UN Adviser Douste-Blazy At Crans-Montana Forum in Western Sahara, UN Says It's Personal

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 14 -- The UN's ambiguous position on Western Sahara is exemplified most recently by UN adviser Philippe Douste-Blazy attending the Crans-Montana Forum in Dakhla, Western Sahara. For day, Inner City Press has been ask to find out what Douste-Blazy was doing there. Inner City Press previously exposed Douste-Blazy's waste of funds through MassiveGood, here. Now this, from the UN Spokesperson's Office:

"We have noted press reports to the effect that the United Nations is participating in the Crans-Montana Forum currently being held in Dakhla, a city in that part of Western Sahara under Moroccan control.

"The Secretary-General was invited to this Forum, but informed its President that he could not attend.  He did not delegate Mr. Philippe Douste-Blazy or anyone else to represent him or the United Nations.  Mr. Douste-Blazy, who serves as a special adviser to the Secretary-General on innovative financing, is attending exclusively in his private capacity.

"While Dakhla is described in Forum materials as a city in Morocco, the definitive status of Western Sahara is the object of a negotiating process being conducted under the auspices of the Secretary-General in accordance with the relevant United Nations resolutions."

  Well there's that. And this, and before that, this. Douste-Blazy is, of course, a former French government official. But how much longer should he be a UN "adviser"?

  Earlier this year after Ban spoke by phone with the King of Morocco, on February 11 Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric said:

"on the status of Christopher Ross, the Personal Envoy of the Secretary-General for Western Sahara.  I can report that he arrived in Rabat today.  Mr. Ross will hold discussions with Morocco and the Frente Polisario and with the neighboring States during this mission."

  But will Ross, the Envoy FOR Western Sahara, actually visit Laayoune? Inner City Press asked:

Inner City Press: On Mr. Ross' visit, I wanted to know whether he in fact will go to Laayoune, the main city in Western Sahara.  Maybe I missed when you read it out.

Spokesman Dujarric:  I will get you… as I said, as we get details, we'll get them to you.

Inner City Press:  If he's not, can we find out why he's not?

Spokesman Dujarric:  Sure.  

  So far, seven hours later, nothing. This is the UN and Western Sahara. Back on November 21 asked the New York spokesman for High Commissioner for Human Rights Prince Zeid for

"an update on action on the leaked cables, related to Western Sahara, involving current OHCHR official Anders Kompass and one, previously head of OHCHR's office in NY, who's just left. What steps has OHCHR taken on the cables / issues?"

  Now two months and three weeks later there has been no answer on this from the OHCHR spokesperson in New York. But we published this response from OHCHR Geneva spokesperson Rupert Colville to similar questions:

From: Rupert Colville [at] ohchr.org
Date: Friday 12 December 2014
Subj: Investigation leaked cables Western Sahara and OHCHR

The investigation is being carried out, at our request, by the Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) in New York, which is an operationally independent office that assists the Secretary-General in fulfilling his internal oversight responsibilities. While the investigation is under way, there is nothing else I can say on the matter.

  On January 29, Carman Lapointe the head of OIOS wrote:

"Our operating policies do not allow OIOS to provide information on whether we are investigating any matter, and so you will need to continue to consult OHCHR on this topic.

"In general terms, however, I can say that when/if we receive allegations of leaked confidential documents, we would advise that investigations into leaks of confidential documents are very challenging for OIOS to substantiate.  As you may be aware, OIOS has authority to conduct only administrative investigations, and we have very limited (and no coercive) powers.  Unless staff members involved in leaks admit or confess, or the leaks are undertaken blatantly using United Nations assets that we can examine forensically (such as by an attachment to an email from a UN computer or other device) we would have no jurisdiction to pursue further. "

  Combined with this new scandal uncovered by Inner City Press, about the sale of posts in UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous, the above gives little confidence.

