Archive | April 5, 2016

British Banking System the Pumping Heart of Terror Finance and Global Drug Trade*

British Banking System the Pumping Heart of Terror Finance and Global Drug Trade*

By Graham Vanbergen

moneyblackholeThe National Crime Agency (NCA) is Britain’s national law enforcement and police agency. It was established in 2013 as a non-ministerial government department, replacing the Serious Organised Crime Agency and has assumed a number of responsibilities of other law enforcement agencies.

It is the U.K’s lead agency against organised crime; human, weapon and drug trafficking; cyber crime; and economic crime that goes across regional and international borders, but can be tasked to investigate any crime.

Both the NCA and government are acutely aware of the scale of money laundering in Britain that they now admit is completely out-of-control.

In a report by the Treasury and Home Office it clearly stated its concerns but attempts to gloss over its seriousness –

“The same factors that make the U.K. an attractive place for legitimate financial activity – its political stability, advanced professional services sector and widely understood language and legal system – also make it an attractive place through which to launder the proceeds of crime.”

The true amount and scale of money laundering in the U.K. is not known. Banks are by far the biggest problem. They use complex corporate structures and offshore vehicles to conceal ownership and facilitate the movement of criminal assets designed to baffle the authorities and they do so with impunity.

Easy  MoneyThe NCA states on its own website:

“The best available international estimate of the amount of money laundering is equivalent to some 2.7% of global GDP or US$1.6 trillion in 2009. The NCA assesses that many hundreds of billions of pounds of international criminal money is laundered through U.K. banks, including their subsidiaries, each year. The scale of the laundering of criminal proceeds is a therefore strategic threat to the U.K’s economy and reputation. The proceeds of virtually all serious and organised crime in the U.K. as well as the proceeds of a significant amount of international serious and organised crime (including corrupt Politically Exposed Persons seeking to launder the proceeds of their corruption and hide stolen assets in the U.K.) is believed to be laundered into and through the U.K.”

Nick Maxwell, the head of advocacy and research at Transparency International (TI)  said last October

“It puts beyond any doubt that vast sums of money from the proceeds of corruption around the world are flowing into the U.K., and our system for stopping it and preventing it isn’t fit for purpose.” TI have also stated that $2 trillion is the likely annual sum for money laundering worldwide as has the United Nations on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) and that the problem lies predominantly with the banking industry – “money in the form of symbols on computer screens can move anywhere in the world with speed and ease.”

endless-staircase by Peter BrookerGiven the statement by the NCA it is fair to say that British banks could be the facilitator of one quarter of all money laundering in the world today with the City of London now classed as the global money-laundering centre for the drug trade, says a crime expert. He found that banks were welcoming dirty money because they need cash, liquidity during the financial crisis, that is ongoing.

A first attempt at tackling the problem by the NCA was in its 2014 paper entitled “High End Money Laundering – Strategy and Action Plan” where it was made clear at the outset that

“we do not have a clear view of the scale of high end money laundering and its impact on the U.K. economy.” This is an admission that the authorities have lost control.

In the same year the head of HMRC David Gauke also produced a paper entitled “No Safe Havens” – where it said:

“We are stepping up our efforts to tackle offshore evasion. Under the Prime Minister’s leadership of the G8, the U.K. has led a global leap forward in tax transparency, meaning there are fewer places to hide. We will now make sure that there will be tough new sanctions for those who do not come forward under HMRC’s offshore disclosure facilities. Those who continue to believe they can hide wealth offshore must know that serious consequences await them.”

David Gauke is an MP who claimed £10,248.32 expenses back from taxpayers to avoid paying the stamp duty and fees involved in the purchase of his home in London. Ironic because it is not only shameless but puts him morally in the wrong place to hunt out tax evaders who buy property for large scale illegal laundering of cash.

In the meantime, two years after the HMRC’s statement of intent, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) went to the lengths of describing its success of prosecuting offshore tax evasion as “woefully inadequate,” while it identifies HMRC’s failure to gather intelligence on losses through aggressive tax avoidance as an obstacle to improving the U.K’s tax laws.

Claims from HMRC that “£1.5 billion has been recovered from offshore tax evaders over the past two years thanks to the Government’s tough and effective approach” were countered by the PAC by saying

“It beggars belief that, having made disappointing progress on tax evasion and avoidance, the taxman also seems incapable of even running a satisfactory service for people trying to pay their fair share.”

