Monsanto sued for underpaying workers

RT.com, 23 July, 2012

Screenshot from monsanto.com

It’s back to court for biotech giants Monsanto. This time America’s largest agriculture corporation is being sued by a group of farmers who say they were promised free housing but instead were charged thousands and poisoned by pesticides.

Seven migrant workers from the state of Texas are suing Monsanto after they say the massive biotech corporation failed to keep their promise. The plaintiffs argue that they were promised free housing and kitchen access for their families in exchange for working on a hybrid corn seed project in the state of Indiana, but instead were milked out of their money and exposed to dangerous chemicals.

Jose Cardenas, the lead plaintiff in the case, is going after Monsanto and its recruiter, Milo Inc., as well as that company’s president. Cardenas insists that Milo Inc. promised the plaintiffs $80 for each acre the farmers detasseled and would be additionally compensated with housing arrangements. According to his complaint, however, the pay that was signed over was less than minimum wage when divided among the crew members.

Courthouse News Service reports that money problems weren’t all the farmers were poised with.

"The motel housing did not comply with substantive federal and state safety and health standards applicable to agricultural labor housing,” the complaint reads.Additionally, instead of complimentary accommodations they were forced to spend $300 per room while on the job.

And the kitchen? “[T]he kitchen facility provided by the defendants – a school bus in which about three to four stoves and two refrigerators had been installed – was substandard."

"Two or more of the working plaintiffs suffered illness or injuries from suspected pesticide exposure while working for defendants,” the farmers add.

Attorney Kathryn Blair Craddock with Texas Rio Grande Legal Aid is representing the group of seven workers whom are seeking damages under the Agricultural Worker Protection Act, as well as unpaid wages as promised through the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Agriculturalists across America have previously tried to take Monsanto to court over charges stemming from their lab-made corn GMOs, but that case was a bit different. Over 2,000 farmers have petitioned the US government to more thoroughly investigate the impact a genetically modified corn crop from Monsanto will have on the country. As RT reported before, the biotech company wants to plant a corn variant across America’s Midwest that will be resistant to a powerful pesticide produced with 2,4-D, the same compound crucial to the make-up of the notorious Vietnam War-era killer Agent Orange. If approved, the new corn will be able to thrive as farmers douse their fields in the chemical, killing off unwanted weeds in the process while at the same time subjecting Americans to a pesticide linked to causing cancer.

Related Articles:

Farmgroup seeks U.S. halt on "dangerous" crop chemicals

Monsanto and Genetically Modified Crops - Is there a cover-up?

FDA Deletes 1 Million Signatures for GMO Labeling Campaign

Scientists warn EPA on Monsanto corn rootworm

Court finds Monsanto guilty of poisoning

Reuters: Prosecutors, regulators close to making Libor arrests

Reuters,  by Matthew Goldstein and Jennifer Ablan and Philipp Halstrick, Jul 2012

The letter ''B'' of the signage on the Barclays headquarters in Canary Wharf

 is hoisted up the side of the building in London July 20, 2012. (Credit: Reuters/

 Simon Newman)

(Reuters) - U.S. prosecutors and European regulators are close to arresting individual traders and charging them with colluding to manipulate global benchmark interest rates, according to people familiar with a sweeping investigation into the rate-rigging scandal.

Federal prosecutors in Washington, D.C., have recently contacted lawyers representing some of the individuals under suspicion to notify them that criminal charges and arrests could be imminent, said two of those sources who asked not to be identified because the investigation is ongoing.

Defense lawyers, some of whom represent individuals under suspicion, said prosecutors have indicated they plan to begin making arrests and filing criminal charges in the next few weeks. In long-running financial investigations it is not uncommon for prosecutors to contact defense lawyers for individuals before filing charges to offer them a chance to cooperate or take a plea, these lawyer said.

The prospect of charges and arrests of individuals means that prosecutors are getting a fuller picture of how traders at major banks allegedly sought to influence the London Interbank Offered Rate, or Libor, and other global rates that underpin hundreds of trillions of dollars in assets. The criminal charges would come alongside efforts by regulators to punish major banks with fines, and could show that the alleged activity was not rampant in the banks.

"The individual criminal charges have no impact on the regulatory moves against the banks," said a European source familiar with the matter. "But banks are hoping that at least regulators will see that the scandal was mainly due to individual misbehavior of a gang of traders."

