China Censors Online Discussion About Panama Papers (bbc.com) 109
An anonymous reader quotes a report from BBC: China appears to be censoring social media posts on the Panama Papers document leak which has named several members of China's elite, including President Xi Jinping's brother-in-law. Hundreds of posts on networks such as Sina Weibo and Wechat on the topic have been deleted since Monday morning. According to the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ), the Panama Papers show that Mr. Deng acquired two offshore companies in 2009, at a time when Mr. Xi was rising in politics. State media appeared to black out the news. But many on microblogging network Sina Weibo and mobile chat network Wechat were discussing the topic on Monday morning, sharing Chinese translations of details of the story, including information on Mr. Deng. A hashtag created on the topic quickly trended. Checks by the BBC found that by the end of the day many of those posts had disappeared, with at least 481 discussions deleted from the hashtag's Weibo topic page, and other posts shared on Wechat also deleted. The website Freeweibo.com, which actively tracks censorship on Weibo, listed "Panama" as the second-most censored term on the network.
Searching Weibo (Score:1)
Weibo is heavily censored, but there are alternative search engines for weibo which are outside of China's jurisdiction
One example is https://freeweibo.com/
For example, in the 'Panama Papers' case, (if you know Mandarin), you do not enter the "Pa Na Ma" in pu tong hua as they are, but using alternative words to search
Despite the hundreds of thousands of censors from China, there are still a lot of conversations taking place, even inside weibo, regarding the "Panama Papers"
China online regarding the "Panama Papers" (Score:5, Informative)
Upon further digging, I found out that weibo might be censored, but the "Panama Papers" has proven to be too hot to contain
http://www.jianshu.com/p/463d19e7f47a?from=timeline&isappinstalled=0
The above link is an example - it is a link from the Jian Shu province of China, and the author of the comment has dished out quite a lot of details, including the photocopy of the passport of the daughter of a former Chinese premier
I do not know how long the above link will remain valid - but the existence of the above link is a proof that the "Panama Papers" has spread throughout the Chinese online world
Re: (Score:2)
For example, in the 'Panama Papers' case, (if you know Mandarin), you do not enter the "Pa Na Ma"
That's a species of grass mud horse I'm not familiar with.
Re:The Real Problem... (Score:4, Insightful)
No, it won't. China will simply call the papers a handiwork of western forces to undermine China. It will call the papers as baseless and fabricated. Nevertheless they will promise to investigate the issue further. Pause for a few months. The issue will be forgotten. Things will be as they were. Things like 'blowing up' happen in the west. Not so in the east. The west tries to advocate and follow democracy. The east tries to advocate and follow corruption. Corruption can buy corruption.
Re: The Real Problem... (Score:4, Insightful)
"Blowing up" doesn't happen in the West anymore, either. Have you seen any reaction to the Wikileaks Cable affair? The Snowden files? Nothing. No riots. No boycotts. No calls for resignations. People are too busy worrying about their next meal - not what it will be but IF it will be - to protest. And protesting would only jeopardize what little they have to hold on to. It's over. They could release a video on corporate CEOs and heads of state feasting on human babies' ribs and nobody would do anything. It's not that people do not care: they just understand they're powerless and acting (or rather, not-acting) accordingly.
Re: The Real Problem... (Score:5, Informative)
No riots. No boycotts. No calls for resignations. People are too busy worrying about their next meal - not what it will be but IF it will be - to protest.
The Icelanders don't agree. [theguardian.com]
Captcha: active
Re: (Score:2)
This is gaining traction here in Canada as well. Apparently enough so that they're telling the tax auditors at the CRA(think IRS for Americans) to get the papers, and find out who's cheating at it [winnipegfreepress.com] Apparently the largest bank in Canada(RBC) has been caught up in in it as well. [winnipegfreepress.com] And the minister responsible for the CRA is demanding that there be an offical investigation and review of the entire tax code, though what I heard earlier there are members within the Liberal Party(party in power), trying to stop th
Re: (Score:1)
Or maybe those stories weren't as big as they are in your mind?
Re: (Score:2)
It's not that we don't care. It's more that it wouldn't shock us, it's pretty much what we expect from them.
Re: (Score:1)
The difference between Chinese and Americans is that the Chinese understand they are ruled by the mob; the Americans still believe in Unicorns and Santa Clause. Chinese know to get licenses and permits, whip out the banknotes. Americans, they only know to bitch, moan, and grovel.
