Home » Archives by category » News » Politics (Page 110)
Factory slump and Greek debts bring double dip closer

Weak manufacturing data reported across Europe and far east, while Athens warns it is likely to miss targets on cutting deficit A dramatic slowdown in manufacturing output across Europe and Greece’s failure to control public spending fuelled fears on Monday that the continent stands on the edge of a double-dip recession that could ripple across to the US and Asia. European stock markets fell sharply after France and Germany joined Spain and Italy on the sick list of manufacturing nations, undermined by weak demand and a lack of business and consumer confidence. Measures of manufacturing activity in China and the far east also showed a weakness that unnerved investors, sending the FTSE 100 back below the 5,000 mark at one stage and leaving all the major European stock markets in the red. Markit’s closely watched eurozone-wide manufacturing purchasing managers index (PMI), which gauges changes in the activity of thousands of factories in the countries that share the euro, fell to a final reading of 48.5 in September from 49 in August. A figure below 50 indicates that the sector is contracting. French manufacturing was especially badly hit, with Spain and Ireland. A survey of British manufacturers found a decline since the summer had been reversed in September, giving the chancellor, George Osborne, a little autumn cheer . However, with little optimism among businesses, and export orders suffering a significant drop, the sector was unlikely to support growth in the wider economy or create jobs. The US proved more resilient, with manufacturing orders and employment up, adding to the recent rise in the value of the dollar and US government bonds. Economists said the gathering storm in the eurozone was the biggest factor weighing on the UK and should give Osborne some pause for thought. The chancellor, speaking in Manchester at the Conservative party conference , said he recognised the significance of the problem and would be pressing his message for action at a series of EU meetings in the coming weeks. He said: “Britain is not immune to all this instability. Indeed, the resolution of the eurozone debt crisis is the single biggest boost to confidence that could happen to the British economy this autumn. “They’ve got to get out and fix their roof, even though it’s already pouring with rain,” Osborne said. Greece warned over the weekend that it would struggle to contain its ballooning debts this year and next, adding pressure on Brussels to agree a package of measures capable of funding Athens – and possibly several other eurozone countries should they be forced to tap bailout funds. Jonathan Loynes, chief European economist at Capital Economics, said the European Central Bank must share the blame for Europe’s struggling manufacturing sector. He said the ECB had taken up arms against inflation in a “phoney war” when a lack of growth outside a core of strong economies was the key problem. “There was a view that all the troubles in Greece, Spain and Portugal would not affect the major economies, but that is clearly no longer the case. Now the eurozone is slipping into recession, which means that consensus expectations are way too optimistic,” he said. The PMI for UK manufacturing rose to 51.1, when it was expected to show a further fall from its August level of 49.4. Back in January the survey stood at 61.4 and was heralded by government supporters as an indication that the Treasury’s focus on keeping international money markets at bay with severe austerity measures was working. Since the spring, confidence in the UK’s ability to grow has evaporated and manufacturers have joined other parts of the economy in decline. Many analysts fear the UK’s manufacturing sector shrank over the last three months, hitting tax receipts and raising unemployment, which in turn will make it harder for the Treasury to cut debt. Samuel Tombs, UK economist at Capital Economics, said: “Output in the industrial sector might have increased a bit – but it still seems likely that the sector remained in recession in the third quarter as a whole. “There are signs that the improvement in the survey in September will prove to be just a blip. A large part of the increase in output was only achieved by the fastest depletion in the backlog of work for two years. “The new orders balance only edged up from 48 to 50.5, reflecting the continued weakness of orders from overseas.” China’s factory activity typically rises in September as businesses prepare for the Golden Week holiday, but this year’s increase was smaller than the average. Yao Wei at Société Générale said: “There was no reason to be cheerful, as this was in fact the weakest September reading ever and was on tie with that in 2008.” European debt crisis European banks Financial crisis Global recession Banking Europe Europe Phillip Inman guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …
Factory slump and Greek debts bring double dip closer

Weak manufacturing data reported across Europe and far east, while Athens warns it is likely to miss targets on cutting deficit A dramatic slowdown in manufacturing output across Europe and Greece’s failure to control public spending fuelled fears on Monday that the continent stands on the edge of a double-dip recession that could ripple across to the US and Asia. European stock markets fell sharply after France and Germany joined Spain and Italy on the sick list of manufacturing nations, undermined by weak demand and a lack of business and consumer confidence. Measures of manufacturing activity in China and the far east also showed a weakness that unnerved investors, sending the FTSE 100 back below the 5,000 mark at one stage and leaving all the major European stock markets in the red. Markit’s closely watched eurozone-wide manufacturing purchasing managers index (PMI), which gauges changes in the activity of thousands of factories in the countries that share the euro, fell to a final reading of 48.5 in September from 49 in August. A figure below 50 indicates that the sector is contracting. French manufacturing was especially badly hit, with Spain and Ireland. A survey of British manufacturers found a decline since the summer had been reversed in September, giving the chancellor, George Osborne, a little autumn cheer . However, with little optimism among businesses, and export orders suffering a significant drop, the sector was unlikely to support growth in the wider economy or create jobs. The US proved more resilient, with manufacturing orders and employment up, adding to the recent rise in the value of the dollar and US government bonds. Economists said the gathering storm in the eurozone was the biggest factor weighing on the UK and should give Osborne some pause for thought. The chancellor, speaking in Manchester at the Conservative party conference , said he recognised the significance of the problem and would be pressing his message for action at a series of EU meetings in the coming weeks. He said: “Britain is not immune to all this instability. Indeed, the resolution of the eurozone debt crisis is the single biggest boost to confidence that could happen to the British economy this autumn. “They’ve got to get out and fix their roof, even though it’s already pouring with rain,” Osborne said. Greece warned over the weekend that it would struggle to contain its ballooning debts this year and next, adding pressure on Brussels to agree a package of measures capable of funding Athens – and possibly several other eurozone countries should they be forced to tap bailout funds. Jonathan Loynes, chief European economist at Capital Economics, said the European Central Bank must share the blame for Europe’s struggling manufacturing sector. He said the ECB had taken up arms against inflation in a “phoney war” when a lack of growth outside a core of strong economies was the key problem. “There was a view that all the troubles in Greece, Spain and Portugal would not affect the major economies, but that is clearly no longer the case. Now the eurozone is slipping into recession, which means that consensus expectations are way too optimistic,” he said. The PMI for UK manufacturing rose to 51.1, when it was expected to show a further fall from its August level of 49.4. Back in January the survey stood at 61.4 and was heralded by government supporters as an indication that the Treasury’s focus on keeping international money markets at bay with severe austerity measures was working. Since the spring, confidence in the UK’s ability to grow has evaporated and manufacturers have joined other parts of the economy in decline. Many analysts fear the UK’s manufacturing sector shrank over the last three months, hitting tax receipts and raising unemployment, which in turn will make it harder for the Treasury to cut debt. Samuel Tombs, UK economist at Capital Economics, said: “Output in the industrial sector might have increased a bit – but it still seems likely that the sector remained in recession in the third quarter as a whole. “There are signs that the improvement in the survey in September will prove to be just a blip. A large part of the increase in output was only achieved by the fastest depletion in the backlog of work for two years. “The new orders balance only edged up from 48 to 50.5, reflecting the continued weakness of orders from overseas.” China’s factory activity typically rises in September as businesses prepare for the Golden Week holiday, but this year’s increase was smaller than the average. Yao Wei at Société Générale said: “There was no reason to be cheerful, as this was in fact the weakest September reading ever and was on tie with that in 2008.” European debt crisis European banks Financial crisis Global recession Banking Europe Europe Phillip Inman guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …
Koch Brothers Join Cheney and Romney Among GOP’s Iran Sanctions Busters