In Europe, financial regulators are focusing on a ring of traders from several European banks who allegedly sought to rig benchmark interest rates such as Libor, said the European source familiar with the investigation in Europe.

The source, who did not want to be identified because the investigation is ongoing, said regulators are checking through emails among a group of traders and believe they are now close to piecing together a picture of how they allegedly conspired to make money by manipulating the rates. The rates are set daily based on an average of estimates supplied by a panel of banks.

"More than a handful of traders at different banks are involved," said the source familiar with the investigation by European regulators.

There are also probes in Europe concerning Euribor, the Euro Interbank Offered Rate.

It is not clear what individuals and banks federal prosecutors are most focused on. A top U.S. Department of Justice lawyer overseeing the investigation did not respond to a request for a comment.

Reuters previously reported that more than a dozen current and former employees of several large banks are under investigation, including Barclays Plc, UBS and Citigroup, and have hired defense lawyers over the past year as a federal grand jury in Washington, D.C., continues to gather evidence.

The activity in the Libor investigation, which has been going on for three years, has quickened since Barclays agreed last month to pay $453 million in fines and penalties to settle allegations with regulators and prosecutors that some of its employees tried to manipulate key interest rates from 2005 through 2009.

Barclays, which signed a non-prosecution agreement with U.S. prosecutors, is the first major bank to reach a settlement in the investigation, which also is looking at the activities of employees at HSBC, Deutsche Bank and other major banks.

The Barclays settlement sparked outrage and a series of public hearings in Britain, after which Barclays Chief Executive Bob Diamond announced his resignation from the big British bank.

The revelations have raised questions about the integrity of Libor, which is used as benchmark in setting prices for loans, mortgages and derivative contracts.

Adding to concerns are documents released by the New York Federal Reserve Bank this month that show bank regulators in the United States and England had some knowledge that bankers were submitting misleading Libor bids during the 2008 financial crisis to make their financial institutions appear stronger than they really were.

Among other details, the Fed documents included the transcript of an April 2008 phone call between a Barclays trader in New York and Fed official Fabiola Ravazzolo, in which the unidentified trader said: "So, we know that we're not posting um, an honest LIBOR."

The source familiar with the regulatory investigation in Europe said two traders who have been suspended from Deutsche Bank were among those being investigated. A Deutsche Bank spokesman declined to comment.

The Financial Times reported on Wednesday that regulators were looking at suspected communication among four traders who had worked at Barclays, Credit Agricole, HSBC and Deutsche Bank.

Credit Agricole said it had not been accused of any wrongdoing related to the attempted manipulation of Libor by Barclays, but had responded to requests for information for various authorities related to the matter.

Beyond regulatory penalties and criminal charges, banks face a growing number of civil lawsuits from cities, companies and financial institutions claiming they were harmed by rate manipulation. Morgan Stanley recently estimated that the 11 global banks linked to the Libor scandal may face $14 billion in regulatory and legal settlement costs through 2014.

In the United States, the regulatory investigation is being led by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which has made the Libor probe one of its top priorities.

(Reporting by Matthew Goldstein and Jennifer Ablan in New York and Philipp Halstrick in Frankfurt, with additional reporting by Emily Flitter in New York and ArunaViswanatha in Washington, D.C.; Editing by Alwyn Scott and Maureen Bavdek)

Under fire: Barclays former chairman Marcus Agius (right)
with former CEO Bob Diamond (centre), and former chief
executive John Varley (left)

Related Article:

Bob Diamond would have known about Libor rigging, claims whistleblower

Rupert Murdoch steps down from boards

CNN News, by the CNN Wire Staff, July 21, 2012

Rupert Murdoch's UK operations have been under intense scrutiny

 over phone hacking revelations.

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• Rupert Murdoch steps down as director from a string of company boards 
• A spokesman calls it "nothing more than a corporate house-cleaning exercise"
• News Corp. is expected to be divided in coming months

(CNN) -- Rupert Murdoch has stepped down from a string of company boards of directors just one month after his embattled News Corporation announced plans to separate publishing interests from its lucrative television and film operations.

The Australian-born media mogul made the move last week, according to a spokesman for News International, a British arm of News Corp.

While Murdoch is expected to remain chairman of both companies, he will be CEO of only the television and film side, further distancing himself from the print business that first brought him fame and fortune.

