I am "hoping" to see US clients exposed. But even if they are, I expect a big "meh" from any authority that could do anything about it. It's easier to chase resourceless drug users and scientific publication "pirates."
Corporate Media Gatekeepers Protect Western 1% from Panama Leak
41–50 of 105 posts
Re: Corporate Media Gatekeepers Protect Western 1% from Panama Leak
#42This guy is impatient... They learned this from wikileaks: 10 huge headlines spread across half a year is more effective than 1 huge headline today.
Actually, Wikileaks released a dump of everything Chelsea Manning sent them, including diplomatic cables that only served to hurt innocents across the globe. That's a great example of what not to do. The Guardian and Washington Post handled Snowden's leaks very differently, sourcing and verifying each article, then releasing quite a lot more than 10 major headlines over the course of a year or so. I trust the ICIJ wi…
Wikileaks released the 'insurance file' encrypted. The release of the password seems to be some kind of bizarre mix-up, the Guardian journalists released it in a book... See:
https://unspecified.wordpress.com/2011/09/03/wikileaks-passw...
Re: Corporate Media Gatekeepers Protect Western 1% from Panama Leak
#43It's only day 1, and the ICIJ has said they have at least 14 days of "major revelations" mapped out in advance. I expect we'll be seeing stories from the Panama Papers for months to come, spaced out for maximum impact, similarly to Snowden's leaks. If a month goes by and not a single story is contrary to american corporate interests, the author's position may be reasonably supportable. But day 1? Not a chance. They w…
I can guarantee you at least two more heads of states tomorrow (European time): Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan.
Note to readers: From a post in the other Pentagon Papers thread on HN, r3bl claims to be a web dev at one of the sites reporting on these leaks, ICIJ, Guardian, BBC, etc. So he isn't guessing!
Re: Corporate Media Gatekeepers Protect Western 1% from Panama Leak
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually, Wikileaks released a dump of everything Chelsea Manning sent them, including diplomatic cables that only served to hurt innocents across the globe. That's a great example of what not to do. The Guardian and Washington Post handled Snowden's leaks very differently, sourcing and verifying each article, then releasing quite a lot more than 10 major headlines over the course of a year or so. I trust the ICIJ wi…
Wikileaks released the 'insurance file' encrypted. The release of the password seems to be some kind of bizarre mix-up, the Guardian journalists released it in a book... See: https://unspecified.wordpress.com/2011/09/03/wikileaks-passw...
Thank you for that link. I was not aware of the circumstances.
Re: Corporate Media Gatekeepers Protect Western 1% from Panama Leak
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also wasn't this a law firm whose data was leaked? A lot of that information is probably financial and personal records which would be massively irresponsible, not to mention highly illegal, to release in a dump.
A law firm whose sole business is establishing companies on paper in tax havens, so not quite your average firm.
With over 200000 shell companies created, you can be pretty sure not every shell company is involved in illegal activity. In fact, it's perfectly legal to create them, though the majority of their use cases is illegal. That still doesn't mean you can just dump private information like that on the internet
Re: Corporate Media Gatekeepers Protect Western 1% from Panama Leak
#46That article is bullshit. Yes, we can't access the raw data - true, but understandable. The editor in-chief of the SZ says they are still working on it and will expose more and more "in waves", often getting statements from the accused before or sharing it with law enforcement agencies. And no, they didn't focus on Russia or Assad, one of the main revelations was that three members of Iceland's government (PM, financ…
The article mentions the Iceland info and characterizes it as a "token" revelation meant exactly to keep people obfuscated and arguing about whether the leak did or did not implicate wealthy Western elites.
I agree with the article. The leaks about Iceland and South America clearly do not count as major investigative reporting on western involvement.
When U.S. officials, celebrities, and financiers start getting named, since there is literally no doubt they have been involved in this in illegal ways, then I'll believe they aren't holding back to protect Western interests.
Until then, the article is absolutely on point with its criticism.
Re: Corporate Media Gatekeepers Protect Western 1% from Panama Leak
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can guarantee you at least two more heads of states tomorrow (European time): Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan.
Note to readers: From a post in the other Pentagon Papers thread on HN, r3bl claims to be a web dev at one of the sites reporting on these leaks, ICIJ, Guardian, BBC, etc. So he isn't guessing!
Best proof I can provide at the moment: https://tech.occrp.org/about/ (members of our tech team on our lame tech blog) and, of course, our affiliation: https://www.occrp.org/en/panamapapers/. Also: https://twitter.com/r3bl_/status/716754286059864065?s=09 and https://twitter.com/r3bl_/status/716325999785418753?s=09
Our journalists have already started posting this on Twitter, kind of like we did yesterday when we warned Russian spokespeople that they're going to have a sleepless night tonight: https://twitter.com/DrewOCCRP/status/716320506052493312?s=09
Re: Corporate Media Gatekeepers Protect Western 1% from Panama Leak
#48That article is bullshit. Yes, we can't access the raw data - true, but understandable. The editor in-chief of the SZ says they are still working on it and will expose more and more "in waves", often getting statements from the accused before or sharing it with law enforcement agencies. And no, they didn't focus on Russia or Assad, one of the main revelations was that three members of Iceland's government (PM, financ…
Sure 2.6 TB is a lot of data. Probably had to be handed over in person rather than via some anonymous website. Also not easy to distribute in unprocessed form.
But I think this suspicion is very called for.
After all the law firm had offices in many "non-corrupt" European countries not on list of leaks:
http://www.mossfon.com/contact-our-offices/
(For some reason there are no offices in the US on this list; eventhough many reports say that this firm is also big in the US?)
Yet it is just the usual suspects ...
Re: Corporate Media Gatekeepers Protect Western 1% from Panama Leak
#49Here's a map showing all entities mentioned in the Panama Papers. TONS in the west, including the US.
https://briankilmartin.cartodb.com/viz/54ddb5c0-f80e-11e5-9a...
Re: Corporate Media Gatekeepers Protect Western 1% from Panama Leak
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
Note to readers: From a post in the other Pentagon Papers thread on HN, r3bl claims to be a web dev at one of the sites reporting on these leaks, ICIJ, Guardian, BBC, etc. So he isn't guessing!
Best proof I can provide at the moment: https://tech.occrp.org/about/ (members of our tech team on our lame tech blog) and, of course, our affiliation: https://www.occrp.org/en/panamapapers/ . Also: https://twitter.com/r3bl_/status/716754286059864065?s=09 and https://twitter.com/r3bl_/status/716325999785418753?s=09 Our journalists have already started posting this on Twitter, kind of like we did yesterday when we war…
[deleted]