Tony blair investments banking crisis of war.
Profit from Poltics cornering the market from War.
Funding Conservatives RightWing Thinktank Chairman of which is Ray Mallon with Ian Duncan Smith MP Civtas Criminal Mayor of Zero Tolerance for Bill Bratton policing Advisor to David Cameron.
Jamie Dimon Resigns Jp Morgan chase
Citigroup insider trading,2013.
In August, Blair happened to see Glasenberg again in New York over tea with Michael Klein, a former Citigroup Inc. banker who acted as an adviser to both mining companies through his New York-based firm, M. Klein and Co.
New evidence against Tony Blair.
Jp Morgan chase was in control of Enron loses,Middlesbrough ICI.
The north korean venture Nuclear war With America.
Blair’s first big foothold in finance came in January 2008, when Dimon hired him to chair JPMorgan’s 27-member International Council, which meets formally once a year and includes China Investment President Gao Xiqing.
ARMS DEALS TO SYRIA.
Blair’s JPMorgan connection led to his peacemaking role in the Glencore-Xstrata deal, as the chain of events is recounted by people familiar with the situation. Blair first met Glencore CEO Ivan Glasenberg at a private dinner hosted by Dimon at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, in January 2010.
“What I do pro bono in Africa, I do for a profit outside,” he says.
As part of his Africa Governance Initiative, he travels to Guinea, Liberia, Malawi, Nigeria, Rwanda, Sierra Leone and South Sudan. In January, Blair met with Sierra Leone President Ernest Bai Koroma to discuss how his AGI team there can help the country build up its tourism industry in order to reduce its dependence on mining.
Jointly published by the United States Committee for a Free Lebanon and the Middle East Forum
Vol. 5 No. 2
Table of Contents
MEIB Main Page
Dossier: Wafic Said
Gary C. Gambill
Although virtually unknown in the United States, Syrian-born multi-millionaire Wafic Said is well-known in London political circles for allegedly receiving kickbacks from British-Saudi arms deals and for his reported connection to an Arab businessman’s bribery of a government official. While he claims never to have met Blair personally, there appears to be more of a connection than meets the eye.
Said was born in Damascus to a prominent aristocratic family in 1939. His father, Rida Said, a distinguished eye surgeon who served as minister of education during the French mandate, died when he was a child. Like many other upper-class Syrians, he attended a Jesuit school in neighboring Lebanon. In 1960, he moved to Britain to continue his education and completed a degree in accounting. During his stay there, he became friends with two sons of Saudi Prince Sultan, Khalid (who later commanded Saudi forces during the 1991 Gulf War) and Bandar (now the Saudi ambassador in Washington). In the mid-1960s he took a job at a bank in Geneva and fell in love with a Scottish secretary, Rosemary Buchanan. In 1967, the two moved back to London, where Said purchased several restaurants, and were married two years later.
In 1969, Said moved to Saudi Arabia and established a design and construction consulting firm. Through his contacts with Prince Sultan’s family and another Syrian-born businessman, Akram Ojjeh, Said was awarded numerous construction and land development contracts, many of them defense-related, during the oil boom years of the 1970s. Said earned a reputation as a shrewd negotiator and was soon brokering arms purchases for the Saudis, most notably a $200 million deal in 1979 to purchase an American command and control system. In 1981, he received Saudi citizenship. Shortly thereafter, Said’s son, Karim Rida, died in a swimming pool accident at the home of Sultan. The Saudi prince felt personally responsible for the tragedy (one of his servants reportedly switched on the automatic pool cover while Karim was still in the water). His desire to make amends would figure decisively in the future of his Syrian friend, who moved to Britain later that year.
The Al-Yamamah Arms Deal
In his capacity as Saudi defense minister, Sultan oversaw the kingdom’s annual multi-billion dollar weapons imports. As with most other Saudi government contracts, the negotiation of arms deals was driven less by the quality of (or need for) competing weapons systems, than by the size of the “commission” earned by the royal family. Part of this commission is typically shared with intermediaries on the other side of the negotiating table in order to ensure that they do not later reveal the magnitude of bribe-taking by Saudi princes. US congressional reluctance to authorize sales of certain weapons systems to the Saudis in the 1980s opened the doors to Britain’s ailing defense industry.
