The Panama Papers - 04/06/2016

There has been much written on “the Panama papers” - the article by the Saker sums it up pretty well.

In the meantime the Guardian has the Chinese leadership in its crosshairs in its highly-selective (and “responsible”) release of the material. I am still waiting for their covreage of Petro Poroshenko, (directly named along with passport details). I notice they have dispensed with the comments section for this.

Uncle Shmuel points fingers (aka “Panama Papers”)

the Saker

Vineyard of the Saker,

6 April, 2016

The so-called “Panama Papers” which are presented by the world’s corporate media as some kind of super-mega-uber-Wikileaks are simply the latest US strategic PSYOP.  Of course, no hard proof of that will ever materialize, but take a look at this pretty good summary of the leak so far:

The source: an anonymous leaker who has made a “no meeting ever” a condition.

The media support: 400 journalists at 107 media organizations in more than 80 countries

The volume: 2.6 terabytes (million million (1012)) of data or 11.5 million documents including 4,804,618 emails, 3,047,306 database format files, 2,154,264 PDFs, 1,117,026 images, 320,166 text files, and 2,242 files in other formats

and now, the best part,

The people named in these documents:

Current heads of state:
Argentine President Mauricio MacriSaudi Arabian King SalmanUnited Arab Emirates President Khalifa bin Zayed Al NahyanUkrainian president Petro Poroshenko

Former heads of state:Qatar Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani, former Emir of QatarSudan Ahmed al-Mirghani, former President of SudanUkraine Pavlo Lazarenko, former Prime Minister of UkraineMoldova Ion Sturza, former Prime Minister of Moldova

Heads of government:
Icelandic Prime Minister Sigmundur Davíð Gunnlaugsson resigned on April 5, 2016Iceland Sigmundur Davíð Gunnlaugsson, Prime Minister of Iceland (resigned April 5, 2016)

Former heads of government:
Georgia (country) Bidzina Ivanishvili, former Prime Minister of GeorgiaIraq Ayad Allawi, former Acting Prime Minister of IraqJordan Ali Abu al-Ragheb, former Prime Minister of JordanQatar Hamad bin Jassim bin Jaber Al Thani, former Prime Minister of Qatar

Other government officials:  for full list please see here

Relatives and associates of government officials: for a full list please see here

Here is how the Panama Paper’s website presented the main actors:

Country leaders

Relatives and Associates of country leaders

Notice something?

Look who is MISSING from this list!

Not a single American citizen, not one.  The best I found was “Tina Turner, American-born Swiss singer“.  Now maybe US Americans are just angelic and pristinely honest, or maybe they simple don’t want to use the Panamanian corporate service provider Mossack Fonseca.  But maybe, just maybe, whoever leaked these documents does not want to be at the receiving end of a lawsuit for violation of the CIA’s prohibition of spying on US nationals.

By the way, the NYT claims that there are 200 US passports mentioned somewhere in the documents.  Maybe.  But if that is true, they are low-level enough not to be mentioned in the flood or articles about these “Panama Papers” and that, in turn, tells me that the individuals named are either indirectly involved or unable to sue.  The NYT had to conclude that “So far, the documents have connected no American politicians or other influential people to Mossack Fonseca“.  The NYT even provides a credible (and truthful) explanation of why so few Americans are listed in these papers:

One reason there may be relatively few Americans named in the documents is that it is fairly easy to form shell companies in the United States. James Henry, an economist and senior adviser to the Tax Justice Network, told Fusion that Americans “really don’t need to go to Panama.” “Basically, we have an onshore haven industry in the U.S. that is as secretive as anywhere,” he said.

More about that later.

Right now let’s the a look at the rest of the list.  What is striking is that it contains a few more or less irrelevant names, at least form the point of view of the AngloZionist world policy, a few ex-leaders and minor politicians, again – from the point of view of the AngloZionist Empire, a few “disobedient leaders” which the Empire is only too happy to compromise,  and only wholly indirect references to big leaders like Putin or Xi Jinping.  Even worse, the category “Relatives and Associates” is a clear case of guilt by association.  But that did not stop the Ziomedia from presenting it like this:

So now we know how Putin hid a billion dollars.  Or do we?  Where is the evidence that Putin hid anythin

So now we know how Putin hid a billion dollars.  Or do we?  Where is the evidence that Putin hid anything at all?  Nowhere.  But who cares about any such niceties as the presumption of evidence or even fair reporting?!  2016 will be an election year, and the Russian 5th column needs all the help it can get.  And Uncle Shmuel is only happy to provide it, of course.

