Monday, July 21, 2014

Call for UN Reforms After Ban Ki-moon Flies Around on Qatar-Funded, UK Registered Plane


By Matthew Russell Lee, Follow up on exclusive

UNITED NATIONS, July 21, more here -- Why shouldn't the UN be able to live up the most basic standards of transparency and good government?

   Inner City Press, and now the Free UN Coalition for Access, have been asking this question. From the UN's July 21 transcript, video here from Minute 12:55

Inner City Press: As I asked you before, and I know that you had said you would answer at some point, how did the Secretary-General fly from New York to Qatar?  Was it on a Qatari plane, and what safeguards are in place? Would he take a flight from any nation?

Spokesman Dujarric:  Okay, Matthew, it was the Qatari Government [that] very generously chartered a plane for the Secretary-General to enable him to go about his visit.  This is not the kind of visit that we could do if we were not flying on a private plane.  It is not a Qatari plane; it was chartered.  It is a British-registered plane, as some of you will be able to see on the photos.  But, it is a private aircraft funded by the Qatari Government.

   Should the UN Secretary General in a mediation attempt accept free travel from a country with a particular interest in the conflict to be mediated?

   What review should take place? What disclosures should be made, and when? From later in the UN's July 21 transcriptvideo here from Minute 31:

Inner City Press: you are saying that the use of private planes, generically if necessary, is signed off by the ethics office, but my question is, private planes provided by anyone? Would the Secretary-General, would he accept such service from any Member State, or would he accept it from corporations? The question becomes, given that particular countries have different views of the conflict, what review is made before accepting a particular country’s contribution?
Deputy Spokesman Farhan Haq: Well, we do have, like I said, an ethics office and a legal office that can look into these things and see whether something is appropriate or not.
Inner City Press: Was this particular flight checked or you’re saying there’s a generic ruling in advance that any private plane is okay?
Deputy Spokesman Haq: No, I don’t think there’s a generic ruling about this, but certainly, if you need to justify this for essential needs, and something like this, a trip that the Secretary-General was able to embark on and made the decision on just at the end of last week and then had to travel, starting Saturday evening, something like that would have been extremely hard or basically impossible to do in a different sort of way.
Inner City Press: I’m asking because in the budget Committee, often many, particularly developing world countries, they say that things should be funded out of the UN’s general budget rather than taking voluntary contributions from States that then have influence. So, my question is, isn’t there a travel budget? We’ve asked in this room many times to know what the budget is, so I’d still like to know that. But, if there is a budget, why wasn’t the general UN budget used for this rather than taking a specific gift from a specific country? That’s the question.
Deputy Spokesman Haq: The worry is, of course, if you run out of money early, does that mean you can’t travel, even if there’s a crisis? In this case, there was a crisis that necessitated sudden travel.
  Inner City Press broke the story on July 19 -- credit has been given, for example, by Newsweek, here -- and has been asking Ban's spokespeople for disclosure and what safeguards are in place.
   Lead spokesman Dujarric replied but did not answer on July 19. When he called in to the UN noon briefing from Cairo on July 21, Inner City Press asked him again on whose plane Ban is traveling. 
  This time, Dujarric answered that Ban is flying on a Qatar government funded, UK registered plane.  But he did not answer if there are any safeguards against influence or conflicts of interest. Would Ban accept free flights from any UN member state? From anyone at all?
  Inner City Press asked Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq, who said the the UN Ethics Office said taking private planes is okay when necessary.
  But private planes from ANYONE? Any member state? A corporation? There have been no real answers, yet. But there need to be.
 Diplomats told Inner City Press that Ban would fly -- on a Qatari plane -- to Qatar, Ramallah (but not for now Gaza), Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Kuwait.
  The diplomats who complained to Inner City Press questioned not only Ban taking free flights from a particular country, but also how the use (and landing) of a Qatari plane will play in, for example, Saudi Arabia and Egypt.
 Inner City Press asked Ban's top two spokespeople, and the spokesperson listed as on weekend duty, the following:
"Please state whether the Secretary General is accepting free transportation from any member state or outside party for his current trip to the region concerning the Gaza crisis, and if so please explain the reason and any safeguards in place against influence or conflict of interest.
"Such disclosure should be common practice; if necessary, note that former Spokesperson Nesirky did answer such Press questions, for example concerning the Secretary General flying on a UAE plane (see sample below). On deadline, thank you in advance.
From: UN Spokesperson - Do Not Reply [at] un.org
Subject: Your questions
To: Matthew Russell Lee [at] InnerCityPress.com
Date: Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 3:00 PM

