Tuesday, January 21, 2020

How U.S. Firms Helped Africa's Richest Woman Exploit Her Country's Wealth
LONG READ DOS SANTOS ANGOLA CORRUPTION
Michael Forsythe, Kyra Gurney, Scilla Alecci and Ben Hallman,
The New York Times•January 20, 2020 

 
Ana Gomes, a former European Parliament member who 
has accused Isabel dos Santos of money laundering, in
 Lisbon, Portugal, Jan. 8, 2020. (Ana Brigida/The New York Times)

LISBON, Portugal — It was the party to be seen at during the Cannes Film Festival, where being seen was the whole point. A Swiss jewelry company had rented out the opulent Hotel du Cap-Eden-Roc, drawing celebrities like Leonardo DiCaprio, Naomi Campbell and Antonio Banderas. The theme: “Love on the Rocks.”

Posing for photos at the May 2017 event was Isabel dos Santos, Africa’s richest woman and the daughter of José Eduardo dos Santos, then Angola’s president. Her husband controls jeweler De Grisogono through a dizzying array of shell companies in Luxembourg, Malta and the Netherlands.

But the lavish party was possible only because of the Angolan government. The country is rich in oil and diamonds but hobbled by corruption, with grinding poverty, widespread illiteracy and a high infant mortality rate. A state agency had sunk more than $120 million into the jewelry company. Today, it faces a total loss.

Dos Santos, estimated to be worth over $2 billion, claims she is a self-made woman who never benefited from state funds. But a different picture has emerged under media scrutiny in recent years: She took a cut of Angola’s wealth, often through decrees signed by her father. She acquired stakes in the country’s diamond exports, its dominant mobile phone company, two of its banks and its biggest cement maker, and partnered with the state oil giant to buy into Portugal’s largest petroleum company.

Now, a trove of more than 700,000 documents obtained by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, and shared with The New York Times, shows how a global network of consultants, lawyers, bankers and accountants helped her amass that fortune and park it abroad. Some of the world’s leading professional service firms — including the Boston Consulting Group, McKinsey & Co. and PwC — facilitated her efforts to profit from her country’s wealth while lending their legitimacy.

The empire she and her husband built stretches from Hong Kong to the U.S., comprising over 400 companies and subsidiaries. It encompasses properties around the world, including a $55 million mansion in Monte Carlo, Monaco, a $35 million yacht and a luxury residence in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, on a seahorse-shaped artificial island.

Among the businesses was the Swiss jewelry company, which records and interviews reveal was led by a team recruited from Boston Consulting. They ran it into the ground. Under their watch, millions of dollars in Angolan state funds helped finance the annual parties on the French Riviera.

When Boston Consulting and McKinsey signed on to help restructure Sonangol, Angola’s state oil business, they agreed to be paid in an unusual way — not by the government but through a Maltese company dos Santos owned. Then her father put her in charge of Sonangol, and the government payments soared, routed through another offshore company, this one owned by a friend of hers.

PricewaterhouseCoopers, now called PwC, acted as her accountant, consultant and tax adviser, working with at least 20 companies controlled by her or her husband. Yet there were obvious red flags as Angolan state money went unaccounted for, according to money-laundering experts and forensic accountants who reviewed the newly obtained documents.

When the Western advisory firms came into Angola almost two decades ago, they were viewed by the global financial community as a force for good: bringing professionalism and higher standards to a former Portuguese colony ravaged by years of civil war. But ultimately they took the money and did what their clients asked, said Ricardo Soares de Oliveira, an international politics professor at Oxford who studies Angola.

“They are there as all-purpose providers of whatever these elites are trying to do,” he said. “They have no moral status — they are what you make of them.”

Now, more than two years after her father stepped down after 38 years as Angola’s strongman president, dos Santos is in trouble.

Last month, an Angolan court froze her assets in the country as part of a corruption investigation, along with her husband’s and those of a Portuguese business associate. The Angolan attorney general claimed the couple were responsible for more than $1 billion in lost state funds, with particular focus on De Grisogono and Sonangol.

Dos Santos and her husband could face years in prison if convicted, according to the office of Angola’s president, João Lourenço. At the heart of the inquiry: $38 million in payments from Sonangol to a Dubai shell company hours after Angola’s new president announced her firing. Dos Santos’ half brother is also facing corruption charges for helping to transfer $500 million from Angola’s sovereign wealth fund. The asset freeze came soon after ICIJ reporting partners asked the government about transactions in the documents.

In an interview with the BBC, dos Santos, 46, denied any wrongdoing and called the inquiry a “political persecution.” “My companies are funded privately, we work with commercial banks, our holdings are private holdings,” she said.

Her husband, Sindika Dokolo, 47, suggested the new government was scapegoating them. “It does not attack the agents of public companies accused of embezzlement, just a family operating in the private sector,” he told Radio France Internationale, another ICIJ partner.

Global banks including Citigroup and Deutsche Bank, bound by strict rules about politically connected clients, largely declined to work with the family in recent years, the documents show.

“These guys hear about Isabel and they run like the devil from the cross,” Eduardo Sequeira, head of corporate finance for Fidequity, a Portuguese firm that manages many of dos Santos’ companies, wrote in a 2014 email after Spanish bank Santander turned down work with her.

Consulting companies, far less regulated than banks, readily embraced her business. American advisory firms market their expertise in bringing best practices to clients around the world. But in their quest for fees, several have worked for authoritarian or corrupt regimes in places like China or Saudi Arabia. McKinsey’s business in South Africa was decimated by its partnership with a subcontractor tied to a political scandal that took down the country’s president.

The new leaks show the pattern repeating itself in Angola, where invoices point to tens of millions of dollars going to the firms. They agreed to be paid for Angolan government work by shell companies — tied to dos Santos and her associates — that were in offshore locations long used to avoid taxes, hide illicit wealth and launder money. The arrangement allowed her to keep a large portion of the state funds, the records show.

(The documents, called the Luanda Leaks after the Angolan capital, include emails, slide presentations, invoices and contracts. They came to the ICIJ through the Platform to Protect Whistleblowers in Africa, a Paris-based advocacy and legal group.)

PwC, based in London, said it was investigating its dealings with dos Santos and would stop working with her family. Boston Consulting said it took steps, when hired, “to ensure compliance with established policies and avoid corruption and other risks.” McKinsey called the allegations against dos Santos “concerning,” and said it wasn’t doing any work now with her or her companies.

‘Shadow Management’

De Grisogono, an upstart Swiss jewelry company, was on life support. Its business had never fully recovered from the global financial crisis, and by 2012, it was deeply in debt.

Dokolo, dos Santos’ husband, seemed to offer a way out. He teamed up with Sodiam, the Angolan state diamond marketer, in a 50-50 venture set up in Malta that took over the jeweler. The state enterprise eventually pumped more than $120 million into the business, acquiring equity and buying off debt, the records indicate. Documents show that shortly after the acquisition, Dokolo put in $4 million, an amount he had gotten from a “success fee” — drawn from the Sodiam money and shunted through a shell company in the British Virgin Islands — for closing the deal.