enlarge In July of 2010, two dozen members of the Congressional Tea Party Caucus led by Michele Bachmann co-sponsored a resolution announcing support for Israel “to use all means necessary to confront and eliminate nuclear threats posed by the Islamic Republic of Iran, including the use of military force.” So, Tea Partiers must have been shocked – shocked! – to learn that Charles and David Koch , the billionaire brothers underwriting their “movement,” were also in business with Iran . As it turns out, the Kochs are merely following Dick Cheney and Mitt Romney among the Republican luminaries caught up in dirty deals with Tehran. Twenty four years after Ronald Reagan sent a Bible, a cake and U.S. weapons to the mullahs in Tehran, Bloomberg News reported that, in the words of a former employee, the Koch brothers in likely violation of the American sanctions used “every single chance they had to do business with Iran, or anyone else.” A Bloomberg Markets investigation has found that Koch Industries — in addition to being involved in improper payments to win business in Africa, India and the Middle East — has sold millions of dollars of petrochemical equipment to Iran, a country the U.S. identifies as a sponsor of global terrorism… Internal company records show that Koch Industries used its foreign subsidiary to sidestep a U.S. trade ban barring American companies from selling materials to Iran. Koch-Glitsch offices in Germany and Italy continued selling to Iran until as recently as 2007, the records show. The company’s products helped build a methanol plant for Zagros Petrochemical Co., a unit of Iran’s state-owned National Iranian Petrochemical Co., the documents show. The facility, in the coastal city of Bandar Assaluyeh, is now the largest methanol plant in the world, according to IHS Inc., an Englewood, Colorado-based provider of chemicals, energy and economic data. In response to the allegations , Koch spokesperson Melissa Cohlmia said, “During the relevant time frame covered in your article, U.S. law allowed foreign subsidiaries of U.S. multinational companies to engage in trade involving countries subject to U.S. trade sanctions, including Iran, under certain conditions,” adding that Koch has since stopped all of its units from trading with Iran. If this story sounds familiar, it should. Just change the company to Halliburton and the CEO’s name to Dick Cheney. As the New York Times explained in March 2010, even as the Obama administration was seeking tougher UN sanctions to press Tehran into curbing its nuclear program, “of the 74 companies The Times identified as doing business with both the United States government and Iran, 49 continue to do business there with no announced plans to leave.” The federal government has awarded more than $107 billion in contract payments, grants and other benefits over the past decade to foreign and multinational American companies while they were doing business in Iran, despite Washington’s efforts to discourage investment there, records show. That includes nearly $15 billion paid to companies that defied American sanctions law by making large investments that helped Iran develop its vast oil and gas reserves . Among the U.S. contractors also profiting from Iran was Halliburton, which pocketed $27.1 billion from American taxpayers between 2000 and 2009: Halliburton, former Vice President Cheney’s old company, provided oil and gas drilling services to Iran through foreign subsidies. After a political furor erupted over the work, the company announced it would do no new business in Iran, and it exited the country altogether in 2007. While still operating in Iran, Halliburton won huge contacts from the federal government, including a no-bid contract to restore Iraq’s oil sector, as did its subsidiary at the time, Kellogg Brown & Root. As Perrspectives detailed four years ago, Halliburton had side-stepped the U.S. sanctions regime in place against Iran since the 1990′s by using a Cayman Islands subsidiary. And what should come as a surprise to no one, CEO Dick Cheney opposed those very sanctions until, of course, he became George W. Bush’s Vice President. In 2004, the CBS newsmagazine 60 Minutes detailed the Iranian business dealings of Cheney’s former company, Halliburton. Despite the prohibitions signed into law by President Clinton with his 1995 executive order and the Iran and Libya Sanctions Act of 1996 , Halliburton continued to reap the profits of business with Iran through its non-U.S. subsidiaries. While U.S. law bans virtually all commerce with the rogue nations, Halliburton was able to jump through its major loophole: the rules do not apply to any foreign or offshore subsidiary so long as it is run by non-Americans. As CBS documented : That subsidiary, Halliburton Products and Services, Ltd., is wholly owned by the U.S.-based Halliburton and is registered in a building in the capital of the Cayman Islands — a building owned by the local Calidonian Bank. Halliburton and other companies set up in this Caribbean Island, because of tax and secrecy laws that are corporate friendly. Halliburton is the company that Vice President Dick Cheney used to run. He was CEO from 1995 to 2000, during which time Halliburton Products and Services set up shop in Iran. Today, it sells about $40 million a year worth of oil field services to the Iranian government. In the wake of the January 2004 60 Minutes piece, the company moved quickly to declare that “Halliburton’s business in Iran is clearly permissible under applicable laws and regulations” and cited its October 2003 disclosures to the New York City police and fire pension funds. Despite those assurances, Dick Cheney’s old firm was subpoenaed by a U.S grand jury in June 2004. In early 2005 , Halliburton announced that it would end its business activities there when after fulfilling its ongoing contracts, including a $35 million gas drilling project it had just won the previous month. Halliburton’s exit was completed in 2007 . Though he did not benefit directly from the Iran contracts of Halliburton’s foreign-based subsidiaries, Cheney continued to have financial ties to his former firm. Despite Cheney’s assurances that “I’ve severed all my ties with the company, gotten rid of all my financial interest,” a 2003 report by the Congressional Research Service found that the Vice President retained 433,000 shares of Halliburton. In addition, Cheney received $162,392 and $205,298 in deferred payments in 2001 and 2002, respectively. Given the stakes, it’s no wonder Dick Cheney had a born-again experience on Iranian sanctions when he entered the Bush administration. While Vice President, Cheney in 2002 denounced Iran as “the world’s leading exporter of terror.” But during his tenure as Halliburton CEO in the 1990′s, Cheney strenuously argued against Clinton’s sanctions regime and expanded Halliburton’s business with Tehran. In 1998, he complained that U.S. firms were “cut out of the action.” And back in 1996, Cheney railed against the Clinton prohibitions on Iranian trade and financial activity for American firms: “We seem to be sanction-happy as a government. The problem is that the good Lord didn’t see fit to always put oil and gas resources where there are democratic governments.” For his part, Dick Cheney never made tough but hypocritical talk about Iran sanctions part of a run for the White House. That comic fate fell to Mitt Romney . Candidate Romney began his grandstanding on Iranian disinvestment by targeting the Democratic-controlled states of New York and Massachusetts. On February 22, 2007, Romney sent letters to New York Governor Eliot Spitzer, Senators Chuck Schumer and Hillary Clinton as well as state comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli urging a policy of “strategic disinvestment from companies linked to the Iranian regime.” Romney’s theatrics continued: “With your new responsibilities overseeing one of America’s largest pension funds, you have a unique opportunity to lead an effort to isolate Iran as it pursues nuclear armament. I request that you immediately launch a policy of strategic disinvestment from companies linked to the Iranian regime. Screening pension investments and divesting from companies providing financial support to the Iranian regime or linked to Iran’s weapons programs and terrorist activities could have a powerful impact. New investments should be scrutinized as long as Iran’s regime continues its current, dangerous course.” Sadly for Governor Romney, as the AP detailed within 24 hours of the letter’s publication, Romney’s former employer and the company he founded had recent links to recent Iranian business deals: Romney joined Boston-based Bain & Co., a management consulting firm, in 1978 and worked there until 1984. He was CEO of Bain Capital, a venture capital firm, from 1984 to 1999, despite a two-year return as Bain & Co.’s chief executive officer from 1991 to 1992. Bain & Co. Italy, described in company literature as “the Italian branch of Bain & Co.,” received a $2.3 million contract from the National Iranian Oil Co., in September 2004. Its task was to develop a master plan so NIOC — the state oil company of Iran — could become one of the world’s top oil companies, according to Iranian and U.S. news accounts of the deal. Bain Capital, the venture capital firm that Romney started and made him a multimillionaire, teamed up with the Haier Group, a Chinese appliance maker that has a factory in Iran, in an unsuccessful 2005 buyout effort. In response to the revelations, Romney played dumb — and blind. The former Massachusetts governor claimed his investments were in Boston-managed blind trust beyond his control. And more importantly, Romney feebly declared that his new-found distrust of the Ahmadinejad regime in Tehran would only apply going forward : “This is something for now-forward. I wouldn’t begin to say that people who, in the past, have been doing business with Iran, are subject to the same scrutiny as that which is going on from a prospective basis.” As the New York Times noted last year, the Iran Sanctions Act was also devised “to punish foreign companies that invest more than $20 million in a given year to develop Iran’s oil and gas fields. But in the 14 years since the law was passed, the government has never enforced it, in part for fear of angering America’s allies.” Which, needless to say, has drawn the ire of one John Bolton . Bolton, American ambassador to the UN under George W. Bush, said: Failing to enforce the law by punishing such companies both sent “a signal to the Iranians that we’re not serious” and undercut Washington’s credibility when it did threaten action. Of course, as the Iran follies of Bolton’s allies the Koch brothers, Dick Cheney and Mitt Romney all showed, credibility begins at home. UPDATE: The National Jewish Democratic Council asked GOP presidential candidates Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann to return donations from the Koch political action committee. The PAC, NJDC noted, “gave $50,000 to Texas Governor Rick Perry and donated to Representative Michele Bachmann in the past.” (This piece also appears at Perrspectives .)