 Meanwhile on January 23 the UN issued this read out:

"The Secretary-General spoke with His Majesty King Mohammed VI of Morocco on Thursday, January 22.  He expressed appreciation for Morocco’s valuable support of the activities of the United Nations, particularly in peacekeeping and in a number of critical issues in Africa and the Middle East.

"On Western Sahara, the Secretary-General acknowledged Morocco’s concerns about the UN-sponsored negotiations between the Kingdom of Morocco and the Frente Polisario.  He confirmed that reports to the Council on this issue will remain objective and reflect facts.  He also reiterated that the UN Mission in Western Sahara, MINURSO, will continue to exercise its existing mandate as set forth by the Security Council.

"In response, His Majesty indicated that Morocco looks forward to moving ahead in collaboration with the United Nations and that Morocco’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations will be working with the Secretary-General’s Personal Envoy, Christopher Ross, to arrange his next visit to Morocco as soon as possible, as well as with the Secretary-General’s Special Representative and Head of MINURSO, Kim Bolduc, to facilitate her rapid deployment to the region."

  So how long will that take?

  The UN system often uses the pendency of an investigation as a way to wait for the “problem” to go away. As the publication Tel Quel, here, has noted, many in the media are not covering the leaks.

  Relatedly, the leaks are now being covered up or censored. Two recent uploads, about Morocco and the African Group at the UN, were put on “ filefactory.com” -- then taken down after, the site says, a complaint under the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

  This is a new trend -- attempt to use copyright law to take down leaked documents. Reuters, for example, filed a “for the record” complaint with the UN trying to get Inner City Press thrown out - then, when the “for the record” complaint was leaked and published, conned Google into blocking it from Search, calling it copyrighted. Click here for that.

So that media uses or abuses copyright to censor its own “for the record” complaint filed with the UN, and does not cover these new leaks about Western Sahara, Morocco, and the UN. This is a new trend. Watch this site.

  In the above, the referenced former head of OHCHR's New York office is Senegal's Bacre Waly Ndiaye, noted Tijania Sufi. The cables reveal a deep scandal in the UN system. Now OHCHR in Geneva is saying it will not comment until an investigation, Inner City Press understands by the UN Office of Internal Oversight Services, is complete. But there is no indication that will be publish. This is one of the ways the UN covers up.

 There other ways, beyond Western Sahara. On rapes in DR Congo by Army units the UN support, Ladsous refused to answer Press questions for months. Video here of then and now spokesman pulling microphone away from Inner City Press. These practices are being opposed by the new Free UN Coalition for Access.

 Now on UN Peacekeeping's November 9 press release covering up mass rape in Thabit in Darfur, Ladsous has not answered any questions; UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric on November 21 told Inner City Press the UN won't comment on leaks. The Western Sahara leaks are so extensive that despite a seeming media blackout by Western wire services, they will not go away. 

While Ladsous is not the only UN official exposed by the cables, his extraordinary campaign of refusing Press questions, to the point of physically blocking Press filming (Vine here), as well as a DPKO to OHCHR connection, make him key to the case. As to MINURSO, Ladsous is blamed for the non-deployment of Bolduc. 

  Back on November 14 Inner City Press asked UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq about Bolduc and an investigation of leaks in Geneva of which sources tell it. Video here.

  On November 5, Inner City Press reported on leaked cables showing among other things the UN's Ladsous undermining MINURSO on the issue of human rights, and improper service of Morocco by Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights staffers Anders Kompass and Bacre Waly Ndiaye.

    Since then, along with anonymous death threats, Inner City Press has received additional information including of a UN Office of Internal Oversight Services investigation of Anders Kompers and Bacre Waly Ndiaye.

  On November 14, Inner City Press asked the UN's Haq, per UN transcript:

Deputy Spokesman Haq:  You had a question on Western Sahara?

Inner City Press: It's a two-pronged question.  What Stéphane [Dujarric] said earlier in the week about Kim Bolduc, the new SRSG [Special Representative of the Secretary-General].  I wanted to just kind of confirm it.  In reading it, does that mean that she has never has been allowed in?  And, if so, where has she been since August?  What is the plan to resolve that?  And I also wanted to ask you about regarding the cables that I base the initial question on.  Can you confirm that OIOS [Office for Internal Oversight Services] is conducting an investigation at the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on at least two staff members who apparently leaked this information to the Moroccan Government?

