Those who not only knows how to read between the lines, but also grasped the secret meaning of punctuation marks in modern Russian reality, it is clear that the question mark in the subtitle signifies not a question but a statement. However, formally it was still a question, and before may the cuckoo three times procombat, as Alexander Lebedev in his blog gave an answer. Formal or not – to judge you by, as we present it almost entirely. Partly because this answer, in turn, generates many new questions.
“No, I’m not Byron. I’m different. About the offshore, the crooks and the CIA” — so called material coming from the pen of Alexander Lebedev. “My former managers-crooks (know their names) merged a, as it seems, the killer “incriminating evidence” relating to the offshore. The author of the publication – one with the speaking name Prokhvatilov, even requires law enforcement agencies to bring me to justice for his work on “the CIA and MI6”. Well hto not know about, offshore? I scho derslerimize? Their “nakalele” mentioned the swindlers, with the participation of Western financial institutions (auditors, banks, lawyers, companies)…
To date, most investigations are finished. Offshore now is an integral part of trials and prosecutions…
So many years I spoke publicly for the dismantling invented the international financial oligarchy offshore system, knowing it from the inside. And this is why currently register all of their offshore accounts in the tax service of the Russian Federation to become a real subject of “Amnesty”.
As for “Version” and Prokhvatilova – wait for a lawsuit.
P. S. by the Way, if mentioned in the publication employee of the law firm Akin GumpStrauss Hauer & Feld Toby Gati – CIA officer, what does that mean? I’m paying her, not she me. If the CIA wants to help my investigations – most welcome! This American firm and was responsible for part of the investigation. It is clear that such services are for money.
Let’s start from the beginning. It is known, are very popular in Russia a psychological technique. Byron good… Ah, Yes, not Byron’s… we Have in fact from time immemorial how? While the person at the court and on service, it dear Mr. Smith. And if jumped much, – Ivashka, filthy dog. But here can be seen as a kind of commendable in these times, loyalty to tradition, to chains and binders. The question is different: if the names of the slanderers and blasphemers known, why would they not call? Perhaps the fact that none of the so-called “managers of rogues” in the court of the rogue was not recognized?
Another question. Is “slaughter dirt” refers to the Lebedev offshore as such? In principle, offshore – this is not a crime. The article was about tax evasion with offshore assets, which is considered a serious offense not only in Russia but also in the West.
Suppose former top executives, and now the nameless scammers, “nakalele” offshore, with the active support of almost all international financial institutions (auditors, banks, lawyers, companies). But what are the physiological reactions or symptoms (cough, runny nose, sneezing, itching, underline) they were able to reproduce the signature g-on Lebedev on financial documents?
As for questionable from an ethical point of view of the passage about “speaking” the names of the author (by the way, g-n Lebedev for some reason it plays two different ways, so claim it by bringing probably both – and Prokhvatilov, and just in case Prokhvatilova), so in fact the name of the person does not choose. Here Lebedev – proud name.
But to threaten the journalist, the court is not the publication of false documents, but for “reasoning”, as it proudly? And the more democratic for fighter for democracy?Related posts: