The Panama Papers thread

McSack said:
Never said it was impossible ... just unlikely. That is one helluva lot of data for an individual to redact.
You take stuff out, there will be references to it somewhere else that you will need to take out ... which will have still more references. Or there won't be any direct references and you will be chasing your tail around for ages trying to uncover them
Click to expand...
OK, let's say that I'm a greedy scumsucker and I was a part of this thing and that's why I got my hands on the records. I'm about to burn some of my partners in crime, so I take the records and, ok, 11TB is a lot, but I know exactly which accounts I have to search for, right?

So how's a reporter or anyone for that matter going to know if an account that's there speaking of an account that's not is because the record was deleted instead of the data being incomplete?

I mean, it's not like there won't be accounts referring to other accounts whose identity remains uncertain, no?

Release the data to the world and all of a sudden you have millions of people digging through the stuff and spotting inconsistencies ... like I said , we may still see this happening
Click to expand...
But that's precisely the thing. I don't think anyone has the physical ability to pick up such an inconsistency in such a large dataset with any kind of haste.

I mean, George Soros has known associations with this group. He's obscenely rich and if rumour is correct he's quite proud of the fact that he got his start in life by prying gold fillings from his fellow Jews who had already died during the Holocaust. Hell, the guy even looks like a stand-in actor for Emperor Palpetine. And for example his emnity of Putin (and Russia) is well-known.

And they found nothing of his yet?

Now this is just conjecture, but I'm sure you can see that until we know the identity of the leaker, the nature of the information and its true intent remains an enigma.
 
NarrowBandFtw said:
The press involved are all / mostly from EU countries though and have greater motivation to highlight negative press of their enemies rather than their allies.

Russia as the old favourite nemesis and Iceland as the one nation willing to go against the grain and imprison bankers for the 2008 fraud are both such enemies.
Click to expand...
A fair concentration , but I wouldn't say "all/mostly from EU countries"
No doubt , Russia generally seems to be considered a big-bad-baddy in the world of news (well your mainstream western news anyway)
NarrowBandFtw said:
I must admit I find it highly suspect that USA as a whole is not really mentioned, never mind Obama, but nobody at all from USA? Didn't read the article posted earlier here making that observation, but just reading all the "trusted" sources (e.g. BBC, The Guardian, Süddeutsche Zeitung) and couldn't find a single mention.
Click to expand...
True , who knows maybe they just never used this particular firm .
(You know the yanks could never really trust those people down there ever since they stole the canal :p ... and that bast@rd Noriega ruled illegally there for years forcing the US to invade so they could arrest the MoFo )
 
McSack said:
A fair concentration , but I wouldn't say "all/mostly from EU countries"
No doubt , Russia generally seems to be considered a big-bad-baddy in the world of news (well your mainstream western news anyway)

True , who knows maybe they just never used this particular firm .
(You know the yanks could never really trust those people down there ever since they stole the canal :p ... and that bast@rd Noriega ruled illegally there for years forcing the US to invade so they could arrest the MoFo )
Click to expand...

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-...ancial-dealings-some-worlds-wealthiest-people

Check the bottom. USAid = America's vehicle for much of it's NGO shenanigens.
 
Xarog said:
OK, let's say that I'm a greedy scumsucker and I was a part of this thing and that's why I got my hands on the records. I'm about to burn some of my partners in crime, so I take the records and, ok, 11TB is a lot, but I know exactly which accounts I have to search for, right?

So how's a reporter or anyone for that matter going to know if an account that's there speaking of an account that's not is because the record was deleted instead of the data being incomplete?

I mean, it's not like there won't be accounts referring to other accounts whose identity remains uncertain, no?
Click to expand...
I'm not disagreeing . Just that I think that scenario is unlikely for such a big dataset in my humble opinion . Your opinion may be that this kind of manipulation is likely ... I dunno because you are talking in hypotheticals

Xarog said:
But that's precisely the thing. I don't think anyone has the physical ability to pick up such an inconsistency in such a large dataset with any kind of haste.

I mean, George Soros has known associations with this group. He's obscenely rich and if rumour is correct he's quite proud of the fact that he got his start in life by prying gold fillings from his fellow Jews who had already died during the Holocaust. Hell, the guy even looks like a stand-in actor for Emperor Palpetine. And for example his emnity of Putin (and Russia) is well-known.

And they found nothing of his yet?

Now this is just conjecture, but I'm sure you can see that until we know the identity of the leaker, the nature of the information and its true intent remains an enigma.
Click to expand...

100% , but what they seem to have found "so far" is that Vladimir, Khulubasi , Sigmundur et al appear to have had their hands very deeply buried in the cookie jar
 
McSack said:
I'm not disagreeing . Just that I think that scenario is unlikely for such a big dataset in my humble opinion . Your opinion may be that this kind of manipulation is likely ... I dunno because you are talking in hypotheticals
Click to expand...
I only think it is uncertain, that's all. I wouldn't presume to judge it one way or the other unless I had actually seen the info for myself or got to see someone else's analysis of the info.