In 1986, Saudi Arabia and Britain signed the so-called Al-Yamamah arms deal, providing for $31 billion in Saudi purchases of military equipment and services from British Aerospace and other UK defense firms over the next decade. Since the Saudis paid for much of the deal in the form of oil shipments delivered outside of their official OPEC quota, there are no reliable records of how much the Saudis actually paid.
While British and Saudi officials have long maintained that no commissions were paid out for any of the Al-Yamamah contracts, there is considerable evidence to the contrary. In 1999, for example, a former executive of the arms company BMARC, David Trigger, testified in court that his company paid a 15% commission to Fahd al-Athel, an associate of Saudi Prince Muhammad bin Fahd, to persuade the regime to buy $650 million worth of helicopter weapons. The chairman of Thorn EMI, Sir Colin Southgate, admitted to paying a 25% commission on a $40 million contract for bomb fuses sold under Al-Yamamah. Some illicit funds went to British intermediaries. There have been credible allegations in the British media that the son of former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, Mark, received 12 million pounds as commission. In 1991, the National Audit Office carried out an inquiry into the Al-Yamamah deal, but the report was suppressed by Bob Sheldon, the Labour chairman of the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, and his Tory deputy.
Said’s precise role in the Al-Yamamah scandal has been the subject of much dispute, but others involved in the arms deal say he was a central player. Alex Sanson, a former British Aerospace marketing director, told a British paper in 1998, “You could not do a thing in Saudi unless you went through the Said channel.” Said himself acknowledges helping to broker the deal, but adamantly insists that he took no commission from it. However, reports in the British media allege that Said received an indirect commission from British Aerospace as part of the deal’s offset arrangements, whereby British firms agreed to invest a percentage of their profits in Saudi Arabia. Indeed, Said himself admitted that he “advised British Aerospace in relation to the offset program” and later acknowledged, “I benefited because the project led to construction in Saudi Arabia that involved my companies.” A British Aerospace spokesman confirmed that Said was paid for “helping this company fulfill its obligations in the Middle East, and Saudi in particular.” According to a “source close to Said” cited by The Observer, this payment consisted of 15 million pounds funneled to a Panamanian-registered company owned by Said, Rawda Investments.
British investigative journalists have uncovered evidence that Said may have been involved in distributing Saudi payoffs in one form or another to participants on the British side of the Al-Yamamah deal. In 1994, British reporters ran a land registry search on the posh Eaton Terrace residence in which Mark Thatcher had been living and found that it was owned by a (
Panamanian company, Formigol, which was registered at the 5th floor of 49 Park Lane – Said’s office. In 1998, (was this the investments david cameron is with)
it was reported that the luxurious Mayfair penthouse of Sir Richard Evans, chief executive of British Aerospace, was registered in the name of a Panamanian company called Knightsbridge Enterprises, which happened to be run from Said’s offices at 49 Park Lane.[
Friday 20 April 2012 22.01 BST
Cameron family fortune made in tax havens
Revealed: David Cameron’s father built up legal offshore funds in Panama and Geneva
The Jersey, Panama and Geneva connection
Tony Blair is controlling the banks,Oil and. @britishGas prices.
Ian Cameron’s will
David Cameron’s father set up offshore investment funds and explicity boasted of their ability to remain outside UK tax jurisdiction. Photograph: Dan Kitwood/Press Association Images
Ed Howker and Shiv Malik
David Cameron’s father ran a network of offshore investment funds to help build the family fortune that paid for the prime minister’s inheritance, the Guardian can reveal.
Though entirely legal, the funds were set up in tax havens such as Panama City and Geneva, and explicitly boasted of their ability to remain outside UK tax jurisdiction.
At the time of his death in late 2010, Ian Cameron left a fortune of £2.74m in his will, from which David Cameron received the sum of £300,000.
Cameron and other cabinet members have recently suggested that they would be willing to disclose their personal tax filings amid growing scrutiny following the budget, but this would only shed light on annual sources of income rather than accumulated wealth or inheritance.
The structure employed by Cameron senior is now commonplace among modern hedge funds, which argue that offshore status can help attract international investors. UK residents would ordinarily have to pay tax on any profits they repatriated, and there is nothing to suggest the Camerons did not.
Nevertheless, the dramatic growth of such offshore financial activity has raised concerns that national tax authorities are struggling to pin down the world’s super-rich.
Ian Cameron took advantage of a new climate of investment after all capital controls were abolished in 1979, making it legal to take any sum of money out of the country without it being taxed or controlled by the UK government.