For all of HMRC’s claims of an “intelligence led approach” and compliance, they have failed. This was no better demonstrated than the 950 lines of enquiry resulting from the so-called Lagarde List stolen from HSBC’s Swiss banking arm, where just one conviction was made by HMRC.

The Tax Justice Network published its findings just four months ago and amongst other things found that “The United Kingdom also remains a huge concern. Its global network of secrecy jurisdictions – the Crown Dependencies and Overseas Territories – still operate in deep secrecy and have, for instance, not co-operated in creating public registers of beneficial ownership. The UK has failed to address this effectively, though it has the power to do so.”

At the November G20 summit in Turkey, Prime Minister David Cameron said that world leaders had agreed to do more to share intelligence and cut off funding for terrorists through money laundering.

More recently, the British government’s CONTEST counter-terrorism strategy called for the U.K. to be a ‘hostile environment for terrorist financing’. In October 2015 publication of the inaugural U.K. National Risk Assessment of Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing (NRA), asserted that ‘Countering terrorist finance forms a key part of the UK’s CONTEST counter-terrorism strategy’.

The NRA also stated that ‘The U.K’s approach to countering terrorist finance focuses on three main areas: reducing terrorist fundraising in the U.K; reducing the movement of terrorist finance into/out of the U.K; and reducing the fundraising and movement of terrorist finance overseas. Yet, despite these worthy policy statements and objectives, it is far from clear that the U.K. is implementing a genuinely effective counter terrorism finance strategy.”

In other words, the U.K. has done little, despite its claims, to have tackled real money laundering, tax evasion and terror financing because the City of London, the banks that reside within its boundaries and tax haven jurisdictions are used for precisely that reason.

Planned government spending cuts will see thousands of police jobs being lost, leaving the public protected by the lowest numbers of officers since the 1970s, according to a private estimate circulating among police chiefs. In the meantime, government expenditure on counter terrorism has increased £500m and the NCA’s budget is protected.

According to the Crime and Policing Update (Nov 2015)

“Cyber security will be enhanced with the creation of a new national cyber centre to make Britain the best protected country in cyber space. Government spending on cyber security will reach £1.9 billion a year by 2020, whilst MI5, MI6 and GCHQ will receive a further 1,900 extra security and intelligence staff.” The ‘Snoopers Charter’ and increased powers for MI5, MI6 and GCHQ, enshrines new capabilities in legislation which has taken years to get through.

All that additional expenditure, surveillance and cyber security and, as Rolling Stone put it when HSBC were caught laundering billions for drug cartels:

“The banks’ laundering transactions were so brazen that the NSA probably could have spotted them from space. Breuer admitted that drug dealers would sometimes come to HSBC’s Mexican branches and “deposit hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash, in a single day, into a single account, using boxes designed to fit the precise dimensions of the teller windows and washed their cash through one of Britain’s most storied financial institutions.”

And yet, clamping down on the City of London, the real pumping heart of global terrorism and crime seems out of the question. Both David Cameron and George Osborne seem so concerned about the artificial health of the City of London that special meetings were conducted to demand cast-iron legal protections for it as part of reforms to prevent the U.K. leaving the E.U. All this whilst, to use a headline from The Independent, “Tory MPs brand David Cameron’s E.U. deal ‘thin gruel’, ‘watered down’ and full of broken promises” – but not for money laundering ops in The City, obviously.

Source*

Related Topics:

London Gold Vaults Are Empty and Transferred to Hong Kong!

Between the State of the City of London and the Crown*

Criminal Syndicate with Links to Terrorism Infiltrated Bank of England*

Britain at Forefront of Deadly Mercenary Trade*

Bank Bail-outs Behind Behind U.K.’s Collapsing Public Services*

Welsh Town Tax Rebellion Uses Big Corporations ‘offshore’ to Avoid Tax on Local Business*

Rothschild Bank Now Under Criminal Investigation*

Lord Rothschild ‘The Tide is Turning’*

Agenda: Redistribution of Global Wealth behind Global Warming Alarmists*

Agenda: Redistribution of Global Wealth behind Global Warming Alarmists*

This article is right on the money.

Climate alarmists are thoroughly disingenuous

when they cloak their true goals

of global redistribution of wealth.

This is nothing short of a complete

replacement of Free Enterprise and Capitalism

in favor of Technocracy – aka Green Economy

and/or Sustainable Development.

Fraud

While the global warming alarmists have done a good job of spreading fright, they haven’t been so good at hiding their real motivation.

