Reasons to be Suspicious about the Panama Papers Leak – Rothschild, Soros Connections
By Pam Barker | TLB staff writer/analyst
Thirteen days after the Brussels’ bombings – just 13 days – the mainstream media has another all-engulfing story, pushing the furor and fear over the bombings almost from memory. One wonders if this isn’t another well-timed step in the false flag, matrix agenda.
It was clear almost from the moment the Panama Papers story broke 4 days ago that the targeting of the usual suspects was going on in the pressitute media. Namely, Putin whose friends, it turned out, were the ones guilty of parking their assets with tax firm Mossack Fonseca, not the Russian leader himself although his photo appears everywhere in connection with this story. Plus Petro Poroshenko, the current president of Ukraine who replaced Viktor Yanukovych, deposed by the Washington neocons. Poroshenko has recently run afoul of the IMF for not implementing reforms fast enough. And Syria’s Assad by way of association with two cousins who were clients of the Panamanian law firm. Egypt and North Korea have also been discussed.
In France, it has taken less than 40 hours since the story first broke for Marine Le Pen, the leader of the Front National, a party despised by both sides of the mainstream political spectrum, to be made the target of the Panama Papers story, even though it is merely guilt by association since it was one of her associates who used an offshore account for a relatively modest sum.
It has also been widely noted that prominent US figures have so far been absent from the reporting, although Suddeutscher Zeitung assures us that will change. For the moment, I will be holding my breath.
Of course, this story will have legs for some time to come, so an initial attack on traditional US State Department enemies might well be Washington’s way of making some immediate political capital out of the story. It is well known for jumping on a MSM story in the first 24 hours, casting blame on its traditional enemies irrespective of whatever evidence emerges to the contrary later on.
But there is a reasonable case to be made at this juncture that the law company at the heart of the leaks scandal, Mossack Fonseca, plus Panama itself, may well be the targets of some NWO plan with the Rothschilds’ business interests very close to the center of the action supported by globalist George Soros.
US fast becoming the world’s foremost tax haven
According to a Bloomberg report, the US – specifically states such as Wyoming, Nevada, South Dakota and Delaware – is now the most attractive, as well as possibly the biggest, tax haven in the world.
It is doing this in part by resisting new global disclosure standards issued by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) to combat tax avoidance while insisting other countries sign on to these stringent measures.
The irony surrounding this is huge given that the US government has been heavily critical of those countries that have historically hidden the assets of Americans. In 2010, the Foreign Account Tax Compliance law (or FATCA) was passed which requires firms to disclose foreign accounts held by US citizens to the IRS or face penalties. This came after the 2007 disclosure by UBS Group AG whistleblower Bradley Birkenfield, who revealed his firm’s help in aiding US clients avoid paying taxes. Many Swiss banks have had to pay fines since then, including Rothschild Bank AG.
Various companies in the US have been opening up shop to pull clients away from more traditional havens such as Bermuda, Grand Cayman, the British Virgin Islands and the Bahamas. These include Rothschild & Co., which has opened a trust company in Reno, Nevada, Cisa Trust Co. SA of Switzerland with an office in Pierre, South Dakota, and Trident Trust in Sioux Falls, S.D.
The strict OECD rules have in fact created something of an exodus of clients from Swiss institutions, which naturally makes the US very attractive to those seeking to escape disclosure rules. So the US refusal to comply clearly has enormous benefits for those companies doing business here. (Bahrain, Nauru and Vanatu are the other countries refusing compliance.) And none other than Rothschild Trust North America LLC is leading the charge in drawing in international clients, according to Bloomberg.
Tyler Durden of Zerohedge notes how the FATCA laws have made American investment in offshore tax havens pointless, meaning the money stays at home:
Yes, Mossack Fonseca may now be history, and its countless uberwealthy clients exposed, but none other than Rothschild is now delighted to be able to fill its rather large shoes. In fact, someone with a conspiratorial bent may decide that today’s dramatic takedown of the Panama “offshoring” industry was nothing more than a hit designed to crush the competition of domestic “tax haven” providers… such as Rothschild.
Is this massive leak a major strategic play?
A Corbett Report video entitled Panama Papers: Are Strategic Leaks A New Form Of Geopolitical Warfare? urges us to take everything concerning the leaks with a very large grain of salt.
His initial take on the leaks is that they constitute a new form of geopolitical warfare, a type of propaganda ploy designed to take aim at some traditional targets of the US State Department, which, of course, doesn’t mean that the leaks aren’t real or useful.
How much can we trust the ICJI?
The International Consortium of Investigative Journalists is the organization that has been used to receive the cache of documents, originally sent anonymously to the German Suddeutsche Zeitung newspaper. The ICIJ in turn distributed them to 400 other journalists at 100 selected media outlets who spent the last 12 months reviewing them.
As Corbett usefully warns us, we simply have to trust these media outlets, which comprise many major players in the MSM, in the absence of being able to see the leaked documents for ourselves. Wise words indeed.
