This has led some observers to say that this is less a European problem than yet another US accounting failure. Such a claim absolves Ahold's bosses of responsibility for their acquisitions and dishonesty and ignores the persistent, firm-wide tendency to test the limits of acceptable accounting.
1) I need simplification of the second sentence.
2) What does it mean by "responsibility for their acquisitions and dishonesty?
3) What does it mean by "ignore the persistent,..."?
As English is my foreign language,such a sentence is too difficult for me to get the meaning.
Please rewrite in a simple message or explain what the writer means.
Because of this, some observers are blaming US accountants and not so much the Europeans. These observers are forgiving Ahold's bosses their (the bosses') mistakes in doing business and don't understand that the accountants are actually doing their job right.