Panama Papers: British Elite Linked to Corruption, yet Media Only Focuses on PutinMichaela Whitton April 04, 2016
(ANTIMEDIA) United Kingdom — Believed to be the largest leak of secret documents in history, the Panama Papers are the latest revelations exposing global corruption. The worldwide investigation supposedly exposes the secretive offshore industry the world’s elites use to hide assets and swerve rules. Based on a library of more than 11 million leaked files, it claims to have exposed a host of characters using offshore companies to facilitate bribery, arms deals, tax evasion, financial fraud, and drug trafficking.
Few will be surprised that the global rich and famous hide their money offshore, regardless of their country of origin. While the Panama Papers are set to identify a cast of characters, from the stars of pitch and screen to political establishments, it’s worth pointing out that the 2.6 terabytes of data hail from just one law firm in one tax haven. They are the tip of the iceberg in spotlighting the shadowy corners where elites stash their cash.
Though much of the public reveres whistleblowers, as author and human rights activist Craig Murray points out, this particular leaker has made the mistake of turning to the Western corporate media to publicise the results. The crucial part of this story, according to Murray, is who is managing the leaked information: the “International Consortium of Investigative Journalists.” He explains they are funded and organised by the U.S.A’s Center for Public Integrity, which includes sponsors such as the Ford Foundation, Carnegie Endowment, Rockefeller Family Fund, W. K., the Kellogg Foundation, and the Open Society Foundation, which is owned by George Soros.
All roads lead to Putin
Considering those guarding the information, it is unsurprising that here in the U.K., corporate press coverage has shown an overarching focus on official enemies like Putin and Assad. With the media dominated by glaring close-ups of Putin and misleading headlines, it seems the British public are only privy to information about official establishment foes while the misdemeanours of tax dodgers are practically ignored. From what Murray says, the identities of those behind managing the leak could also explain the deafening silence on the hundreds of Israeli companies and shareholders implicated.
With the enemies of the West paraded by British news outlets, by mid-morning only the Mirror and the Metro had given brief mention to the fact that David Cameron’s father and a host of senior Tory figures had reportedly used tax havens for the rich and powerful. David Cameron’s late father, Ian, is allegedly named as a client of Mossack Fonseca, the firm at the centre of the scandal. Using it it to protect his investment fund from U.K. taxes, he is said to have built up a significant legacy, part of which was inherited by the Prime Minister. The irony is not lost on many, especially in view of Cameron’s previous pledges to clamp down on tax dodgers and havens. He has described them as “morally wrong.”
Few will hold their breath for any of the rich and powerful named in the files to be held to account for the details released the latest data splurge. Undoubtedly, it will soon become clear whether there will be any real consequences of a leak of this size, particularly when most of the information will remain private. While tumbleweeds blow through the corporate media on the fact that the Tories were up to their necks in global corruption, the Facebook Mob and the Twitterati are hsving a firld day (but like the Sheeple they are, they're atacking the wrong targets. Has nobody else noticed that while Russians and Europeans are being fingered, we are expected to believe no prominent American political figures have so far been named, although a quick search of the documents reveals plenty are involved.
British blood in Libya - Obama's price for 'stay' campaign support?
There's a very funny smell hanging around Cameron, Obama, Libya and the 'stay' campaign right now. Firstly, the US President, whose every public word is guarded by a phalanx of PR experts, blames Cameron for leaving business unfinished in Libya. Then it's revealed that Obama will strongly support the 'stay' campaign. And now the leaks are starting that Obama wants boots on the ground in Libya before the end of his presidential term - that means this year. And Cameron has nothing left to lose.
So one has to wonder if Cameron, like Blair, has already promised the US President that UK troops will fight in Libya alongside a US contingent - and whether Obama's support for the 'stay' campaign is the price for this.
We won't know, of course, until Cameron feels compelled to tell the House of 'urgent' matters that have just arisen regarding Libya and seeking support for an expeditionary force. No doubt the Cabinet Secretary is already writing the mandatory Dodgy Dossier. Or perhaps a Libyan 'incident' is already being contrived or allowed to develop.
We've got nine months of 2016 left to find out.
There's a petition on the Govt. website to stop Obama's visit CLICK HERE to sign it