Given a document and an entity the task is to select the author's sentiment towards the entity. Sentiments can be Positive, Neutral and Negative. Select Positive if the article expresses a positive view towards the given entity or praises its quality or skills. Select Neutral if the document expresses no clear view towards the entity or has equal amounts of positive and negative statements or expressing some fact/quote by someone else. Select Negative if the article expresses a negative view towards like harsh remarks, criticizing entities action/decision etc. Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link].

Q: What is the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Puigdemont ? Regional president Carles Puigdemont  criticized the European Commission in an interview Wednesday with The Associated Press for turning "deaf ears" so far to Catalonia's desire to hold a vote.
 Puigdemont  also said that the Commission has turned its back on Catalans by not defending the fundamental rights of all European citizens during the controversial measures adopted by Spain's courts and central authorities to try to stop the vote.
In the interview four days ahead of the vote   Puigdemont  also promised to turn the conflict with Spain into a European affair rather than a domestic issue.
Catalonia's regional president  Carles Puigdemont walks ahead of an interview with The Associated Press at the Palace of Generalitat or Catalan government headquarters  in Barcelona  Spain  Wednesday  Sept. 27  2017. (AP Photo/Emilio Morenatti)

A: Positive
****
Q: What is the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Forrest Claypool ? Mayor Rahm Emanuel on Thursday continued to defend his handpicked Chicago Public Schools chief in the face of a searing inspector generalâs report that accuses district CEO Forrest Claypool of engaging in a âfull-blown cover-upâ to ward off an ethics probe.
 Claypool  ârepeatedly liedâ during the investigation by denying  he  had asked an attorney to alter a bill for legal advice on an ethics issue involving the districtâs top attorney  said Inspector General Nicholas Schuler  who has recommended that  Claypool  be fired. âIâm not looking at freaking bills  â Claypool  said in one interview with investigators  according to Schulerâs report.
âAt every turn in this matter   Claypool  kept making matters worse. And it appears that  his  decisions were driven by a clear desire to keep information harmful to  his  narrative from the Board  the OIG and the public â Schuler wrote.
 Claypool  met privately with school board members on Thursday and issued a lengthy statement in which  he  apologized for âmistakes in judgmentâ while defending  his  legacy and making it clear  he  disagrees with Schulerâs interpretation of CPS ethics policy.
âTo put this in perspective: This situation is about how I zealously tried to get Chicago students their fair share of state education dollars  after years and years of racial discrimination  and getting those kids the best possible legal representation â said  Claypool   who canceled a scheduled appearance at a North Side elementary school on Thursday. He did not directly address Schulerâs most damaging allegations.
Claypoolâs alleged cover-up turned an investigation into whether district attorney Ronald Marmer violated CPS ethics policies on contracts and business relationships into a call for  Claypoolâs  termination. Schuler also is recommending that Marmer be disciplined with a âlengthy suspension or even termination.â
Marmer is one of several of  Claypool 's former colleagues and past political donors who have won district jobs and consulting contracts. He has received annual payments of roughly $200 000 as severance from the law firm of Jenner & Block in addition to his CPS salary.
Three attorneys on a CPS ethics committee concluded Marmer couldnât manage the contract because his severance payments created a âbusiness relationshipâ with Jenner.. A fourth CPS attorney  Joseph Moriarty  was told of the committeeâs decision and agreed with it. Moriarty told Schuler that Marmer âbecame concerned by the decision â and was going to speak with  Claypool .
 Claypool  and Marmer then turned to former CPS general counsel Patrick Rocks for another opinion  Schuler said. In a conference call with  Claypool  and two other attorneys  Rocks said he agreed with CPS' legal consensus.
 So Claypool  and Marmer decided to ask labor attorney James Franczek for his take. Franczek also agreed with the previous opinions  which didnât go down well with  Claypool  and Marmer. He later sent an email to Moriarty that said âI think I am off the xmas card list.â
 Claypool  ultimately turned to political donor J. Timothy Eaton  who  according to Schulerâs report  served as a teacherâs assistant for a college course  Claypool  took while Eaton was a law student.
 âClaypool  attempted to paper over the opinions of the six attorneys with Eatonâs letter â Schuler wrote in his report. In addition  after the IGâs investigation had begun  Marmer complained about Franczekâs bill  which had âCPSâs Code of Ethicsâ and âethics issuesâ listed on it.  Claypool  asked Franczek to change the listings. Franczek then crossed out the entries and hand wrote âpersonnelâ and âpersonnel issuesâ in their place  the report says.
Franczek delivered the reworded invoice back to  Claypool  with a cover letter marked âFor Forrest Claypoolâs Eyes Only.â
In interviews with the IG during the investigation   Claypool â unequivocally  emphatically and repeatedlyâ denied  he  had asked Franczek to make changes to the bill  and said â he  would never have been involved in such lowly billing matters.â
But last month  in a letter to Schuler's office   Claypool  apologized for intervening to reword the invoice.  Claypool 's letter acknowledged Schuler had documents that contradicted the CEO's initial claim.
â He  turned 180 degrees from claiming certain memory to no memory at all â Schuler wrote in  his  report. â His  letter was designed to taint the Boardâs reception of the OIGâs final report by falsely portraying lies on two separate occasions as mere lapses of memory.â

A: Neutral
****
Q: What is the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Nikki Haley ? UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - The United States will seek to boost its case for United Nations action against Iran when Security Council envoys visit Washington on Monday to view pieces of weapons that  U.S. Ambassador Nikki Haley  says Tehran gave to Yemenâs Houthi group.
 Haley  and  her  14 council colleagues will also lunch with President Donald Trump  the U.S. Mission to the United Nations said Friday.
The U.N. ambassadors will visit a military hangar at Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling near Washington  where  Haley   the U.S envoy to the United Nations  last month presented remnants of what the Pentagon said was an Iranian-made ballistic missile fired from Yemen on Nov. 4 at Saudi Arabiaâs capital Riyadh  as well as other weapons.
 Haley  said last month  she  was exploring several U.N. options for pressuring Iran to âadjust their behaviorâ. But  she  is likely to struggle to convince some Security Council members  like veto powers Russia and China  that U.N. action is needed.
 Haley  has said the Security Council could strengthen the provisions in that resolution or adopt a new resolution banning Iran from all activities related to ballistic missiles. To pass  a resolution needs nine votes in favor  and no vetoes by the United States  Britain  France  China or Russia.
Diplomats  speaking on condition of anonymity  say  Haley  has not signaled which accountability option  she  might pursue or when.

A:
Neutral
****