Dokolo, through his law firm, said he had initially invested $115 million and “has subsequently invested significantly more into the business,” but that could not be verified in the documents.

Flush with Angolan government money, the Geneva jeweler hired the Boston Consulting Group, an American management company with offices in more than 50 countries.

In 2012, according to the documents, a Lisbon-based team at the firm took a central role in helping to run De Grisogono — “shadow management” as John Leitão, a Boston Consulting employee who would become the jeweler’s chief executive, said in a November interview in Lisbon.

The consulting firm, however, said its employees worked only on three specific projects, ending its involvement in early 2013.

By that year, the consultants had started leaving the firm to join the jeweler, eventually occupying the positions of chairman, chief financial officer and chief operating officer alongside Leitão.

He said in the interview that the consultants had inherited “a total mess.” But under his watch, the company, with boutiques in London, New York and Paris, went deeper into the red, despite an initial uptick in sales, documents show.

De Grisogono had a run of bad luck, including economic pressures affecting Russian oligarchs and Saudi sheikhs who had been big customers, Leitão said. Yet many rich patrons, including dos Santos and her husband, would take jewelry and wristwatches without paying for them up front, the documents show. Marketing expenses also shot up — 42% during Leitão’s first year to $1.7 million, with the increase going to the Cannes party, according to an internal presentation.

Dokolo was unapologetic about spending big on parties. “You tell me what major luxury brand spends less than this on promotion to become a global brand,” he told the French radio service. In an interview with BBC, dos Santos said she was not a stakeholder in De Grisogono, though several emails and documents call that into question, indicating she had an ownership interest in the Maltese companies controlling it.

The jeweler gave the couple an ability to better market Angolan diamonds. Dokolo already controlled the rights to more than 45% of the country’s diamond sales through a company that bought uncut gems, generating hundreds of millions of dollars in income, according to the Angolan president’s office.

Dokolo’s lawyers said he aimed to integrate the country’s diamond industry, “from mining to polishing to retail sales.”

The Angolan people did more than pay dearly for a European jewelry company. They paid with money borrowed at a 9% annual interest rate from Banco BIC, an Angolan lender where dos Santos owns a 42.5% stake. The government will have to repay some $225 million, according to the Angolan president’s office. The loans had been guaranteed by dos Santos’ father.

For all the money it put in, Sodiam never exercised any management control of the jeweler and never recouped any of its investment. Now, Sodiam officials want out, and the business is for sale.

“It is strange,” said Eugenio Bravo da Rosa, Sodiam’s new chairman, speaking of the man he replaced, who had signed off on the investment. “I can’t believe a person would start a business and let its partner run the business with total power to make all the decisions.”

Striking Oil


In 2016, Sonangol, Angola’s state oil company, was in crisis after a drop in market prices. One former Boston Consulting employee described a company in an “absolutely chaotic” state. The Angolan president fired the company’s board and appointed his daughter, Isabel dos Santos, as chairwoman that June. Boston Consulting was helping Sonangol come up with a “road map” to restructure.

Dos Santos had a history with the company. A decade earlier, she and her husband made millions partnering with Sonangol and a Portuguese businessman to invest in a Lisbon gas company, Galp Energia. Their stake came courtesy of the Angolan government — through an $84 million loan from Sonangol, documents show. Their share in Galp is now worth about $800 million.

The former Boston Consulting employee, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said that dos Santos — the president’s eldest child — was able to get things done that other executives could not because she wasn’t susceptible to pressure.

“We’re very committed to transparency,” dos Santos told Reuters at the time. “We’re very committed to improving our profits at Sonangol and to improving our organization.”

But transparency went only so far. More than half a year before she was named chairwoman, her father signed off on a decree drafted at the couple’s law firm, records show, that led to the awarding of $9.3 million to a Maltese company to oversee Sonangol’s restructuring. The business, Wise Intelligence Solutions, was owned by the couple and run by a close associate, Mário Leite da Silva, De Grisogono’s former chairman. Boston Consulting came on board, followed by McKinsey, with the Maltese firm acting as their manager.

Boston Consulting and other advisers billed for only about half of what Wise received from the Angolan treasury, receipts and invoices show, even though the Maltese company had only limited expertise of its own. Wise “does not have the human resources and specific know-how,” its Maltese accountant said in a March 2016 email. Dos Santos disputed this, with her law firm saying Wise had “technical expertise.”

After she took charge of Sonangol, the payments to the offshore companies would surge even higher.

In May 2017, Wise was replaced as project manager by a company in Dubai owned by one of her friends. It issued a flurry of invoices later that year, some with the barest of details. One of them, simply marked “Expenses May-September 2017,” carried a charge of more than 470,000 euros (over $520,000). These invoices account for the $38 million Sonangol paid to the Dubai company in the hours after dos Santos was fired on Nov. 15, 2017.

The Sonangol account was with the Portuguese arm of Banco BIC, where she was the biggest shareholder. Shunned by global banks, the couple increasingly relied on the Angolan lender, which has a big office in Lisbon steps from her apartment. In 2015, Portuguese regulators said the bank had failed to monitor money flowing from Angola to European companies linked to her and her associates, concluding that the lender lacked internal controls.

“Paying huge and dubious consulting fees to anonymous companies in secrecy jurisdictions is a standard trick that should sound all alarm bells,” said Christoph Trautvetter, a forensic accountant based in Berlin who worked as an investigator for KPMG, a global business advisory firm.

Days before the invoices were issued, the Sonangol executive who would have approved them was fired, replaced by a relative of dos Santos, the documents show. The managing director of the Dubai company, Matter Business Solutions DMCC, was her frequent associate da Silva.

Months later, Carlos Saturnino, dos Santos’s successor as Sonangol’s head, publicly accused her of mismanagement, saying her tenure was marked by conflicts of interest, tax avoidance and excessive reliance on consultants. He also said she had approved $135 million in consulting fees, with most of that going to the Dubai shell company.

“We have there some situations of money laundering, some of them of doing business with herself,” Hélder Pitta Grós, Angola’s attorney general, said in an interview with ICIJ partners.

Dos Santos, speaking with the BBC, said the Dubai company supervised work for Sonangol by Boston Consulting, McKinsey, PwC and several other Western firms. When asked about the invoices, she said she was unfamiliar with them but insisted the expenses were legitimate, charged at “the standard rate” under a contract approved by Sonangol’s board.

“This work was extraordinarily important,” she added, saying that Sonangol cut its costs by 40%.

Her lawyers said the $38 million was “for services that had already been provided and delivered by consultants in accordance with the contract.”

By late 2017, Boston Consulting was winding down its work on the project, which ended that November. McKinsey and PwC declined to comment.