- The UAE Government provided an aircraft to fly the Secretary-General from Beirut to Abu Dhabi because of time constraints.
     Later on July 19, the following was received, which we publish in full 25 minutes after receipt:
From: Stephane Dujarric [at] un.org
Date: Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 5:30 PM
Subject: Re: Press question if SG is accepting free travel from any member state or outside party, as was disclosed in 2012, on deadline, thanks
To: Matthew.Lee [at] innercitypress [dot] com
Cc: FUNCA [at] funca.info
Dear Matthew, Thanks for your question and thanks for the draft answer. The logistical details of the SG's trip, including the travel arrangements are still being worked out. Once we are in a position to confirm them, i will revert.
best
Stephane Dujarric (Mr.)
Spokesman for the Secretary-General
  But obviously the "logistical details" of getting to Qatar were worked out - Ban had already been to Qatar, then Kuwait before Cairo.

  One asked, what can you solve if you can't even say how you got there?
  Inner City Press thanked Dujarric and his colleagues for the interim response and asked, "both Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Poroshenko's office say they have spoken with the Secretary General and give read-outs. Will a UN read-out be put out? If so, when? If not, why not?"
  On July 21, Inner City Press asked Haq, who confirmed the calls took place but nothing about the contents. What is happened with the UN? The Free UN Coalition for Access is pressing for reforms. We'll have more on this.


 
  

At UN, Malaysia Ambassador Hussein Haniff Tells Inner City Press Yes, Deal with Rebels for Flight MH17 Black Box, “Like Around Now” (with video)


By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, July 21 -- After the UN Security Council unanimously adopted a resolution to an independent international investigation of the downing of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 over Eastern Ukraine, Inner City Press asked Malaysia's Permanent Representative to the UN Hussein Haniff if there is, in fact, an agreement with the separatist rebels for Malaysia to get the black boxes. Video here.

Ambassador Hussein Haniff said yes, “there is this understanding that the black box will be handed over to Malaysia.” He said, “We have our people ready, we hope this agreement will be honored.”

Inner City Press asked when the hand-over is supposed to take place.

Like around now,” Ambassador Hussein Haniff replied. It was just past 5 pm in New York on July 21.



  Earlier on July 21 at the US State Department's press briefing in Washington, Deputy Spokesperson Marie Harf was asked if Malaysia was breaking ranks with other countries by making its own deal with the rebels, and if an agreement with Malaysia about the black boxes and flight recorders would give the separatist rebels leadership any legitimacy.
No, Harf insisted. Watch this site.

 
  

In UN Security Council, MH17 Resolution Passes 15-0 for International Investigation, Amid Partial Questions


By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, July 21, updated -- After late-night wrangling, the UN Security Council unanimously adopted a resolution on July 21 on downed flight MH17.

  The resolution, which Inner City Press put online here, among other things noted “the crucial role played by the International Civil Aviation Organization in aircraft accident and incident investigations and welcomed the decision by ICAO to send a team.”

    After the vote and speeches, the foreign minister of the Netherlands, with the most victims, and Australia came to the Council stakeout. The Australian mission took the role of choosing questions, given the first one to an Australian correspondents from Reuters, the next to the Sidney Morning Herald, and the last to Kosovo media. The Free UN Coalition for Access asks, Is this balance?

  Australian foreign minister Julie Bishop said this should be the last such incident, because its perpetrators will be found. But isn't there a wider issue of non-state actors seeking advanced weapons, for example in Syria?

   In its resolution, the Security Council demanded that “all military activities, including by armed groups, be immediately ceased in the immediate area surrounding the crash site to allow for security and safety of the international investigation.” 