It's not clear who will be CEO of the publishing company, which would be less than one-third the size of its counterpart.

The News International spokesman on Saturday played down Murdoch's boards resignation, calling it "nothing more than a corporate house-cleaning exercise prior to the company split."

Murdoch grilled on power, influence

Murdoch: Romney should drop old friends Rupert Murdoch in a buying mood News Corp. to become two companies

News Corp., a Murdoch-controlled media conglomerate, is expected to be divided in the next 12 months. The split comes after some of its U.K.-based newspapers were thrust to the center of a recent phone-hacking scandal.

His British operations have remained under intense scrutiny after revelations of widespread phone hacking, which included celebrities and public officials, by people working for his newspapers.

Gordon Brown lashes out at Rupert Murdoch, son and tabloid

The controversy prompted News Corp. to shut down its venerable British tabloid, News of the World, last year, and preceded a decision to withdraw a multi-billion-dollar bid to take over British Sky Broadcasting.

The coming split would separate operations like 20th Century Fox film studio, Fox broadcast network and Fox News Channel from the firm's newspapers holdings such as Britain's The Sun, the London Times and the London Sunday Times.

News Corp.'s American media holdings include The Wall Street Journal, the New York Post and Barron's. Its book publishing assets include such companies as HarperCollins.

Rupert Murdoch put pressure on Tony Blair, ex-prime minister says

Related Article:

Rupert Murdoch quits as News International director

$21tn: hoard hidden from taxman by global elite

• Study estimates staggering size of offshore economy

• Private banks help wealthiest to move cash into havens

guardian.co.uk, Heather Stewart, business editor, Saturday 21 July 2012

The Cayman Islands: a favourite haven from the taxman for the global elite.
Photograph: David Doubilet/National Geographic/Getty Images

A global super-rich elite has exploited gaps in cross-border tax rules to hide an extraordinary £13 trillion ($21tn) of wealth offshore – as much as the American and Japanese GDPs put together – according to research commissioned by the campaign group Tax Justice Network.

James Henry, former chief economist at consultancy McKinsey and an expert on tax havens, has compiled the most detailed estimates yet of the size of the offshore economy in a new report, The Price of Offshore Revisited, released exclusively to the Observer.

He shows that at least £13tn – perhaps up to £20tn – has leaked out of scores of countries into secretive jurisdictions such as Switzerland and the Cayman Islands with the help of private banks, which vie to attract the assets of so-called high net-worth individuals. Their wealth is, as Henry puts it, "protected by a highly paid, industrious bevy of professional enablers in the private banking, legal, accounting and investment industries taking advantage of the increasingly borderless, frictionless global economy". According to Henry's research, the top 10 private banks, which include UBS and Credit Suisse in Switzerland, as well as the US investment bank Goldman Sachs, managed more than £4tn in 2010, a sharp rise from £1.5tn five years earlier.

The detailed analysis in the report, compiled using data from a range of sources, including the Bank of International Settlements and the International Monetary Fund, suggests that for many developing countries the cumulative value of the capital that has flowed out of their economies since the 1970s would be more than enough to pay off their debts to the rest of the world.

Oil-rich states with an internationally mobile elite have been especially prone to watching their wealth disappear into offshore bank accounts instead of being invested at home, the research suggests. Once the returns on investing the hidden assets is included, almost £500bn has left Russia since the early 1990s when its economy was opened up. Saudi Arabia has seen £197bn flood out since the mid-1970s, and Nigeria £196bn.

"The problem here is that the assets of these countries are held by a small number of wealthy individuals while the debts are shouldered by the ordinary people of these countries through their governments," the report says.

The sheer size of the cash pile sitting out of reach of tax authorities is so great that it suggests standard measures of inequality radically underestimate the true gap between rich and poor. According to Henry's calculations, £6.3tn of assets is owned by only 92,000 people, or 0.001% of the world's population – a tiny class of the mega-rich who have more in common with each other than those at the bottom of the income scale in their own societies.

"These estimates reveal a staggering failure: inequality is much, much worse than official statistics show, but politicians are still relying on trickle-down to transfer wealth to poorer people," said John Christensen of the Tax Justice Network. "People on the street have no illusions about how unfair the situation has become."

TUC general secretary Brendan Barber said: "Countries around the world are under intense pressure to reduce their deficits and governments cannot afford to let so much wealth slip past into tax havens.