The consultants’ involvement with dos Santos extended far beyond the Swiss jeweler and Sonangol. McKinsey, for example, provided advice on a Portuguese engineering firm she had just acquired and the Angolan mobile phone company where she served as chairwoman, documents show.

Two of the “big four” accounting firms, PwC and KPMG, did consulting work for Urbinveste, another thinly staffed company she owned that acted as a public works contractor in Angola. It oversaw projects — such as road and port design and urban redevelopment — worth hundreds of millions of dollars, some set to be financed with loans from Chinese banks and built by Chinese state-owned companies. KPMG also audited at least two companies she owned in the country. The firm said that in Angola, it performs “additional due diligence procedures” for all the businesses it audits.

The other two major accounting firms, Deloitte and Ernst & Young, now known as EY, did work for companies tied to her as well.

Accounting firms in the European Union, where much of dos Santos’ business empire was located, are bound by the same rules banks are, requiring them to report suspicious activity. One firm in particular, PwC, had a broad view into the inner workings of dos Santos’ empire.

The Accountant


Dos Santos had a long history with PwC. In the early 1990s, fresh out of King’s College London, she took a job with Coopers & Lybrand, soon to merge to become PricewaterhouseCoopers.

Her top money manager, da Silva, whose assets in Angola were frozen last month, was also a PwC alum. And when dos Santos took over Sonangol, she brought in a PwC partner, Sarju Raikundalia, as its finance head. The payments to Dubai in November 2017 happened on his watch before he, too, was fired. Neither of the businessmen responded to requests for comment.

PwC not only audited the books of her far-flung shell companies, but also provided her and Dokolo’s companies with tax advice and did consulting work for Sonangol.

Like Boston Consulting, PwC was paid by Wise Intelligence for its Angola work, and it audited the financial statements of the Maltese holding companies that controlled the Swiss jeweler.

In 2014, PwC accountants in Malta had a problem. As they prepared annual financial statements for Victoria Ltd., one of the Maltese companies that controlled De Grisogono, they wrote in a draft that the ultimate owners were Dokolo and the Angolan government. But Antonio Rodrigues, an executive at Fidequity, objected — the couple had been facing increasing media scrutiny after a 2013 Forbes article examined the origins of their wealth. Such information, he wrote, should not “be mentioned.”

“Noted — we will discuss internally and revert,” a PwC accountant replied. The language was removed.

PwC accountants also noticed there was no paperwork to account for millions of dollars in loans being pumped into the Maltese holding companies and De Grisogono, according to emails.

Robert Mazur, who was an anti-money-laundering investigator for the U.S. Customs Service, reviewed the PwC financial statements at the ICIJ’s request, along with email exchanges between the accountants and dos Santos’ money managers.

“The accountants and financial service providers involved in these transactions should have seriously considered filing a suspicious transaction report,” he said.

When presented with the ICIJ’s findings, PwC said it would not comment on specific projects, citing client confidentiality, but said it was ending its work with dos Santos. “In response to the very serious and concerning allegations that have been raised,” the firm said, “we immediately initiated an investigation and are working to thoroughly evaluate the facts and conclude our inquiry.”

As for dos Santos’ assets, the bulk of her fortune is now outside Angola, much of it in tax and secrecy havens where it will be hard to pry loose.

Ana Gomes, a former European Parliament member, filed a complaint in November in Portugal alleging that dos Santos laundered money through Banco BIC. Gomes said that the network of professional service firms had enabled dos Santos to move her money out of Angola and into legitimate businesses in Europe and elsewhere.

“They are part of a system of finding the safest landing for all the assets that are siphoned off,” she said.

This article originally appeared in The New York Times.

© 2020 The New York Times Company



World needs to prepare for 'millions' of climate refugees: U.N.

By Luke Baker, Reuters•January 21, 2020



1 / 4
World needs to prepare for 'millions' of climate refugees: U.N.
FILE PHOTO: A general view of tents at a camp in Bar Elias

By Luke Baker

DAVOS, Switzerland (Reuters) - The world needs to prepare for a surge in refugees with potentially millions of people being driven from their homes by the impact of climate change, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees said on Tuesday.

Speaking to Reuters at the World Economic Forum, Filippo Grandi said a U.N. ruling this week meant those fleeing as a result of climate change had to be treated by recipient countries as refugees, with broad implications for governments.

The U.N. Human Rights Committee made the landmark ruling on Monday in relation to Ioane Teitiota, from the Pacific nation of Kiribati, who brought a case against New Zealand after authorities denied his claim of asylum.

"The ruling says if you have an immediate threat to your life due to climate change, due to the climate emergency, and if you cross the border and go to another country, you should not be sent back because you would be at risk of your life, just like in a war or in a situation of persecution," Grandi said.

"We must be prepared for a large surge of people moving against their will," he said. "I wouldn't venture to talk about specific numbers, it's too speculative, but certainly we're talking about millions here."

Potential drivers include wildfires like those seen in Australia, rising sea levels affecting low-lying islands, the destruction of crops and livestock in sub-Saharan Africa and floods worldwide, including in parts of the developed world.

Whereas for most of its 70 years UNHCR, the UN's refugee agency, has worked to assist those fleeing poorer countries as a result of conflict, climate change is more indiscriminate, meaning richer countries may become a rising source of refugees.

"It is further proof that refugee movements and the broader issue of migration of populations... is a global challenge that cannot be confined to a few countries," said Grandi.

UNHCR, whose budget has risen from $1 billion a year in the early 1990s to $8.6 billion in 2019 as conflicts in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria have forced civilians to flee, now assists more than 70 million forcibly displaced people globally.

Turkey is the largest recipient, with more than 4 million refugees and asylum seekers, the vast majority from Syria. That has put strain on Turkey's public finances and led President Tayyip Erdogan to demand more assistance from Europe.

Last November, Erdogan threatened to open the door for Syrian refugees to head to Europe unless the European Union stepped up, and is now calling for the "resettlement" of up to 1 million Syrians in the north of their homeland.

Grandi said European governments needed to think hard about solutions to the migrant crisis that has affected them since 2015, but also show more understanding of Turkey's situation.

"We must recognize that for the past several years (Turkey)has been hosting the largest refugee population in the world," he said. "There's a lot of political talk. I concentrate on the substance of this, which is 'let's strengthen Turkey's ability to host refugees until they can go back safely, voluntarily to their countries'."


---30---

Greta Thunberg: 'Pretty much nothing' has been done about climate crisis

Oscar Williams-Grut
Senior City Correspondent, Yahoo Finance UK,
Yahoo Finance UK•January 21, 2020

Climate activist Greta Thunberg said Tuesday “basically nothing” has changed since she started protesting about climate change 18 months ago.

“Pretty much nothing has been done,” Thunberg said at a panel Davos on Tuesday. “Emissions of CO2 has not reduced and that is what we are trying to achieve.”

The 17-year-old Swedish climate activist made the comments at one of the opening sessions of the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) annual meeting, commonly known as Davos. Her comments came after she was asked what had changed since she launched her student climate strike movement in August 2018.