Not long after the change, brought in by Margaret Thatcher after her first month in power, Ian Cameron began setting up and directing investment funds in tax havens around the world.
Leaving his full-time role as a City stockbroker, Ian Cameron went on to act as chairman of Close International Asset management, a multimillion-pound investment fund based in Jersey; as a senior director of Blairmore Holdings Inc, registered in Panama City and currently worth £25m; and he was also a shareholder in Blairmore Asset Management based in Geneva.
However, the family will – a public document seen by the Guardian – only details the assets of Ian Cameron’s estate in England and Wales. Offshore investments would only be listed in submissions to HMRC for inheritance tax purposes. It is unclear what those assets – if any – are worth and which family member owns them.
In 2009 the compilers of the Sunday Times Rich List estimated Ian Cameron’s wealth at £10m.
He was survived by his wife, Mary Fleur Cameron, who as his spouse would not have had to pay inheritance tax on sums transferred between them.
In 2006 Ian’s eldest son, Alexander, became the sole owner of the family’s £2.5m house in Newbury, Berkshire, where David had been brought up.
Another family home in Kensington, London, worth £1m, passed to his two daughters in equal share.
Cameron’s father was “instrumental” in setting up the Panamanian company, Blairmore Holdings, in 1982, which was exempt from UK tax, when David was a pupil at Eton aged 16.
The fund shares its name with the family’s ancestral home in Aberdeenshire,(could this be TONY Blairmore House), in which Ian Cameron was born in 1932 but which the family no longer owns.
(Tony blair is Also known for making investments abroad, bringing back to England as an ENVOY Agent Millions,nobody knew who was his accountant,presumably it wasn’t checked enough ,when it was brought to light Noone brought allegations against him for whome we know now was a LTD company)
A lengthy prospectus for Blairmore Holdings written in 2006 and meant to attract high net worth “sophisticated” investors, with at least $100,000 to buy shares, is explicit about how the fund sought to avoid UK tax. At the time more than half of the fund’s 11 directors were UK nationals.
Under Panamanian law the fund was excluded from taxation derived from other parts of the world.
(Panama known for Drugs columbians )
“The fund is not liable to taxation on its income or capital gains as long as such income or capital gains are not derived from sources allocated within the territory of the Republic of Panama,” the 2006 prospectus reads.
“The Directors intend that the affairs on the Fund should be managed and conducted so that it does not become resident in the United Kingdom for UK taxation purposes. Accordingly … the Fund will not be subject to United Kingdom corporation tax or income tax on its profits,” the prospectus continues.
The investor document also credits Ian Cameron as a founder member of Blairmore Holdings and states that as an adviser he would be paid $20,000 a year – the highest paid director – whatever profits were realised.
In fact, the long-term Panamanian investment fund performed above market rate over many years averaging a 116% return from 2002-2007. Today many of the fund’s largest holdings are in blue-chip stocks such as Apple, Unilever and Coca Cola.
Before his death, aged 77, Ian Cameron was also chairman and shareholder of Close International Equity Growth Fund Ltd, registered in Jersey and worth £9m according to papers filed in 2005. In that year just under half of the fund’s holdings were in UK listed stocks.
A third fund set up in Geneva, Switzerland, had a shorter life span and finally dissolved in 2007 but had many of the same registered shareholders as the Panamanian outfit. These included a number of former employees of Panmure Gordon, the stockbroking firm where Ian Cameron spent much of his career and those from Smith and Williamson investment management where Cameron senior was a consultant.
One notable investor into the Panama fund was a charity established by Tory peer Lord Vinson. Accounts from 2009 show that a charitable trust set up under his own name invested £82,000 into the fund – almost one quarter of its investments in shares.
Vinson’s trust that year went on to donate tens of thousands of pounds to rightwing think tanks including the Institute of Economic Affairs and Civitas.
David Cameron has recently remarked on companies who have taken advantage of offshoring to legally avoid tax. Speaking at the start of the year to small business leaders in Maidenhead, he said: “With the large companies, that have the fancy corporate lawyers and the rest of it, I think we need a tougher approach.
“One of the things that we are going to be looking at this year is whether there should be a general anti-avoidance power that HMRC can use, particularly with very wealthy individuals and with the bigger companies, to make sure they pay their fair share.”