"Closing down the tax loopholes exploited by multinationals and the super-rich to avoid paying their fair share will reduce the deficit. This way the government can focus on stimulating the economy, rather than squeezing the life out of it with cuts and tax rises for the 99% of people who aren't rich enough to avoid paying their taxes."

Assuming the £13tn mountain of assets earned an average 3% a year for its owners, and governments were able to tax that income at 30%, it would generate a bumper £121bn in revenues – more than rich countries spend on aid to the developing world each year.

Groups such as UK Uncut have focused attention on the paltry tax bills of some highly wealthy individuals, such as Topshop owner Sir Philip Green, with campaigners at one recent protest shouting: "Where did all the money go? He took it off to Monaco!" Much of Green's retail empire is owned by his wife, Tina, who lives in the low-tax principality.

A spokeswoman for UK Uncut said: "People like Philip Green use public services – they need the streets to be cleaned, people need public transport to get to their shops – but they don't want to pay for it."

Leaders of G20 countries have repeatedly pledged to close down tax havens since the financial crisis of 2008, when the secrecy shrouding parts of the banking system was widely seen as exacerbating instability. But many countries still refuse to make details of individuals' financial worth available to the tax authorities in their home countries as a matter of course. Tax Justice Network would like to see this kind of exchange of information become standard practice, to prevent rich individuals playing off one jurisdiction against another.

"The very existence of the global offshore industry, and the tax-free status of the enormous sums invested by their wealthy clients, is predicated on secrecy," said Henry.

Related Articles:

German region reportedly buys second tax cheater CD

Almost entire US Congress refuses to release tax returns

Romney had Swiss bank account, but now closed

Study: Many Fortune 500 cos. paid $0 taxes

Spain's king ousted as WWF honorary president

Associated Press, Jul 21, 2012 

MADRID (AP) — The World Wildlife Fund's branch in Spain says it has ousted King Juan Carlos as its honorary president — a title he'd held since 1968 — because the monarch's recent elephant hunting safari was incompatible with the group's goal of conserving endangered species.

The fund said in a statement that "although such hunting is legal and regulated" it had "received many expressions of distress from its members and society in general." It says members voted in a meeting in Madrid on Saturday to "to get rid of the honorary President."

News of the king's April elephant hunting trip in Botswana upset many Spaniards who considered it an opulent extravagance at a time of economic distress in the country.

The Royal Palace declined immediate comment on the WWF announcement.

Related Articles:

'I made a mistake': Spanish King Juan Carlos in unprecedented apology over elephant hunting safari...  as calls grow for him to be axed from WWF presidency

Spain's model monarchy shoots itself in the foot

King Juan Carlos on his €10,000-a-day hunting safari in Botswana, which
had  been hushed up before he fell and broke his hip. Photograph: Target
Press/Barcroft Media

Is the WWF too close with industry?

Israel urged to treat Palestinian child detainees in accordance with rights law – UN

UN News Centre, 20 July 2012

Special Rapporteur Richard Falk. UN Photo/Jess Hoffman

20 July 2012 – A United Nations independent human rights expert today condemned Israel’s use of solitary confinement against Palestinian children, and urged the Israeli Government to treat such detainees in accordance with international human rights laws.

“Israel’s use of solitary confinement against children flagrantly violates international human rights standards,” the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the occupied Palestinian territories, Richard Falk, said in a news release.

“However, using solitary confinement as a punishment for Palestinian children who wish to peacefully protest their situation, including by commencing a hunger strike against conditions of detention, is an appalling abuse of child prisoners,” he added. “I again condemn Israel’s harsh arrest operations and procedures.”

Mr. Falk’s comments came in the wake of earlier concerns on the issue, raised today by the UN Special Committee on Israeli practices in the Occupied Territories, at the end of a fact-finding mission to Jordan, Egypt and the Gaza Strip.

“According to testimony received, Israel uses solitary confinement against 12 per cent of Palestinian child detainees,” the Special Committee’s Chairperson, Ambassador Palitha T.B. Kohona of Sri Lanka, said in a news release. “This is especially troubling when one considers that Israel arrests about 500 to 700 Palestinian children every year.”

The Special Committee also warned that a pattern of detaining and mistreating children “links to broader, longstanding concerns regarding Israel detention of Palestinians generally.”