Continue reading …
Koch Brothers Join Cheney and Romney Among GOP’s Iran Sanctions Busters

enlarge In July of 2010, two dozen members of the Congressional Tea Party Caucus led by Michele Bachmann co-sponsored a resolution announcing support for Israel “to use all means necessary to confront and eliminate nuclear threats posed by the Islamic Republic of Iran, including the use of military force.” So, Tea Partiers must have been shocked – shocked! – to learn that Charles and David Koch , the billionaire brothers underwriting their “movement,” were also in business with Iran . As it turns out, the Kochs are merely following Dick Cheney and Mitt Romney among the Republican luminaries caught up in dirty deals with Tehran. Twenty four years after Ronald Reagan sent a Bible, a cake and U.S. weapons to the mullahs in Tehran, Bloomberg News reported that, in the words of a former employee, the Koch brothers in likely violation of the American sanctions used “every single chance they had to do business with Iran, or anyone else.” A Bloomberg Markets investigation has found that Koch Industries — in addition to being involved in improper payments to win business in Africa, India and the Middle East — has sold millions of dollars of petrochemical equipment to Iran, a country the U.S. identifies as a sponsor of global terrorism… Internal company records show that Koch Industries used its foreign subsidiary to sidestep a U.S. trade ban barring American companies from selling materials to Iran. Koch-Glitsch offices in Germany and Italy continued selling to Iran until as recently as 2007, the records show. The company’s products helped build a methanol plant for Zagros Petrochemical Co., a unit of Iran’s state-owned National Iranian Petrochemical Co., the documents show. The facility, in the coastal city of Bandar Assaluyeh, is now the largest methanol plant in the world, according to IHS Inc., an Englewood, Colorado-based provider of chemicals, energy and economic data. In response to the allegations , Koch spokesperson Melissa Cohlmia said, “During the relevant time frame covered in your article, U.S. law allowed foreign subsidiaries of U.S. multinational companies to engage in trade involving countries subject to U.S. trade sanctions, including Iran, under certain conditions,” adding that Koch has since stopped all of its units from trading with Iran. If this story sounds familiar, it should. Just change the company to Halliburton and the CEO’s name to Dick Cheney. As the New York Times explained in March 2010, even as the Obama administration was seeking tougher UN sanctions to press Tehran into curbing its nuclear program, “of the 74 companies The Times identified as doing business with both the United States government and Iran, 49 continue to do business there with no announced plans to leave.” The federal government has awarded more than $107 billion in contract payments, grants and other benefits over the past decade to foreign and multinational American companies while they were doing business in Iran, despite Washington’s efforts to discourage investment there, records show. That includes nearly $15 billion paid to companies that defied American sanctions law by making large investments that helped Iran develop its vast oil and gas reserves . Among the U.S. contractors also profiting from Iran was Halliburton, which pocketed $27.1 billion from American taxpayers between 2000 and 2009: Halliburton, former Vice President Cheney’s old company, provided oil and gas drilling services to Iran through foreign subsidies. After a political furor erupted over the work, the company announced it would do no new business in Iran, and it exited the country altogether in 2007. While still operating in Iran, Halliburton won huge contacts from the federal government, including a no-bid contract to restore Iraq’s oil sector, as did its subsidiary at the time, Kellogg Brown & Root. As Perrspectives detailed four years ago, Halliburton had side-stepped the U.S. sanctions regime in place against Iran since the 1990′s by using a Cayman Islands subsidiary. And what should come as a surprise to no one, CEO Dick Cheney opposed those very sanctions until, of course, he became George W. Bush’s Vice President. In 2004, the CBS newsmagazine 60 Minutes detailed the Iranian business dealings of Cheney’s former company, Halliburton. Despite the prohibitions signed into law by President Clinton with his 1995 executive order and the Iran and Libya Sanctions Act of 1996 , Halliburton continued to reap the profits of business with Iran through its non-U.S. subsidiaries. While U.S. law bans virtually all commerce with the rogue nations, Halliburton was able to jump through its major loophole: the rules do not apply to any foreign or offshore subsidiary so long as it is run by non-Americans. As CBS documented : That subsidiary, Halliburton Products and Services, Ltd., is wholly owned by the U.S.