“In one aspect, lots has happened that no one could have predicted,” Thunberg said. “This has sparked general awareness and a movement. All these many, many young people from many different places pushing together to form this alliance of movements.

“People are more generally aware now. The climate and environment is a hot topic now, thanks to young people pushing.”


Swedish climate change activist Greta Thunberg attends the 50th World Economic Forum annual meeting in Davos, Switzerland, on 21 January. Photo: Denis Balibouse/Reuters

But she said that awareness had not translated into action and “basically nothing” had been done about reducing emissions and tackling the warming planet.

Thunberg said people must “start listening to the science” and “start treating this crisis as the crisis it is.”

Thunberg urged world leaders and the media to take climate change more seriously, warning the planet has just eight year’s worth of ‘carbon budget’ left to avoid dangerous warming to the globe over the next 100 years.

“These numbers aren’t people’s opinions or political views, this is the current best available science,” she said in prepared remarks at the end of the session.

“Richer countries need to get down to zero emissions much faster and then help poorer countries do the same.”

She added: “These numbers also don’t include most feedback loops, nonlinear tipping points, nor additional warming hidden by toxic air pollution.”

“Without treating this as a real crisis we cannot solve it and we cannot solve it from a holistic view.”

Thunberg appeared alongside other young activists from around the world on a panel titled “Forging a Sustainable Path towards a Common Future”.

She is attending Davos for the second year in a row, with sustainability and climate change high on the agenda of the elite gathering. This year’s Davos conference is titled “Stakeholders for a Cohesive and Sustainable World” and WEF warned ahead of the event that environmental risks are the biggest threat to global stability over the next decade.

Thunberg, who was named TIME’s 2019 person of the year, said in an open letter to Davos attendees ahead of the conference that they must immediately abandon all fossil fuels. Climate activists have also been protesting in Switzerland ahead of the event.

Earlier on Tuesday, Green Finance Institute chief executive Rhian-Mari Thomas said during a TV interview at Davos abandoning fossil fuels would lead to a “disorderly transition” to clean energy. Thomas said industry would have to work with polluting energy companies to help move them towards more sustainable energy sources.

---30---





Northeastern College Student Deported to Iran Despite Judge’s Order

The attorneys for a 24-year-old Iranian national and Northeastern University student said their client was deported late Monday in spite of a federal court order.



Olivia Messer, The Daily Beast•January 21, 2020
 

Joe Raedle/Getty Images

The attorneys for a 24-year-old Iranian national and Northeastern University student who inspired protests at Boston Logan International Airport over the weekend said their client was deported late Monday in spite of a federal court order.

Shahab Dehghani was detained Sunday night at about 5 p.m. when he arrived to study economics at the private school on a valid F1 student visa. He was held for secondary questioning by federal agents, and more than 100 people reportedly came out to demonstrate on his behalf outside of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) area of the airport for at least three hours on Monday. Protesters chanted “let Shahab in,” “do the right thing,” “stop deporting students,” and “let him in!”

Dehghani was ordered removed from the U.S. without his having access to a lawyer, WBUR reported, but his attorneys, Susan Church and Kerry Doyle, filed an emergency federal petition on his behalf Monday night. The filing claimed CBP agents violated Dehghani’s rights when they detained him at the airport in the first place.

U.S. District Court Judge Allison Burroughs granted the order, scheduled a hearing in Boston federal court at 10 a.m. on Tuesday to discuss the matter, and appeared to delay Dehghani’s removal.

“It is not a total victory. It is a partial victory,” Church told a crowd of protesters on Monday night, according to MassLive.com.

Despite that order, Church said on Twitter Tuesday morning that Shahab Dehghani was “removed from the U.S. at 10:03 p.m.” Monday after agents told “multiple attorneys” that he was taken off the plane about 30 minutes earlier.

Church tweeted on Tuesday morning: “THEY LIED.”

A CBP spokesperson said in a statement that the agency could not confirm or deny that Dehghani was even in custody, citing the Privacy Act.

“Applicants must demonstrate they are admissible into the U.S. by overcoming all grounds of inadmissibility including health-related grounds, criminality, security reasons, public charge, labor certification, illegal entrants and immigration violations, documentation requirements, and miscellaneous grounds,” the statement said.

Judge Richard G. Stearns reportedly dismissed the case during a Tuesday morning hearing, declaring the issue moot—since Dehghani had already been deported—and noting that he did not believe he had the authority to order CBP to allow for the student’s return, according to WBUR.

During the 10 a.m. hearing in Boston federal court, CBP attorneys also disputed the timeline presented by Dehghani’s attorneys, one of whom said Massachusetts Sen. Ed Markey received confirmation that the emergency stay order was granted before the flight took off, WBUR reported. In court, the agency’s attorneys reportedly claimed that Dehghani’s plane left before the order was issued.

“We are aware that a Northeastern University student who is an Iranian citizen has been denied entry to the United States,” school spokeswoman Shannon Nargi said in a statement to The Daily Beast. “Northeastern welcomes thousands of international students and supports them with an array of resources. We have been in touch with federal officials to learn more about this case and to provide our student with the appropriate assistance to facilitate a successful return to Northeastern.”

Dehghani previously attended University of Massachusetts Boston and was in the country for more than two years before he returned to Iran to visit family in December 2018, MassLive.com reported.

Massachusetts Senator and Democratic presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren recently requested more information from CBP about additional security measures that may target Iranian travelers entering the country. The Guardian reported that the U.S. has deported at least 10 Iranian students with valid visas since August—despite the lengthy and intense approval process it takes to acquire that paperwork. Seven of those students had reportedly flown into Logan International Airport in Boston, and some now allege serious infractions by an individual CBP officer at the Boston airport, the newspaper reported.

Iranian student with valid visa facing deportation from US ‘without explanation’

Lawyers allege attempted removal ‘a result of additional scrutiny targeting Iranians’


Andy Gregory

Mohammad Shahab Dehghani Hossein was detained upon his return to the US despite having a valid student visa

An Iranian student with a valid visa to study in the US was detained without explanation or direct access to legal counsel and threatened with imminent deportation as the country celebrated Martin Luther King Day, his lawyers said.

More than 50 protesters gathered at Logan Airport in Massachusetts, where Mohammad Shahab Dehghani Hossein was arrested by US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents and was due to be deported at 6:30pm local time on Monday.

The 24-year-old economics student’s lawyers filed an emergency petition to block his forced removal and allow him to finish his studies at Northeastern University. The document was seen by The Independent.

His deportation was delayed and his hearing will take place on Tuesday morning at Boston’s federal court.

After two years studying in the US, Mr Dehghani is believed to have been visiting family in Iran, an act that has been made more complex by Donald Trump’s so-called Muslim travel ban.