“Witnesses informed the Committee that mistreatment of Palestinian children starts from the moment of detention,” Mr. Kohona said. “Large numbers are routinely detained. Children’s homes are surrounded by Israeli soldiers late at night, sound grenades are fired into the houses, doors are broken down, live shots are often fired; no warrant is presented. Children are tightly bound, blindfolded and forced into the backs of military vehicles.”

The Special Committee head said that parents are not allowed to accompany the detainees, and that family members are insulted, intimidated and at times physically assaulted. According to witnesses, the detention and transfer of children can last for hours, and can often include stops in Israeli settlements, Israeli checkpoints and police or military bases.

“This pattern of abuse by Israel is grave,” said Special Rapporteur Falk. “It is inhumane, cruel, degrading, and unlawful, and, most worryingly, it is likely to adversely affect the mental and physical health of underage detainees.”

The Special Rapporteur appealed to the Government of Israel to take urgent steps to bring their treatment of Palestinian children detainees into line with international human rights laws, in particular the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which spells out the basic human rights that children everywhere have.

In its preliminary observations in the wake of its fact-finding mission, the Special Committee drew attention to two further areas of immediate concern in the West bank, including East Jerusalem: the Israeli practice of demolishing Palestinian homes, and violence by Israeli settlers against Palestinians.

The Special Committee also assessed the economic impact of the Israeli blockade on the Gaza Strip.

“These Israeli practices lead the Special Committee to one over-arching and deeply troubling conclusion,” Mr. Kohona said. “The mass imprisonment of Palestinians; the routine demolition of homes and the displacement of Palestinians; the widespread violence by Israeli settlers against Palestinians; and the blockade and resultant reliance on illegal smuggling to survive; these practices amount to a strategy to either force the Palestinian people off their land or so severely marginalize them as to establish and maintain a system of permanent oppression.”

The Special Committee will present a mission report to the UN General Assembly in November, with its observations and recommendations to improve the human rights situation.

Independent experts, or special rapporteurs, are appointed by the Geneva-based Council to examine and report back on a country situation or a specific human rights theme. The positions are honorary and the experts are not United Nations staff, nor are they paid for their work.

Related Article:

Man sets himself alight at Israeli social justice protest

American Service Members to March in Gay Pride Parade

Jakarta Globe, July 20, 2012

This 2011 file photo shows two women, both active duty sailors in the Navy
 who gave their names as Nikki, left, and Lisa, kiss as they march in the Gay
 Pride Parade in San Diego. The Defense Department on Thursday announced it
 is allowing service members to march in uniform in a gay pride parade for the first
 time in US history. The department said it was making the exception for Saturday's
 San Diego's Gay Pride Parade because organizers had encouraged military personnel
 to march in their uniform and the event was getting national attention. (AP Photo/
 Gregory Bull, File)

               

Related articles

• Rap Singer Frank Ocean Lauded for Revealing Same-Sex Love
• Yudhoyono Proposes Australia-US-Indonesia Exercises
• CNN's Anderson Cooper Says 'The Fact Is, I'm Gay'
• Pentagon Probe Targets Islamic Extremists in US Army
• US Seeks to Reassure Japan Over Osprey Aircraft

Camp Pendleton, California. The Defense Department on Thursday announced it is allowing service members to march in uniform in a gay pride parade for the first time in US history.

In a memorandum sent to all its branches, the department said it was making the allowance for San Diego’s Gay Pride Parade on Saturday even though its policy generally bars troops from marching in uniform in parades.

The Defense Department said it did so because organizers had encouraged military personnel to march in their uniform and the event was getting national attention.

The move came only weeks after the Pentagon joined the rest of the US government for the first time in marking June as gay pride month and made an official salute to gay and lesbian service members.

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta vowed in a video message to remove as many barriers as possible to making the military a model of equal opportunity and said gays and lesbians can be proud in uniform with the repeal last year of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law.

Last year, San Diego’s Gay Pride Parade had the nation’s largest contingency of active-duty troops participate before the military lifted its ban on openly gay service members. About 200 service members last year wore T-shirts with their branch’s name.

Former sailor Sean Sala, who organized the military’s participation in the parade, said he wanted service members to wear their official uniform this year to show there is no longer anything to hide.

“My soul is on fire,” he said after hearing the news Thursday. “They don’t fight in T-shirts. They fight in uniforms. This is about showing who they are.”

The Pentagon said the allowance is only for this year’s parade in San Diego and does not extend beyond that. Military personnel wearing civilian clothes do not need permission to march in any parades.

