So the BPL is juicing it up, who new?

[Sven Mischkies]

No thread yet? Is everybody asleep at the wheel or too shocked? ;)


Ciao,
SM
--
91st Minute in the relegation play off:
KSC 1 - 0 HSV. HSV must score or or gets relegated.
"I'll shoot" - Rafael van der Vaart to Marcelo Diaz
"Yeah! Tomorrow, my friend – tomorrow!" - Marcelo Diaz

[alka...@hotmail.com]

On Sunday, April 3, 2016 at 2:21:42 PM UTC-4, Sven Mischkies wrote:
> No thread yet? Is everybody asleep at the wheel or too shocked? ;)
>

What do you mean? Leicester?

[Sven Mischkies]

The Sunday Times and WDR have pieces about it, and other sources picked
up on it.

[jvazquez]

But The Guardian comes to the rescue with the Mossack Fonseca Panama papers scandal hehe..

http://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/apr/03/panama-papers-money-hidden-offshore

[PearsfromanElm]

On 4/04/2016 5:59 AM, jvazquez wrote:
>
> But The Guardian comes to the rescue with the Mossack Fonseca Panama papers scandal hehe..
>
> http://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/apr/03/panama-papers-money-hidden-offshore

You mean:

http://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/apr/03/leaked-papers-fifa-ethics-committee-credibility-crisis-juan-pedro-damiani-eugenio-figueredo


--
"In the frigid football at the end of the century, which detests defeat
and forbids all fun, that man was one of the few who proved that fantasy
can be efficient."

~Galeano on Maradona

[jvazquez]

El domingo, 3 de abril de 2016, 16:23:31 (UTC-4:30), PearsfromanElm escribió:
> On 4/04/2016 5:59 AM, jvazquez wrote:
> >
> > But The Guardian comes to the rescue with the Mossack Fonseca Panama papers scandal hehe..
> >
> > http://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/apr/03/panama-papers-money-hidden-offshore
>
> You mean:
>
> http://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/apr/03/leaked-papers-fifa-ethics-committee-credibility-crisis-juan-pedro-damiani-eugenio-figueredo
>

Both.

The timing of the The Guardian bringing out the Panamanian scandal was very convenient to make the drug scandal pale.

Moreover, The Guardian minimizes the drug affaire quoting the clubs' denials first as the important news and relegating the denounce to the background.

[Abubakr]

Sorry, I'm not following, there's a drugs scandal?

[Sven Mischkies]

Abubakr <delta...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Sorry, I'm not following, there's a drugs scandal?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=permier+league+doping

At the moment most links will be about the clubs denying everything.

[Abubakr]

On Monday, 4 April 2016 09:02:09 UTC+10, Sven Mischkies wrote:
> Abubakr <delta...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Sorry, I'm not following, there's a drugs scandal?
>
>
> http://lmgtfy.com/?q=permier+league+doping

Thanks.

> At the moment most links will be about the clubs denying everything.

Naturally.

[Insane Ranter]

If everyone is doing it who cares? If its not against the rules who cares?

[Bruce D. Scott]

Sven Mischkies <hs...@der-ball-ist-rund.net> wrote:

> At the moment most links will be about the clubs denying everything.

I'm more interested in the Olympic sport angle since UK media have been
so high and mighty against Russia (and also Kenya).

Will it be bigger than the Balco scandal in the US?

--
ciao,
Bruce

drift wave turbulence: http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/

[jvazquez]

Scandaltoyourservice Inc. (Confidential. FYEO)

Many years ago we chartered a secret enterprise for selling tailor made scandals.

Say, you are a politician or a head of state or the president of a sport organization, club, federation or the director of a big firm or a presidential candidate or a pederast priest, and you are in real deep trouble...

We can get you out of your misery by confectioning an ad-hoc custom made scandal to make your problems seem trivial to public opinion, prosecutors, the law, the ONU, etc.

Say, you are the owner of a newspaper chain, a news media conglomerate and your rival news media conglomerate comes out with a huge piece of news, for example, a sort of Bernie Madoff scandal.

We have a reserve and kept up to date a bank of scandals to beat your opponents.

We invent whistleblowers, false witnesses, bogus hackers, hoaxes, fake sex tapes and fictitious nude pics, bogus evidence, phony data breaches, counterfeit results of doping tests, forged e-mails, etc.

You pay as when you get out of your problem.

CALL NOW!!!

0 800 SCANDAL

(HEY, FBI: THIS IS A JOKE. FOR THE RECORD).