-based Halliburton and is registered in a building in the capital of the Cayman Islands — a building owned by the local Calidonian Bank. Halliburton and other companies set up in this Caribbean Island, because of tax and secrecy laws that are corporate friendly. Halliburton is the company that Vice President Dick Cheney used to run. He was CEO from 1995 to 2000, during which time Halliburton Products and Services set up shop in Iran. Today, it sells about $40 million a year worth of oil field services to the Iranian government. In the wake of the January 2004 60 Minutes piece, the company moved quickly to declare that “Halliburton’s business in Iran is clearly permissible under applicable laws and regulations” and cited its October 2003 disclosures to the New York City police and fire pension funds. Despite those assurances, Dick Cheney’s old firm was subpoenaed by a U.S grand jury in June 2004. In early 2005 , Halliburton announced that it would end its business activities there when after fulfilling its ongoing contracts, including a $35 million gas drilling project it had just won the previous month. Halliburton’s exit was completed in 2007 . Though he did not benefit directly from the Iran contracts of Halliburton’s foreign-based subsidiaries, Cheney continued to have financial ties to his former firm. Despite Cheney’s assurances that “I’ve severed all my ties with the company, gotten rid of all my financial interest,” a 2003 report by the Congressional Research Service found that the Vice President retained 433,000 shares of Halliburton. In addition, Cheney received $162,392 and $205,298 in deferred payments in 2001 and 2002, respectively. Given the stakes, it’s no wonder Dick Cheney had a born-again experience on Iranian sanctions when he entered the Bush administration. While Vice President, Cheney in 2002 denounced Iran as “the world’s leading exporter of terror.” But during his tenure as Halliburton CEO in the 1990′s, Cheney strenuously argued against Clinton’s sanctions regime and expanded Halliburton’s business with Tehran. In 1998, he complained that U.S. firms were “cut out of the action.” And back in 1996, Cheney railed against the Clinton prohibitions on Iranian trade and financial activity for American firms: “We seem to be sanction-happy as a government. The problem is that the good Lord didn’t see fit to always put oil and gas resources where there are democratic governments.” For his part, Dick Cheney never made tough but hypocritical talk about Iran sanctions part of a run for the White House. That comic fate fell to Mitt Romney . Candidate Romney began his grandstanding on Iranian disinvestment by targeting the Democratic-controlled states of New York and Massachusetts. On February 22, 2007, Romney sent letters to New York Governor Eliot Spitzer, Senators Chuck Schumer and Hillary Clinton as well as state comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli urging a policy of “strategic disinvestment from companies linked to the Iranian regime.” Romney’s theatrics continued: “With your new responsibilities overseeing one of America’s largest pension funds, you have a unique opportunity to lead an effort to isolate Iran as it pursues nuclear armament. I request that you immediately launch a policy of strategic disinvestment from companies linked to the Iranian regime. Screening pension investments and divesting from companies providing financial support to the Iranian regime or linked to Iran’s weapons programs and terrorist activities could have a powerful impact. New investments should be scrutinized as long as Iran’s regime continues its current, dangerous course.” Sadly for Governor Romney, as the AP detailed within 24 hours of the letter’s publication, Romney’s former employer and the company he founded had recent links to recent Iranian business deals: Romney joined Boston-based Bain & Co., a management consulting firm, in 1978 and worked there until 1984. He was CEO of Bain Capital, a venture capital firm, from 1984 to 1999, despite a two-year return as Bain & Co.’s chief executive officer from 1991 to 1992. Bain & Co. Italy, described in company literature as “the Italian branch of Bain & Co.,” received a $2.3 million contract from the National Iranian Oil Co., in September 2004. Its task was to develop a master plan so NIOC — the state oil company of Iran — could become one of the world’s top oil companies, according to Iranian and U.S. news accounts of the deal. Bain Capital, the venture capital firm that Romney started and made him a multimillionaire, teamed up with the Haier Group, a Chinese appliance maker that has a factory in Iran, in an unsuccessful 2005 buyout effort. In response to the revelations, Romney played dumb — and blind. The former Massachusetts governor claimed his investments were in Boston-managed blind trust beyond his control. And more importantly, Romney feebly declared that his new-found distrust of the Ahmadinejad regime in Tehran would only apply going forward : “This is something for now-forward. I wouldn’t begin to say that people who, in the past, have been doing business with Iran, are subject to the same scrutiny as that which is going on from a prospective basis.” As the New York Times noted last year, the Iran Sanctions Act was also devised “to punish foreign companies that invest more than $20 million in a given year to develop Iran’s oil and gas fields. But in the 14 years since the law was passed, the government has never enforced it, in part for fear of angering America’s allies.” Which, needless to say, has drawn the ire of one John Bolton . Bolton, American ambassador to the UN under George W. Bush, said: Failing to enforce the law by punishing such companies both sent “a signal to the Iranians that we’re not serious” and undercut Washington’s credibility when it did threaten action. Of course, as the Iran follies of Bolton’s allies the Koch brothers, Dick Cheney and Mitt Romney all showed, credibility begins at home. UPDATE: The National Jewish Democratic Council asked GOP presidential candidates Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann to return donations from the Koch political action committee. The PAC, NJDC noted, “gave $50,000 to Texas Governor Rick Perry and donated to Representative Michele Bachmann in the past.” (This piece also appears at Perrspectives .)

