wsj | World War II history haunts attempts to seize "immobilized" Russian assets, 28 Apr blame Berlin

[...]
Within the G-7, a complicated compromise may be starting to emerge. The U.S. has proposed that the group front-load [sic] 10 years of profits—essentially interest payments on matured assets [sic]—from the frozen funds. That money would act as collateral for a bond issued by a special-purpose vehicle [encore!] set up by the G-7 to raise money for Ukraine. G-7 countries would guarantee [Ukraine'] debt [to G-7 "investors"].

< wipes tears >

Europeans have their own plan to use the interest [sic] generated by frozen Russian assets [sic] to pay for weapons and reconstruction for Ukraine. That is likely to go ahead soon, although EU officials say Europe could join the U.S. plan in 2025. Discussions are still at an early stage.
[...]
Initially, U.S. officials also worried that confiscating [sic] Russian assets could backfire against Washington and allies such as Israel [?!]. The U.S. has since argued that only directly affected countries, such as Ukraine's main backers [sic], whose security is threatened and who are paying for < wipes tears > some of Kyiv's defense, would be < wipes tears > entitled to confiscate ["seized"?] assets.

Bart Szewczyk [PhD], an associate [hahaha] at U.S. law firm Covington who previously advised the European Commission and worked at the ICJ, said that Berlin's concerns about setting a precedent for reparations cases were unwarranted. "The logic behind countermeasures [sic] clearly applies only to current and ongoing violations of international law, rather than those that occurred 80 years ago," he said.

alrighty then. Isn't about time to hint, if not disclose, Fortune 500 eNTiTiEs associated with equities, bonds, SPACs, and PIPES freezing in Russia's Euroclear accounts? Repatriation has a WARTIME ring to it.