Behind the “Panama Papers:” London’s “Anti-Corruption” Regime-Change Caper

With the resignation of Prime Minister Sigmundur David Gunnlaugsson Tuesday, the government of Iceland became the first to fall, in the wake of the orchestrated media frenzy over the so-called “Panama Papers” dumped upon the world. Their release was timely: just six weeks before an international “Anti-Corruption Summit” in London, called for by the British government for May 12, with the stated intent of creating a strengthened supranational “anti-corruption architecture” through which to overthrow designated governments of choice.

Rather shameless for an empire functioning for centuries upon the Venetian principle of “Private Vices, Public Good”!

Her Majesty’s Prime Minister David Cameron first announced the anti-corruption summit on July 28, 2015, in a speech delivered at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy in Singapore. Cameron baldly declared that corruption of other governments creates migration and terrorism; that many refugees are fleeing “from corrupt African states where they have no economic prospects because everything is controlled by a corrupt elite,” and Boko Haram, ISIL, Al-Qaeda, et al. demonstrate “how an oppressive and corrupt government can drive its people into the hands of the extremists in the first place.”

Cameron cited Oxford University’s infamous British colonialist (and former senior advisor to Tony Blair’s Commission on Africa), Paul Collier, in proposing that this May’s anti-corruption summit bring about “a fundamental change to the way the international community fights poverty,” by using “international aid” to enforce “better governance.”

Transparency International — created in 1993 under the direct instigation of Prince Philip — has been fleshing out the agenda for Cameron’s summit. On Jan. 27, 2016, the UK branch of Transparency published their proposals for the summit, which they envision as “a coalition of the willing.” Anti-corruption summits fail, because “serially corrupt” governments are allowed to participate, TI wrote, the only two countries mentioned by name in their proposal being China and Saudi Arabia. “Serial blockers—countries that use spurious excuses to stop any progress,” must be excluded, and if diplomatic protocol requires they be invited, “it is vital that the blockers are not allowed to dictate the terms of the debate.”

This rump caucus in London is then to agree upon such measures as adopting “a visa denial-of-entry regime for suspects of corruption;” “a corporate debarment regime between like-minded governments with the power to enforce it;” and “providing legal support for those living abroad to challenge the corruption taking place at home.”

The key to success, however, is the use of the press and “civil society” to mobilize the victims of Bertrand Russell’s cult of stupidity into Jacobin mobs which can bring down governments. In the words of TI: “Civil society and a free press are two of the (few) mechanisms that can promote transparency and accountability, particularly in countries that are not democracies.”

Ergo: “the Panama papers”