To use a KGB expression the CIA’s “ears are clearly sticking out” in this strategic PSYOP who point is very obvious: to jump on the Wikileaks bandwagon and create a little “imperial wikileaks” in the hope to be taken as seriously as the real thing.

It is hard to say who exactly in the USA is behind that.  As far as I know the Pentagon’s strategy PSYOP are normally directed at military conflict areas. A good guess might that this could be the work of the Political Action Group (PAG) division inside the CIA’s Directorate of Operations (DO).  But my gut feeling tells me that there is a special and still secret agency in the US government in charge of large-scale “covert propaganda” operations.  But, at the end of the day, this really does not matter: the US government’s fingerprints are all over these pseudo-leaks and that is what matters.

Some might wonder if those documents are true and, if yes, how the CIA, or some OGA, could have come across these very “sensitive” files?  Simple.

For many years already the US government has been using its influence to get all the main financial centers of the world under its control.  Some countries, such as Switzerland, have simply bullied in giving up their traditionally secretive banking practices, while banks were infiltrated by US agents and spies.  The grand plan is simple: to take control of all the money flow worldwide.  You want to bank “safe”?  You better do it in the USA or else…

Now look at the James Henry quote reported by the NYT above: “we have an onshore haven industry in the U.S. that is as secretive as anywhere”.  Get that?   What this means is  this: “If you want to hide money, that’s fine with us, but only as long as you hide it with us“.  It’s that simple.  And, of course, if you want your money safe, you better not disobey Uncle Shmuel because he can take it anytime he wants.  Elegant, simple, effective.  Beautiful, really.

The truth is that while the US intelligence community is rather incompetent, especially in HUMINT, the US control of the financial movements worldwide is nothing short of superb, especially in region of the world already controlled by the USA (such as Panama) or with banks with a long history of corruption and shady activities (Deutsche Bank, HSBC).

The other surefire sign pointing at a US role is a fundamental cultural misrepresentation.  While people living in the West might think that Vladimir Putin or Xi Jinping might want to “hide billions abroad” the truth is that the very notion that these leaders might “need money” in a traditional sense of the word is absurd.  Why?  Simple:

First, they both know that any money kept in US-controlled jurisdictions is extremely unsafe for them.  Not only can it be seized, it can also make them the target of blackmail.  Does anybody seriously believe that an ex-KGB lieutenant-colonel like Putin would not understand that?

Second, money is power and power is money.  That means that when you have a lot of power, you also have a lot of money or, more accurately, you don’t need money.  The truth is that with the power Xi or Putin have, they don’t need to use any paper or electronic money at all, their power is way above any dollar denominated price tag.

Third, neither Putin nor Xi are clueless, ignorant 3rd world leader à la Bokassa or Idi Amin.  They have the full use of advanced intelligence services which would immediately tell them that the “regular” offshoring is just a trap which will, sooner or later, ensnare you.  In fact, Putin specifically warned Russian businessmen against using such services – does anybody believe that he warns them and then does exactly what he warned against?

Now, let us assume the worst: Putin and Xi are corrupt to the bone they want to keep their money in the West.  Why in the world would they do that through some well-known and easily tracked “friends of the family” when they could use the services of their national intelligence agencies or, just to make the tale even more sexy, to use the contact Russian and Chinese security services (really) do have with the Russian Mafia and the Chinese Triads?  The truth is that both of these men could very easily and safely use such contacts (neither the Russian nor the Chinese Mafia would *ever* pass the opportunity to be of use to the Top Leader) to hide any amount of money.  This being said, rather than using such exotic “spy novel” schemes, a much simpler option for them would be to simply take control of a highly profitable company or resource *inside* Russia/China.  If you were a putatively totally corrupt Putin or Xi, would you rather keep your money in a US controlled jurisdiction or simply take control of, say, a nickel ormolybdenum mining corporation?

In many cases, these documents probably *do* reveal real corruption, especially in the upper-middle level of government.  That is typically were corruption would happen and the folks on that level really might want to hide some money abroad for the “rainy day”, especially if they risk lose power and if losing power means the immediate need to emigrate.

So what we have here is a typical mix or true and false information, carefully tailored to embarrass mostly irrelevant or anti-US leaders, with a few not so subtle hints are Putin and Xi with the (misguided) hope to weaken them on their internal front.  I would rate this entire effort as rather clumsy and it if it was not for unconditional and uncritical support of “400 journalists at 107 media organizations in more than 80 countries” so would many others.

The Saker