it. Don't make claims you're not prepared to back up.
So there's no link between the Panama papers & Clinton as the headline alleges?
See, I knew your short term memory would fail as usual, read my edit.
If you want to see scattershot bullshit, you have made over 28,000 posts of it.
Podesta Group is another one of her many slimebag supporters. Almost all of her backers are slimebags, it's just proof of yet another one, do we see these bundlers supporting Sanders? nope and we probably know why.
I want what is worst for groups like Podesta. You want what is best for Wallstreet and Podesta.