Putin Says Panama Papers Part of US Plot to Weaken Russia (go.com) 207
An anonymous reader writes: Russia President Vladimir Putin says he has no links to offshore accounts unveiled in the Panama Papers. Moreover, Putin believes that these leaks are part of Western efforts to weaken Russia. As ABC News reports, Putin criticised Western media for involving his name in offshore business even though his name didn't feature in any of the leaked documents. Speaking in St Petersburg, Putin added that it certainly seems like a US-led disinformation campaign waged against Russia. Putin also defended a cellist friend who was named as the alleged owner of an offshore company, noting that his friend is a philanthropist.People in Russia, sadly, don't seem to care much about Panama Papers. As Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty reports, most Russians haven't heard of -- or don't care about -- the Panama Papers. The media house interviewed 30 people on the street, of which it found only
1 person thought it was wrong. (video).
in Soviet russia... (Score:3, Funny)
Panama papers leak you!
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
And Russia is not the biggest loser here. They just try to gain some cheap political points because the US isn't high on the list.
Re:in Soviet russia... (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm always amused, mind you, why autocrats always view themselves as effectively the "state", so that when some allegation is made against them, suddenly, it's all about destabilizing the "state".
As it is, Putin's presence in the Panama Papers, so far as I understand it, is notable by his absence. Just about everyone around him is multi-zillionaires, but Putin is not to be found. The same goes for the Chinese Premier, an apparently very poor man with lots of rich relatives.
Re: (Score:2)
That's because autocrats no longer have need of money... they speak and their will is done.
Re: (Score:2)
"Who will rid me of this troublesome priest?"
Re: (Score:2)
Putin essentially is the state now. At least he's such a big part of the state that even he has difficulty knowing the difference.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Putin is thought to be the richest man in the world.
"is thought"??? The unattributed, anonymous passive voice? Is that honestly the best you can do?
You are thought to be a ridiculous dork.
Re:in Soviet russia... (Score:5, Funny)
Shouldn't you be deleting a Wikipedia article right now?
Re: (Score:2)
Putin is thought to be the richest man in the world. I suspect the rackets in the Panama Papers were too low-tier for him, not even worth his effort.
I thought the Chinese Premier was there? Who's there that China is aggressively censoring any mention of Panama fright now?
You should read more about what was in those papers. Putin's holdings are about $2 billion. That's not low-tier.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Standard Kremlin responses. Accuse the opponent of undermining their political system, or of being Nazi collaborators, or preferrably both. Anything it takes to make the kleptocracy look good.
Re: (Score:2)
Jeltsin passed away quite a while ago so he's no longer interested.
Polls (Score:5, Insightful)
"People in Russia, sadly, don't seem to care much about Panama Papers. As Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty reports, most Russians haven't heard of -- or don't care about -- the Panama Papers. The media house interviewed 30 people on the street, of which it found only 1 person thought it was wrong. (video)."
Does not follow. You mean to say: only one person was willing to speak out against it. Polls have little to do with what people think. They only tell you what they are willing to admit.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Also, it was a sample of 30 (Ooooo) random people on the street. For all we know, these were people who just left a Putin Indoctrination Meeting or people leaving a bar that was closing in Moscow.
Truly, Journalism is Dead. Also in other news. Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics.
Re:Polls (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Omg.. u never been in Russia. No one cares if you talk to reporter domestic or foreign.
It is not 1950 anymore sigh...
It's not 1950 anymore, but it's also not 2000 either. Keep in mind that Russia is currently governed by an autocrat who feels that Russia should have returned to its 1950s ways. But under him, not The Party. He's more corporatist than communist.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Polls (Score:4, Informative)
Oh wait, you can't. Putin ordered his assassination in a pathetic attempt to silence the work he and others had done showing the systemic corruption in Russia.
Go ask the Tartars of Crimea who have their homes invaded by Russian police searching for anything that is against the official party line or that references Tartar culture. Since Russian's invasion of Crimea this is a daily occurrence, not to mention any Tartar newspaper radio service being shut down.
Just the other day Putin ordered the creation of a "national guard" [bbc.com], over 400K strong with tanks and artillery to be used, he claims, to fight terrorism. The reality is with conditions worsening in Russia due to sanctions over its invasion of Ukraine and plunging oil prices, with elections in the fall Putin is planning to use this national guard to suppress any vocal opposition to his hand chosen candidates. In other words, if you speak out against Heir Putin, the national guard can and will shoot you on sight, no other order necessary.