[alka...@hotmail.com]

On Sunday, April 3, 2016 at 7:02:09 PM UTC-4, Sven Mischkies wrote:
> Abubakr <delta...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Sorry, I'm not following, there's a drugs scandal?
>
>
> http://lmgtfy.com/?q=permier+league+doping

LMGTFY......LMAO!

[alka...@hotmail.com]

On Sunday, April 3, 2016 at 5:18:25 PM UTC-4, jvazquez wrote:
> El domingo, 3 de abril de 2016, 16:23:31 (UTC-4:30), PearsfromanElm escribió:
> > On 4/04/2016 5:59 AM, jvazquez wrote:
> > >
> > > But The Guardian comes to the rescue with the Mossack Fonseca Panama papers scandal hehe..
> > >
> > > http://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/apr/03/panama-papers-money-hidden-offshore
> >
> > You mean:
> >
> > http://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/apr/03/leaked-papers-fifa-ethics-committee-credibility-crisis-juan-pedro-damiani-eugenio-figueredo
> >
>
> Both.
>
> The timing of the The Guardian bringing out the Panamanian scandal was very convenient to make the drug scandal pale.

But so is every other major news source. Or are you saying that Guardian actually "broke" the story?

[Sven Mischkies]

Bruce D. Scott <b...@g01.itm.rzg.mpg.de> wrote:

> Sven Mischkies <hs...@der-ball-ist-rund.net> wrote:
>
> > At the moment most links will be about the clubs denying everything.
>
> I'm more interested in the Olympic sport angle since UK media have been
> so high and mighty against Russia (and also Kenya).

It was always funny to see them glow in the shine of cycling medals.
There is only one way this can end.

[jvazquez]

I actually don't know. I was speculating.

To be fair, I first read the news in the Spanish writing-speaking press and everything was about the drug scandal, then went to see The Guardian and found a completely different news panorama.

Knowing that the drug scandal was published first by The Sunday Times (couldn't had access to it because I am not a subscriber) I assumed that it was the leading news on it. I can't know if that is true.

My theory of conspiracy is only a possibility. But, then, you find that all the newspapers are biased, although all of them simulate to be balanced.

You only learn this after some many years.

***I think you learn the important things of life when they are no longer of use to you.***

I still consider The Guardian as a good paper, although lately they have become a bit yellow for my taste and also with too many news from the USA. If I want to read news from the USA I go to the New York Times or the Washington Post, etc.

[jvazquez]

El domingo, 3 de abril de 2016, 20:48:12 (UTC-4:30), Insane Ranter escribió:
> If everyone is doing it who cares? If its not against the rules who cares?

You are right.

I think there should be a deregulation of drugs in sports.

[jvazquez]

I forgot to add a ;-)

[jvazquez]

El lunes, 4 de abril de 2016, 12:49:31 (UTC-4:30), jvazquez escribió:
> > But so is every other major news source. Or are you saying that Guardian actually "broke" the story?
>
> I actually don't know. I was speculating.
>
> To be fair, I first read the news in the Spanish writing-speaking press and everything was about the drug scandal, then went to see The Guardian and found a completely different news panorama.
>
> Knowing that the drug scandal was published first by The Sunday Times (couldn't had access to it because I am not a subscriber) I assumed that it was the leading news on it. I can't know if that is true.
>
> My theory of conspiracy is only a possibility. But, then, you find that all the newspapers are biased, although all of them simulate to be balanced.
>
> You only learn this after some many years.
>
> ***I think you learn the important things of life when they are no longer of use to you.***
>
> I still consider The Guardian as a good paper, although lately they have become a bit yellow for my taste and also with too many news from the USA. If I want to read news from the USA I go to the New York Times or the Washington Post, etc.

There is the possibility of someone, interested in minimizing the drug scandal, fabricated a new scandal to that effect and fed it to The Guardian, BBC and other newspapers and media.

But I would have to prove it, and I have no proofs.

[Sven Mischkies]

jvazquez <jvaz...@semavenca.com> wrote:

> There is the possibility of someone, interested in minimizing the drug
> scandal, fabricated a new scandal to that effect and fed it to The
> Guardian, BBC and other newspapers and media.
>
> But I would have to prove it, and I have no proofs.

Sure, someone created several terabytes of data incriminating the great
and the good and funnelled this - websites ready - to German and
interational press just to save Britain from a possible drug scandal. ;)

[Sven Mischkies]

jvazquez <jvaz...@semavenca.com> wrote:

> I actually don't know. I was speculating.