  But what about Kyiv's continued "anti-terrorist operation" beyond a 40 kilometer radius?
   Amid questions of why MH17 was flying over the East of Ukraine on July 17, after a Ukrainian military plane has already been shot down at 21,000 feet, the Security Council resolution “urges all parties to the Convention on International Civil Aviation to observe to the fullest extent applicable, the international rules, standards and practices concerning the safety of civil aviation in order to prevent the recurrence of such incidents.”
  Reportedly, flights now go over Syria, and permission has been sought from Iran. 
   Late on July 20, Ambassador Vitaly Churkin said Russia would support a draft with providing for a independent, impartial investigation.
   As a pointed precedent, he cited the US' downing of a airplane in 1988. (That killed approximately 300 Iranian passengers). 
  On July 21 in the Security Council, he brought up a downing over the Black Sea by Ukraine, and said they haven't taken responsibility and shouldn't be in charge of this investigation.
  On July 20 Australian Ambassador Gary Quinlan arrived at 10:55 pm, stopping to say there is no reason any Council member should not support the earlier draft.  Video here.
  Meanwhile rebel groups elsewhere are requesting advanced weapons. On July 18 the Syrian Coalition rebels put out a press release that they should be given "advanced weapons."
   Here is what the Syrian Coalition, until recently headed by Saudi backed Ahmad Al Jarba and now headed by Saudi backed Hadi Al Bahra, said:
Louay Safi, spokesman for the Syrian Coalition, said earlier that the connection between the Assad regime and ISIS has never been so intimately interwound as it is today with the progress being made by regime forces near Aleppo and that of ISIS in Deir Ezzor. These advancement have not been interrupted by a single clash between regime forces and ISIS, which proves the existence of full coordination between them.” Safi attributes the setbacks suffered by Syrian rebels to the reluctance of the friends of Syria group to provide the rebels with the advanced weapons that can tip the balance on the ground.”
  What about, “in the air”? The Syrian Coalition continues:
Furthermore, Safi agrees with the former U.S. ambassador to Syria Robert Ford, who blames the rise of extremist groups in Syria on the Obama administration’s hesitation to support the moderate opposition forces. The military situation is very critical, as regime forces are about to laid siege on Aleppo. But even if Assad’s forces recapture Aleppo, the crisis will not be over. (Source: Syrian Coalition)”
  So, what of the US announced plan for $500 million to “vetted” Syrian rebels?
Also on Syria, on July 14 when the UN Security Council adopted a resolution on humanitarian access to Syria, its Operative Paragraph 11 said the Council “affirms that it will take further measures in the event of non-compliance with this resolution or resolution 2139 (2014) by any Syrian party.”
 Afterward, Australia's Permanent Representative to the UN Gary Quilan emphasized at the media stakeout that resolutions are binding, that the Council had affirmed that it will take measures if not complied with by the parties. Video here, from Minute 2:10
  Inner City Press sought to ask a question about a statement inside the Security Council by Russia's Vitaly Churkin, and Quinlan agreed to take the question. Inner City Press asked Quinlan to respond to Churkin saying that the resolution “doesn't plan for automatism” in sanctions or the use of force, that any such steps would require the specific consideration of the Security Council and “convincing evidence.” Video of Churkin's statement here, from Minute 25.
  Quinlan replied that what Churkin said was correct, then said that while there would have to be a further decision by the Security Council about what measures to take, the decision that some measures would be taken has already been made. Video here from Minute 18.
Readers can draw their own conclusion how meaningful it is to claim that a decision to definitely act has been made, if another vote including veto powers is required.
Footnote: Asking this question was not easy. The first question was given to Voice of America; the second taken by the whip of the UN Correspondents Association's president, sometimes writing for the Huffington Post. She then tried to keep the UN Television boom microphone operator for giving the microphone to Inner City Press -- even as Ambassador Quinlan said, “Matthew... what Ambassador Churkin said was correct.” 
  This UNCA, becoming the UN's Censorship Alliance,seems to believe it can block questions (as well as having tried to get Inner City Press thrown out after its reporting about Sri Lanka, here). The new (and resulting) Free UN Coalition for Access opposes this.
  To come full circle, acknowledging deft diplomacy by Australia and its co-leads Jordan and Luxembourg on this resolution, it is sometimes hard not to note the contradiction of Australia returning asylum seekers from Sri Lanka after only “reviewing” their claims on a ship. Inner City Press has asked Ambassador Quinlan about this, and we hope to have a story on the topic soon. Watch this site.

 
  

In UNreformed UN, Ban Ki-moon Flying on Qatar-Funded, UK Registered Plane, Inner City Press First Reported, FUNCA Asks: No Rules?



By Matthew Russell Lee, Follow up on exclusive

UNITED NATIONS, July 21, more here -- Should the UN Secretary General in a mediation attempt accept free travel from a country with a particular interest in the conflict to be mediated?