While the number of F1 (student) visas granted to those from the affected countries has significantly dropped since the ban’s introduction, these visas can offer only one entry to the US, meaning many students have been forced to stay in the country for the entire duration of their studies, with their families banned from visiting them.

Mr Dehghani attended the University of Massachusetts Boston before transferring to Northeastern, at which point he reapplied for a visa, which took nearly a year before he received it last week, Mass Live reported one of his lawyers, Susan Church, as saying.

“He went through an extensive processing period before he came back, which means that overseas investigators research his family, they speak to employers, they do a very thorough investigation,” Ms Church, told The Boston Globe.

CBP officials refused to provide a reason for his detention and did not allow direct communication with his lawyers, the emergency petition stated.



His detention came after the Trump-ordered strike that killed top Iranian general Qassem Soleimani brought tensions between the two nations to boiling point, casting doubt over America’s immediate role in the region and the future of the 2015 nuclear pact.

Rather than being based in “legitimate concerns” over his admissibility to the US, his attempted removal was “a result of additional scrutiny targeting Iranians”, his lawyers alleged.

Legal experts said Mr Dehghani’s was far from an isolated case.

“This is but one of many Iranian students “deported” by CBP Logan since August 2019,” said Mahsa Khanbabai, chair of New England’s American Immigration Lawyers Association. “Legitimate students, vetted thoroughly by many agencies, granted visas, and then treated like this by CBP with no explanation.”

Presidential hopeful Elizabeth Warren also weighed in on Mr Dehghani’s case, writing on Twitter: “His deportation must be halted, and we must fight the Trump administration's xenophobic policies.”

“Given the Trump administration’s xenophobic policies and Logan Airport’s troubling practice of sending students back to Iran, we are deeply concerned that Shahab was detained,” said the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts executive director Carol Rose, adding that the organisation was assisting with the case.

“He has a valid visa ... and he went back to visit home, and now he can’t come back?” Mr Dehghani’s friend, Omar Rashed, told The Globe.

“He got an apartment, he did everything he’s supposed to do, he followed all the rules, he jumped through all the hoops. It’s injustice. And today is Martin Luther King Day, of all days. Does anyone see the irony in this?”



As presidential candidates spend big on advertising, only a few invest in Snapchat

Brittany Shepherd National Politics Reporter, Yahoo News•January 10, 2020
Political ads on Snapchat. (Photo illustration: Yahoo News;
 screengrabs via Snapchat)

WASHINGTON — In early December, a select group of teens and young adults in South Carolina would have been greeted by a new friend on Snapchat, the popular messaging app: a dimly lit photo of Pete Buttigieg, his notable crisp white collar barely inching into view. Positioned under his face was an anonymous quote about the then-South Bend, Ind., mayor, praising his quest to root out racism.

The graphic was part of his presidential campaign’s targeted South Carolina ad buy: $3,293 for ads targeted at eight area codes running throughout the month of December.

But not all app users received the advertising golden ticket. The campaign targeted teens age 17 and up who were “urban & hip-hop music fans” as well as viewers of the Black Entertainment Television network (BET), according to data made public by Snap, the parent company of Snapchat. The ad buy in the critical early state suggests Buttigieg is targeting younger black voters, a demographic that the campaign has floundered with thus far.

Buttigieg’s ad buy on Snapchat may sound modest, but it’s still bigger than some of his competitors’: His was one of only five Democratic campaigns to buy Snapchat ads in the first place. It also underscores the way some campaigns are experimenting with new social media platforms, where there’s little empirical data to demonstrate effectiveness.
Screengrabs via Snapchat

“In a crowded primary, these campaigns are eager to find voters wherever they can get them, particularly in these segments of the electorate. Snapchat is a great platform to reach young voters and young voters of color,” said Kyle Tharp, spokesman of progressive nonprofit Acronym, which specializes in analysis of digital ad spending. “It would make sense they want to invest in Snapchat.”

Compared to the money flowing into television ads — Michael Bloomberg alone is spending over $53 million on airtime — the dollars going into social media are still small. But candidates are clearly thinking about how and where to focus their efforts, and looking at new platforms is clearly part of that. In the last presidential election, Hillary Clinton focused on traditional television ad spending, while the Trump campaign made deep investments in digital advertising, putting four times as much money into ads that would populate on Facebook, Google and other platforms than Trump’s Democratic rival did, aiding in his eventual competitive advantage.

As interest in advertising on social media expands, a number of candidates appear to be moving into Snapchat, which is popular among younger people. According to a Pew study, more than three-quarters of young adults in the U.S. age 18 to 24 are Snapchat users. Another survey shows nearly 80 percent of black, non-Hispanic teens and 64 percent of Hispanic teens are active Snapchat users.

Snap has made every global political advertising purchase on its app public in a searchable database called the political ads library. Yahoo News reviewed the 2019 data and found a modest playing field: The campaigns of Buttigieg, Joe Biden, Bloomberg, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, Sen. Bernie Sanders and President Trump were the only ones buying ads on the app.

The overall breakdown looks like this: Since April, Warren bought the most ads — 147 — with only nine specifically targeted toward early states. There, users 18 years old and up who happened to be “green living enthusiasts, collegiates, and advocates” would be greeted with videos of Warren running in her trademark cardigan asking users to join the fight to cancel student loan debt, promising to challenge the National Rifle Association, etc., all issues top-of-mind for Generation Z voters.

Buttigieg’s campaign began its ad buys a little later, starting in September, and eventually purchased 72 ads for $59,906 — 38 of those running in Iowa and 26 in New Hampshire targeting “collegiates, green living enthusiasts, political news watcher, and tv viewers (news).” A green-living enthusiast over 18 years old in New Hampshire in September, for example, would be greeted with a video of the former mayor saying “climate change is not theoretical.” Months later, a hip-hop-loving teen would get an ad with Buttigieg discussing how his faith informs his policies dealing with racial inequality.

Both Warren and Buttigieg made concerted efforts to target young African-American voters, with Warren focusing on ads about criminal justice and gun control at Southern historically black colleges and universities, and Buttigieg focusing a series of ads on reparations.

Trump’s campaign — which took early advantage of Snapchat during the 2016 cycle — bought 15 ads since July. None were aimed toward an early state, and only one was aimed toward a specific, though unsurprising, demographic: Fox News viewers over 18 years old. Those users would simply see a black Trump supporter wearing a Trump 2020 hat. Other ads encouraged users to swipe up to find MAGA rallies in their area or inquired if the users supported Trump in a sponsored poll. Trump’s Snap buys were unique compared to competitors’ because they targeted users over 35 — older than the average Snapchat user.

A Trump campaign official told Yahoo News, “The campaign’s approach to digital advertising is similar to high-frequency trading on Wall Street, constantly buying and selling to see which ads bring the most value. We test different ad variations on numerous platforms to see what performs the best. While Democrats are locked in a primary fight only talking to their base, we are talking to voters of varied interests across the country.”
 