Re: (Score:2)
Caution with that! Normally, it's a lie (I don't mean it is in this case...)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh wait, you can't. Putin ordered his assassination in a pathetic attempt to silence the work he and others had done showing the systemic corruption in Russia.
It's only corruption if you thought the purpose was to be fair for everyone in the first place. It's just business as usual for everyone in on it!
Re: (Score:2)
Putin is the state. So seeking to make sure Putin is not reelected is seen as equivalent to seeking the overthrow of the state.
Re: (Score:2)
Bad grammar aside, yes, seriously, the first thing that a totalitarian regime targets is loyalty to traditional entities, like religion, family, etc...
This is why sick aberrations like Pavlik Morozov are turned into martyrs, why organizations like all the stages of Communist Youth are created, why religion is undermined, infiltrated and presented as a kinky delusion.
The idea is to make the individual loyal to the state. How well does it work? It doesn't work on everyone. Most of those who keep their sen
Re:Polls (Score:5, Funny)
I live in Russia and I can confirm that most Russians are sure that most Russians haven't heard of -- or don't care about -- the Panama Papers.
Re: (Score:2)
That's settled then.
Re: (Score:2)
I disagree. Quite a few people have heard about Panama Papers. What they have heard, though, is that it exposed massive corruption in the Ukrainian government.
Re: (Score:2)
I think that one person was actually a tourist.
To be fair (Score:5, Funny)
I live in the US and I barely care about the Panama Papers either.
Actually... the first thing I think of when I see "Panama Papers" is David Lee Roth for some reason...
Re: To be fair (Score:2, Insightful)
The largest bank in the Nordic countries was caught hiding client money in Panama etc. Tax evasion is sort of a big deal there with all the commies and so on. You should all expect a big mess with European banks because of all this. Also expect the US to put some sanctions and set some fines on those darn banks too.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Yeah... I get it.. tax evasion by wealthy people... it shocks me to the core...
Re: To be fair (Score:4, Insightful)
The wealthy will always avoid paying taxes. Taxes are for us little people, always have been. Useful idiots like Bernie always talk about the 1% to distract the tax increases being passed along to everyone else. Taxes are regressive. All of them.
Re: To be fair (Score:4, Insightful)
And yet the US has lead the way in shutting down probably the most infamous haven; the Swiss banks. It was the US who put the most pressure on Switzerland to reform banking practices and start abiding some reasonable standards of transparency. In fact, I'd say the popularity of other tax havens in the intervening years is because Switzerland is no longer so friendly to those seeking to hide their cash.
The reality here is that the one government who could do a lot to reduce avoidance and out and out evasion and laundering is Britain. It's overseas dependencies are some of the most notorious tax havens, but every attempt to close loopholes has been met with resistance. Judging by the increasingly hot water David Cameron is in, I think we know why.
Re: To be fair (Score:4, Informative)
And yet the US has lead the way in shutting down probably the most infamous haven; the Swiss banks.
Yeah, I'm not so sure they are actually trying to fight this stuff. If they were then the three states that allow anonymous shell corporations would not be so popular. The US is rated third in the world for "Offshore" shell games [npr.org].
The Tax Justice Network [washingtonpost.com] ranks the U.S. third in terms of the secrecy and scale of its offshore industry, behind Switzerland and Hong Kong but ahead of the Cayman Islands and Luxembourg.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, and those poor American workers from circa-WW2 to the early 80s cried all the way to the bank, until Reagan saved them from their plight.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, Jimmy Carter was such a great president!
Re: (Score:2)
Since then it's been "heck of a job" instead of actually delivering bad news. Carter's failures were blamed on honesty versus slick salesmanship hence the America of today where 100% salesmanship and no substance is seen as Presidential material.
There's been many Presidents better than Carter, but how would you compare him to the current nominations and the current President? Do you honest
Re: (Score:2)
Well he did manage to fix the mess that was left to him, though Reagan took the credit. It's like Obama getting flack for the mess that Bush II left him while America is performing better then most any other western country.
Of course not being American, it seems to me that the President doesn't have nearly as much power as he's made out to have. Isn't it Congress who passes laws and budgets?