The news was broken here:

https://panamapapers.icij.org/

And here:

http://panamapapers.sueddeutsche.de/en/

> To be fair, I first read the news in the Spanish writing-speaking press
>and everything was about the drug scandal, then went to see The
>Guardian and found a completely different news panorama.

Well, dunno about South America, but the panama papers are undoubtedly
magnitudes bigger than the utterings of some wannabe doc in London.

German newspapers don't give a shit about the drug story either, it's
all about people hiding money, which people and what for that dominates
(like nothing else dominated in a while, it may be bigger than the
migration crisis and the Greek bailout in the last two years)


> My theory of conspiracy is ...


...stupid. :P

[jvazquez]

El lunes, 4 de abril de 2016, 18:26:03 (UTC-4:30), Sven Mischkies escribió:
>
>
> ...stupid. :P
>
Ea, ea, sin ofender, eh?

;-)

[jvazquez]

El lunes, 4 de abril de 2016, 18:26:03 (UTC-4:30), Sven Mischkies escribió:

> jvazquez <jvaz...@semavenca.com> wrote:
>
> > I actually don't know. I was speculating.
>
>
> The news was broken here:
>
> https://panamapapers.icij.org/
>
> And here:
>
> http://panamapapers.sueddeutsche.de/en/
>
>

Interesting info.

The Panamanian papers as well as that of Dr. Bonar.

With the Panamanian affair they going clearly after Putin.

The FIFA Ethics Committee, Messi, the Austrian Banks and the Icelandic PM are collateral effects.

Why I say they go for Putin? Because it is an empirical fact he is the biggest fish on the net.

I have grown to learn that everybody has an agenda.

We live in a world of conspiracies: the FIFA scandal, the Lance Amstrong case, the Sandro Rosell-Neymar scandal, the Russian enhancing drugs scandal, the Spanish Operacion Puerto and Eufemiano Fuentes, etc. And those are the ones which have come out of obscurity. They say that when you see a cockroach in your kitchen, there are hundreds.

Around here it has been natural that a scandal is killed for a more recent scandal.

A sophisticated modus operandi could be to keep a scandal in reserve to bring it out at the correct time. I am not saying it is a fact, but it is a possibility.

What made an otherwise obscure doctor, to come out of the blue, with those revelations about top footballers in England?

What made an otherwise unknown journalists organization, to come out of the blue, with those terabytes of sensitive documents on the wealthy and rich politicians, banks, etc.?
Are they going against all the money launderers? Or they make a selection and excise a selected few in disposition to pay?

How it is possible that everybody knows that there are fiscal havens and nobody makes a move against those? Panama, Cayman Islands, Andorra, Bahamas, Belize, the Channel Islands, Hong Kong, the Isle of Man, the Cook Islands, Mauritius, Lichtenstein, Monaco, Switzerland and St. Kitts and Nevis...

I have reached a point in which I don't even believe in Mother Teresa of Calcutta.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/mother-teresa-why-the-catholic-missionary-is-still-no-saint-to-her-critics-a6778906.html

[jvazquez]

Actually, the likelihood of The Guardian and BBC trying to minimize a British drug scandal is forfeited as the Panamanian papers brought out a British (among many others) money laundering or tax evasion scandal.

Cameron's dad, Tory MP's, six peers and dozens of party donors:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/04/panama-papers-tax-haven-used-by-politicians-and-celebrities/

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/04/panama-papers-tax-haven-used-by-politicians-and-celebrities/

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/david-cameron-father-ian-cameron-blairmore-holdings-panama-papers-offshore-tax-haven-fund-leak-a6967671.html

http://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/apr/04/panama-papers-david-cameron-father-tax-bahamas

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-cameron-father-and-senior-tory-figures-named-in-panama-papers-leak-a6967116.html

I believe these whistle-blower people and the press bid their time to make more revelations step by step to keep selling papers on the one hand, and wait for people to pronounce themselves outraged and then embarrass them with accusations about their own involvement.

Now we have Putin friends, Cameron's dad, Macri, Messi, Kirchner's friends, Gunnlaugsson, Poroshenko, Marine Le Pen, al-Saud, Allawi, Ivanishvili, al-Ragheb, al-Thani 1, al-Thani 2, al-Mirghani, al-Nahyan, Lazarenko, Arias Cañete, etc.

And some press take advantage of the confusion to name political rivals in the scandal, without confirmation, just to embarrass people or sell papers or both.