Screengrabs via Snapchat

Former Vice President Biden bought only four ads over six months totaling $1,675, with one targeted to Iowa and another aimed at users over 17. Two of the ads featured a filter where users could impose Biden’s trademark aviator sunglasses over their selfies, one thanked guests for going to the Iowa steak fry, and the last featured a message from a 10-year-old girl talking to Biden about the threats of climate change.

The smallest purchase was from Sanders’s campaign, which spent a mere $361 on an ad that ran in early June of a young woman of color who “stood with Bernie.” It was a surprisingly sparse presence from a candidate who boasts support from young Democratic voters at especially high margins.

While much smaller than his other major ad buys, former New York City Mayor Bloomberg spent $122,108 on Snapchat at the end of December: Two ads ran in several Super Tuesday states. His ad buy on Snapchat may have been just a fraction of his spending on television, but it was nonetheless more than any other candidate spent on the social media platform.

But not all advertising spending is equal. One $29,215 purchase by the Trump campaign — a simple “do you approve of President Trump” graphic aimed at all users over 18 — received nearly 22 million impressions, or the number of users who saw the ad. The second and third ads with the highest impressions were purchased by Bloomberg, with about 20 million and 9 million impressions, respectively. This combined reach for just two ads towers above the reach from all of Buttigieg’s ads, which combined at about 17 million users. Which, well, makes sense when you look at how much money those top two candidates have in their war chests.

Such a phenomenon might potentially turn off other candidates lacking the money to invest in a risky social media strategy. Why spend a little money and time to run a strategic ad campaign when, in the eleventh hour, a billionaire could outspend and outreach you tenfold?

But Tharp argues it’s not fear of being outspent by billionaires that is keeping candidates away. Rather, it’s the conventional thinking that young voters are an unreliable part of the electorate.

He also suggested that Warren and Buttigieg’s spending is far more intentional.

“It seemed like the Bloomberg team just wanted to dump a bunch of money because they had a lot of money to spend,” said Tharp. “There’s not a lot of nuance to the strategy: Throw money, and see if they can get a quick ROI.”

Still, during a time when Twitter and Spotify have announced they will no longer run political ads, Snapchat might be one of the only clear avenues where campaigns can microtarget their advertisements toward young people and see results.

Based on Acronym’s own advertising spending, Tharp said that Snapchat ads are a “cheaper way to reach wider audiences than Facebook and Instagram ads.” Plus, users might trust ads on Snapchat more since the company pledged to fact-check — a promise Facebook is far less clear about.

“I think what we try to do is create a place for political ads on our platform, especially because we reach so many young people and first-time voters we want them to be able to engage with the political conversation,” Snap CEO Evan Spiegel said in November, “but we don’t allow things like misinformation to appear in that advertising.”

---30---
Hillary Clinton on Bernie Sanders: 'Nobody likes him' — herself included

SORE LOSER
REHASHES HER SLANDERS AGAINST SANDERS 
WHOM SHE DEFEATED IN THE PRIMARY IN 2016 BY CHEATING 

Dylan Stableford Senior Writer,Yahoo News•January 21, 2020




Clinton slams Sanders: 'Nobody likes him'

Four years after a bitter primary that she felt hurt her in the general election, it appears Hillary Clinton is still not ready to let go of her hard feelings toward Sen. Bernie Sanders.

Four years after her bitter primary fight against Sen. Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton is leveling fresh criticism against the Vermont senator, calling him an ineffectual lawmaker and refusing to commit to supporting him if he wins the 2020 Democratic nomination.

In an upcoming Hulu documentary, Clinton claims the Vermont senator has no allies in Congress.

“Nobody likes him,” Clinton says. “Nobody wants to work with him; he got nothing done. He was a career politician. It’s all just baloney and I feel so bad that people got sucked into it.”

In an interview with the Hollywood Reporter published Tuesday, Clinton was asked if that assessment still holds.

“Yes, it does,” she replied.

“It’s not only him,” Clinton continued. “It’s the culture around him. It’s his leadership team. It’s his prominent supporters. It’s his online Bernie Bros and their relentless attacks on lots of his competitors, particularly the women.”

She added: “I really hope people are paying attention to that because it should be worrisome that he has permitted this culture — not only permitted, [but he] seems to really be very much supporting it.”
Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders. (Photos: Richard Shotwell/Invision/AP, Elise Amendola/AP)

Sanders, who battled for the nomination almost until the end of the primaries, endorsed Clinton two weeks before the 2016 Democratic convention, and spent weeks campaigning for her before the November election. But Clinton believes that his support was too late and less than wholehearted — factors that cost her the election.

The Sanders campaign did not immediately return a request for comment.

In the interview, Clinton refused to commit to endorsing or campaigning for Sanders if he emerges as the 2020 Democratic nominee.

“I’m not going to go there yet,” she said. “We’re still in a very vigorous primary season.”

At a debate last week, Sanders disputed Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s account of a conversation in which he allegedly told her a woman couldn’t beat President Trump. He invoked Clinton in his response.

“Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by 3 million votes,” Sanders said. “How could anybody in a million years not believe that a woman could become president of the United States? And let me be very clear. If any of the women on this stage or any of the men on this stage win the nomination — I hope that’s not the case, I hope it’s me — but if they do, I will do everything in my power to make sure that they are elected in order to defeat the most dangerous president in the history of our country.”



---30---
California considers declaring common pain killer carcinogen

California considers declaring common pain killer acetaminophen a carcinogen

ADAM BEAM,Associated Press•January 21, 2020


A fight is coming to California over whether to list one of the world's 
most common over-the-counter drugs as a carcinogen, echoing recent 
high-profile battles over things like alcohol and coffee.


SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — A fight is coming to California over whether to list one of the world's most common over-the-counter drugs as a carcinogen, echoing recent high-profile battles over things like alcohol and coffee.

The drug is acetaminophen, known outside the U.S. as paracetamol and used to treat pain and fevers. It is the basis for more than 600 prescription and over-the-counter medications for adults and children, found in well-known brands like Tylenol, Excedrin, Sudafed, Robitussin and Theraflu.

Acetaminophen has been available in the U.S. without a prescription since 1955. Concerns about its potential link to cancer come from its relationship to another drug: phenacetin. That drug, once a common treatment for headaches and other ailments, was banned by the FDA in 1983 because it caused cancer.

State regulators have reviewed 133 studies about acetaminophen, all of which were published in peer-reviewed journals. Some studies reported an increased risk of some types of cancers, while others did not. Overall, the review noted acetaminophen has been difficult to examine because it is hard to isolate it from other variables that could contribute to cancer, such as smoking.
- ADVERTISEMENT -


A state law known as Proposition 65 says California must warn people of any chemical known to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity. The state's list has grown to about 900 chemicals, including toxic pesticides and flame retardants, and is more extensive than any in the U.S. Some critics say California regulators have been overzealous, requiring warning labels for countless products that confuse instead of inform consumers when the risk of cancer is disputed.