Re: The Real Problem... (Score:1)
Need to bring freedom to China and the US (Score:4, Funny)
As an EU citizen, I'm appalled that Chinese citizens don't have free access to information and don't have free speech. This is wrong and goes against everything we believe in. It is our duty to spread our freedom to the world and demand that non-free countries become free. If necessary, we should use force. I'm advocating going to war with China and the United States for the good of the people in those countries. It's unacceptable for leaders to censor information that might make them look bad. We're free to speak out against our governments, spread any ideas we desire, and read or hear any information that might be available. That includes things that are damaging to our leaders. This freedom is a human right. We have a duty to demand human rights for all. If China doesn't allow free access to information, we should go to war with them. If the United States doesn't allow free access to information, we need to go to war with them, as well. Freedom is more important than even political and military alliances.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You do understand that using violence to impose freedom defeats the values protected by the very freedom?
Re: (Score:1)
Wooooooooooosh.
Re: (Score:3)
What Catastrophe was occasionied by the UK (yes, it's that obvious) joining the EU? Just curious. You realise the guys with the turbans in Birmingham would've been there anyway right? That whole evil empire thing you had back in the day led to that. I realise the 7 Syrian children they allowed in the other day might be a major problem for you and I suppose that's been forced somehow by the EU...? I'm not actually sure on that point.
Maybe the UK isn't shit because of the EU, but despite it? I guess we'll fin
Re: (Score:2)
Britain has certainly tried to, but its experience over the entire Modern Era (roughly from the rise of the Tudors onward) has shown that no matter how much Britain tries to plow its own row, it inevitably has been dragged into European conflicts. From the attempted invasion of the Spanish Armada to the Second World War, Britain may have fancied itself apart from the Continent, but has inevitably been dragged into the chaos. In fact, one of the chief reasons there is a EU is because no less than Winston Chu
Re: (Score:2)
There are lots of people who are citizens of the EU countries that don't want to be part of the Union. With any such thing, you really can't please everyone. Sometimes you get very vocal opponents to it. That's why your assumption about the UK wasn't correct. Yeah, the UK is in the news with BREXIT but that means others will talk about it as well.
Ah well. You know what they say about 'assume.' However, I'm pretty sure it doesn't make an ass out of me if *you* do the assuming. ;-)
This is a big deal (Score:5, Interesting)
From what I've heard about China, this is a big deal. Living in or near China, people generally say they're allowed to talk online, even criticizing the government, so long as they don't plan to meet. As soon as the talk turns toward actions, it becomes verboten. (Someone living in China, please correct me if I'm wrong.)
So this must be quite a big deal. It'll be interesting to see whether there's aftermath to the censorship.
Re: (Score:1)
It's rather more like "you are allowed some smalltalk so that the veneer of existence of some speech can be held up, but whatever and whoever threatens the rule of the party and its stability will be mercilessly crushed, be it by action or by speech."
Re: (Score:2)
But what would they do with all those bear arms? Would they be panda bear arms? What about the poor bears?
Re:This is a big deal (Score:5, Informative)
been living in China for 7 years now. I general it used to be like this. Around 2011 it really looked like the government relaxed its grip on censorship a bit.
However, in the last year things got worse. Xi has a much lower tolerance for people letting steam off, and he seems to be particularly concerned with his own image. Things are now censored far quicker than before and the regime seems to have lost most scruples as it realized how toothless the West is. Expect more show trials and confessions on TV and more sudden disappearances of people, regardless which passport they hold.
Re: (Score:2)
I find that unremarkable and unsurprising. It seems like China blocks Western web sites randomly/intermittently, or for indecipherable reasons. You seem to be concluding that the US consulate's web site was blocked specifically, but I would estimate around 20% of Western web sites were blocked when I was in Shanghai five years ago.
Re:The USA is better at censorship then China... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Delaware does not hide income. It's simply a state without state tax. Perhaps you've heard of Florida and Nevada, same thing. Incorporating in such a state does not hide income from the government. It is all declared on the IRS annual accounts by law. The fact a few dollars isn't taxed in the registered state is meaningless, it will be taxed were the corp operates. Any properties are taxed by the local city/county. The reason Delaware was popular (it isn't now), was simply because they would not give out re
Re: (Score:2)
I believe they also had some favorable regulations for banking/lending institutions for quite a while. I'm not sure if they still do. You see a bunch of credit card companies out of there - as well as insurance. I want to say that there were favorable laws for insurance as well but that might actually just be because of the process of incorporating there.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Senior UK Tory donors and the British PM's own dad are people the US doesn't like?