Re: (Score:3)
Taxes are regressive. The rich will avoid them, and the middle class and poor cannot. You can say it is "BS" all you want, but I have evidence, and you have your "BS" ;)
Yet in the US, the top 1% of earners paid nearly half of the federal income taxes. The top 20% paid around 85% of the federal income taxes, which makes up about half of the federal budget. Those numbers come from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a progressive think-tank, but they don't seem to be controversial to conservatives or progressives. They certainly don't square with the notion that the rich can just avoid all their taxes. They certainly have more ways around some taxes, but they cert
Re: (Score:3)
Gini is an interesting concept. But I wouldn't call it anything other than what it is, socialist (Fascist) crap.
Redistribution of wealth is a noble idea, but sucks in practice, as it is entirely elitist driven. Elites decide who is "too wealthy" and then tax the poor and middle class in an effort to get the wealthy's money. Meanwhile the wealthy buy access to those in power, and move their wealth to places that aren't taxed and none of it actually helps anyone.
The strange thing about socialism is that it wo
Re: To be fair (Score:4, Informative)
Tax evasion is sort of a big deal there with all the commies and so on.
Much of what is documented in the Panama Papers is tax avoidance [wikipedia.org], not tax evasion [wikipedia.org].
In fact, this is the big story here, just how much tax avoidance has been made legal [theintercept.com] by western governments at the request of the rich and powerful.
Re: To be fair (Score:5, Insightful)
As Simon Jenkins at the Guardian notes, while tax avoidance may be legal, the use of them, particularly by lawmakers, is just plain wrong. David Cameron, in particular, has stood against closing loopholes, and now it turns out that, because of his old man's dealings, he has been a beneficiary.
And this is the crux of the problem that the Panama Papers reveal. Yes, there is certainly a criminal element to all of this, in that these havens are used by people out and out evading taxes, and some criminals are using these havens to launder or hide their money (much as they used to do with their private Swiss bank accounts). But the real scandal here is that it is the very people who make the laws that create tax havens who are either directly making the laws (like Cameron) or have an extraordinary amount of influence over the laws being passed. These aren't just Joe and Jane Average using a few tax deductions or trusts to reduce their tax bill, these are some of he wealthiest people in the world, the kind of people that can put all sorts of pressure on lawmakers to make sure that their "avoidance" schemes stay legal.
The Panama Papers are an example of a worse kind of crime that evasion and money laundering. They are an example of the fundamental corruption of many even "liberal" political systems. In a way, this makes someone like Cameron no better than Putin, except Putin actually looks to be a lot smarter than the Prime Ministers of Britain and Iceland.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, the real problem is the hypocrisy. Government leaders who on one hand will be encouraging citizens to dutifully pay their taxes, or who campaign that they side with the little people instead of the wealthy, then end up looking like fools or liars when they're caught playing tax tricks with their money.
So what? (Score:2)
I don't expect a big mess, because as with every other case of fraud and tax evasion the more likely outcome will be silence and no action. There are some high profile American's on the list, and if you look at their associations I'm sure you could implicate many many other people. The Prime Minister of the UK has cried "private matter, don't look" from day one. All of the names of people in the Middle East, including many supported by the US and UK (and their best allies). One politician has left over
Re: (Score:3)
Even David Cameron is under an incredible amount of pressure. The Telegraph, or as some affectionately call it, the Torygraph, is calling him out. I think, particularly in an age when many governments are imposing austerity measures on their citizens, to have the very politicians who are invoking the necessity of austerity turning around and hiding their own income, and helping their wealthy friends hide their income, is becoming an unforgivable kind of hypocrisy. That the average family will have to pay hi
Re: (Score:2)
It's not even majority rule. With 3 or more parties 34% can mean ruling over the 66% who disagree with you. Actually it can be even worse with electoral districts as the party only has to win 51% by 51% and can loose 49% by a hundred percent.
The one thing worse then the tyranny of the majority is tyranny of the minority.
Re: (Score:2)
Public shaming is part of that if only a small part - time to wake up pentagon fake crash fake engineer boy.
Re: (Score:3)
That's because in the U.S., we have Delaware, no need to go to Panama.
Re: (Score:2)
As an American, i'm sure I can speak for most of us when I say that we're not shocked. We expect politicians and big bank CEO's to be doing this. Other than a massive civil war or revolution, we can't do anything about it. The powers to be make their own rules. Newly voted in are quickly currupted if they aren't already.