Supporters of Prop 65 say it protects not only Californians but consumers nationwide by compelling manufacturers to make products safer.

Evidence for acetaminophen's link to cancer has been weak enough that the International Agency for Research on Cancer declined to list it as a possible carcinogen following reviews in 1990 and 1999. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has warned state officials that labeling acetaminophen as cancer-causing would be “false and misleading” and also illegal under federal law.

A panel of scientists appointed by the governor can add chemicals to this list. In 2011, the panel voted to make acetaminophen a “high priority” for consideration because it believed there was relevant evidence to consider, according to Sam Delson, spokesman for the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment.

The review process has been slow, but the panel is scheduled to have a public hearing on the listing this spring after the public comment period closes on Jan. 27.

“It's a difficult issue because it's a very commonly used drug. But that doesn't make any difference. That's not what our mandate is,” said Thomas Mack, chairman of the Carcinogen Identification Committee and a professor of preventive medicine at the University of Southern California.

Adding a chemical to the list can have broad repercussions. After the state listed glyphosate — widely known as the weed killer Roundup — as a carcinogen in 2017, a jury ordered the company that makes Roundup to pay a California couple with cancer more than $2 billion. A judge later reduced that award to $87 million. That's just one of the estimated 13,000 pending lawsuits involving the chemical.

That's one reason why the industry is pushing back on a potential listing. The Consumer Healthcare Products Association, a trade group representing over-the-counter medicines and dietary supplements, conducted its own review and found most studies suggest no risk for most forms of cancer, although some studies did show increased risk for kidney, liver and some forms of blood cancer.

The association urged California regulators to have a “cautious interpretation” of studies that show an increased risk of cancer.

Some listings in California require warning labels. But the state has made exceptions. Alcohol has been listed as a carcinogen since 1988. But instead of warning labels, the state directs the alcohol industry to provide signs to California retailers to post where alcohol is sold.

Acrylamide, a byproduct of roasting coffee beans, has been listed as a carcinogen since 1990. But when a court ruling would have resulted in warning labels for coffee, state regulators stepped in and exempted the drink.


___

LIBYA UPDATES

No evidence of Sudan paramilitaries fighting in Libya: UN 


AFP•January 20, 2020

Protesters hold a banner reading "Stop war in Libya, Haftar and mercenaries" 

during a protest near the chancellery during the Peace summit on Libya
 at the Chancellery in Berlin on January 19, 2020 
(AFP Photo/John MACDOUGALL) 

United Nations (United States) (AFP) - A United Nations panel said Monday it had no "credible evidence" of Sudanese paramilitaries fighting in conflict-wracked Libya for military strongman Khalifa Haftar as alleged by some media outlets.

Several Libyan and regional media outlets had claimed in recent months that hundreds of Sudanese paramilitaries from the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) were deployed in Libya to fight alongside Haftar's Libyan Arab Armed Forces.


But a UN panel of experts on Sudan dismissed these claims in a report released on Monday.


"The panel has no credible evidence of the presence of Rapid Support Forces in Libya," the report said.

It said there were, however, many Arabs from Sudan's conflict-wracked region of Darfur and neighbouring Chad fighting as "individual mercenaries" in Libya and they belonged to the same tribes that made up a majority of RSF personnel.

The UN experts' report also said several Darfuri armed groups operating in Libya "have participated in various clashes and military operations alongside Libyan warring parties".

Libya has been mired in chaos since a 2011 NATO-backed uprising that killed longtime dictator Moamer Kadhafi, with the main cleavage nowadays pitting Haftar's LAAF against a UN recognised government in Tripoli.

The deputy of Sudan's ruling transitional sovereign council, General Mohamed Hamdan Daglo, heads the feared RSF which has long been accused by human rights groups of committing widespread abuses in Sudan's Darfur provinces.

The report said Darfur itself did not see any large-scale outbreak of violence during the reporting period -- March to December 2019 -- although the region saw intercommunal skirmishes, militia attacks on civilians and tensions in major camps housing people displaced by the conflict.

It said that a main rebel group in Darfur, the Sudan Liberation Army-Abdul Wahid group, has strengthened its military capability after its revenues increased following the discovery of a gold mine in an area it controls.

"The movement has been able to strengthen its military capability by acquiring new weapons and ammunition from local militias and engaging in a recruitment drive," the report said.

The group fought Sudanese government forces for years during the regime of Omar al-Bashir, who was deposed during street protests in April last year.

The conflict in Darfur erupted in 2003, when non-Arab rebels took up arms against Bashir's Arab-dominated regime, whom they accused of marginalising the region.

The conflict left at least 300,000 people dead and displaced 2.5 million others, the UN says.

The SLA-Abdul Wahid group has not participated in ongoing peace talks with Sudan's new transitional government which is negotiating with several other rebel groups in a bid to achieve a peace deal to end wars in Darfur as well as Blue Nile and South Kordofan states.


Russia and Turkey have one goal over Libya – undermining Europe’s influence
Ahmed Aboudouh,The Independent•January 21, 2020
 
Mikhail Metzel/TASS

For one day at least, the real battle for Libya’s future was not the battleground around Tripoli, but effectively a conference table in Berlin. It is a shame then that while the true shot-callers in the war-raged country were present, any progress looks set to remain on paper.

The conference was doomed to fail from the outset because it stands at odds with the new relationship the US and Russia have developed - even if they haven't officially acknowledged it - in the Middle East. Germany, the US, France and the UK were all there and the right noises were made about a need to limit foreign interference in the conflict. There was also an agreement that anyone breaking the arms embargo would face sanctions. There were also scattered comments about the use of a possible peace-keeping force.

But international powers face two main issues. The first is that the two major forces involved, the UN-recognised government in Tripoli led by the prime minister, Fayez al-Sarraj, and the Libyan National Army led by General Khalifa Haftar will not yet negotiate directly. Both sides have agreed to nominate five members to an UN ceasefire monitoring committee, but it is clear there is much work to be done. “Our long experience in dealing with Haftar reinforces that he will seek power at any cost,” Sarraj has said

The second issue is political will. While any diplomatic efforts should be welcomed, the US was seemingly only at the table half-heartedly. Diplomats have mostly stuck closely to Donald Trump's 2017 comment that he doesn’t “see a role in Libya.” Subcontracting any major role to Germany and other EU nations allows Trump to stick to his promise of cutting down Washington's influence in the Middle East. And by doing so, he is giving president Vladimir Putin of Russia almost a free hand to do as it likes.

Sounds like a fair deal, doesn’t it?

Europe is itching to adopt a more aggressive role. Libya is a tinderbox not far from the bloc's borders. But Moscow will not want any European power, through its own national efforts or under the EU umbrella, to become the new trusted mediator in the region. This is also apparently not in the interests of Trump administration. While it is not official US policy, the US president has sought to downplay Russia's actions around the world in his various statements - particularly whenever Putin is in earshot. This only works to weaken Europe.