Re: (Score:2)
Really, no Americans [bbc.com]?
Anyway, meanwhile in Iceland... [caucus99percent.com]
Re: (Score:2)
No Americans THAT ACTUALLY MATTER...US Senators? US Pollys? US Company CEOs? US Banking execs? Where are they in this list?....and you tell me there is no censorship in the US media.
Re: (Score:3)
No Americans THAT ACTUALLY MATTER...US Senators? US Pollys? US Company CEOs? US Banking execs? Where are they in this list?
They are not on the list because in America it is PERFECTLY LEGAL to use your influence to get rich. So there is no need to hide the wealth. Senators collect money from lobbyists, and use the revolving door to become lobbyists. American CEOs and bankers make far more than their European counterparts, mostly in leveraged stock options. There is no need to hide the money, since is is all above board.
Re: (Score:2)
My understanding is that the Americans will be released in a separate list.
Re: (Score:2)
At your link, my translator turns "Helvítis Fokking Fokk!" into "Fucking Hell Jib!" The first two words, I've got. But, what's jib in this context? Well, other than a nautical term? It is, IIRC, a type of sail. I guess that could be a throwback to the days of longboats. I dunno... But, at any rate, I tried the mighty Google and it's not being all that helpful.
Re: (Score:1)
That's simply not true. The first name outed was a famous get-rich-quick female from the US. She paid $30,000 to set up a shell company using a fake owner (90 year old man in the UK), and paid $10,000pa thereafter. Whenever she wants access to her illegal monies, it is withdrawn under his name but passed to her. Yes, it is illegal. All US citizens and resident aliens have to declare all bank accounts (routing/sort-code, acc#) with their respective balances, regardless of where they are around the world, to
Re: (Score:2)
Uh, I am a US citizen, and I have never declared my bank account information to the IRS - except to tell them where to send my refund deposit. Now, if you have an account that pays interest (which hardly any checking accounts do these days) you have to declare the interest income, but all you do is
Re: (Score:2)
Your bank does, silly.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Putin, Xi, and some no name american chick
Neither Putin nor Xi were on the list. You're basically white noise.
Re: (Score:1)
From what I read this morning, it may be because the U.S. has a separate tax agreement with Panama. So U.S. citizens may not have been able to hide stuff there as readily as people in other countries.
Remember, we... *ahem*... "liberated" them from their president in the late 1980's. I'm sure we got them to make all kinds of agreements while we occupied the country.
Offered a sea change (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
They speak of corruption, but in reality, when faced with it, in their families, they do nothing
How do you know? It is still very early days - only a few names have been reported in the press so far, out of several million documents. Right now they are probably busy trying to assess any damage and figure out how to handle it, which I suggest anybody in a similar situation would be sensible to do, whether they are individuals, institutions or governments. I hope these revelations will result in a major clean-up of corruption everywhere. Perhaps I'm too naive, but one can hope.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The one thing that is going to happen is action against tax shelters. This is a big deal in Britain, because some of the most often used tax shelters are British overseas dependencies (colonies). Britain has long resisted forcing reforms because for these dependencies, their financial status is a significant part of their economy. But now, I think, reform will become inevitable. Probably not enough to completely eliminate tax shelters, but, as with Swiss bank reforms, it is steadily narrowing the means by w
self censoring also aplies (Score:2)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Consortium_of_Investigative_Journalists
just see who funds the icij then talk about china censoring results.
Hint: it's the us gov plus many big interests groups.
Shocking!
Re: (Score:3)
I had a look at your link. I guess you didn't want people to do that, hence you didn't (or can't) make it an actual link with an anchor tag. But yeah. I looked at your link and you're lying.
For anyone who cares, this [publicintegrity.org] is the list of donors.
C'mon, Comrades! (Score:2)
Falling Down (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
You poseurs vote for the same D / R people in ever election.
People do change. Elect a nice guy and he becomes an asshole.