The US political tree is just one big dynasty.
Re: (Score:2)
That's right! Everything that's legal is also moral!
Re: (Score:2)
Paying taxes is not a moral imperative, you fucking dipshit.
This isn't church, and the IRS isn't a collection plate.
If you want to pay more, go for it, but don't pretend that somehow makes you better than anyone else. Just a sucker.
Interesting. Do you use government services at all? Is there a road in front of your house? A bridge nearby? Do you like knowing that the meat you buy at the grocery store won't kill you? Or that your funds are FDIC-insured? Perhaps you enjoy the security that a strong military gives. I suppose I could go on and on, but you use and benefit from a lot of government services. So pay your damn taxes.
Putin would make a helluva SJW (Score:4, Funny)
"Legitimate criticism of my wrongdoing, backed up by objectively verifiable facts, is in fact harassment and will not be tolerated."
Just give him some neon hair, a side-shave and some problem glasses and have him write blogposts about how objects in C++ are oppressive toward womxn.
Charitable foundation (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Exactly this. Instead of paying 50% in taxes, you spend 10% being a "charity", and keep the difference for personal use. But they get a pass because they aren't (R) (who are just as bad).
Talk the BS, but don't have to walk it, same for both (D) and (R), just different BS being spewed
Re:Charitable foundation (Score:5, Insightful)
In countries, that do not tax wealth, only your actual income matters to your tax-bill. What you already have is irrelevant.
Whether other politicians are squeaky clean or not, you've got to admit, the Clinton Foundation racket [nypost.com] is something special — not just for the scale, but also for the brazenness of it...
Re: (Score:2)
In countries, that do not tax wealth, only your actual income matters to your tax-bill. What you already have is irrelevant.
I'm guessing you don't own much real property.
And out came the conspiracy theorists ... (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
I'll mostly buy that argument, but one thing that seems weird is how the NY Times did almost no reporting on the topic. The silence was so deafening that the Public Editor or whatever the column is called actually wrote a column on why they hadn't reported much on it.
The closest non-conspiracy angles I could come with for this were:
1) They weren't invited to the journalism party on this "leak" so they could on report on it as the documents were released, and responsible journalism meant a lot of work tryin
Re: (Score:3)
My guess is that Putin is boss and lives in Russia forever, which means he basically has the entire resources of the state at his personal disposal. Why bother moving money overseas at all?
It's good for dictators to have a backup plan...
Re: (Score:2)
I do think it's weird that Putin would funnel money overseas for personal use. Is he planning on retiring to Costa Rica or something? My guess is that Putin is boss and lives in Russia forever, which means he basically has the entire resources of the state at his personal disposal. Why bother moving money overseas at all?
The smart investor diversifies, puts his money in many different places. He lived through the collapse of the Soviet Union and the near-dissolving of Russia's economy before he came to power. Put all of your money in Russian banks, and then if the Russian banks go down, so do you.
Also, there could be some hedging of bets against, say, the rest of the world freezing his assets if he does something even more aggressive than the Crimea invasion.
Re: (Score:2)
[Standard polite company disclaimer: I am not a Trump supporter, etc.]
The local paper had a column by a civil engineer who claimed that a "Trump Wall" would have side loading which would require footings ~10 M deep, deep enough that it might make all but the most complex tunnels difficult.
For all the really good tunnels (deep, long, well-constructed), I'd guess the majority are shitty tunnels not that deep and not that long, and a well-built wall may make them obsolete. And there's limited places you can
Re: (Score:2)
Same stupid game different players - shooting the messenger as an Olympic level sport.
Re: (Score:2)
And also, if you wanted to hide money from your government (which is the one that would otherwise tax it), why would you park it in a country that is pretty much owned by said government?
Re: (Score:2)
Big surprise? (Score:4, Informative)
Don't forget, Panama Papers is just a subset of data that was released. Heavily edited. Conveniently, not a single US politician mentioned in the released data. Also, Putin's name isn't there either, just his "childhood friend". Yet in all the newspapers it was reported that Putin was directly implicated. So, what else would you expect him to claim? Also, he actually wasn't the first to come to the same conclusion:
https://twitter.com/wikileaks/... [twitter.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Well, the US elections are not set. Wait until after the conventions.