Yet another one has slipped up and revealed the catalyst driving the climate scare.

We have been told now for almost three decades that man has to change his ways or his fossil-fuel emissions will scorch Earth with catastrophic warming. Scientists, politicians and activists have maintained the narrative that their concern is only about caring for our planet and its inhabitants. But this is simply not true.

The narrative is a ruse. They are after something entirely different.

If they were honest, the climate alarmists would admit that they are not working feverishly to hold down global temperatures – they would acknowledge that they are instead consumed with the goal of holding down capitalism and establishing a global welfare state.

Have doubts?

Then listen to the words of former United Nations climate official Ottmar Edenhofer:

“One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy.

This has almost nothing to do with the environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole,” said Edenhofer, who co-chaired the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change working group on Mitigation of Climate Change from 2008 to 2015.

So what is the goal of environmental policy?

We redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy,” said Edenhofer.

For those who want to believe that maybe Edenhofer just misspoke and doesn’t really mean that, consider that a little more than five years ago he also said that,

the next world climate summit in Cancun is actually an economy summit during which the distribution of the world’s resources will be negotiated.”

Mad as they are, Edenhofer’s comments are nevertheless consistent with other alarmists who have spilled the movement’s dirty secret.

Last year, Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of U.N.’s Framework Convention on Climate Change, made a similar statement.

This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution,” she said in anticipation of last year’s Paris climate summit.

“This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model for the first time in human history.”

The plan is to allow Third World countries to emit as much carbon dioxide as they wish – because, as Edenhofer said, “in order to get rich one has to burn coal, oil or gas” – while at the same time restricting emissions in advanced nations.

This will, of course, choke economic growth in developed nations, but they deserve that fate as they,

“have basically expropriated the atmosphere of the world community,” he said.

The fanaticism runs so deep that one professor has even suggested that we need to plunge ourselves into a depression to fight global warming.

Perhaps Naomi Klein summed up best what the warming the fuss is all about in her book “This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. the Climate.”

“What if global warming isn’t only a crisis?” Klein asks in a preview of a documentary inspired by her book.

“What if it’s the best chance we’re ever going to get to build a better world?”

In her mind, the world has to “change, or be changed” because an “economic system” – meaning free-market capitalism – has caused environmental “wreckage.”

This is how the global warming alarmist community thinks.

It wants to frighten, intimidate and then assume command. It needs a “crisis” to take advantage of, a hobgoblin to menace the people, so that they will beg for protection from the imaginary threat.

The alarmists’ “better world” is one in which they rule a global welfare state.

They’ve admitted this themselves.

Source*

Related Topics:

Australian PM Advisor on the NWO Climate Change Hoax*

Paris Climate Change Conference shows Road to NWO Weather Control*

Geoengineering Climate Change*

What They Haven’t Told You about Climate Change*

Climate Change in the Universe unravels another Structure*

Secretive U.N. Legal Conference Wants to Outlaw “Climate Change Denial”*

U.N. Plan to Make Legally Binding Climate Change Laws – Worldwide*

U.S. Places “Gag Order” on Weather Agency Employees, Inserts Geo-engineering Propaganda into ‘Common Core’ Syllabus*

Pakistan Gv’t Warns the Country to Prepare for Global Cooling*

Chemtrail, HAARP Space Fence and Weather Warfare*

Government Quietly Admits Weather Modification*

How the U.S. Blocked the E.U. Ban on Animal Testing in Cosmetics*

How the U.S. Blocked the E.U. Ban on Animal Testing in Cosmetics*

By Graham Vanbergen

During the course of 1970’s and 80’s we saw a strong emergence of animal rights activists campaigning, significantly against live animal testing in cosmetics. Large cosmetics corporations were targeted with high profile actions covered in the news headlines in America and Europe leading to organisations such as Avon and Revlon eventually adopting fairly strong anti-animal testing policies that led directly to their products.

The media attention was fervent and widespread which led to some countries to start enforcing new laws on animal testing bans in cosmetics.

The testing ban in the E.U. applied in September 2004 was only on finished products giving millions of people the idea that animal testing on cosmetics had finished completely. In fact the ban did not extend to the individual ingredients that went into them. That ban did not come in until March 2009.

What was the point in banning the use of animal testing on the finished product but not on the ingredients – it’s still animal testing on cosmetics products? Well, there’s more to this than meets the eye.