The row also comes as the top rate of tax was lowered in last month’s budget from 50p to 45p and the rate of corporation tax continue to drop to achieve the chancellor’s ambition of giving the UK one of the lowest rates of corporation tax in the G7.
Responding to opposition criticisms over the lowering of the top tax rate, Cameron said: “The cut in the 50p tax rate is going to be paid five times over by the richest people in our country.”
Downing Street said it did not want to comment on what was a private matter for the Cameron family.
A spokesperson added: “The government’s tax reforms are about making sure that some of the richest people in the country pay a decent share of income tax.”
The investment managers Smith and Williamson, for whom Ian Cameron worked, chose not to comment.
20 Apr 2012
David Cameron’s family fortune: the Jersey, Panama and Geneva connection
Offshore venture in tax haven – named after family home in Aberdeenshire – valued at £25m
Making Millions from War.
UNCLAS BAKU 000051
DEPT FOR EB/IFD/OIA
DEPT PASS TO TREASURY, COMMERCE, USTR
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: EINV EFIN ETRD ELAB KTDB PGOV USTR OPIC AJ
SUBJECT: AZERBAIJAN – INVESTMENT CLIMATE STATEMENT 2010
REF: 09 STATE 124006
Â¶1. This cable contains Post’s Investment Climate Statement for 2010
and includes the following sections:
A.1. Openness to Foreign Investment
A.2. Conversion and Transfer Policies
A.3. Expropriation and Compensation
A.4. Dispute Settlement
A.5. Performance Requirements and Incentives
A.6. Right to Private Ownership and Establishment
A.7. Protection of Property Rights
A.8. Transparency of the Regulatory System
A.9. Efficient Capital Markets and Portfolio Investment
A.10. Competition from State Owned Enterprises
A.11. Corporate Social Responsibility
A.12. Political Violence
A.14. Bilateral Investment Agreements
A.15. OPIC and Other Investment Insurance
A.17. Foreign Trade Zones/Free Trade Zones
A.18. Foreign Direct Investment Statistics
Â¶2. Azerbaijan’s strategic development of its oil and gas resources
continues to drive the country’s economic growth, and keeps this
country of barely nine million people at the forefront of world
energy security discussions. Unfortunately corruption, lack of
transparency, politically connected economic monopolies, and
cronyism remain significant obstacles to economic progress,
hindering both domestic as well as foreign investment. The nearly
two decade-long, and as yet unresolved, conflict with Armenia,
which left the country with over 700,000 refugees and internally
displaced persons (IDPs) to care for, has also been a notable drain
on public coffers.
Â¶3. 2009 once again confirmed the Azerbaijani economy’s deep
dependence on the global prices of oil, its main export commodity,
and attendant market vagaries. The global economic crisis
negatively affected both the opportunities and mood of emerging and
established Azerbaijani businesses, though the country as a whole,
with limited foreign debt and a general lack of integration with the
global financial regime, largely escaped a serious impact. The
financial and construction sectors suffered losses, but economic
growth in real terms continued at a rather strong rate of over 9
percent. Fortunately, wide-scale anti-crisis measures and direct
monetary injections by the Central Bank of Azerbaijan (CBA) helped
to prevent a failure of the banking system; however, the insurance,
securities and leasing markets were hit hard.
Â¶4. Sharp decreases in Azerbaijan’s GDP growth rates, which reached
25-30 percent in recent years, were certainly noticed, but caused
different responses from analysts and investors. Moody’s Investor
Service did not change Azerbaijan’s ratings, but decreased the
forecast on them from Positive to Stable. Fitch Ratings merely
confirmed previous ratings, while Standard & Poor’s changed its
forecast from Stable to Positive. Foreign investments decreased
significantly, mainly because of a slow period in new projects
related to oil and gas. Due to increasing resource constraints,
from decreases in both foreign investment and traditional budgetary
inputs, Azerbaijan has begun to increase its foreign debt. This
debt grew to 3.33 billion USD, an increase of eleven per cent in the
first nine months of 2009. Foreign debt now comprises a relatively
modest 8.7 per cent of Azerbaijan’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP),
and investment project credits made up 90 per cent of the external
debt. These credits, also financed by the state budget, helped
maintain a certain level of business activity in Azerbaijan’s
Â¶5. Azerbaijan’s revenues failed to meet state budget projections
because profit tax incomes were down significantly for the first
half of the year. The state budget is normally buttressed by direct
allotments from the State Oil Fund, up to 50 per cent some years.
