[Kizzy]

What are they? What's going on?... :/

http://www.theguardian.com/news/live...b0fde262ff63fc

[Cherie]

You need to listen to the BBC news Kizzy, details of tax haven accounts leaked WH did a poem on it this am

[Kizzy]

I'll stick to the Guardian thanks
Still fair play to the BBC here.

We'll be up to our scrawny necks in it too no doubt.

[bots]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

I'll stick to the Guardian thanks
Still fair play to the BBC here.

We'll be up to our scrawny necks in it too no doubt.

Its more a case of who hasn't been doing dodgy deals there .... really funny now they are all found out

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

I'll stick to the Guardian thanks
Still fair play to the BBC here.

We'll be up to our scrawny necks in it too no doubt.

But watch how they turn our attention away from what's happening on our own front doorstep. I mean, lets all talk about Iceland and Putin!.

Poor Dave; I bet he was totally unaware of his father’s own attempts to hide the ownership of Blairmore Holdings, Inc. in order to avoid paying taxes in the UK
http://www.thecanary.co/2016/04/04/g...onaire-father/

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

But watch how they turn our attention away from what's happening on our own front doorstep. I mean, lets all talk about Iceland and Putin!.

Poor Dave; I bet he was totally unaware of his father’s own attempts to hide the ownership of Blairmore Holdings, Inc. in order to avoid paying taxes in the UK
http://www.thecanary.co/2016/04/04/g...onaire-father/

This was discussed at length this afternoon on BBC 5 live so no hiding the issue

[DemolitionRed]

The information contained in the documents is huge. This is a story that will continue to run and reveal for years.

[hijaxers]

Dear David - wow talk about 'on top' and about bout time ! Of course ' we're all in it together ' Yeah ok

[Livia]

Looks like everyone's okay with these documents being "leaked". I mean, it fits in with a lot of people's agendas, doesn't it. David Cameron's Dad... how fortunate.

Anyone interested in who it was who leaked these documents? I mean, there is a whole other thread about Apple refusing to allow the Security Services to access a terrorist's phone because it'll apparently threaten "personal privacy"... but there's an awful lot of support... and a certain amount of glee... that some nameless, faceless organisation has unlawfully accessed what are essentially private files because it shames people you don't like.

You can't have it both ways... no access for the security services but full acceptance of some spotty hacker because he reinforces your own agenda.

[bots]

Originally Posted by Livia

Looks like everyone's okay with these documents being "leaked". I mean, it fits in with a lot of people's agendas, doesn't it. David Cameron's Dad... how fortunate.

Anyone interested in who it was who leaked these documents? I mean, there is a whole other thread about Apple refusing to allow the Security Services to access a terrorist's phone because it'll apparently threaten "personal privacy"... but there's an awful lot of support... and a certain amount of glee... that some nameless, faceless organisation has unlawfully accessed what are essentially private files because it shames people you don't like.

You can't have it both ways... no access for the security services but full acceptance of some spotty hacker because he reinforces your own agenda.

Personally, i always protect peoples right to privacy. However, if someone breaches that and the information enters the public domain, then there is no going back, and if wrong doing has been committed, then it should be acted upon.

If it was a whistleblower/hacker, if they broke the law publishing it, they should be prosecuted. Simple really.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Livia

Looks like everyone's okay with these documents being "leaked". I mean, it fits in with a lot of people's agendas, doesn't it. David Cameron's Dad... how fortunate.

Anyone interested in who it was who leaked these documents? I mean, there is a whole other thread about Apple refusing to allow the Security Services to access a terrorist's phone because it'll apparently threaten "personal privacy"... but there's an awful lot of support... and a certain amount of glee... that some nameless, faceless organisation has unlawfully accessed what are essentially private files because it shames people you don't like.

You can't have it both ways... no access for the security services but full acceptance of some spotty hacker because he reinforces your own agenda.

We can argue how morally indefensible it is for illegal behaviour to out corruption at the highest level, how that is comparable to security services asking for access to data I don't know... In the end they hacked it anyway so there really is no high ground to be had is there?
There is also no 'glee' in knowing this information, nor does it affect anyone I don't like, personally I don't know anyone affected here.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Livia

Looks like everyone's okay with these documents being "leaked". I mean, it fits in with a lot of people's agendas, doesn't it. David Cameron's Dad... how fortunate.

Anyone interested in who it was who leaked these documents? I mean, there is a whole other thread about Apple refusing to allow the Security Services to access a terrorist's phone because it'll apparently threaten "personal privacy"... but there's an awful lot of support... and a certain amount of glee... that some nameless, faceless organisation has unlawfully accessed what are essentially private files because it shames people you don't like.

You can't have it both ways... no access for the security services but full acceptance of some spotty hacker because he reinforces your own agenda.

What you have to understand Livia - as difficult as that may be for anyone with logic - is that this contradiction within some peoples views of 'Neighing' to the Security Services having access to terrorists phones because of 'privacy protection', and the 'Yeighing' to this invasion of privacy in the case of these so-called 'Panama Papers', is nothing unusual.

