É aceitável que informação relevante para o interesse púbico, podendo mesmo ter conteúdo do foro criminal, seja divulgada de acordo com o calendário editorial de uma publicação, mesmo depois de ser afirmado que anda a ser trabalhada há um ano?
É aceitável que informação relevante para o interesse púbico, podendo mesmo ter conteúdo do foro criminal, seja divulgada de acordo com o calendário editorial de uma publicação, mesmo depois de ser afirmado que anda a ser trabalhada há um ano?
O Meu Quintal 
https://www.publico.pt/sociedade/noticia/orcamento-tira-57-milhoes-as-universidades-e-politecnicos-1728284
hm?
GostarGostar
Obviamente que não.
Damage controle.
A maneira como o Expresso “tratou” a informação do caso wikileaks foi vergonhoso.
É giro e interessante ficarem com a exclusividade para “tratarem” determinada informação para protegerem a pandilha nojenta do costume.
Objectivo único.
GostarGostar
WikiLeaks’ Kristinn Hrafnsson calls for data leak to be released in full
(…)
Icelandic investigative journalist and WikiLeaks spokesperson Kristinn Hrafnsson has called for the Panama Papers to be published in full online.
(…)
Mr Hrafnsson, who worked on the ‘Cablegate’ leak of diplomatic documents in 2010, suggested the withholding of documents is understandable to maximise the impact, but said that in the end the papers should be published in full for the public to access.
He told RT’s Afshin Rattansi on Going Underground: “When they are saying this is responsible journalism, I totally disagree with the overall tone of that.
“I do have a sympathy to stalled releases, we certainly did that in WikiLeaks in 2010 and 2011 with the Diplomatic Cables… but in the end the entire cache was put online in a searchable database.
“That is what I’d want to see with these Panama Papers, they should be available to the general public in such a manner so everybody, not just the group of journalists working on the data, can search it.”
The reports are from a global group of news organisations working with the Washington-based International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ).
The consortium have been processing the legal records from the Mossack Fonseca law firm that were first leaked to the German Sueddeutsche Zeitung newspaper.
Shell companies are not necessarily illegal. People or companies might use them to reduce their tax bill legally, by benefiting from low tax rates in countries like Panama, the Cayman Islands and Bermuda.
But the practice is frowned upon, particularly when used by politicians, who then face criticism for not contributing to their own countries’ economies.
Because offshore accounts and companies also hide the names of the ultimate owners of investments, they are often used to illegally evade taxes or launder money.
Presenter Rattansi mentions that the ICIJ is funded by the Ford Foundation, the Carnegie Endowment think tank, the Rockefellers and George Soros.
Asked if he is surprised that there has been “no big American names released – so far” Mr Hrafnsson said: “It seems to be skewed away from American interests. American companies are only a third of British companies there.
“You have to keep in mind this one law firm in Panama servicing, providing tax haven companies mostly out of the British Virgin Islands – so it doesn’t give the entire picture.”
The full interview airs Wednesday at 11:30am on Going Underground on RT and can be viewed later on the RT website.
(…)
Ler mais:http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/panama-papers/panama-papers-wikileaks-kristinn-hrafnsson-calls-for-data-leak-to-be-released-in-full-34601909.html
GostarGostar
Esta é dedicada ao Pedro Santos Guerreiro:
#PanamaPapers: If you censor more than 99% of the documents you are engaged in 1% journalism by definition.
https://twitter.com/wikileaks?ref_src=twsrctfw
GostarGostar
Pois é muito chato esta coisas sairem cá para fora…não é Pedrinho?
Assim, sem mais nem menos…
IMF Internal Meeting Predicts Greek ‘Disaster’, Threatens to Leave Troika
by Julian Assange
Today, 2nd April 2016, WikiLeaks publishes the records of a 19 March 2016 teleconference between the top two IMF officials in charge of managing the Greek debt crisis – Poul Thomsen, the head of the IMF’s European Department, and Delia Velkouleskou, the IMF Mission Chief for Greece. The IMF anticipates a possible Greek default co-inciding with the United Kingdom’s referendum on whether it should leave the European Union (‘Brexit’).
(…)
Ler mais:https://wikileaks.org/imf-internal-20160319/
GostarGostar
Ó Pedro Santos Guerreiro:
“(…)Se a panamiana Mossack Fonseca é a quarta do ranking, que papelada andará pelas três primeiras?”
Ler mais:http://correntes.blogs.sapo.pt/os-rankings-e-os-papeis-do-panama-2399416
GostarGostar
Ai e tal…eficiência fiscal…coisa e tal…
Vendemos a EDP à China, não foi?
A questão é que com os dividendos já está paga ou perto disso.
Panama Papers reveal offshore secrets of China’s red nobility
(…)
Ler mais:http://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/apr/06/panama-papers-reveal-offshore-secrets-china-red-nobility-big-business
GostarGostar
(…)Chinese news groups have been ordered to purge all mention of the Panama Papers from their websites and warned of harsh punishment if they are found to have published material “attacking China”.
Ler mais:http://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/apr/05/all-mention-of-panama-papers-banned-from-chinese-websites#img-1
GostarGostar
Penso que o melhor sistema para divulgar um assunto destes, deverá inspirar-se no antigo concurso de professores.
Criação de uma lista ordenada de corruptos ,com classificação de delito e anos de serviço como fatores de ponderação, seguida de uma lista de colocação em estabelecimentos prisionais.
Tudo isto sem tretas de “aplicações” e passewordezinhas. Uma impressa, colada na montra do equivalente ao C.I.R.E.P..
GostarGostar