However, receiving only one quarter of the forecast revenues from
the country’s largest sector, oil, which reportedly makes up nearly
65 per cent of the budget’s income, had a strong negative effect.
Budget incomes were 50 per cent less than projected for H1, 2009.
The situation began to improve in H2, but experts surmise that full
income and expenditure forecasts will not be reached. Also, in
spite of the global financial crisis, Azerbaijan’s strategic
currency reserves, held by the State Oil Fund and the Central Bank,
increased to 19.1 billion USD during the year, exceeding the January
1, 2009 projection of 18.55 billion USD.
Â¶6. Despite public presidential statements promising focused support
for the agriculture, tourism and telecommunications sectors,
Azerbaijan’s dependence on the oil and gas sector increased. The
sector’s share in Azerbaijan’s industrial production reached 75 per
cent, an increase of greater than 11.1 per cent. Recently, the
Azerbaijani President acknowledged that national economic
development would depend on oil and gas and not on the non-oil
sector for the next 10-20 years. Therefore, in order to decrease
economic risk, the government of Azerbaijan (GOAJ) intends to manage
hydrocarbon extraction uniformly until 2020. The non-oil sector
strongly diminished, with a surplus of only 1.1 per cent in October
against 13.9 per cent in February and March, when it seemed the
non-oil sector might be able to rescue the entire economy.
Â¶7. For the first 11 months of 2009, 6.44 billion manat (AZN) was
invested the Azerbaijan economy from all sources of financing. This
was down 18.8 per cent against the same period in 2008. Local
investments totaled 5.163 billion AZN or 80.1 per cent of all
investments during this period, almost four times greater than the
amount of foreign capital invested in the country’s economy during
those same 11 months. Local investments decreased by 16.5 per cent
against the same period in 2008. Foreign investments reduced by
37.2 per cent and totaled 1.281 billion AZN. The majority of
domestic investments, 69.3 per cent, fell to the state sector. The
state budget for 2009 allocated 4.718 billion AZN for investment
purposes, of which only 2.131 billion AZN was used during the first
11 months of the year.
Â¶8. So how does the GOAJ manage to continue to support a constantly
“growing” economy? The answer lies in its reliance on enhancements
from the State Oil Fund of Azerbaijan (SOFAZ), assets f which
totaled 14.2 billion USD in reserves as f October 31, 2009. Annual
transfers from SOFAZto the state budget are significant, but the
GOAJ has stipulated that such transfers not exceed 50 per cent of
SOFAZ’s accumulated funds, while the rest be preserved as a social
“safety net”. The GOAJ is encouraged in its fiscal policies by the
positive results of its efforts to protect the stability of the
manat, the high level of foreign reserves, the relatively low level
of foreign debt and increasing export-related incomes against the
backdrop of recovering oil and gas prices.
Â¶9. The search for new exports Azerbaijan could offer to the world
is still extremely passive. Sometimes this search for new exports
is rather unclear or surprising, such as the production of pianos,
badly assembled machines, or even the production of ostrich meat.
Late in 2009, the GOAJ also stated its’ intention to encourage
industrial projects supporting the oil and gas sector. Related
projects in the works include a methanol production plant and the
construction of a shipyard in Baku. Both projects are primarily
aimed at producing products for export. In the first, a private
company will lead the project, estimated to cost over1.1 billion
AZN. Construction on the factory began in 2007 and it is now 50 per
cent complete. While the EBRD is stated to support this project,
the first credit input of 120 million USD was received without a
guarantee from EBRD. It is estimated that 30 million USD will be
allotted to a quasi-joint-stock fund, where EBRD will most likely
participate. Former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair, attended a
signing ceremony for the enterprise in the fall of 2009. As for the
shipyard, SOCAR has partnered with offshore and marine giant Keppel,
which will have a 10 per cent stake in the venture.
Â¶10. Another hindrance to foreign direct investment is the
difficulty of established Azeri businesses to adapt to standard
investor-friendly practices, such as those associated with the
concept of corporate governance. Because of their inability or
unwillingness to comply with the attendant disclosure and financial
transparency required for potential shareholders to confidently
invest, many enterprises are unable to successfully market their
companies on Azerbaijan’s nascent stock market. There is a clear
shortage of management expertise in the corporate sector.