The Defense Department policy says personnel cannot march in parades in uniform unless they receive approval from their commanding officers or other Pentagon-approved authorities.

Sala believes there will be no going back after Saturday. He said he has reached his dream in seeing the US military sanction participation in a gay pride parade, as the armed forces have done in Canada and Great Britain,

Uniformed soldiers in those countries have marched down the streets of Toronto and London next to scantily clad men, drag queens and civil rights activists.

“I think across the country we will start seeing active-duty members in uniform march in pride parades,” Sala said.

San Diego Pride Executive Director Dwayne Crenshaw called it an historic moment.

“San Diego Pride is honored to have the privilege of celebrating our country and our service members with dignity and respect,” he said. “The fight for equality is not over, and it is not easy, but this is a giant leap in the right direction.”

Before Thursday, several service members wanting to participate in San Diego’s parade were told they could not do so in uniform. Others were granted permission by their commanding officers.

“I think many people thought after ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ was gone, discriminatory things would be eradicated,” Sala said. “But now these parades have become a very sticky subject as far as commanders using their own discretion because they are showing either a bias toward a pride parade, or the right view, which this is about recognizing who people are.”

Before the repeal, gay troops could serve but could be discharged if they revealed their sexual orientation. At the same time, a commanding officer was prohibited from asking a service member whether he or she was gay.

More than 300 service members have signed up to participate this year in the San Diego parade. It was unclear how many will wear their uniform.

The Defense Department said in its message to the service members that they should adhere to policy regarding behavior while wearing their uniforms.

Service members in uniform cannot appear to endorse or selectively benefit groups or individuals, provide a platform for a political message, or appear to be commercially sponsored. They also must ensure their presence in uniform is not intended to increase sales and business traffic.

Air Force Officer Joanna Gasca was among those who risked marching last year in a T-shirt. Her commanding officer had given her permission to do so this year before Thursday’s memorandum was issued.

“It was absolutely thrilling last year to walk down the street,” the 47-year-old Air Force recruiter said. “But this year — to be able to march in uniform — wow! I’m speechless.”

Associated Press

Related Article:

Tutu calls for end to gay stigma to help tackle HIV

Almost entire US Congress refuses to release tax returns

RT.com, 19 July, 2012

Reuters/Kevin Lamarque

Members of Congress are demanding that U.S. presidential candidate Mitt Romney give full disclosure of all of his tax returns, but most are refusing to publicize their own.

The presumptive presidential nominee has disclosed his 2010 tax return and 2011 tax return estimate, but refuses to publicize any more. His refusal is generating critical responses from Congressional members, who claim his secrecy makes him unfit to run for president.

However most members of Congress do not think that this same level of transparency should apply to them. While senators and representatives are required to publicize their sources of income, they are not required to disclose their tax returns, which contain additional financial data like spousal income.

McClatchy has asked all 535 members of Congress for full disclosure of their tax returns, but only 17 have complied.

Among those who refused are Rep. Nancy Pelosi and Rep. Harry Reid – both of which have heavily criticized Romney for his limited transparency.

“He could not even become a Cabinet member for that lack of disclosure, and now with the lack of disclosure, he wants to be president of the United States,”  Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said.

Reid said Romney’s refusal to publicize more of his financial information makes him unfit to be a “dogcatcher” – a metaphor for the lowest possible elected office.

But Pelosi’s aides refused to disclose the representative’s own tax returns, saying she has already disclosed all that Congress requires.

“The leader has filed a complete financial disclosure report as required by law that includes financial holdings, transactions and other personal information,”  a Pelosi spokesman told McClatchy.“There has been no question about where Leader Pelosi and Democrats stand on tax policy.”

But similarly, there is no lawful requirement for presidential candidates to publicly release their tax returns, and it remains a matter of choice for the contenders.

Romney claims that full disclosure of his finances would distract from the issues he finds important.

“In the political environment that exists today, the opposition research of the Obama campaign is looking for anything they can use to distract from the failure of the president to reignite our economy,”  Romney told the National Review Online. “I’m simply not enthusiastic about giving them hundreds or thousands of more pages to pick through, distort and lie about.”

While some members of Congress find Romney's full disclosure necessary to better understand his financial background, they don't consider themselves responsible for the same.