As it turns out, the European Union wanted to ban the marketing of any cosmetic product that was tested on animals back in 1993. At the time, the E.U. clearly thought that this was the best way to stop animal testing on cosmetics by driving down sales, thereby forcing manufacturers to change their ways. The E.U. even gave the industry five years notice by way of the Cosmetics Directive that would ban this type of marketing by 1998.

The U.S. authorities did not like this idea much and started pressuring the European Commission. The U.S. strategy was to place the E.U. marketing ban on its list of trade barriers and then went ahead and threatened the E.U. with a formal complaint to the World Trade Organisation (WTO). The E.U. commissioners caved in quickly thinking that European cosmetics industry would be badly hit internationally and changed its strategy to appease the Americans.

The consequence was that the ban was changed to make it sound as though the E.U. commissioners were doing something when in fact it was a ‘work-around’ that was very misleading.

They agreed to swap the marketing ban with a ban on animal testing within the borders of the E.U.  This enabled U.S. companies to continue marketing their products in the E.U. that had been tested on animals in the U.S.  At the same time this also allowed European companies to test their products outside the European Union and still be able to market them in their home countries.

The threat the U.S. imposed upon the E.U. for daring to limit U.S. manufacturers was worded like this;

 “If this ban goes into effect on that date it will not only dramatically discriminate against the E.U. industry but will also seriously impact trade between the U.S. and the E.U. and could give rise to a potential trade complaint,” (October 1998).

During these years animal rights activists and the various high profile methods they adopted continued to get wide media coverage and politicians were balancing up trade issue with voters. In 2002 a rejuvenated and unified European ban was finally adopted on the grounds that the U.S. had inappropriately interfered in its decision-making for the good of the people.

However, it made concessions, namely that the marketing ban would be imposed but not until 2009 and that final animal testing in all areas of cosmetics manufacture would be banned in 2013.

To summarise then. The E.U. was going to legislate for good and proper reason against animal testing on cosmetic products and it was delayed by two decades after the first legislative decision was instigated and fifteen years after it was supposed to be implemented.

What we have here is a clear example of inappropriate and imperious bullying by the U.S. of the E.U. purely for corporate profit, irrespective of the wishes of the people or democratic processes that existed.

As it turned out, the marketing ban in Europe had a profound effect in the USA as sales of cosmetics tested on animals slumped in favour of products free from animal testing and the industry itself in now calling for non-animal testing methods to be approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

Within the TTIP negotiations, much abhorred by the general public, there is an agreement emerging called “regulatory cooperation”. The fifteen year delay to the marketing ban of cosmetics would never have happened, not would any animal testing ban as this is exactly what this new agreement would have achieved. It is designed to bypasses democratic processes. It demonstrates how ‘regulatory cooperation’ decides what is best for corporations.

Corporate Observatory put this in context thus;

Regulatory cooperation (within TTIP) is not about finding ways to boost consumer rights. It is about making regulation more coherent, especially for transnational corporations, through liberalization or deregulation. And that, in turn, poses a series of threats to protective rules”.

The intended E.U. cosmetics ban is yet another example of how sovereign legislation has been overturned by American interference and that now, the unelected bureaucrats of the E.U. Commissioners have decided that democracy is now longer important.

Through the dismantling of regulatory differences between the different markets and countries in order to pursue profit, TTIP is essentially legally guaranteeing that transnational corporations outrank governments.

Source*

Related Topics:

America Blocked a Massive Solar Project in India*

TTIP: Big business and U.S. to have Major Role in E.U. Trade Deals*

Soros-Obama-Merkel-Erdogan get Control of Europe!?*

Israeli Minister: “Brussels Wouldn’t Be Attacked If E.U. Didn’t Boycott Israeli Products.”*