Re: (Score:3)
Don't forget, Panama Papers is just a subset of data that was released. Heavily edited. Conveniently, not a single US politician mentioned in the released data. Yet in all the newspapers it was reported that Putin was directly implicated
From wikipedia:
McClatchy Newspapers, the only participating US news organization, has found four Americans in the documents, all of whom were previously either accused or convicted of financial crimes such as fraud and tax evasion.[43] In 2008, Mossack Fonseca reportedly utilized a 90-year-old British man to conceal the offshore accounts of Marianna Olszewski, a well-known US businesswoman.[197]
In response to the lack of American individuals in the documents, the editor of Süddeutsche Zeitung said: "Just wait for what is coming next."
Also, it has been revealed that Mossack Fonseca created over 1000 US corporations in the last 15 years [cnn.com]. And most accounts I have read have not directly implicated Putin, however quite a few people and entities closely associated with Putin (such as his eldest daughter's godfather-a professional cellist-who had assets of $100million in the leaked documents, or Rossiya Bank) are included in the documents.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Also, Putin's name isn't there either, just his "childhood friend". Yet in all the newspapers it was reported that Putin was directly implicated.
Uh huh. So his childhood friend, a cellist, just happens to have $2 billion worth of holdings. But Putin had nothing to do with this, and doesn't benefit in any way. Right.
Useful idiot.
Re: (Score:2)
In Soviet Russia... (Score:2)
My first guess is that the people of Russia have more important things to think about. Based on the past actions of Putin, this probably doesn't even rank in the top 100 things to care about politically/legally.
Also, do we even know if this is illegal under Russian tax code? Even if it were, I'm guessing Russia would follow the legal maxim of rex non potest peccare (the king can do no wrong).
hmm... (Score:1)
Peter Piper picked a peck of pickled peppers while Putin proposes Panama Papers potentially part of political plot
Re: (Score:1)
Get what you deserve (Score:4, Interesting)
People in Russia, sadly, don't seem to care much about Panama Papers.
Yeah, I really don't care. The people of Russia clearly aren't terribly interested in a free press, an uncorrupt government or any semblance of a modern open democratic state. If that's what they want, that's what they get and I'm not going to get too worked up about their choices.
The Russian people don't need the Panama papers to see the obvious corruption and political nepotism. The Olympics should have provided more than enough proof and most people didn't care. If they don't care, I don't care.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with the Russian people is that they don't know how to care about these principles. They are, in a lot of ways, indicative of what Americans are on their way to becoming if oligarchs in the US have their way. The lesson that the despotism of other nations can teach democratic societies is that it is possible to erase the collective memory of oppression and injustice among a people in a remarkably short amount of time. By (1) controlling the flow of information, (2) indenturing the public by e
No, the russian people know too well (Score:2)
The Russian people know that caring bout those principles is a joke and complete waste of time. No matter the government they've had, they've been screwed over, be it the Tzar, the commies, the capitalists, and everyone in between. No matter the party, no matter the message, the end result has been a few people at the top stealing whatever they can get their hands on.
When have the rich people of the US, or anywhere, been ethical in their wealth? Not individual people here and there, but the whole lot? When
Re: (Score:2)
This is rather disingenuous and not indicative of the popular attitudes of Russian society under Vladimir Putin's rule. As corrupt as he is, he has not gotten this far simply by demonstrating the futility of opposing him. He has extremely widespread support among the Russian people. They don't support him because they're afraid of him. They support him for reasons that are very similar to why a certain segment of American society supports Donald Trump.
Moreover, if you look at the history of other nation
Re: (Score:2)
Putin is able to keep his grip on power precisely because for the most part, Russian society LIKES him, even if that sentiment is based upon lies and manipulation.
A thousand times this. People act shocked that Trump is doing well. Trump is doing well because of lies. Trump is doing well because he represents an ideal leader for them. Some people want a dictator. It's certainly efficient in a lot of ways. You don't have obstructionism within an 'altruistic' dictatorship. "You want healthcare? Here is healthcare." I'm reminded of the quote from World War Z (the film) where the guy offhandedly acknowledges that North Korea is fine because everybody had their tee
Re:Get what you deserve (Score:4, Insightful)
People in Russia, sadly, don't seem to care much about Panama Papers.