Tax return documents indicate spousal incomes, and several members of Congress have married rich. Among the top of the list are Rep. Michael McCaul, Sen. John Kerry and Pelosi’s husband, who heads a venture capital and real estate firm. The representative’s spousal income thus remains publicly unknown.

Most lawmakers who did share their tax returns with McClatchy received significant deductions for interest on personal and investment real estate – information that taxpayers may be interested in, since the tax code is expected to change in the next few years.

Reporters are also interested in Congressional members’ tax returns to see how changes in tax laws would affect their income tax rates and capital gains taxes, dividends and deductions.

But most lawmakers refused full disclosure of their own tax returns, while continuing to demand that Romney release his.

Although most members of Congress refused to publicize their own tax returns, the DISCLOSE Act is bringing the transparency debate into the spotlight. On Tuesday, Senate Republicans blocked the Democratic legislation, which would require certain tax-exempt groups to disclose the names of some of their highest donors.

While Congress is battling over greater transparency in presidential campaigns, hypocrisy has found its way into the government, with most members opposed to having the same rules apply to them.

Related Article:

Romney had Swiss bank account, but now closed

Bradley Manning's treatment was cruel and inhuman, UN torture chief rules

UN special rapporteur on torture's findings likely to reignite criticism of US government's treatment of WikiLeaks suspect

guardian.co.uk, Ed Pilkington in New York, Monday 12 March 2012

Bradley Manning has been charged on 22 counts, including aiding
 the enemy. Photograph: Mark Wilson/Getty Images

The UN special rapporteur on torture has formally accused the US government of cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment towards Bradley Manning, the US soldier who was held in solitary confinement for almost a year on suspicion of being the WikiLeaks source.

Juan Mendez has completed a 14-month investigation into the treatment of Manning since the soldier's arrest at a US military base in May 2010. He concludes that the US military was at least culpable of cruel and inhumane treatment in keeping Manning locked up alone for 23 hours a day over an 11-month period in conditions that he also found might have constituted torture.

"The special rapporteur concludes that imposing seriously punitive conditions of detention on someone who has not been found guilty of any crime is a violation of his right to physical and psychological integrity as well as of his presumption of innocence," Mendez writes.

The findings of cruel and inhuman treatment are published as an addendum to the special rapporteur's report to the UN general assembly on the promotion and protection of human rights. They are likely to reignite criticism of the US government's harsh treatment of Manning ahead of his court martial later this year.

Manning, 24, was arrested on May 29 2010 at the Forward Operating Base Hammer outside Baghdad, where he was working as an intelligence analyst. Manning has been charged with 22 counts, including aiding the enemy, relating to the leaking a massive trove of state secrets to the whistleblowing website WikiLeaks.

Mendez, who runs the UN office that investigates incidents of alleged torture around the world, told the Guardian: "I conclude that the 11 months under conditions of solitary confinement (regardless of the name given to his regime by the prison authorities) constitutes at a minimum cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment in violation of article 16 of the convention against torture. If the effects in regards to pain and suffering inflicted on Manning were more severe, they could constitute torture."

Manning was initially held for almost three months at Camp Arifjan in Kuwait, and then transferred in July 2010 to the Marine corps base at Quantico in Virginia. He was held there for another eight months in conditions that aroused widespread condemnation, including being held in solitary confinement for 23 hours a day and being made to strip naked at night.

In his opening letter to the US government on December 30 2010, Mendez said that the prolonged period of isolated confinment was believed to have been imposed "in an effort to coerce him into 'cooperation' with the authorities, allegedly for the purpose of persuading him to implicate others."

It is known that the US department of justice is conducting a grand jury in Virginia exploring the possibility of bringing charges against Julian Assange, the WikiLeaks founder.

The US mission to the UN in Geneva responded to Mendez on January 27 2011. It said that the US government "is committed to protecting human rights in our country and abroad, and we value the work of the special rapporteur".

In a later letter, dated May 19 2011, the Pentagon's legal counsel told Mendez that it was satisfied that Manning's treatment at Quantico had been fine. "Though Private Manning was classified as a maximum custody detainee at Quantico, he occupied the very same type of single-occupancy cell that all other pretrial detainees occupied."