That is a human nature and there is not much to do about that.
See Stanford experiment: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re:Hmmm.... (Score:5, Informative)
The REAL problem with the Panama Papers is that they were turned over to the mainstream media outlets, who have ONLY published dirt on people who we already knew were dirty. And people are noticing:
http://www.politico.com/agenda/story/2016/04/the-panama-papers-where-are-the-americans-000083 [politico.com]
Here's a "partial list" of people named in the Panama Papers:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_named_in_the_Panama_Papers [wikipedia.org]
This article is not even findable via Google no matter how specific you are with the search terms:
http://undergroundreporter.org/something-oddly-missing-from-largest-leak-since-snowden/ [undergroundreporter.org]
Now, I know this is going to sound like conspiracy theory talk, but who benefits from this leak? Western power brokers, that's who. Their foreign contemporaries are all now embattled, especially that Icelandic guy who had the nerve to *gasp* allow the banks to fail after the GFC. What fucking cheek!
Re: (Score:1)
A post from lower down:
"dig deeper you american idiots. While I have no love for the people targeted by this *leak*, for the most part the people targeted are enemies of the US state and the American banking cartel: Putin, Chinese dudes, that dude from Iceland whose country had the balls to default on the banks, and the list goes on. Then you have the lack of information actually released (wake me when I can get the torrent on the pirate bay) - thus nothing was actually *released*. And that this information
Oh my Godwin (Score:3)
This is the logical equivalent of "Well, the Americans don't seem to like Hitler, soooo...."
Re: (Score:2)
actually you can download the data.
Same page that lets you do a search of the data by name, company, country, etc.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Including those named in the Unaoil scandal, which has been conveniently pushed off the front pages.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Obama lectures us like a pious college professor about inequality/Islam and yet he stashes his loot in off shore banks.
Obama hasn't earned Big Money yet. You don't earn a lot when you are the president of the United States. You make Big Money after your terms by giving talks starting at $100,000 per hour, and peddling influence. Hell, next year, Obama could offer a cup of his piss or shit on eBay and folks would bid for it.
I bet Hillary does the same shit
Being that she was cozy with Wall Street types . . . that's pretty much a given. Her customers are used to doing Panama deals.
Re: (Score:2)
I was about to slam the AC for this one, then Googled it myself:
http://www.washingtontimes.com... [washingtontimes.com]
Though I doubt Hillary had anything to do with this issue, it does make her look bad as the ultimate manager of the department.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm pretty old. I think they're pulling your chain. The only thing I can remember is a paper company by that name. I'm not sure if they were bought out by IP or GP, however. I'm mostly familiar with IP and GP, I've bought land from both of their remaining entities.
Re:Hmmm.... (Score:4, Insightful)
>China has been surprisingly open WRT to the Panama Papers
What are you talking about? This is an article about China censoring those papers. That is kind of the opposite of being "surprisingly open".
Re: (Score:3)
Ever heard the term "obvious troll is obvious"?
Re:Hmmm.... (Score:5, Informative)
Really? Do a google search on "Panama Papers". Hell, it even has a wikipedia page on them. And no one stopping you from going to Guardian and reading them. I suspect the U.S. doesn't give a flying rat's ass about them. Not that many Americans had accounts with the Panamanian firm, those that do mainly seem to have them for purchasing property in L. America. Also, the U.S. has rather lax laws, so there was no need to go to Panama.
There is speculation that the U.S.'s own Panama, Delaware, will have to open up but I have my doubts. Their financial cesspool of legislation makes a lot of money for the state. Many companies incorporate there because of their lax laws. They are also the kingpin in bankruptcies...case in point, SCO, but they are small potatoes to what's really going on there.
Re: (Score:3)
I suspect the U.S. doesn't give a flying rat's ass about them.
Either that or censorship over here doesn't operate in the blatant, simplistic fashion that it does in China.
Re: (Score:1)
"no one stopping you from going to Guardian and reading them" ... the Panama Papers?? Really? The public can read them all?
Re: (Score:2)
A shame? You look at it wrong. Not at all - that was a brilliant bit of baiting. You might even say that the AC is a Master Baiter.
Trolls are gonna troll. I appreciate reading the replies to a good troll. Sometimes they make you think. Sometimes they're even right. Hell, sometimes it's the right thing to do.
Re: (Score:2)