Yeah, I really don't care. The people of Russia clearly aren't terribly interested in a free press, an uncorrupt government or any semblance of a modern open democratic state. If that's what they want, that's what they get and I'm not going to get too worked up about their choices.
You are correct. I can't tell you why it's that way though, but it's been that way for a long time. I posted on this earlier in the week. There are stories going back to the days of the Tsars where the Tsar would send out his minions to rough up or kill the peasants and the survivors would wail and say "If only the Tsar knew what was happening, he would save us!" when what happened was because he ordered it. Russians love to believe the guy at the top is wonderful and kind and it's really the people under him who are evil. This is why it's not difficult at all to find people in Russia who revere Stalin still, which to me is just a hair breadth's of difference from revering Hitler. I've read that Putin himself doesn't seem to own much of anything but his daughters, son-in-law and close friends have billions. So it allows him to provide enough plausible deniability that he's not corrupt and crooked for the public to buy it. They really don't care.
The more things change.. (Score:1)
New Tzar just like the old Tzar..
Let them be (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think "25 years ago" wasn't the number the original poster meant to give. "20 years" is probably more accurate, give how Russia's GDP in 1995 was half of what it was in 1990. They probably hit a low with the 1998 Russian Financial Crisis.
Re: (Score:2)
when hearing 83% of Russian approve Putin
Hahahah.
A lot of Russians may well approve of Putin. But this report could just as easily say 75% or 99% or 117% approval.
Not "maybe it is biased in some way", but you cannot trust 1) anyone answering a survey, 2) anyone doing a survey and 3) you certainly cannot trust a person doing a survey and discussing it (non-anonymously!) with a reporter.
English, German, Cyrillic... (Score:2)
At least Hillary and Putin agree on the vast right (Score:2)
Sure (Score:2)
"Oh. You won't mind, then, if we seize all these accounts in your, amd your lieutenants', names?"
No No (Score:2)
The Panama Papers are part of US plot to weaken FIFA
Nope (Score:2)
We're just trying to drag the world down to our level [wikipedia.org]. It's the bucket of crabs [wikipedia.org] mentality.
Long term (Score:2)
No selected press, well funded groups with very regional stories to sell, waiting times.
Re: (Score:1)
Evading taxes in the US should be every citizen's duty. And it should be every non-US citizen's duty to mankind to help US citizens evade taxes. The less money the US government gets, the less people in the world will suffer and die.
Re:No argument here (Score:5, Insightful)
The money lost to tax avoidance can give everyone an extra couple of grand a year in their pockets. It's not "free money" - it's returning your money, that was stolen from you because others refused to pay their fair share, from them, making restitution to you.
Think of what that extra money would do for the economy. For yourself.
Re: (Score:2)
It's taking advantage of the law as written, and there is absolutely no written system out there that can always beat people who are trying to game the rules. Take interest deductions - the one with the fewest limitations is the home mortgage interest deduction. Let's say you have a property worth $400k, and you and your spouse earn $200k/year in total. Let's assume you've been quite productive and have managed to pay the pri
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How fucking ironic that you think not having your money stolen equals theft. What insane mindfuck mental gymnastics.
Take your meds, schizo.
Fraud and corruption in these cases are theft under cover of law. Maybe you should indulge in a few mental gymnastics to exercise your grey matter.
Re: (Score:2)
A lot of it is outright fraud.
Re: (Score:3)
I think that just makes you a moron. Defending very wealthy people hiding their cash and making sure the system is gamed so they can is not laudable, and it takes a complete fucking idiot to be making a relatively small annual salary to think what they're doing is some sort of stab at the heart of the Big Bad Government.
Re: (Score:3)
Why would Americans wanting to hide stuff go off-shore when they can do everything they need to do right in the USA?
Re:Follow the Money (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
And there's the Russian troll. Considering USAID distributes food, medicine and shelter, and helps those countries who want to have some form of democracy, unlike Russia, it is quite clear why you trolls would mention an NGO.
After all, Russia has a long history of paranoia when it comes to groups trying to help people better themselves or understand why oppression, such as is practiced in Russia, is not how countries become strong and independent.
How's the weather in St. Petersburg? Is Uncle Putin still p
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, Putin had nothing to do with it — it is perfectly common for a cellist in Russia to have $2 billion in Panama [latimes.com]. Right...