Let's wait and see, who are the next ones:

hehe

[jvazquez]

This is what I am speaking about:

Spanish monarchic and PP daily newspaper ABC come out conveniently with this piece of news of Chavez financing Podemos in Spain, trying to protect PP Arias Cañete on his involvement in the Panama papers.

http://www.abc.es/

Chávez pagó 7 millones de euros para «crear en España fuerzas políticas bolivarianas»

(Chavez paid 7 million Euros to create in Spain "Bolivarian political forces").

http://www.abc.es/espana/abci-chavez-pago-7-millones-euros-para-crear-espana-fuerzas-politicas-bolivarianas-201604050224_noticia.html

Sorry, no English version.

[Sven Mischkies]

jvazquez <jvaz...@semavenca.com> wrote:

> I believe these whistle-blower people and the press bid their time to make

> more revelations step by step to keep for selling papers on the one hand,

> and wait for people to pronounce themselves outraged and then embarrass
> them with accusations about their own involvement.

The opposite more likely - find some basics and big names to start with,
then publish (or others will publish before you). It is more than 11 TB
of data - This will take years to unravel.


> hehe


Indeed.

[jvazquez]

El martes, 5 de abril de 2016, 11:24:58 (UTC-4:30), Sven Mischkies escribió:
> jvazquez <jvaz...@semavenca.com> wrote:
>
> > I believe these whistle-blower people and the press bid their time to make
> > more revelations step by step to keep for selling papers on the one hand,
> > and wait for people to pronounce themselves outraged and then embarrass
> > them with accusations about their own involvement.
>
>
> The opposite more likely - find some basics and big names to start with,
> then publish (or others will publish before you). It is more than 11 TB
> of data - This will take years to unravel.
>
>

Any new piece of news about the drug scandal?

I have been looking and can't find anything ;-)

[jvazquez]

> >
>
> Any new piece of news about the drug scandal?
>
> I have been looking and can't find anything ;-)

It's been said that the daily La Nacion from Buenos Aires had the information of the Panama Papers before the Argentinean election which took Macri to the Casa Rosada, but chose not to publish it ;-)

[jvazquez]

Suppose that "Dan Stevens, drugs-cheat amateur cyclist ... at the centre of explosive new claims that a doctor illegally treated 150 elite sportsmen, including Premier League footballers" and Dr. Bonar were paid by Putin, through one of his cronies, to take revenge of British denounces of Russian drugs cheating (fiction).

Follow the money. I have no means nor the will to do it. It could be dangerous, btw.

The Spanish press echoed the drug scandal in revenge for past suggestions of Spanish drugs cheating denounced by the British press (fiction).

The Guardian and the BBC had knowledge of the Panama Papers before Sunday, maybe months before. (this is a fact, I quote The Guardian: "The ICIJ then shared them with a large network of international partners, including the Guardian and the BBC"), but chose to reveal them on Sunday at the same time (fact) to silence the drug scandal, among other things (fiction). It would not be the only goal of the Panama Papers.

Assange-Wikileaks, possibly out of jealously, say (fact) that the group of journalists ICIJ are financed by the USA through USAID, according to Le Monde, and are at the service of USA and against Putin.

http://www.lemonde.fr/evasion-fiscale/article/2016/04/06/panama-papers-passe-d-armes-entre-wikileaks-et-le-consortium-international-de-journalistes_4897082_4862750.html

Le compte Twitter de WikiLeaks a critiqué, mardi 5 avril dans la soirée, les premières révélations du Consortium international de journalistes d'investigation (ICIJ, dont le Monde est partenaire), l'accusant à demi-mot deservir les intérêts des Etats-Unis en s'attaquant à l'entourage de Vladimir Poutine.

<< L'attaque contre Poutine a été écrite par l'OCCRP, un organisme qui cible la Russie et les anciennes républiques soviétiques et qui est financé par l'USAID et George Soros >>, écrit WikiLeaks. Tout en reconnaissant que l'OCCRP (pour Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project - << Projet de reportage sur le crime organisé et la corruption >>) << fait parfois du bon travail >>, WikiLeaks estime que << le fait que les Etats-Unis financent directement les attaques #panamapapers contre Poutine mine sa crédibilité >>.

The Twitter account of WikiLeaks criticized, Tuesday, April 5 in the evening, the first revelations of the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ, the World is a partner), accusing them of serving the interests of the United States by attacking the entourage of Vladimir Putin.

"The attack against Putin was written by OCCRP, an organization that targets Russia and the former Soviet republics and is funded by USAID and George Soros," wrote WikiLeaks. While acknowledging that the OCCRP (for Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project - "Draft report on organized crime and corruption") "sometimes does good work," WikiLeaks said that "the fact that the United States directly fund #panamapapers the attacks against Putin undermines his credibility. "

But Assange could be on the Putin's payroll (fiction).