British Gov’t Silent on Secret E.U. Meetings with Lobbyists*

Poroshenko Talking Peace but Preparing for War backed by 11 E.U. Countries*

E.U. Flags Trampled On*

E.U. Making Paedophilia Legal Across Europe*

U.S. and E.U. Block the Family from new U.N. Development Goals*

E.U. Refuses to give Cameron the 4-year Ban on E.U. Migrant Benefits*

Merkel Tells Cameron Support E.U. Military in exchange for EU negotiation Talks*

E.U. Takes Countries to Court for not Dipping into Personal Bank Accounts*

Not in the U.S. or E.U. Russian Manufacturing Sector Grows in October*

Israel Anger over E.U. to Label Settlement Goods*

Israeli Manufacturers Move Factories from Settlements to Avoid E.U. Labelling*

E.U. Takes Control of Greek Borders*

The Rothschild’s Zionist World Order*

This Man Riddled their Mosque With Bullets, now They’re Forgiving Him*

This Man Riddled their Mosque With Bullets, now They’re Forgiving Him*

By Jack Jenkins

Just hours after a series of deadly terrorist attacks struck Paris, France, on November 13, 2015, Ted A. Hakey Jr. slipped deeper and deeper into a drunken rage. Convinced that Muslims were inherently dangerous and overcome with anger, the inebriated Hakey — a retired Marine and resident of Meriden, Connecticut — snapped. At around 2:00 a.m., he grabbed one of his high-powered rifles, pointed it out the window at a nearby mosque, and squeezed off several shots.

Many of the bullets pierced the wall of the Baitul Iman “House of Peace” mosque, leaving holes just feet from where worshippers sat a few hours earlier reading the Qur’an. The chilling episode was the first in an unprecedented wave of anti-Islam incidents that swept the country in the aftermath of the Paris attacks, with an ever-growing number of Muslim Americans falling victim to harassment, threats, and assaults on their houses of worship.

But if Hakey’s attack set in motion a rash of anti-Muslim violence and negativity, he and members of the Meridian Muslim community are hoping to usher in a second, stronger movement rooted in something very different: forgiveness and reconciliation between American Muslims and their neighbours.

After the shooting, police officers quickly arrested and charged Hakey with intentional destruction of religious property, which is classified as a federal hate crime. But soon after discovering evidence of the shooting, officials at the Baitul Iman — a mosque affiliated with the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, a subset of Islam that believes that a messiah has already come — offered their forgiveness to the then-unnamed shooter. When Baitul Iman outreach director Zahir Muhammad Mannan and others learned that the shooter lived next to their worship community, they were shocked — but remained focused on what they could do to be closer to their neighbours in the future.

“When we heard that it was our neighbour, we said, ‘Where did we go wrong, not reaching out to our neighbours properly?’” Mannan told ThinkProgress.

Ted Hakey speaking to the members of the Baitul Iman mosque on Saturday, April 2. He apologized for firing shots at their house of worship in January. CREDIT: Zahir Muhammad Mannan

 

Months later, Mannan and others got a chance to ask Hakey themselves. Hate crime cases usually involve strict separation between victims and alleged perpetrators, but the judge in Hakey’s case granted him the unusual concession of allowing him to visit with mosque officials to apologize. He, along with officer escorts, met with four leaders of the community last week, including Mannan.

“[Hakey] was tearing up,” Mannan told ThinkProgress.

“He actually cried and said ‘I hope you can forgive me I hope God can forgive me.’ It was a very emotional meeting. It brought us to tears.”

Mannan said he and the other representatives responded to Hakey’s apology with repeated offers of forgiveness. He explained their focus on absolution — not retribution or resentment — stems from their Muslim faith, and while some Quranic verses emphasize something akin to the Christian Bible’s concept of an ‘eye for an eye,’ forgiveness is always the superior option in Islam.

“[The Qur’an] says that if your forgiveness brings about reformation in the person, then forgiveness is better,” he said. “Reconciliation is better.”

At the end of the meeting, the leaders invited Hakey to deliver his apology to the mosque at a scheduled event on “True Islam,” part of a nationwide campaign launched by the Ahmadiyya Muslim community that seeks to combat both rising Islamophobia and rising extremism by forging interfaith dialogue. Haley accepted, and met with Mannan and 50 other mosque members this past Saturday to voice his formal apology, according to the Hartford Courant.

“I was drinking that night more than I probably should have been,” Hakey said, standing before the group.

“As a neighbour, I did have fears, but fear is always when you don’t know something. The unknown is what you are always afraid of. I wish I had come knocked on your door, and if I spent five minutes with you, it would have made all the difference in the world. And I didn’t do that.”

The Baitul Aman community listens to Hakey’s apology. CREDIT: Zahir Muhammad Mannan

 

When Hakey finished, he and his wife were passionately embraced by several in attendance, many of them moved by his words. As the group gathered to pray at the close of the event, they offered to let Hakey step outside. But Hakey declined, choosing to stand next to the Muslims whose mosque he’d fired on months prior, bowing his head with them in silent prayer.

“It melted their hearts,” Mannan said. “He is not just a shooter, but like a brother to us now.”