Some of these outlets include the BBC, which we remember well for its advanced reporting of the collapse of WTC building 7 on the day of 9/11 fifteen minutes before it actually happened. The BBC is theorized to be part of the widely touted 9/11 false flag theory. French daily Le Monde is another ICIJ player. French mainstream media outlets are well known in academic journalistic circles for their kowtowing to government influence. Newsworthy stories that might have been relevant to the Charlie Hebdo shootings in early 2015, for example, such as the alleged suicide of Limoges’ top cop Helric Fredou who had been investigating an aspect of the case on the first day of the shootings, never made it into the pages of Le Monde.
It is also a matter of much public speculation currently why major US media outlets such as the New York Times never made the final cut in favor of much smaller American media groups. ICIJ has been quoted as saying that the big media outlets have not been chosen because they may dominate the story, yet one wonders if they are simply less easily controllable in how the story develops.
ICJI as a propaganda machine? Soros funding
Corbett warns us against a 4-minute video posted on the ICIJ website and he is right to do so. The video clearly links the offshore company to some admittedly awful crimes: Russian men using girls for underage sex where one of the perpetrators is a Mossack Fonseca client and an alleged pedophile (the video even shamelessly includes a witness impact statement read by an actress!); a client company selling fuel to Syria which has aided Assad in perpetrating his ‘war crimes’, a war that has produced ‘real victims’ according to the video; a company in Uganda, also a Mossack Fonseca client, that has been fighting in court to avoid paying 400 million in taxes while the country has a dreadfully inadequate healthcare system.
It isn’t by any means a stretch to suppose that the company of Mossack Fonseca is being targeted in this heavily slanted video which makes truly irrelevant leaps to other issues, connecting an offshore company to generalized criminal activity or merely politically dubious activity while implicating State Department enemies. Corbett is right to judge this as no more than a piece of propaganda.
Further, it turns out that the ICIJ is being partially funded by billionaire George Soros’ Open Society Foundation, which CNBC reports way down in its article as a mere footnote about Russia, evidently deeming it a not very important piece of information:
Russia, in particular, could respond aggressively, Bremmer added. Given that the ICIJ was partially funded by billionaire George Soros’ Open Society Foundation, the Kremlin may seek to punish the U.S., Soros and the CIA, he noted.
Indeed, Corbett warns us about the entire group of foundations that are supporting ICIJ. Breitbart offers us a list of seven funding partners including Soros’ Open Society, which I urge you to check for yourself. This reads like a group of sponsors who are generally pro-open borders, pro-EU (i.e. pro-Big State), pro-mass migration, including being pro-environment, whose foundations we know tend to function as part of the Agenda 21 globalist plan.
Panama’s refusal to sign onto OECD global tax agreement
A second thing that strikes Corbett as odd is that Panama is the very country that has refused to exchange tax-related information on its clients’ bank accounts. In an article titled ‘The Problem Child’ published in The Economist on February 20th, 2016, which Corbett draws our attention to, Panama has refused to sign onto the OECD global tax-transparency agreement which promotes the passing of legislation to ensure the sharing of account information:
It is also holding out against global tax-transparency plans known as the Common Reporting Standard (CRS) being championed by the OECD club of rich nations. It says it will develop its own standard, which will probably mean less information, exchanged with fewer countries. Small financial centres, it huffs, are being bullied into accepting competitiveness-sapping rules shunned by some bigger countries, in particular America. “We’ll move at the same speed as the slowest,” says one of its leading lawyers. “Otherwise our financial centre faces a death sentence.”
Panama is obviously an important yet recalcitrant, defiant player in the world of offshore finance since it
remains home to thousands of secretive firms and famous for the discretion of its bankers and lawyers. The Central American microstate is the financial and incorporation centre of choice for many Latin Americans and Europeans—and, critics say, many financial ne’er-do-wells.
Moreover, Mossack Fonseca is one of its largest law firms.
According to the ICIJ site, Mossack Fonseca also had 123 companies in Nevada and ran into legal problems in the state when it refused to turn over information on a client who had allegedly taken millions in Argentinian government contracts. Mossack Fonseca allegedly claimed it was not connected to the Las Vegas operations, which can be refuted according to some of the newly-leaked documents.
As of today, French Finance Minister Michel Sapin has recommended to the OECD that Panama be put back on the list of non-cooperative countries because it has not improved on its compliance measures since 2012, according to Nasdaq.
The Panamanian law firm, as well as the country itself, is indeed in the crosshairs.
Corbett reminds us that a plan to share financial transaction information globally, which is what is required by the OECD rules, indicates a global tax structure may be put in place, which would likely be a key part of a global government plan, too. So Panama, he surmises, is forming a roadblock in the OECD globalist plans, with Mossack Fonseca as a very key player.
About the author
Pam Barker is a TLB staff writer/analyst. She has an extensive background in the educational system of several countries at the college and university level as a teacher and administrator