   What review should take place? What disclosures should be made, and when?  These questions are raised by Ban Ki-moon's now acknowledged accepting for his entire Gaza-related tour of a Qatar funded, UK registered plane.

  Inner City Press broke the story on July 19, and has been asking Ban's spokespeople for disclosure and what safeguards are in place.

   Lead spokesman Stephane Dujarric replied but did not answer on July 19. When he called in to the UN noon briefing from Cairo on July 21, Inner City Press asked him again on whose plane Ban is traveling. 

  This time, Dujarric answered that Ban is flying on a Qatar government funded, UK registered plane.  But he did not answer if there are any safeguards against influence or conflicts of interest. Would Ban accept free flights from any UN member state? From anyone at all?

  Inner City Press asked Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq, who said the the UN Ethics Office said taking private planes is okay when necessary.

  But private planes from ANYONE? Any member state? A corporation? There have been no real answers, yet. But there need to be.

 Diplomats told Inner City Press that Ban would fly -- on a Qatari plane -- to Qatar, Ramallah (but not for now Gaza), Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Kuwait.
  The diplomats who complained to Inner City Press questioned not only Ban taking free flights from a particular country, but also how the use (and landing) of a Qatari plane will play in, for example, Saudi Arabia and Egypt.
 Inner City Press asked Ban's top two spokespeople, and the spokesperson listed as on weekend duty, the following:
"Please state whether the Secretary General is accepting free transportation from any member state or outside party for his current trip to the region concerning the Gaza crisis, and if so please explain the reason and any safeguards in place against influence or conflict of interest.
"Such disclosure should be common practice; if necessary, note that former Spokesperson Nesirky did answer such Press questions, for example concerning the Secretary General flying on a UAE plane (see sample below). On deadline, thank you in advance.
From: UN Spokesperson - Do Not Reply [at] un.org
Subject: Your questions
To: Matthew Russell Lee [at] InnerCityPress.com
Date: Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 3:00 PM

- The UAE Government provided an aircraft to fly the Secretary-General from Beirut to Abu Dhabi because of time constraints.
     Later on July 19, the following was received, which we publish in full 25 minutes after receipt:
From: Stephane Dujarric [at] un.org
Date: Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 5:30 PM
Subject: Re: Press question if SG is accepting free travel from any member state or outside party, as was disclosed in 2012, on deadline, thanks
To: Matthew.Lee [at] innercitypress [dot] com
Cc: FUNCA [at] funca.info
Dear Matthew, Thanks for your question and thanks for the draft answer. The logistical details of the SG's trip, including the travel arrangements are still being worked out. Once we are in a position to confirm them, i will revert.
best
Stephane Dujarric (Mr.)
Spokesman for the Secretary-General
  But obviously the "logistical details" of getting to Qatar were worked out - Ban has already been to Qatar, then Kuwait before Cairo.
  One asked, what can you solve if you can't even say how you got there?
  Inner City Press hanked Dujarric and his colleagues for the interim response and asked, "both Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Poroshenko's office say they have spoken with the Secretary General and give read-outs. Will a UN read-out be put out? If so, when? If not, why not?"
  On July 21, Inner City Press asked Haq, who confirmed the calls took place but nothing about the contents. What is happened with the UN? The Free UN Coalition for Access is pressing for reforms.
  On July 18 after the Gaza meeting of the UN Security Council, the Press was sent "the revised draft resolution that will be put before the Members of the Security Council by the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, in its capacity as the Arab representative on the Security Council."
  Inner City Press put the document online, here, explicitlycomparing it to Resolution 1860 (2009), which passed because the US abstained but did not veto, as it would later do on settlements. We will stay on this.
  Meanwhile the French government banned a demonstration planned for July 19 about the situation of Palestinians in Gaza. 
  Inner City Press asked UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq for the UN's position. Haq said "our general point of view on this is that people have a right to peaceful protest.... We'd have to see how this proceeds, you're talking about something to happen in the future."
  But the ban was already in place.
  While the French government predicted that Saturday's demonstration would be violent, that's akin to prior restraint or profiling. There are have peaceful protests about Palestine in France, for example on July 16.
  But from Niger -- appropriately -- Francois Hollande said “we cannot allow the conflict to be imported into France." 
 Is Ban's UN criticizing France? Is a man biting a chien? Whether a formal statement comes out may be the test.
  So how is a statement of UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon produced? The question was raised by those, both in the real / outside world and even inside the UN who were surprised by this Ban statement of July 13:
The Secretary-General, abhorring the images of Israeli families hovering in shelters in fear for their children's safety, repeats his condemnation of Palestinian rockets fired from Gaza and demands an immediate cessation of these indecent attacks. The Secretary-General is also deeply worried about the impact on Palestinian families of Israeli military action.”
   Several UN officials expressed surprise or even "disgust... at putting Israel first despite no deaths versus 180 in Palestine, abhorring the first but only 'deeply worried' about Gazans."
  And so based on complaints and reporting, Inner City Press can say that such statements are said to originate with a desk officer in UN Department of Political Affairs, run by former US diplomat Jeffrey Feltman.