Continue reading …
Koch Brothers Join Cheney and Romney Among GOP’s Iran Sanctions Busters

enlarge In July of 2010, two dozen members of the Congressional Tea Party Caucus led by Michele Bachmann co-sponsored a resolution announcing support for Israel “to use all means necessary to confront and eliminate nuclear threats posed by the Islamic Republic of Iran, including the use of military force.” So, Tea Partiers must have been shocked – shocked! – to learn that Charles and David Koch , the billionaire brothers underwriting their “movement,” were also in business with Iran . As it turns out, the Kochs are merely following Dick Cheney and Mitt Romney among the Republican luminaries caught up in dirty deals with Tehran. Twenty four years after Ronald Reagan sent a Bible, a cake and U.S. weapons to the mullahs in Tehran, Bloomberg News reported that, in the words of a former employee, the Koch brothers in likely violation of the American sanctions used “every single chance they had to do business with Iran, or anyone else.” A Bloomberg Markets investigation has found that Koch Industries — in addition to being involved in improper payments to win business in Africa, India and the Middle East — has sold millions of dollars of petrochemical equipment to Iran, a country the U.S. identifies as a sponsor of global terrorism… Internal company records show that Koch Industries used its foreign subsidiary to sidestep a U.S. trade ban barring American companies from selling materials to Iran. Koch-Glitsch offices in Germany and Italy continued selling to Iran until as recently as 2007, the records show. The company’s products helped build a methanol plant for Zagros Petrochemical Co., a unit of Iran’s state-owned National Iranian Petrochemical Co., the documents show. The facility, in the coastal city of Bandar Assaluyeh, is now the largest methanol plant in the world, according to IHS Inc., an Englewood, Colorado-based provider of chemicals, energy and economic data. In response to the allegations , Koch spokesperson Melissa Cohlmia said, “During the relevant time frame covered in your article, U.S. law allowed foreign subsidiaries of U.S. multinational companies to engage in trade involving countries subject to U.S. trade sanctions, including Iran, under certain conditions,” adding that Koch has since stopped all of its units from trading with Iran. If this story sounds familiar, it should. Just change the company to Halliburton and the CEO’s name to Dick Cheney. As the New York Times explained in March 2010, even as the Obama administration was seeking tougher UN sanctions to press Tehran into curbing its nuclear program, “of the 74 companies The Times identified as doing business with both the United States government and Iran, 49 continue to do business there with no announced plans to leave.” The federal government has awarded more than $107 billion in contract payments, grants and other benefits over the past decade to foreign and multinational American companies while they were doing business in Iran, despite Washington’s efforts to discourage investment there, records show. That includes nearly $15 billion paid to companies that defied American sanctions law by making large investments that helped Iran develop its vast oil and gas reserves . Among the U.S. contractors also profiting from Iran was Halliburton, which pocketed $27.1 billion from American taxpayers between 2000 and 2009: Halliburton, former Vice President Cheney’s old company, provided oil and gas drilling services to Iran through foreign subsidies. After a political furor erupted over the work, the company announced it would do no new business in Iran, and it exited the country altogether in 2007. While still operating in Iran, Halliburton won huge contacts from the federal government, including a no-bid contract to restore Iraq’s oil sector, as did its subsidiary at the time, Kellogg Brown & Root. As Perrspectives detailed four years ago, Halliburton had side-stepped the U.S. sanctions regime in place against Iran since the 1990′s by using a Cayman Islands subsidiary. And what should come as a surprise to no one, CEO Dick Cheney opposed those very sanctions until, of course, he became George W. Bush’s Vice President. In 2004, the CBS newsmagazine 60 Minutes detailed the Iranian business dealings of Cheney’s former company, Halliburton. Despite the prohibitions signed into law by President Clinton with his 1995 executive order and the Iran and Libya Sanctions Act of 1996 , Halliburton continued to reap the profits of business with Iran through its non-U.S. subsidiaries. While U.S. law bans virtually all commerce with the rogue nations, Halliburton was able to jump through its major loophole: the rules do not apply to any foreign or offshore subsidiary so long as it is run by non-Americans. As CBS documented : That subsidiary, Halliburton Products and Services, Ltd., is wholly owned by the U.S.-based Halliburton and is registered in a building in the capital of the Cayman Islands — a building owned by the local Calidonian Bank. Halliburton and other companies set up in this Caribbean Island, because of tax and secrecy laws that are corporate friendly. Halliburton is the company that Vice President Dick Cheney used to run. He was CEO from 1995 to 2000, during which time Halliburton Products and Services set up shop in Iran. Today, it sells about $40 million a year worth of oil field services to the Iranian government. In the wake of the January 2004 60 Minutes piece, the company moved quickly to declare that “Halliburton’s business in Iran is clearly permissible under applicable laws and regulations” and cited its October 2003 disclosures to the New York City police and fire pension funds. Despite those assurances, Dick Cheney’s old firm was subpoenaed by a U.S grand jury in June 2004. In early 2005 , Halliburton announced that it would end its business activities there when after fulfilling its ongoing contracts, including a $35 million gas drilling project it had just won the previous month. Halliburton’s exit was completed in 2007 . Though he did not benefit directly from the Iran contracts of Halliburton’s foreign-based subsidiaries, Cheney continued to have financial ties to his former firm. Despite Cheney’s assurances that “I’ve severed all my ties with the company, gotten rid of all my financial interest,” a 2003 report by the Congressional Research Service found that the Vice President retained 433,000 shares of Halliburton. In addition, Cheney received $162,392 and $205,298 in deferred payments in 2001 and 2002, respectively. Given the stakes, it’s no wonder Dick Cheney had a born-again experience on Iranian sanctions when he entered the Bush administration. While Vice President, Cheney in 2002 denounced Iran as “the world’s leading exporter of terror.” But during his tenure as Halliburton CEO in the 1990′s, Cheney strenuously argued against Clinton’s sanctions regime and expanded Halliburton’s business with Tehran. In 1998, he complained that U.S. firms were “cut out of the action.” And back in 1996, Cheney railed against the Clinton prohibitions on Iranian trade and financial activity for American firms: “We seem to be sanction-happy as a government. The problem is that the good Lord didn’t see fit to always put oil and gas resources where there are democratic governments.” For his part, Dick Cheney never made tough but hypocritical talk about Iran sanctions part of a run for the White House. That comic fate fell to Mitt Romney . Candidate Romney began his grandstanding on Iranian disinvestment by targeting the Democratic-controlled states of New York and Massachusetts. On February 22, 2007, Romney sent letters to New York Governor Eliot Spitzer, Senators Chuck Schumer and Hillary Clinton as well as state comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli urging a policy of “strategic disinvestment from companies linked to the Iranian regime.” Romney’s theatrics continued: “With your new responsibilities overseeing one of America’s largest pension funds, you have a unique opportunity to lead an effort to isolate Iran as it pursues nuclear armament. I request that you immediately launch a policy of strategic disinvestment from companies linked to the Iranian regime. Screening pension investments and divesting from companies providing financial support to the Iranian regime or linked to Iran’s weapons programs and terrorist activities could have a powerful impact. New investments should be scrutinized as long as Iran’s regime continues its current, dangerous course.” Sadly for Governor Romney, as the AP detailed within 24 hours of the letter’s publication, Romney’s former employer and the company he founded had recent links to recent Iranian business deals: Romney joined Boston-based Bain & Co., a management consulting firm, in 1978 and worked there until 1984. He was CEO of Bain Capital, a venture capital firm, from 1984 to 1999, despite a two-year return as Bain & Co.’s chief executive officer from 1991 to 1992. Bain & Co. Italy, described in company literature as “the Italian branch of Bain & Co.,” received a $2.3 million contract from the National Iranian Oil Co., in September 2004. Its task was to develop a master plan so NIOC — the state oil company of Iran — could become one of the world’s top oil companies, according to Iranian and U.S. news accounts of the deal. Bain Capital, the venture capital firm that Romney started and made him a multimillionaire, teamed up with the Haier Group, a Chinese appliance maker that has a factory in Iran, in an unsuccessful 2005 buyout effort. In response to the revelations, Romney played dumb — and blind. The former Massachusetts governor claimed his investments were in Boston-managed blind trust beyond his control. And more importantly, Romney feebly declared that his new-found distrust of the Ahmadinejad regime in Tehran would only apply going forward : “This is something for now-forward. I wouldn’t begin to say that people who, in the past, have been doing business with Iran, are subject to the same scrutiny as that which is going on from a prospective basis.” As the New York Times noted last year, the Iran Sanctions Act was also devised “to punish foreign companies that invest more than $20 million in a given year to develop Iran’s oil and gas fields. But in the 14 years since the law was passed, the government has never enforced it, in part for fear of angering America’s allies.” Which, needless to say, has drawn the ire of one John Bolton . Bolton, American ambassador to the UN under George W. Bush, said: Failing to enforce the law by punishing such companies both sent “a signal to the Iranians that we’re not serious” and undercut Washington’s credibility when it did threaten action. Of course, as the Iran follies of Bolton’s allies the Koch brothers, Dick Cheney and Mitt Romney all showed, credibility begins at home. UPDATE: The National Jewish Democratic Council asked GOP presidential candidates Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann to return donations from the Koch political action committee. The PAC, NJDC noted, “gave $50,000 to Texas Governor Rick Perry and donated to Representative Michele Bachmann in the past.” (This piece also appears at Perrspectives .)