The radical moment of forgiveness may not solve Hakey’s legal issues, of course. He pleaded guilty to firing on the mosque in February, and will face eight to 14 months in prison when he is sentenced by a federal judge in May.

Still, Mannan said the mosque would offer Hakey what support they could, guided by their faith and the their motto — “love for all and hatred for none.”

“The Qur’an says everybody deserves a second chance,” Mannan said.

This is a personification of the real values of Islam. This is what real Islam is doing. It’s forgiving. It seeks to build bridges. It seeks to transform foes into friends.”

Source*

Related Topics:

Faceoff between New Black Panthers and Armed anti-Muslim Trouble-Makers*

A Small Act of kindness Disarms anti-Muslim Protester.*

7-Year-Old Texas Boy Who Donated Piggy Bank to Vandalized Mosque Gets Surprise*

Inspiring Muslim Woman Donates $1 for Every Hate Tweet She Receives*

NATO’s Jihad Operation in Brussels*

Putin: Illuminati Plans to Use Islam To Spark World War III*

Muslim Group Donating 30,000 Bottles of Water to Lead-Poisoned Flint*

Muslim Charities Are Helping To Raise Money for Burned Black Churches In The US*

American Muslims Raise Over $190,000 For San Bernardino Victims*

Despite Increasing Threats and Violence, Americans Show Support for Muslim Neighbours*

The Priest Who Brings Assistance and Support To Muslim Syrian Refugees*

Four Million Muslims Killed and Counting since 1990*

Apology to German Muslims from the PEGIDA Movement*

Christmas in Damascus for Christians and Muslims*

Eritrea: Where Muslims and Christians Live in Peace*

Christians Join Forces with Muslim Group Hezbollah to Fight ISIS in Lebanon*

What I Learned From the Panama Papers

What I Learned From the Panama Papers

From Alexandra Bruce

From the selectivity of the leaks from this largest of strategic data dumps in all history, it is pretty clear to anyone with any ability to distinguish anything that the Anglosphere is notably absent and un-implicated by the mega-shaming Panama Papers.

James Corbett calls this “patently ridiculous.”

We know that all of the corrupt elites worldwide engage in offshore banking, so why don’t we see mention of just one transnational corporation or just one Wall Street bankster – or even one of the thousands of denizens of the U.S. Government, currently profiting from every kind of kickback imaginable, including the large-scale trafficking of Afghan heroin, that’s led to the skyrocketing of U.S. heroin overdoses?

Why?

Because the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ), tasked with releasing this information (which you and I will never be able to see for ourselves) is funded and directed, almost in its entirety by the U.S.-based Center for Public Integritywhich, in turn is funded by such organizations as the Ford Foundation, Carnegie Endowment, Rockefeller Family Fund, WK Kellogg Foundation and the Open Society Foundation (Georg Soros).

As Craig Murray, former British Ambassador to Uzbekistan writes in his  article, Corporate Media Gatekeepers Protect Western 1% From Panama Leak:

“Do not expect a genuine expose…The dirty secrets of Western corporations will remain unpublished.”

Related Topics:

Icelandic PM Refuses to Resign Amid Panama Papers Leak*

Ukrainian Oligarch Donated $10 Million to the Clinton’s*

The Clintons and their Bankster Friends, 1992-2016*

Clinton Receives Massive Funding from American-Jewish Oligarch*

Italy and Spain Have Funded a Massive Backdoor Bailout of French Banks*

The Brothers who Funded Blair, Israeli Settlements and Islamophobia*

U.K. Police Target Schoolchildren as Young as 4 with Tax Payer Funded, Transgender Propaganda*

Organizations Funded Directly by Soros*

Putin Reveals ISIS Funded by 40 Countries, Including G20 Members*

Financial Power Struggle, ISIS and IMF Chief Charged for Corruption*

Spanish Judge Makes Bank President and Former IMF Chief Pay for Financial Crimes*

Spanish Banks, Obama et al Threaten Financial Meltdown if Catalonia Votes for Independence*

Far Right Islamophobic Foundation in the U.K. Financed by Tea-Party Conservatives*

Hillary Clinton and the Ex-Im Bank Financing of the World’s Largest Coal Plants in South Africa*

Brazil’s Right Wing Protest Funded by U.S. Billionaire Foundations, Training in U.S.*

U.S. Sued over $280bn Tax-deductible Aid Sent to Israel*

Congress Removes Ban on Funding Neo-Nazis*