Meanwhile, Russia wouldn’t give up its new role as kingmaker in the region. After spending billions of dollars propping up Bashar al-Assad in Syria, Putin's influence has been steadily rising in the Middle East, the last thing the Russian leader would want is to have a European power muscle in on this. If anything, Putin is trying to copy his Syria’s successful policy in Libya.

The German foreign minister Heiko Maas’s statement about making sure “Libya doesn’t become a second Syria” is a case of too little too late. Libya risks turning slowly but steadily into another Syria, and this is how Putin and the Turkish president Recep Rayyip Erdogan appear to envisage the crisis.

Erdogan has said that his country will do all it can to support Sarraj and his government. But Turkey seems increasingly keen on re-establishing mutual deterrence and create a standoff where none of the warring parties is superior over the other. This strategy would help both Russia and Turkey build a conclusive leverage over both sides, and slowly move to block out other European and regional players in Libya.

For most of the war, it was Haftar that appeared the stronger by controlling vast swaths of the country. Turkey feels it has little choice but to support Tripoli government, although the fact that could bring a share of the immense East Mediterranean gas reserves will also have played a part. What Ankara wants in the long-term is influence and this is one way to bring it.

Russia’s objectives are slightly different. It wants to make sure it has direct links with whoever will control Libya’s oil supplies in the future. It is also looking to establish a foothold close to Southern Europe and impede the EU’s attempts to diversify its gas resources away from dependence on Russia. Both countries are also rubbing their hands for future lucrative construction and energy contracts at the end of the conflict. The more influence both Russia and Turkey wield, as in Syria, the less room there is for others.

However, Putin and Erdogan still face two problems. Italy and France have a lot at stake over Libya, with the movement of refugees and migrants from the country a major concern for Rome. The other problem is the Arab states. Egypt, the UAE and Saudi Arabia have all backed Haftar. Qatar, on the other hand, has been on Turkey’s side in keeping the Tripoli government afloat.

In showing up at the Berlin conference, Egypt's President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi and the UAE foreign minister Abdullah bin Zayed have also sent a clear message to all parties that Arab states will be looking for a say in any diplomatic resolution in Libya, having been pushed to the diplomatic fringes over Syria.

For civilians on the ground in Libya, the Berlin conference offers little but words. The conference lengthy statement involved lofty goals. It called for a lasting ceasefire, the demobilisation and disarming of militias and talks to form a single government. As well as a fair distribution of oil resources, and free elections to endorse the new government. Had it focused on less ambitious goals there may have been something tangible to build upon at another conference.

For better or worse, the summit was essentially a PR event. There are few reasons for Sarraj and Haftar to get around a table together as it stands. While Russia and Turkey may want to keep influence over the country to themselves, Libyans deserve much better than that.
Dutch farm dad 'beat bad spirits out of kids'

ANOTHER CRAZY CHRISTIAN 


Danny KEMP, AFP•January 21, 2020


Prosecutors spoke to the court during a procedural hearing 
 in the case (AFP Photo/Robin VAN LONKHUIJSEN)
The Hague (AFP) - A Dutchman isolated six of his children in a remote farmhouse from birth and beat them to drive out "bad spirits," prosecutors told a court on Tuesday.

Gerrit Jan van D., 67, subjected the youngsters who were found on the farm in the village of Ruinerwold in October to "very serious physical punishment" when he thought they had been made "unclean".

One child was tied up by his hands and feet as punishment, while another child was forced to spend an entire summer in a doghouse at the farm in northern Drenthe province, prosecutors said.

Van D. is also accused of sexually abusing two older children.

"The children all speak of very serious physical punishment if their father thought there was a 'bad spirit' in them. That happened from a very young age, four or five years," prosecutors said during a procedural hearing in the case.

Prosecutors said the youngest six of the man's nine children "lived in seclusion from birth, were kept indoors and had to be quiet so that no one would notice that they existed."

They were not registered with Dutch authorities and had never been to school, they said.

- 'Punching and kicking' -

The family was first discovered in October when the oldest son still living on the farm walked into a local bar in a confused state and raised concern about the welfare of his other siblings.

Police raided the farm and arrested Van D. and an Austrian man identified as Joseph B., 58.

Van D. was absent for medical reasons from Tuesday's hearing in the town of Assen after suffering a brain haemorrhage.

He is charged with depriving the children of their liberty from 2007 to 2019 and "punching, kicking and denying food and drink" to the six children. He is also charged with sexually abusing two of the older three children.

Joseph B. is also charged with depriving the children of their liberty and was in court.

"I feel like this is a witch hunt," Joseph B. told the court. "I have a clear conscience... I have not robbed anyone of his freedom."

The court ordered the two men to be detained for another three months while further tests were carried out on Van D. Defence lawyers will also question the children behind closed doors.

Prosecutors said the three oldest children were not allowed to talk about the existence of their brothers and sisters.

- 'Unclean' -

Citing diaries kept by the children, prosecutors said they had all spoken of their "conviction that contact with the outside world makes you 'unclean' and about 'bad spirits' that come into bodies. The father determined when a child had a 'bad spirit'.

"This child was isolated, had to pray and the other family members were not allowed to have contact with this child, sometimes not even for months."

One of the children was separated from the rest of the family at the age of 12 and made to stay in a caravan on another part of the farm, prosecutors said, adding that "after that he spent a whole summer in a doghouse in a shed."

The three oldest of the nine children were allowed to go to school and the "exterior doors were not locked all those years", prosecutors said.

But they said that there was still "unlawful deprivation of liberty for all these years -- classically locked up at times, but in a less classic way at other times."

Prosecutors said the abuse was a "figurative lock on the door", adding that "no physical lock is required on the door as evidence of unlawful deprivation of liberty or hostage-taking."
LECTURERS TOLD NOT TO USE CAPITAL LETTERS TO AVOID UPSETTING STUDENTS


Picture: Google Maps and Twitter

University lecturers at Leeds Trinity University have reportedly been told not to write words in capital letters for fear of scaring students into failure.

A memo sent out to staff in the journalism department says using uppercase letters might be detrimental to students’ learning.

It makes suggestions on how to address students, including using a friendly tone and avoiding negative language.

The memo, obtained by the Express, reads:

Despite our best attempts to explain assessment tasks, any lack of clarity can generate anxiety and even discourage students from attempting the assessment at all.

The memo also suggested that writing in capital letters could make the work seem more difficult.

A lecturer at the school told the paper that caps were necessary for telling students important parts of an assignment. They said:

We are not doing our students any favours with this kind of nonsense.

Leeds Trinity have denied “banning” capital letters in this way, as reported by some news outlets, and instead say they are following best practice teaching guidelines.

Professor Margaret A House, OBE, vice-chancellor at the university said:

We follow national best practice teaching guidelines and the memo cited in the press is guidance from a course leader to academic staff, sharing best practice from the latest teaching research to inform their teaching.