Continue reading …
Koch Brothers Join Cheney and Romney Among GOP’s Iran Sanctions Busters

enlarge In July of 2010, two dozen members of the Congressional Tea Party Caucus led by Michele Bachmann co-sponsored a resolution announcing support for Israel “to use all means necessary to confront and eliminate nuclear threats posed by the Islamic Republic of Iran, including the use of military force.” So, Tea Partiers must have been shocked – shocked! – to learn that Charles and David Koch , the billionaire brothers underwriting their “movement,” were also in business with Iran . As it turns out, the Kochs are merely following Dick Cheney and Mitt Romney among the Republican luminaries caught up in dirty deals with Tehran. Twenty four years after Ronald Reagan sent a Bible, a cake and U.S. weapons to the mullahs in Tehran, Bloomberg News reported that, in the words of a former employee, the Koch brothers in likely violation of the American sanctions used “every single chance they had to do business with Iran, or anyone else.” A Bloomberg Markets investigation has found that Koch Industries — in addition to being involved in improper payments to win business in Africa, India and the Middle East — has sold millions of dollars of petrochemical equipment to Iran, a country the U.S. identifies as a sponsor of global terrorism… Internal company records show that Koch Industries used its foreign subsidiary to sidestep a U.S. trade ban barring American companies from selling materials to Iran. Koch-Glitsch offices in Germany and Italy continued selling to Iran until as recently as 2007, the records show. The company’s products helped build a methanol plant for Zagros Petrochemical Co., a unit of Iran’s state-owned National Iranian Petrochemical Co., the documents show. The facility, in the coastal city of Bandar Assaluyeh, is now the largest methanol plant in the world, according to IHS Inc., an Englewood, Colorado-based provider of chemicals, energy and economic data. In response to the allegations , Koch spokesperson Melissa Cohlmia said, “During the relevant time frame covered in your article, U.S. law allowed foreign subsidiaries of U.S. multinational companies to engage in trade involving countries subject to U.S. trade sanctions, including Iran, under certain conditions,” adding that Koch has since stopped all of its units from trading with Iran. If this story sounds familiar, it should. Just change the company to Halliburton and the CEO’s name to Dick Cheney. As the New York Times explained in March 2010, even as the Obama administration was seeking tougher UN sanctions to press Tehran into curbing its nuclear program, “of the 74 companies The Times identified as doing business with both the United States government and Iran, 49 continue to do business there with no announced plans to leave.” The federal government has awarded more than $107 billion in contract payments, grants and other benefits over the past decade to foreign and multinational American companies while they were doing business in Iran, despite Washington’s efforts to discourage investment there, records show. That includes nearly $15 billion paid to companies that defied American sanctions law by making large investments that helped Iran develop its vast oil and gas reserves . Among the U.S. contractors also profiting from Iran was Halliburton, which pocketed $27.1 billion from American taxpayers between 2000 and 2009: Halliburton, former Vice President Cheney’s old company, provided oil and gas drilling services to Iran through foreign subsidies. After a political furor erupted over the work, the company announced it would do no new business in Iran, and it exited the country altogether in 2007. While still operating in Iran, Halliburton won huge contacts from the federal government, including a no-bid contract to restore Iraq’s oil sector, as did its subsidiary at the time, Kellogg Brown & Root. As Perrspectives detailed four years ago, Halliburton had side-stepped the U.S. sanctions regime in place against Iran since the 1990′s by using a Cayman Islands subsidiary. And what should come as a surprise to no one, CEO Dick Cheney opposed those very sanctions until, of course, he became George W. Bush’s Vice President. In 2004, the CBS newsmagazine 60 Minutes detailed the Iranian business dealings of Cheney’s former company, Halliburton. Despite the prohibitions signed into law by President Clinton with his 1995 executive order and the Iran and Libya Sanctions Act of 1996 , Halliburton continued to reap the profits of business with Iran through its non-U.S. subsidiaries. While U.S. law bans virtually all commerce with the rogue nations, Halliburton was able to jump through its major loophole: the rules do not apply to any foreign or offshore subsidiary so long as it is run by non-Americans. As CBS documented : That subsidiary, Halliburton Products and Services, Ltd., is wholly owned by the U.S.-based Halliburton and is registered in a building in the capital of the Cayman Islands — a building owned by the local Calidonian Bank. Halliburton and other companies set up in this Caribbean Island, because of tax and secrecy laws that are corporate friendly. Halliburton is the company that Vice President Dick Cheney used to run. He was CEO from 1995 to 2000, during which time Halliburton Products and Services set up shop in Iran. Today, it sells about $40 million a year worth of oil field services to the Iranian government. In the wake of the January 2004 60 Minutes piece, the company moved quickly to declare that “Halliburton’s business in Iran is clearly permissible under applicable laws and regulations” and cited its October 2003 disclosures to the New York City police and fire pension funds. Despite those assurances, Dick Cheney’s old firm was subpoenaed by a U.S grand jury in June 2004. In early 2005 , Halliburton announced that it would end its business activities there when after fulfilling its ongoing contracts, including a $35 million gas drilling project it had just won the previous month. Halliburton’s exit was completed in 2007 . Though he did not benefit directly from the Iran contracts of Halliburton’s foreign-based subsidiaries, Cheney continued to have financial ties to his former firm. Despite Cheney’s assurances that “I’ve severed all my ties with the company, gotten rid of all my financial interest,” a 2003 report by the Congressional Research Service found that the Vice President retained 433,000 shares of Halliburton. In addition, Cheney received $162,392 and $205,298 in deferred payments in 2001 and 2002, respectively. Given the stakes, it’s no wonder Dick Cheney had a born-again experience on Iranian sanctions when he entered the Bush administration. While Vice President, Cheney in 2002 denounced Iran as “the world’s leading exporter of terror.” But during his tenure as Halliburton CEO in the 1990′s, Cheney strenuously argued against Clinton’s sanctions regime and expanded Halliburton’s business with Tehran. In 1998, he complained that U.S. firms were “cut out of the action.” And back in 1996, Cheney railed against the Clinton prohibitions on Iranian trade and financial activity for American firms: “We seem to be sanction-happy as a government. The problem is that the good Lord didn’t see fit to always put oil and gas resources where there are democratic governments.” For his part, Dick Cheney never made tough but hypocritical talk about Iran sanctions part of a run for the White House. That comic fate fell to Mitt Romney . Candidate Romney began his grandstanding on Iranian disinvestment by targeting the Democratic-controlled states of New York and Massachusetts. On February 22, 2007, Romney sent letters to New York Governor Eliot Spitzer, Senators Chuck Schumer and Hillary Clinton as well as state comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli urging a policy of “strategic disinvestment from companies linked to the Iranian regime.” Romney’s theatrics continued: “With your new responsibilities overseeing one of America’s largest pension funds, you have a unique opportunity to lead an effort to isolate Iran as it pursues nuclear armament. I request that you immediately launch a policy of strategic disinvestment from companies linked to the Iranian regime. Screening pension investments and divesting from companies providing financial support to the Iranian regime or linked to Iran’s weapons programs and terrorist activities could have a powerful impact. New investments should be scrutinized as long as Iran’s regime continues its current, dangerous course.” Sadly for Governor Romney, as the AP detailed within 24 hours of the letter’s publication, Romney’s former employer and the company he founded had recent links to recent Iranian business deals: Romney joined Boston-based Bain & Co., a management consulting firm, in 1978 and worked there until 1984. He was CEO of Bain Capital, a venture capital firm, from 1984 to 1999, despite a two-year return as Bain & Co.’s chief executive officer from 1991 to 1992. Bain & Co. Italy, described in company literature as “the Italian branch of Bain & Co.,” received a $2.3 million contract from the National Iranian Oil Co., in September 2004. Its task was to develop a master plan so NIOC — the state oil company of Iran — could become one of the world’s top oil companies, according to Iranian and U.S. news accounts of the deal. Bain Capital, the venture capital firm that Romney started and made him a multimillionaire, teamed up with the Haier Group, a Chinese appliance maker that has a factory in Iran, in an unsuccessful 2005 buyout effort. In response to the revelations, Romney played dumb — and blind. The former Massachusetts governor claimed his investments were in Boston-managed blind trust beyond his control. And more importantly, Romney feebly declared that his new-found distrust of the Ahmadinejad regime in Tehran would only apply going forward : “This is something for now-forward. I wouldn’t begin to say that people who, in the past, have been doing business with Iran, are subject to the same scrutiny as that which is going on from a prospective basis.” As the New York Times noted last year, the Iran Sanctions Act was also devised “to punish foreign companies that invest more than $20 million in a given year to develop Iran’s oil and gas fields. But in the 14 years since the law was passed, the government has never enforced it, in part for fear of angering America’s allies.” Which, needless to say, has drawn the ire of one John Bolton . Bolton, American ambassador to the UN under George W. Bush, said: Failing to enforce the law by punishing such companies both sent “a signal to the Iranians that we’re not serious” and undercut Washington’s credibility when it did threaten action. Of course, as the Iran follies of Bolton’s allies the Koch brothers, Dick Cheney and Mitt Romney all showed, credibility begins at home. UPDATE: The National Jewish Democratic Council asked GOP presidential candidates Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann to return donations from the Koch political action committee. The PAC, NJDC noted, “gave $50,000 to Texas Governor Rick Perry and donated to Representative Michele Bachmann in the past.” (This piece also appears at Perrspectives .)

