By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, September 29 -- Despite and without responding to an urgent September 24 protest from Syria, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon met Saturday at his (UN-provided) residence with Saudi-sponsored Syria rebel boss Ahmad al Jarba.
Inner City Press asked about Syria's letter; Ban's Office of the Spokesperson replied that it was not aware of the letter. Inner City Press immediately provided a copy and asked, what is the Secretariat's response to the argument? Separately, as now applies to SG's September 28" meeting with al-Jarba?
A full day has elapsed, and there has been no response. Rather, the questions have mounted. If it was an unofficial or personal meeting, why was there a read-out more than 100 words long?
Why was it not listed on the UN's Media Alert? Why, unlike Ban's meeting at the residence with his Syria chemical weapons prober Ake Sellstrom, was there no photograph?
The murky meeting has been covered, not surprisingly, not only by Agence France Presse (France sponsored Jarba in the UN's ECOSOC chamber) but now by Saudi-supported Al Arabiya. Another Gulf station which is "all in" against Assad has seen fit to simultaneous try to rehabilitate Sri Lanka's Mahinda Rajapaksa, who killed at least 40,000 civilians.
As September ends tomorrow, Ban Ki-moon is still withholding the UN's report on the UN's inaction during this 2009 killing. But unlike his Saturday meeting with Jarba, he had a photograph taken with Sellstrom AND the first page of his report.
What is the difference? Look at the positions of the US and France, and of the Gulf countries that have been allowed to increasingly fund and dominate in the UN, and the answer is obvious. But we are still awaiting responses from Ban's spokesperson's office, a full day after the questions were asked. Watch this site.