100% , but what they seem to have found "so far" is that Vladimir, Khulubasi , Sigmundur et al appear to have had their hands very deeply buried in the cookie jar
Click to expand...
You don't find it strange that not a single prominent American has been mentioned? I mean, there aren't any mentioned yet, right?
 
Xarog said:
...

You don't find it strange that not a single prominent American has been mentioned? I mean, there aren't any mentioned yet, right?
Click to expand...
Whether I find it strange or not doesn't change the fact that there is a whole lot of data supporting claims of dodgy dealings by the individuals exposed here. Should we just gloss over these findings just because we don't yet see any claims against those evil Americans ?
 
McSack said:
Whether I find it strange or not doesn't change the fact that there is a whole lot of data supporting claims of dodgy dealings by the individuals exposed here. Should we just gloss over these findings just because we don't yet see any claims against those evil Americans ?
Click to expand...
Of course not.
 
NarrowBandFtw said:
I must admit I find it highly suspect that USA as a whole is not really mentioned, never mind Obama, but nobody at all from USA? Didn't read the article posted earlier here making that observation, but just reading all the "trusted" sources (e.g. BBC, The Guardian, Süddeutsche Zeitung) and couldn't find a single mention.
Click to expand...

Over 3000 US companies are involved in the leaks.
 
McSack said:
Charna I will get to those eventually I'm sure... my starting point is however never going to be ZeroHedge
Click to expand...
Look at the bottom of the official site. ZH just took a screenshot of the official website. You can CLEARLY see the USAid logo at the bottom.
 
Official Silence In Russia Over Putin Allegations In Panama Papers

State-owned Russian media was silent Monday over documents allegedly showing a multi-billion dollar money-laundering scheme run by close associates of President Vladimir Putin. The information emerged as part of a leak of confidential material from secretive Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca.

The 9 a.m. news bulletin on Russia’s leading state-owned Channel One television channel contained items on recent fighting in the South Caucasus, allegations of doping in British sport and Russian de-mining experts in Syria — but nothing on the network of offshore companies apparently tied to Putin and other Russian officials.

The allegations were covered in detail by Russia's small group of independent media outlets and there were brief reports about the allegations by Russian news agencies, but state-controlled television — how most Russians get their news — almost completely ignored the story.

The Kremlin’s English-language channel, RT, carried a brief report on the leak Monday on its homepage, with no direct mention of a connection to Putin.
Click to expand...

Full article: http://www.ibtimes.com/official-silence-russia-over-putin-allegations-panama-papers-2347783
 
Xarog said:
Look at the bottom of the official site. ZH just took a screenshot of the official website. You can CLEARLY see the USAid logo at the bottom.
Click to expand...
Yes ... and ....

What is at the bottom of the ICIJ website? I'm not seeing your point somehow :confused:
 
McSack said:
Yes ... and ....

What is at the bottom of the ICIJ website? I'm not seeing your point somehow :confused:
Click to expand...
The official logo that shows that the people funding the website are none other than the US Government. Do you think the US Government would pay money to an organisation that was publishing information it didn't want to be released?

All I am saying is that the proposition that the information leak is incomplete does not deserve to be hastily dismissed.
 
Unhappy438 said:
Where do you get the information thats the official site? ICIJ and Süddeutsche Zeitung took a lead role on this.
Click to expand...
My mistake.

Edit: Though Open Society Foundations is mentioned by the ICIJ:

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.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Xarog said:
The official logo that shows that the people funding the website are none other than the US Government. Do you think the US Government would pay money to an organisation that was publishing information it didn't want to be released?

All I am saying is that the proposition that the information leak is incomplete does not deserve to be hastily dismissed.
Click to expand...

I think you are affording the US government way too much credit with regards what is possible on a bit of funding through a charity organisation
I do agree with you that we cannot rule out the possibility of the information being incomplete ... I just don't think it is likely considering the number of people and complexity of data involved.
Let's agree to disagree and wait and see
 
McSack said:
I think you are affording the US government way too much credit with regards what is possible on a bit of funding through a charity organisation
Click to expand...
Are you familiar with USAid's involvement with regime change attempts in various countries such as Ukraine? The US Govt funnels billions of dollars through USAid when they find it geopolitically convenient to do so.

I do agree with you that we cannot rule out the possibility of the information being incomplete ... I just don't think it is likely considering the number of people and complexity of data involved.
Let's agree to disagree and wait and see
Click to expand...
The more complex the data, the harder it becomes to conclude that anything is missing. That's my point. I think it's nigh impossible to tell, and will remain like that at least until quantum computing becomes commonplace.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X