These are the same people who for years on here, have called David Cameron and some of his closest cronies, every bad name in the book - from 'Evil', 'Dishonest' and 'Corrupt', to 'Uncaring' and 'Heartless' - UNTIL it comes to Cameron and his closest cronies stance on remaining in the EU, which just happens to coincide with their own viewpoint, and then they READILY accept EVERY one of Cameron's claims about the benefits of EU membership, and their hatred of him has visibly shifted to notable EU 'OUT' campaigners Boris Johnson and Michael Gove.

Add to the above, the fact that these same people weep and wail about the impoverished state of the N.H.S., Schools and other services, and the lack of homes, whilst at the same time protesting against any type of immigration control, and there is no wonder we are confused - or should that be THEY are confused?

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

What you have to understand Livia - as difficult as that may be for anyone with logic - is that this contradiction within some peoples views of 'Neighing' to the Security Services having access to terrorists phones because of 'privacy protection', and the 'Yeighing' to this invasion of privacy in the case of these so-called 'Panama Papers', is nothing unusual.

These are the same people who for years on here, have called David Cameron and some of his closest cronies, every bad name in the book - from 'Evil', 'Dishonest' and 'Corrupt', to 'Uncaring' and 'Heartless' - UNTIL it comes to Cameron and his closest cronies stance on remaining in the EU, which just happens to coincide with their own viewpoint, and then they READILY accept EVERY one of Cameron's claims about the benefits of EU membership, and their hatred of him has visibly shifted to notable EU 'OUT' campaigners Boris Johnson and Michael Gove.

Add to the above, the fact that these same people weep and wail about the impoverished state of the N.H.S., Schools and other services, and the lack of homes, whilst at the same time protesting against any type of immigration control, and there is no wonder we are confused - or should that be THEY are confused?

Well I for one am voting for out of the EU or did you miss me saying that?!
If you have more patronising assumptions to make, send them to my secretary.

[kirklancaster]

QUOTE=DemolitionRed;8597200]Well I for one am voting for out of the EU or did you miss me saying that?!
If you have more patronising assumptions to make, send them to my secretary.[/QUOTE]

Ha ha - Methinks that you think FAR too much of yourself dear and overestimate your importance in these debates. I was neither addressing you, nor referring to you, so save the thinly veiled perjorative comments, you may need them.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

QUOTE=DemolitionRed;8597200]Well I for one am voting for out of the EU or did you miss me saying that?!
If you have more patronising assumptions to make, send them to my secretary.

Ha ha - Methinks that you think FAR too much of yourself dear and overestimate your importance in these debates. I was neither addressing you, nor referring to you, so save the thinly veiled perjorative comments, you may need them.[/QUOTE]

I could say the same to you, Comments relating to 'them' are as ambiguous as the 'some people' reference. Maybe state who you are addressing to take the guesswork out of forming a response to your posts.

[Ninastar]

Originally Posted by Livia

Looks like everyone's okay with these documents being "leaked". I mean, it fits in with a lot of people's agendas, doesn't it. David Cameron's Dad... how fortunate.

Anyone interested in who it was who leaked these documents? I mean, there is a whole other thread about Apple refusing to allow the Security Services to access a terrorist's phone because it'll apparently threaten "personal privacy"... but there's an awful lot of support... and a certain amount of glee... that some nameless, faceless organisation has unlawfully accessed what are essentially private files because it shames people you don't like.

You can't have it both ways... no access for the security services but full acceptance of some spotty hacker because he reinforces your own agenda.

Brilliantly well said.

[DemolitionRed]

Whilst Cameron is not accountable for his fathers actions, he does have a duty to answer questions about whether or not he still has links to this offshore company. He can't claim its a private matter when tax evasion is of public interest and very much a public concern.

Lets also not forget that Cameron has a very privileged background which was financed by his fathers offshore dealings. If my parents stole the crown jewels and left them to me in their will, I wouldn't be allowed to keep or benefit from those jewels because they never really belonged to my parents, they belonged to the country.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

Whilst Cameron is not accountable for his fathers actions, he does have a duty to answer questions about whether or not he still has links to this offshore company. He can't claim its a private matter when tax evasion is of public interest and very much a public concern.

Lets also not forget that Cameron has a very privileged background which was financed by his fathers offshore dealings. If my parents stole the crown jewels and left them to me in their will, I wouldn't be allowed to keep or benefit from those jewels because they never really belonged to my parents, they belonged to the country.

You cannot prosecute the son for the sins of the father and David Cameron has no duty whatsoever to speak for his father's actions, whether he's Prime Minister or not. Seems to me that Cameron's biggest crime is to be considered "privileged".

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by Livia

You cannot prosecute the son for the sins of the father and David Cameron has no duty whatsoever to speak for his father's actions, whether he's Prime Minister or not. Seems to me that Cameron's biggest crime is to be considered "privileged".

