Was aiming at Putin – were in Cameron. A little over a week ago, on the eve of publication exposing “the Panama dossier” one of the owners of the “suitcases with the compromising evidence” sarcastically advised Putin’s press Secretary Dmitry Peskov in advance to stand in a fighting stance, saying, do not expect to stay in the workplace, the work you will have plenty! We can state today that actually “work,” Peskov was with gulkin nose. Whether the “work” Putin’s mouthpiece was really a lot, but he coped with it not even five and five plus.
photo: Natalia Gubernatorova
Leakage “of the Panama dossier” about “fabulous wealth” of Putin orchestrated by Putin himself – is it possible to imagine a more bizarre question is that? But this version was not put forward on page facebooknew some regular domestic “fighter against bloody regime” in Kiev and the Verkhovna Rada.
The article titled “Not quite a crazy theory that Russia leaked the Panama papers,” was published in the Washington Post – one of the most serious and respectable Newspapers of America.
From the article, though: from the author of this exotic version of the famous American economist and Advisor to Russian Ministry of Finance in 90-e years of Clifford Gaddy not a single proof of the justification of their suspicions. As stated by gadde: “This, of course, not a theory. It’s not even really a hypothesis. It’s just a suggestion that something must be seriously investigated”. And investigated according to gadde must be mainly this: why in “Panama dossier” so little that hurts Putin? And why there is so much that is “extremely distressing” for other world leaders?
Clifford Gaddy suspects that the answer is: the newspaper “süddeutsche Zeitung”, which became in 2015 the owner of “Panama dossier”, was the victim of a Kremlin working for the Russian hackers. Schizophrenia and paranoia? It seems to me that clearly. Let’s assume for a moment that “working for the Kremlin Russian hacker” really was. How could he make Western researchers Panamanian securities to make them exactly the conclusions that were made? How could he convince them under the guise of “exposing Putin” to carry out the exposure Poroshenko and Western politicians?
This requires not a hacker. This requires a hypnotist with psychic powers – a man of “great and terrible” from the pages of Stephen king’s novel. And since we’re not talking about a literary work, and about real life, happened in real life, most likely, that the previously much-hyped non-existent revelations about the “terrible financial secrets” Putin, the publishers of “the Panama dossier” put themselves in an extremely stupid position. And the Kremlin that their blunders skillfully used, in full “exposing the exposers”.
In the end, against Putin “Panama dossier” de facto played into Putin. The Kremlin in this question were able to seize the political initiative and outright beat their opponents.
Is it possible to put the point? From my point of view, possible, but not necessary. The winners, as is known, not judged. But the winners – or, rather, their words and actions – can be analyzed. In this case, something like this seems to me to be absolutely necessary.
Why the publication “the Panama dossier” caused such a stir in the West? Not because of that, the file should be that all of his helpers from among international political figures are liars and schemers. The word “offshore” is not a synonym for the word “crime”. Offshore is just a specific form of organization of your finances – shape, which is not necessarily unlawful.
What is the cause of a major world sensation? That “Panama dossier” raises a lot of questions about the “rules of the game” for important political and public figures in financial and tax matters. That is why in a very complex political situation now, for example, British Prime Minister David Cameron. Contained in “Panamanian dossier” of information about his family finances does not suggest that Cameron himself or his parents stole money from the Treasury.
They suggest that the Cameron family has used “creative” accounting methods aimed at minimizing the volume of taxes. From a human point of view such behavior is absolutely clear. It is we, simple citizens of the Russian Federation, the “good” state takes only 13% of salary. In Western countries the appetite of tax authorities more ambitious: the Treasury often wants to swallow up to 50% of income or more.
In this fact lies the explanation of why the family of Cameron resorted to the use of “creative” accounting, and why the British public reacted so nervously and negatively.
British citizens don’t tend to look at the finances of the Prime Minister’s family through the prism of “the human standpoint”. Instead, they are seeking an answer to the question: why can, but we can’t? Why the state apparatus, which is headed by Cameron, mercilessly knocks out of us taxes, if David Cameron meanwhile uses clever tricks to pay the Treasury as little as possible?
In Russia under such Polom of view on “ PanAmSat” looks almost no one. The Panamanian papers are perceived almost exclusively through the prism of relations between Russia and the West and the desire of America and the EU by any means “to nail” Putin. But, if you display the brackets the shape of the GDP, which indeed does not appear anywhere, then raise the “Panama dossier” questions about the rules of the game relate to and Russia.
For several years, as our government says a lot about the urgent need deofshorizatsii Russian economy. And now it turns out: according to the “Panama dossier” some prominent members of the Russian elite, including a known member of the Cabinet of Ministers and the Deputy head of the major law enforcement agencies refer to official state policy of de-offshore-isation, shall we say, somewhat peculiar.
This again does not follow that these and other leaders have done something bad. This implies another: the Russian government is obliged to articulate associated with offshore rules of the game for politicians and bureaucrats. This should be done not at the level of General and declarative statements. Need more specifics – specifics, as close to specific individuals who appear in the Panama files. I would like to understand: they libel or slander? In the Kremlin assured me that Putin has already given the relevant instructions to the Prosecutor General. A interesting read?
Read the material on “the Only American billionaire in “Panama dossier” was born in Russia.”Related posts: