Many eager to smear Thai banks and others in relation
to the FinCEN Files quickly repeated the ICIJ’s accusations. None looked
into its Soros and Ford Foundation-funded background,
motives, or even the veracity of its supposed claims.
September 23, 2020 (Tony Cartalucci – ATN) – The Bangkok Post in its article,
” Thai banks probed over ‘dirty money'” made sure to repeat so-far
unfounded accusations made against several of Thailand’s major banks,
based on what the article itself admitted was an “International
Consortium of Investigative Journalists’ report referring to alleged leaked files from the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) of the US.”
the Bangkok Post and other anti-government opportunists failed to do
was investigate the “International Consortium of Investigative
Journalists” (ICIJ) itself, its funding, and thus its possible motives
for making its most recent and otherwise baseless accusations.
No Evidence of Criminality, Just Transactions ICIJ Claims are “Suspicious”
FinCEN Files source documents aren’t even fully provided by ICIJ – only
an alleged selection picked by ICIJ itself. The alleged data presented
on ICIJ’s website provides no information about the transactions beside
how much money was transferred and from where to where, not even by
whom. The handpicked documents released by ICIJ are “Suspicious Activity
Reports” or SARs.
ICIJ defines these, claiming (emphasis added):
A suspicious activity report is a document filed to U.S. authorities when a bank or other financial institution observes a transaction that seems suspicious. A SAR is not an accusation
but a way to alert government regulators and law enforcement to
irregular or possibly criminal activity. SARs are strictly confidential –
so secret that banks aren’t allowed to publicly confirm their
Thus, ICIJ is publishing the names of
people and businesses who have not even been accused let alone convicted
of any wrongdoing, and simply flagged as “suspicious.”
appears to be claims by the ICIJ – and those repeating its claims – that
some banks “turned a blind eye” to allegedly suspicious behavior – but
this only means they didn’t file SARs with the US government.
creating “leaks” the Western corporate media can now manipulate to
smear virtually any state, bank, as well as anyone appearing in
disclosed SARs made public by ICIJ, there appears to be little other
purpose for ICIJ’s “FinCEN Files” project – except perhaps attempting to
sell the idea that all banks, worldwide, are accountable to the US
Finally, ICIJ links its FinCEN Files project to
allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 elections – allegations
of interference that after 2 years of investigation were proven baseless
– only further undermining ICIJ’s credibility and revealing its
ICJI’s Partners and Sponsors Explain Much
A cursory look at ICIJ’s “media partners”
reveals what is simply the Western corporate media including British
state media outlet the BBC, the New York Times, the Washington Post, CBC
Canada, and many more notorious for their role in advancing Western
interests around the globe almost entirely in contradiction to actual
journalism, fact, or truth.
ICIJ’s financial sponsors also read as a “who’s who” of Western “soft power.” They include convicted financial criminal George Soros’
Open Society Foundation and the Ford Foundation – a funding mechanism
the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) itself admits it has partnered
On the CIA’s own official website in a post titled, “The Cultural Cold War: The CIA and the World of Arts and Letters ,” it admits:
the CIA worked with existing institutions, such as the Ford Foundation
and the Rockefeller Foundation, and established numerous “bogus”
foundations to “hide” its funding of the Congress for Cultural Freedom
and its other covert activities.
While the passage
refers to a specific program the CIA was involved in, the fact that the
Ford Foundation willingly abetted the CIA and that it was admitted the
US government uses various fronts to hide funding has serious
implications regarding ICIJ’s current activities.
content on ICIJ’s website appears to be partial disclosures of
information incriminating of Western interets – much of it is not and
almost all of it is impossible to verify. This is done to create public
confidence and the illusion of legitimacy while in reality ICIJ’s main
purpose is spreading false information politically beneficial to the
United States and its allies. The ICIJ is one of several manufactured
The ICIJ’s “investigations”
almost exclusively targets of Washington’s interests. For example it has
a “China Cables” section dedicated to spreading propaganda about China
and its security operations in Xinjiang specifically.
“investigation” into money laundering appears to attempt to sell the
necessity of strengthening and policing the Wall Street-London dominated
global monetary system quickly being circumvented and replaced as more
nations seek to overcome growing numbers of US sanctions.
One post on the ICIJ’s website even claims, “Global banks defy U.S.
crackdowns by serving oligarchs, criminals and terrorists,” as if the US
isn’t the global center of oligarchical criminality and terrorism.
ICIJ’s “report” conveniently comes out and is quickly leveraged against Thailand at the “height” of Thai
anti-government protests – whose core leadership and organizations are
entirely funded by the US government, Open Society, as well as the Ford
Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation – and just so happens to
target major Thai banks is a repeated tactic seen in previous US-backed
regime change operations.
the Bangkok Post and other Western-linked media organizations
uncritically reported the ICIJ’s claims without even providing basic
information to readers about its funding or media partners, only further
Thailand’s response has been to “look into
the claims,” noting that they are just that – mere claims from allegedly
leaked documents originating from within the US government’s Financial
Crimes Enforcement Network.
Also notably suspicious is that while
Julian Assange faces the possibility of life in jail for his role in
Wikileaks and exposing Western crimes against humanity, there appears to
be no interest at all in finding the source of leaks being supplied to
Wikileaks counter-operations like ICIJ whose work solely benefits the
West and its many global interventions. In other words, these are most
likely not leaks at all, but deliberate disclosures made to appear as
leaks, and selected specifically because their timely utility for US