But the Pentagon's arguments did not impress the special rapporteur. He stressed in his final conclusions that "solitary confinement is a harsh measure which may cause serious psychological and physiological adverse effects on individuals regardless of their specific conditions." Moreover, "[d]epending on the specific reason for its application, conditions, length, effects and other circumstances, solitary confinement can amount to a breach of article seven of the international covenant on civil and political rights, and to an act defined in article one or article 16 of the convention against torture."

He also said that the US government had tried to justify Manning's solitary confinement by calling it "prevention of harm watch". Yet the military had offered no details as to what actual harm was being prevented.

Mendez told the Guardian that he could not reach a definitive conclusion on whether Manning had been tortured because he has consistently been denied permission by the US military to interview the prisoner under acceptable circumstances.

The Pentagon has refused to allow Mendez to see Manning in private, insisting that all conversations must be monitored. "You should have no expectation of privacy in your communications with Private Manning," the Pentagon wrote.

The lack of privacy is a violation of human rights procedures, the UN says, and considered unacceptable by the UN special rapporteur.

Manning's travails in solitary confinement came to an end on April 20 2011 when he was transferred from Quantico to Fort Leavenworth in Kansas, where he was held in more open conditions. He is currently being held in a facility in Virginia so that he can make frequent pre-trial appearances at Fort Meade in Maryland ahead of his eventual court martial.

Moscow Prosecutors Send Pussy Riot Case To Court For Trial

Radio Free Europe, July 12, 2012

Members of the Pussy Riot punk band whose case has been sent to court
 (left to right): Nadezhda Tolokonnikova, Maria Alyokhina, and Yekaterina
Samutsevich

Related Articles 

• Notes From Underground: Russia's Deep Society
• Court Upholds Pussy Riot Detentions
• Q&A: Faith No More Keyboardist Calls Pussy Riot 'Free Speech Pioneers'
• Anti-Kremlin Punkers' Case Stokes Emotions
• CulturalFigures Sign 'Punk' Petition

The Moscow prosecutor's office has sent its case against members of the all-female Pussy Riot punk band to court for trial.

The indictment accuses the three young women of inflicting "deep spiritual wounds" on Orthodox Christians as a result of their performance in Christ the Savior Cathedral that called for an end to Vladimir Putin’s rule in Russia.

A prosecutor's spokesman said on July 12 that the women had "colluded to commit an act of hooliganism for reasons of religious hatred and animosity against a social group."

The trio -- Nadezhda Tolokonnikova, Yekaterina Samutsevich and Maria Alekhina – have been in pre-trial detention since March.

Reports say they could face up to seven years in prison if convicted.

The case has sparked a debate in Russia and elsewhere about the limits of free speech.

Related Articles:

Rock and the Russian Church: The Pussy Riot debate

Pussy Riot detention drawn out 6-months, public outraged

Russian feminist punk band Pussy Riot behind bars and in the dock over anti-Putin prank

Russian civil rights legend carries on struggle


"The Recalibration of Awareness – Apr 20/21, 2012 (Kryon channeled by Lee Carroll) (Subjects: Old Energy, Recalibration Lectures, God / Creator, Religions/Spiritual systems  (Catholic Church, Priests/Nun’s, Worship, John Paul Pope, Women in the Church otherwise church will go, Current Pope won’t do it),  Middle East, Jews, Governments will change (Internet, Media, Democracies, Dictators, North Korea, Nations voted at once), Integrity (Businesses, Tobacco Companies, Bankers/ Financial Institutes, Pharmaceutical company to collapse),  Illuminati (Based in Greece, Shipping, Financial markets, Stock markets, Pharmaceutical money (fund to build Africa to develop)), Shift of Human Consciousness, (Old) Souls, Women, Masters to/already come back, Global Unity.... etc.)


"Perceptions of God" – June 6, 2010 (Kryon channelled by Lee Carroll) (Subjects: Quantum Teaching, The Fear of God, Near-death Experience, God Becomes Mythology, Worship, Mastery, Intelligent Design, Benevolent Creator, Global Unity.... etc.) (Text version)

“.. For centuries you haven't been able to think past that box of what God must be like. So you create a Human-like God with wars in heaven, angel strife, things that would explain the devil, fallen angels, pearly gates, lists of dos and don'ts, and many rules still based on cultures that are centuries old. You create golden streets and even sexual pleasures as rewards for men (of course) - all Human perspective, pasted upon God. I want to tell you that it's a lot different than that. I want to remind you that there are those who have seen it! Why don't you ask somebody who has had what you would call a near-death experience?