Continue reading …
Erin Burnett Confirms She’ll Be ‘More Opinionated’ at CNN than at CNBC

CNN's newest addition to its prime-time line-up, former CNBC anchor Erin Burnett, told Reliable Sources host Howard Kurtz on Sunday that yes, she would be “more opinionated” at CNN than in the past. Burnett's show, “Out Front,” airs for the first time on Monday Oct 3 at 7 p.m. EDT. Kurtz interviewed Burnett at the bottom of the 11 a.m. hour on Sunday. He asked her “Are you going to be more opinionated, Erin Burnett, then you have been in your previous role as business correspondent?” She answered in the affirmative. [Video below the break.] However, Burnett added that “I would say point of view, to me, can be distinct from a partisan political point of view.” “[B]eing trustworthy, which I think is something I bring to the table in terms of numbers, and then you come out with a point of view of, this makes sense, this doesn't make sense, that isn't fair, that is fair – we can do that,” she continued. Last year, Burnett bizarrely compared soda pop with cocaine in an interview with a beverage company spokesperson on the “Fat Tax.” Earlier this year, Burnett claimed that the problem with the national debt is the country's revenue . “The problem is our revenue, what the government takes in, in taxes,” she told NBC's Today show host Matt Lauer. “What you pay every month out of your paycheck is way smaller, in fact, it's only somewhere around $2 trillion a year.” She did, back in 2007, provide a fact rarely heard on a network news broadcast as she explained how the wealthy pay a disproportionately large share of the tax revenue in the U.S. A transcript of the segment, which aired on October 2 at 11:38 a.m. EDT, is as follows: [11:38] KURTZ: Now nighttime cable news is very competitive, as you know. Very opinionated, as you know. People who have done the best seem to be the people who are the strongest personalities, sometimes the loudest. Certainly they don't lack for opinions. Are you going to be more opinionated, Erin Burnett, then you have been in your previous role as business correspondent? BURNETT: I think that there is – KURTZ: I want a yes or no answer. BURNETT: You want a yes or a no answer? KURTZ: Teasing. BURNETT: Well, the answer is yes, but I would say point of view, to me, can be distinct from a partisan political point of view. So where you have very successful people yelling from the left and from the right, being passionate, enthusiastic, energetic, and pulling together – being trustworthy, which I think is something I bring to the table in terms of numbers, and then you come out with a point of view of, this makes sense, this doesn't make sense, that isn't fair, that is fair – we can do that. KURTZ: I've read somewhere you don't want to worry about ratings. But, for example, Campbell Brown, a very talented journalist who came here from NBC News, eventually gave up her CNN show and said, I can't put up the kind of numbers that Bill O'Reilly, and at the time, Keith Olbermann, were putting up. So ratings is a reality in this business, as you know. Is this going to be a tough challenge for you? BURNETT: Well, I'm not going to be looking at them at first, because I think we have to be – we know what we are, and we have a mission statement and we need to be consistent with that. And I think that's really important, because I think as people know what that is, and you're consistent the issues we care about, that they will come to the show. So the most important thing is to be consistent and to believe in what we're doing. And I think it will rate – KURTZ: I bet your producers will look at the numbers. BURNETT: – and we will tweak as we need to tweak. But I come into this with a real belief that there is space for passionate, enthusiastic, fair journalism, as opposed to that pure political point of view. And I think a 7 p.m. hour is an hour where you can still do that.