Don't put words in my mouth Livia, nobody said prosecute Cameron; I said Cameron needs to answer questions regarding his current interests in his inheritance.

Originally Posted by Livia

Of course tax evasion is a crime. I can't imagine anyone saying it isn't.

The deliberately muddled terms between “tax evasion” and "tax avoidance" tend to get used interchangeably, even by conservative MP's.

Originally Posted by Livia

So... this kind of action is okay in your books, respectable even. But terrorists can continue to use their cellphones with impunity knowing that the security services can't touch them. And let's face it, you're making up your own story here about the noble hacker doing it for the greater good and what the government can and can't access when you know no more about this story or who is responsible than any of us.

One rule of unlawful whistle-blowers, another for the security services.

Absolutely. The whistle-blower in this case has done the British nation a huge service. They have very decently just confirmed what we already suspected but it needed a vigil anti with more guts than a xmas turkey to reveal the corruption going on by billionaires around the globe. Now Cameron has to be seen to be doing something because the majority of the nation won't allow this one to be swept under the carpet.

The British bourgeoisie and aristocracy have been benefiting from these arrangements for a very long time. Half this country is now owned by offshore investors and so no, I don't accept that the few crumbs the government throws at the British electorate is enough to pacify me. Why should the minions who humbly pay their taxes have to subsidise these massive tax avoiders.

So... NO, I don't trust this corrupt government to gain access to our privacy and I don't believe for a second that they want access to encryption because of terrorism.

[smudgie]

Ian Cameron's offshore dealings were public knowledge years ago.
Plenty of people put their money offshore, the same as Swiss bank accounts. If it is not illegal then what is all the fuss about.....Ohhh yeah, someone with money and privilege might be getting one over on the taxman, these same people that probably already pay more taxes than us plebs earn.
Good for them. Seems it is a sin to be well off in this country.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by smudgie

Ian Cameron's offshore dealings were public knowledge years ago.
Plenty of people put their money offshore, the same as Swiss bank accounts. If it is not illegal then what is all the fuss about.....Ohhh yeah, someone with money and privilege might be getting one over on the taxman, these same people that probably already pay more taxes than us plebs earn.
Good for them. Seems it is a sin to be well off in this country.

Smudgie smacking the nail on the head, there...

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by smudgie

Ian Cameron's offshore dealings were public knowledge years ago.
Plenty of people put their money offshore, the same as Swiss bank accounts. If it is not illegal then what is all the fuss about.....Ohhh yeah, someone with money and privilege might be getting one over on the taxman, these same people that probably already pay more taxes than us plebs earn.
Good for them. Seems it is a sin to be well off in this country.

Speak for yourself smudgie.

Tax is proportional, you pay more the more you earn. If you earn not very much you don't have the luxury of moving your money places where you can effectively pay no tax.
It is not a sin to be rich in this country, that's a ridiculous statement. It's the double standards that stick in the craw of many, when the likes of Jimmy Carr were exposed as avoiding tax he was accused of being 'morally corrupt'... seems the more you earn the less corrupt it is not to declare it!
How very odd.

[DemolitionRed]

When a crime is being committed, as we see here; then we often rely on whistle-blowers. Lets take a nursing home scenario where elderly folks with dementia are being abused. Its usually just one person who sees the going on as morally wrong and decides to pull the plug on this criminal activity.

I work in an environment where we are expected to whistle-blow if we see anything we deem to be suspicious.

The person who has pulled the plug on this massive tax evasion has not done so for financial gain or for notoriety, though he/she did ask for protection. They did not personally meet journalists in the flesh or talk to them on the phone. Everything was handed of in encrypted files. If the government had been able to unlock encryption, these files very probably couldn't of been handed over because they would of been immediately blocked and traced back to the sender.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

When a crime is being committed, as we see here; then we often rely on whistle-blowers. Lets take a nursing home scenario where elderly folks with dementia are being abused. Its usually just one person who sees the going on as morally wrong and decides to pull the plug on this criminal activity.

I work in an environment where we are expected to whistle-blow if we see anything we deem to be suspicious.

The person who has pulled the plug on this massive tax evasion has not done so for financial gain or for notoriety, though he/she did ask for protection. They did not personally meet journalists in the flesh or talk to them on the phone. Everything was handed of in encrypted files. If the government had been able to unlock encryption, these files very probably couldn't of been handed over because they would of been immediately blocked and traced back to the sender.

So... this kind of action is okay in your books, respectable even. But terrorists can continue to use their cellphones with impunity knowing that the security services can't touch them. And let's face it, you're making up your own story here about the noble hacker doing it for the greater good and what the government can and can't access when you know no more about this story or who is responsible than any of us.

One rule of unlawful whistle-blowers, another for the security services.

[DemolitionRed]

Oh and before anyone says, tax evasion is not a crime...in my eyes its very much a crime. Its ****ing appalling that people are allowed to get away with this sort of theft.