  Then they are reviewed, on the Middle East, by Antonella Caruso, then Feltman, then in Ban's office one Andrew Gilmour. That's how this statement was issued, Inner City Press is informed.
  Inside the Security Council on July 10, Israel's Ron Prosor told BanKi-moon that while he had given his speech, five rockets had been fired at Israel (Prosor played a rocket warning siren on his phone, to make his point.) At the stakeout, on-camera, Prosor raised the number of rockets to six.
  While Palestine's Riyad Mansour spoke on camera, the stakeout was nearly full with journalists. But when Prosor spoke there were far fewer -- one of whom told Inner City Press, “This is a question for FUNCA,” the Free UN Coalition for Access. Again Prosor played the rocket siren warning, and used the line “From Abuja to Falluja.”
  Inner City Press asked Prosor about those who say Hamas is not formally part of the unity government; he replied, “Hamas is Hamas.”
  On Palestine joining or complaining to the International Criminal Court, Inner City Press' question which Ban Ki-moon dodged on July 9, Prosor did not answer. Yet.
  Watch this site.

 
  

On Gaza Tour, Ban Ki-moon Is Flying on Qatar-Funded, UK-Registered Plane: Any Safeguards? Follow Up on Exclusive


By Matthew Russell Lee, Follow up on exclusive
UNITED NATIONS, July 21, more here -- When UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Dujarric took question by phone from Cairo on July 21, Inner City Press asked him again on whose plane Ban is traveling. 
  This time, Dujarric answered that Ban is flying on a Qatar government funded, UK registered plane.  But he did not answer if there are any safeguards against influence or conflicts of interest. Would Ban accept free flights from any UN member state? From anyone at all?
 Back on the day UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon was to begin his "travel to the region" of Israel and Palestine, diplomats told Inner City Press that Ban will fly -- on a Qatari plane -- to Qatar, Ramallah (but not for now Gaza), Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Kuwait.
  The diplomats who complained to Inner City Press questioned not only Ban taking free flights from a particular country, but also how the use (and landing) of a Qatari plane will play in, for example, Saudi Arabia and Egypt.
   Even with Ban already in Qatar, Ban's spokesman has responded but still not yet answered. One might wonder what can be solved, if you can't even say how you got there.
  Now John Kerry is headed to Cairo - how will that change Ban's magical mysterious tour?
 Inner City Press asked Ban's top two spokespeople, and the spokesperson listed as on weekend duty, the following:
"Please state whether the Secretary General is accepting free transportation from any member state or outside party for his current trip to the region concerning the Gaza crisis, and if so please explain the reason and any safeguards in place against influence or conflict of interest.
"Such disclosure should be common practice; if necessary, note that former Spokesperson Nesirky did answer such Press questions, for example concerning the Secretary General flying on a UAE plane (see sample below). On deadline, thank you in advance.
From: UN Spokesperson - Do Not Reply [at] un.org
Subject: Your questions
To: Matthew Russell Lee [at] InnerCityPress.com
Date: Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 3:00 PM

