The following two articles detail who funded the Panama Papers and that there are 441 unnamed US clients in the document leak.
Why is it that US clients are not named when they are one of the biggest patrons of the Mossack Fonseca law firm?
Related The Panama Papers Largest Leak in History | Propaganda, Preparation for Mass Arrests or Evidence of Silent Cold War?
Related Panama Papers | Clinton and Obama Supported and Enabled Panama Tax Evasion, Bernie Sanders did NOT
– Justin
Mossack Fonseca Has 441 U.S. Clients: Who Are They?
By Tyler Durden
As the shock from the initial revelation of leaked Mossack Fonseca files fades away, one recurring question has emerged: why were there no American clients of the firm named (at least not yet)? After all, leaders in Iceland, Russia, Ukraine, Brazil, Australia and many other nations are already facing questions about their use of the Panamanian law firm, and yet nothing about the US?
The United States is pure and good and incorruptible. pic.twitter.com/Xo9LEuCavF— Adam H. Johnson (@adamjohnsonNYC) April 3, 2016
One hint may have emerged when observing at the funding supporters of the project, among which we find George Soros’ heavily financially connected Open Society:
Recent ICIJ funders include: Adessium Foundation, Open Society Foundations, The Sigrid Rausing Trust, the Fritt Ord Foundation, the Pulitzer Center on Crisis Reporting, The Ford Foundation, The David and Lucile Packard Foundation, Pew Charitable Trusts and Waterloo Foundation.
Clearly, this would imply editorial intervention by the funding sources due to a potential “conflict of interest”, although hopefully not as that would undermine the objective nature of this massive journalistic undertaking.
There may be a simpler explanation: as Eoin Higgins points out, the 2010 United States—Panama Trade Promotion Agreement included a taxation clause that effectively shut down any chance of the rich in the US using Panama as a shelter.
The Tax Information Exchange Agreement includes a clause, Article 5, that specifies the terms of information sharing between the two countries on tax related matters:
The competent authority of the requested Party shall provide upon request by the competent authority of the requesting Party information for the purposes referred to in Article 1 of this Agreement. Such information shall be exchanged without regard to whether the requested Party needs such information for its own tax purposes or the conduct being investigated would constitute a crime under the laws of the requested Party if it had occurred in the territory of the requested Party.
The Article goes on to make clear that Mossack Fonseca’s type of services would particularly be included in the information request.
According to Higgins, “if Panama had ever been an attractive destination for American offshore storage of funds, this agreement shut the door on that possibility.”
Perhaps. However that does not explain why according to an interactive map created by Brian Kilmartin which lays out shotgun data (no names) about the number of companies, clients, beneficiaries and shareholders of Mossack Fonseca, there are at least 441 clients, 3,072 companies, 211 beneficiaries and 3,467 U.S.-based shareholders of the Panamanian law firm.
It also does not explain why according to primary data compiled in Fusion’s interactive universe, one can find an abundance of US-based nodes in the client/company/shareholder and beneficiary map (highlighted in blue).
Indicatively with 441 clients, the US is among the countries with the most clients served by Mossack Fonseca.
So who are these 441 clients, and why has the ICIJ decided not to reveal any of them?
Or perhaps it will all be revealed in due course.
According to a tweet by a tech editor at Germany’s Suddeutsche Zeiting – the outlet that received the original leak – there will be more disclosures forthcoming.
Editor of Süddeutsche Zeitung responded to the lack of U.S. individuals in the documents, saying “Just wait for what is coming next”— Mathew Ingram (@mathewi) April 3, 2016
Still, one can’t help but wonder: why not do a Wikileaks type data dump, one which reveals if not all the 2.6 terabytes of data due to security concerns, then at least the identities of these 441 US-based clients.
After all, with the rest of the world has already been extensively shamed, it’s only fair to open US books as well.
_____________________
Certain species of lizard – when threatened, cornered or in danger of being eaten – have the ability to “drop” their tail. This process, “Autotomy” (from the Greek, auto=self, tome=severing), enables the lizard to flee whilst the predator gets a brief distraction and small meal. The lizard survives. Tails grow back.