Continue reading …
Occupy Wall Street Protest: As Movement Spreads, a Message Evolves

When the Occupy Wall Street protesters bedded down on Friday night, their two-week-old movement appeared to have found a central message. The movement’s website explained that on the two week anniversary of the day protesters first occupied Zuccotti Park in downtown Manhattan, there would be a solidarity march entitled, “We are the 99%–This Saturday thousands more of

Continue reading …
Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito cleared of murder

Ecstatic delight and furious protests after judges upheld appeal by the American student and her Italian former boyfriend There were scenes of delight inside and protests outside an Italian courtroom after judges upheld the appeal by the American student, Amanda Knox, against a 26-year sentence for killing her British flatmate, Meredith Kercher. The judges also overturned a 25-year sentence imposed on her Italian former boyfriend, Raffaele Sollecito. A sobbing and stumbling Knox was hustled from the courtroom by police officers as members of her family embraced and wept. Sollecito hugged his lead counsel, Giulia Bongiorno. Across the courtroom, the prosecutor, Giuliano Mignini, stood alone while Stephanie Kercher, the victim’s sister, consoled her mother, Arline. Outside, several hundred mainly young people had been gathering since late afternoon. As news of the verdict swept through the crowd, whistles erupted and then a chant went up of “Vergogna. Vergogna” – “Disgrace. Disgrace.” As defence lawyers emerged from the courthouse, they were greeted with roars of disapproval from the mob, interspersed with the odd cheer. One of Knox’s lawyers, Carlo Dalla Vedova, said his client would be released from prison immediately and spend the night with her family at a guesthouse outside Perugia. She is expected to leave for her home city of Seattle on Tuesday. The first person to reach her after the verdict was announced was Dalla Vedova’s junior, Maria del Grosso. “She was terror-struck”, Del Grosso said. “If I had not held her, she would have fallen.” The judges confirmed Knox’s conviction for slandering her former employer, Diya “Patrick” Lumumba, whom she initially accused of the murder, and increased her sentence from one to three years. But since she has already spent four years in jail, Knox was able to walk free. The tension in court as the verdict was delivered exploded into gasps when the presiding judge, Claudio Pratillo Hellmann, began by declaring that the American student’s appeal had been rejected, before adding that the rejection only applied to the slander charge. Hellmann, who has a distinctively metallic voice, read out the verdict in the vaulted and frescoed 14th-century courtroom that has been the scene of an appeal swept by emotion, high tension and furious dispute. The two professional and six lay judges reached their decision after 11 hours of deliberation having earlier heard final pleas from the two appellants. Moments after the verdict was announced Knox’s sister Deanna Knox gave a brief statement outside court. “We’re thankful that Amanda’s nightmare is over,” she said. “She has suffered for four years for a crime that she did not commit.” Deanna paid tribute to her sister’s legal team. “Not only did they defend her brilliantly, but they also loved her. We are thankful for all the support we have received from all over the world – people who took the time to research the case and could see that Amanda and Raffaele were innocent. And last, we are thankful to the court for having the courage to look for the truth and to overturn this conviction.” Francesco Sollecito, Raffaele Sollecito’s father said he had “allowed himself some tears”. Of Meredith Kercher, he said: “We will remember her with affection. I would have liked to talk to her relatives as well, as they have lost a daughter in a very cruel way. “But tonight, they [the court] have given me back my son.” Earlier, in her final statement to the court, Knox, her voice quavering and never far from breaking down, said: “I want to go home, to my life. I don’t want to be deprived of my life, my future for something I have not done.” Though the judges did not immediately disclose their reasoning, they are likely to have been heavily influenced by the report of experts appointed by the court to review the forensic evidence. In June, the independent experts decided that two pillars of the prosecution case were not reliably founded. One was a trace of Sollecito’s DNA on Meredith Kercher’s bra clasp, which was found more than six weeks after the discovery of her body, and which the young Italian’s lawyer implied last week might have been planted. The experts said the DNA could have got there by contamination. The second key item of evidence was a kitchen knife, bearing Sollecito’s and Knox’s DNA, that the prosecution claimed was used to slash Kercher’s throat. The experts said a third sample of DNA was not necessarily that of the victim. The Kerchers’ legal representative had earlier said the family would accept the ruling of the appeal court, as they had accepted that at the original trial. But speaking at a press conference in a Perugia hotel, they said the “brutal death” of the British student had been overlooked. “I think Meredith has been hugely forgotten,” said Kercher’s sister, Stephanie, sitting alongside Kercher’s mother Arline and brother Lyle. “It is very hard to find forgiveness at this time,” said Lyle Kercher. “Four years is a very long time but on the other hand it is still raw. Within 90 days, the judges must submit their written verdict and the various parties will then have 45 days in which to take the case to Italy’s highest appeals court, the court of cassation. Under Italian law, the prosecution can lodge an appeal in the same way as the defence. But it was expected that Knox would leave immediately for the US, and if the court of cassation were to reinstate the decision of the lower court, the authorities would have to seek her extradition. The prosecutor who oversaw the inquiry, Giuliano Mignini, hinted more than once before the outcome that he might not seek a further ruling. The defence argument was, from the beginning that the murder was committed during a break-in by a third person, Rudy Guede from the Ivory Coast. Guede has also been convicted, but is serving a lighter, 16-year sentence after opting for a fast-track trial. Amanda Knox Meredith Kercher Italy Europe United States John Hooper Tom Kington guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …
Fox News Watch Panel Continues to Flog Discredited Obama Bullied Ford Story

Click here to view this media Media Matters has been following this discredited story for some time now and you can read some of their past posts on that here —

Continue reading …