These are only suggestions and hypothesis. It is plausible.

[BTW, I was also thinking also that scandals are usually break on Mondays, but this one coming from a Sunday paper, of course came out a Sunday].

[Benny]

On 04/04/2016 18:33, jvazquez wrote:
>
> There is the possibility of someone, interested in minimizing the drug scandal, fabricated a new scandal to that effect and fed it to The Guardian, BBC and other newspapers and media.
>
> But I would have to prove it, and I have no proofs.

Two weeks on I've heard very little about this so called scandal, it's
been dismissed by the mainstream media. They portray it as a non story.

[Chagney Hunt]

It didn't help that the guy to blew the whistle (Bonar) turned out to be not quite credible a witness.

I'm sure there are individuals flirting (or more) with performance enhancing drugs, but systematic at club or national level (like Russia)?

[jvazquez]

Even the Panama papers have lost some gas.

[alka...@hotmail.com]

On Friday, April 15, 2016 at 12:14:26 PM UTC-4, jvazquez wrote:
> Even the Panama papers have lost some gas.

I think people often forget that media is big business driven primarily by profit motive and much less on any sense of social justice.

The Guardian recently had a piece on why they gave the Paris and Brussels attacks days/weeks of coverage while the Lahore attacks a few weeks back (75 dead, including many children) was off the front page within a day or two. The short answer was that their web analytics showed that news stories about terrorism in the third world generated barely any interest among its readers, and focusing on those will hurt their bottom line.

Corruption amongst the super rich is not something that keeps viewers riveted to their TVs or news sites day after day - time to move on to the new juicy stories.

[Chagney Hunt]

On Friday, April 15, 2016 at 12:14:26 PM UTC-4, jvazquez wrote:

> Even the Panama papers have lost some gas.

No it's not. The sheer amount of data will take years to go through and study.

[Benny]

On 15/04/2016 16:59, Chagney Hunt wrote:

> It didn't help that the guy to blew the whistle (Bonar) turned out to be not quite credible a witness.
>
> I'm sure there are individuals flirting (or more) with performance enhancing drugs, but systematic at club or national level (like Russia)?

I doubt it's systematic. Clubs who maintain insane levels of stamina
have to be questioned. It's not surprising Lippi's Juve team were
involved in an ugly scandal or under drug cheat Guardiola, Barcelona
suddenly became middle distance runners. Teams that play like that are
either on the gas or suffer lots of injuries e.g. Dortmund. Yes some
people have great stamina but to suddenly develop great stamina
overnight? Not by legit means.

[jvazquez]

Scandal vs scandal or big news vs big news to distract attention:

Now we have the revelations that Brexit vote was a "silver lining" to distract the public from the Chilcot report.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/brexits-silver-lining-was-that-it-covered-up-chilcot-report-admitted-straw-7zdmln7h8

Brexit’s silver lining was that it covered up Chilcot report, admitted Straw

Jack Straw, foreign secretary in Tony Blair’s government at the time of the invasion in 2003, said in an email to Colin Powell, the former US Secretary of State, that the “only silver lining of Brexit is that it will reduce medium-term attention on Chilcot — though it will not stop the day of publication being uncomfortable”.


But we have no evidence that the Brexit referendum was devised as a tool against the Chilcot Report.

[Benny]

On 25/09/2016 10:23, jvazquez wrote:
>
> Scandal vs scandal or big news vs big news to distract attention:
>
> Now we have the revelations that Brexit vote was a "silver lining" to distract the public from the Chilcot report.
>
> http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/brexits-silver-lining-was-that-it-covered-up-chilcot-report-admitted-straw-7zdmln7h8
>
> Brexit’s silver lining was that it covered up Chilcot report, admitted Straw
>
> Jack Straw, foreign secretary in Tony Blair’s government at the time of the invasion in 2003, said in an email to Colin Powell, the former US Secretary of State, that the “only silver
> lining of Brexit is that it will reduce medium-term attention on
Chilcot — though it will not stop the day of publication being
uncomfortable”.

The report isn't going to reveal anything we don't already now and the
deaths of upto 2 million civilians mean little to an increasingly
jingoistic public who have little empathy with anyone other than white,
British people. Yes, Brexit lessened the impact of the report but what
it also exposed the deep seated racism still prevalent in millions of
people and forced the gutter press to confront the racism that they have
fostered, not that they care.