A simple, efficient survival method. The body ejects a replaceable part in protection of the vital whole. Easily adapted for the “Grand Chess Board”. Pinochet, the Shah of Iran, Saddam Hussein. All have played their part, only to be dropped when it became convenient. Despots and puppets grow back, too.
The Panama Papers broke, yesterday. Dozens of MSM outlets joined together in echoing this startling piece of investigative journalism: Rich people avoid paying their taxes. I know, I was shocked too.
Most of the BIG HEADLINES and threatening looking diagrams were reserved for Vladimir Putin (The Guardian) and Bashar al-Assad (The Independent), despite the fact that (as we covered last night) neither are named in any of the leaked documents.
The names that ARE mentioned? A who’s who of disposable despots, monsters of the week and inconveniently uncooperative politicians…with a few minor British political figures to add some verisimilutude.
Petro Poroshenko, a slow, stupid, politically inept post-Soviet fossil thrown into the least appealing Presidency on the planet.
Pavlo Lazarenko – convicted criminal and former Ukrainian PM.
Bidzina Ivanishvili – former PM of Georgia under the bufoon Saakashvili.
Sheikh Khalifa, President of the UAE and Hamad bin Jassim bin Jaber bin Mohammed bin Thani Al Thani former PM of Qatar, both magnets for acceptable criticism.
The King of Saudi Arbia, the perrenial boogeyman of “alternative” thinkers, and reposit of all mainstream criticism of any Western foreign policy – a sock puppet with a scary face, that we’re all encouraged to boo and hiss at so we can feel we have made a stand.
Ten-a-penny climbers, idiots and monsters. Lizard tails all. Cut them off and grow a new one.
No American citizens were named. No American companies were implicated. In espionage terms this is what they call a “limited hangout”: a vaguely worded and dishonestly presented partial truth, used to add credence to a backstory and increase the believability of the source.
In more coloquial, and honest, terminology: It is agenda-driven bullshit.
The cooperative of intelligence-backed hacks who “broke” this “story” all hail from The International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) a “special project” (their website tells us) of the not-at-all-Orwellian-sounding “Center for Public Integrity”.
Now, we’ve been here before – see our work on The New East Network – let’s just take a stroll down the About page of the Center for Public Integrity, and find out where they get their money from:
The Goldman-Sonnenfeldt Foundation – they don’t have a website, but their President does. He’s a “philanthropist and entrepeneur”. In case you’re wondering…yes, that is “Goldman” as in “Goldman Sachs”.
- The Ford Foundation – yes, as in Henry Ford. Business magnate and Nazi collaborator.
- Open Society Foundation – we’ve tangled with these fine folks before. The OSF are an NGO set up by billionaire George Soros. Because billionaires love justice and freedom.
- The Rockefeller Brothers Fund and Rockefeller Family Fund – how exactly these two things differ I’m not sure, however they do both exist, and they both give money to the CfPI, because the Rockefellers are all about that integrity.
- The Carnegie Corporation of New York – As in Andrew Carnegie, the billionaire. As in the Carnegie Endowment for American Hegemony…sorry, I mean International Peace.
So – to sum up:
George Soros, David Rockefeller, the Carnegie Corporation, the Ford Foundation, Goldman-Sachs et al. – who are all rabibly anti-corruption and always pay their taxes – all pooled their resources to fund the “International Consortium of Investigative Journalists” and tasked them with investigating shady international financial practices.
The result is this “leak”, a list of geo-political nobodies, has-beens, easy targets and dead ancestors. The tenuous and absurd connections to “enemies” of the West are exaggerated and plastered all over the headlines, whilst the names of allies and relatives are sidelined and barely mentioned – the majority of the information will “never be made public” according to the Guardian.
This is what “investigative journalism” has come to, printing billionaires’ enemy lists under the guise of “leaks”. Maybe this is a sign they feel cornered or threatened – because all they offer us here is a brief distraction and a small meal.
Sources:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-04-04/mossack-fonseca-has-441-us-clients-who-are-they
Image Source – http://misionesparatodos.com/inicio/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/panama-1.jpg
Image Source – http://img.timeinc.net/time/daily/2007/0704/george_soros.jpg
Image Source – http://specials-images.forbesimg.com/imageserve/02sE7JcgEY5Ze/0x600.jpg?fit=scale&background=000000
Leave a Reply