- The UAE Government provided an aircraft to fly the Secretary-General from Beirut to Abu Dhabi because of time constraints.
     Later on July 19, the following was received, which we publish in full 25 minutes after receipt:
From: Stephane Dujarric [at] un.org
Date: Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 5:30 PM
Subject: Re: Press question if SG is accepting free travel from any member state or outside party, as was disclosed in 2012, on deadline, thanks
To: Matthew.Lee [at] innercitypress [dot] com
Cc: FUNCA [at] funca.info
Dear Matthew, Thanks for your question and thanks for the draft answer. The logistical details of the SG's trip, including the travel arrangements are still being worked out. Once we are in a position to confirm them, i will revert.
best
Stephane Dujarric (Mr.)
Spokesman for the Secretary-General
  But obviously the "logistical details" of getting to Qatar were worked out - Ban is IN Qatar, and Dujarric's office put out a transcript of Ban's remarks with the Qatari foreign minister, that "I look forward to meeting with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas later this evening to continue our discussions and find the way to peace.  I am going to visit the countries in the region including Egypt, Ramallah and Israel and some other countries wherever I need to be."
  One might ask, what can you solve if you can't even say how you got there?
  Inner City Press has thanked Dujarric and his colleagues for the interim response and asked, "both Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Poroshenko's office say they have spoken with the Secretary General and give read-outs. Will a UN read-out be put out? If so, when? If not, why not?"
    For now we note that the Qatari foreign ministry has listed on its website, for example, receiving a call from Ban Ki-moon. Earlier on July 19, this came out from Jeddah:
"The Secretary General of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), Iyad Ameen Madani, asked the Secretary General of the United Nations, Ban Ki-moon to visit the Gaza Strip during his current tour of the region in order to observe first hand the severe damage to innocent human lives, the destructions of homes and infrastructure caused by the unrelenting Israeli raids on Gaza, that have also claimed the lives of hundreds of mostly defenseless Palestinian elderly and children."
  On July 18 after the Gaza meeting of the UN Security Council, the Press was sent "the revised draft resolution that will be put before the Members of the Security Council by the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, in its capacity as the Arab representative on the Security Council."
  Inner City Press put the document online, here, explicitlycomparing it to Resolution 1860 (2009), which passed because the US abstained but did not veto, as it would later do on settlements. We will stay on this.
  Meanwhile the French government has banned a demonstration planned for July 19 about the situation of Palestinians in Gaza. 
  Inner City Press asked UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq for the UN's position. Haq said "our general point of view on this is that people have a right to peaceful protest.... We'd have to see how this proceeds, you're talking about something to happen in the future."
  But the ban is already in place.
  While the French government predicts that Saturday's demonstration would be violent, that's akin to prior restraint or profiling. There are have peaceful protests about Palestine in France, for example on July 16.
  But from Niger -- appropriately -- Francois Hollande said “we cannot allow the conflict to be imported into France." 
 Is Ban's UN criticizing France? Is a man biting a chien? Whether a formal statement comes out may be the test.
  So how is a statement of UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon produced? The question was raised by those, both in the real / outside world and even inside the UN who were surprised by this Ban statement of July 13:
The Secretary-General, abhorring the images of Israeli families hovering in shelters in fear for their children's safety, repeats his condemnation of Palestinian rockets fired from Gaza and demands an immediate cessation of these indecent attacks. The Secretary-General is also deeply worried about the impact on Palestinian families of Israeli military action.”
   Several UN officials expressed surprise or even "disgust... at putting Israel first despite no deaths versus 180 in Palestine, abhorring the first but only 'deeply worried' about Gazans."
  And so based on complaints and reporting, Inner City Press can say that such statements are said to originate with a desk officer in UN Department of Political Affairs, run by former US diplomat Jeffrey Feltman.

  Then they are reviewed, on the Middle East, by Antonella Caruso, then Feltman, then in Ban's office one Andrew Gilmour. That's how this statement was issued, Inner City Press is informed.
  Inside the Security Council on July 10, Israel's Ron Prosor told BanKi-moon that while he had given his speech, five rockets had been fired at Israel (Prosor played a rocket warning siren on his phone, to make his point.) At the stakeout, on-camera, Prosor raised the number of rockets to six.
  While Palestine's Riyad Mansour spoke on camera, the stakeout was nearly full with journalists. But when Prosor spoke there were far fewer -- one of whom told Inner City Press, “This is a question for FUNCA,” the Free UN Coalition for Access. Again Prosor played the rocket siren warning, and used the line “From Abuja to Falluja.”
  Inner City Press asked Prosor about those who say Hamas is not formally part of the unity government; he replied, “Hamas is Hamas.”
  On Palestine joining or complaining to the International Criminal Court, Inner City Press' question which Ban Ki-moon dodged on July 9, Prosor did not answer. Yet.
  Watch this site.