Deputy Spokesman Haq:  On that, I cannot confirm that.  As you know, the OIOS conducts its work independently.  At some point, once they have completed their work, they apprise us [inaudible].  But I wouldn't be aware of any work that is ongoing.  Beyond that, regarding Kim Bolduc, as you know, both Christopher Ross and Kim Bolduc briefed the Security Council on 27 October.  And at that point, the Security Council reiterated its desire, first of all, to see Ambassador Ross's facilitation resume and reiterated its desire to see Kim Bolduc be able to take up her duties at the helm of MINURSO [United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara] as soon as possible.  And we look forward to the resumption of Mr. Ross's visit to the region and also to the deployment of Kim Bolduc.

Inner City Press:  But is she currently, I mean, she is the SRSG?

Deputy Spokesman Haq:  She is the SRSG, but she has not been able to function with her MINURSO duties in-country.

  In-country, eh? We'll have more on this. And on this: Inner City Press is informed that while Ladsous claims to have performed as required in connection with the appointment of Bolduc, even on this he is accused of failing to do his duty, as on many other parts of his job. Video compilation here; recent Vine here.

   Document leaks from inside the UN have identified improper service of Morocco, on the question of Western Sahara, by a staffer at the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Anders Kompass.

  Inner City Press has waited to report on them; the spokesperson for the High Commissioner has today said his office is aware the leaked cables, which contain the perspective of certain diplomats, and that the situation is being investigated to clarify the facts.”

  Whatever the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, now under Jordan's Prince Zeid, does about the content of the leaks, more will be required in the UN Secretariat in New York -- particularly at the top of the Department of Peacekeeping Operations, which runs the MINURSO mission in Western Sahara.

  The cables show that Herve Ladsous, a long-time French diplomat now the boss of DPKO and thus of MINURSO, was flacking for Morocco on the supposed quality of its human rights mechanisms. This directly undercuts the MINURSO mission, for which Ladsous is supposed to be working.

  African Union members of the Security Council, from Uganda to South Africa to Nigeria, have demanded that MINURSO have the same type of human rights monitoring mechanism as the UN Peacekeeping missions in the DR Congo, Mali and Central African Republic. 

  Now Ladsous is exposed undermining extending this to Western Sahara -- the policy of his country, France, but undercutting DPKO.

  During General Assembly debate week in September 2014, Ladsous refused to answer Press questions and ended up blocking the Press' camera, Vine here.

  This is a scandal. And since Ladsous had refused to answer Press questions, about rapes by his mission's partners in the DRC, about DPKO bringing cholera to Haiti, about under-reporting attacks on civilians and even peacekeepers in Darfur and now Central African Republic, it is time for the question to be asked. 

Update: on November 6, Inner City Press asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric about this, video here.

  Immediately after the briefing, Inner City Press emailed Dujarric the cable it had asked about. Watch this site.

   

On Malaria, UN's Ray Chambers Explains Net Slow Down, Heat, Douste-Blazy's MassiveGood's Quiet Death

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 25 -- Why did the number of malaria bed nets distributed in Africa fall from 145 million in 2010 to only 66 million last year?

  Thursday was World Malaria Day -- WMD, to some -- so Inner City Press asked at the UN's noon briefing about bed nets, and about the failure of the “MassiveGood” fundraising trumpeted by Philippe Douste-Blazy, former French foreign minister and now sometime-UN official.

  Both questions were addressed by Ray Chambers, with the long title of “Special Envoy of Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon for Malaria and for the Financing of the Health-related Millennium Development Goals.” 

Inner City Press asked Chambers about MassiveGood back on December 14, 2010, here.

 OThursday, Chambers said he hadn't heard anything about MassiveGood for the past year.

  Exactly -- it closed down, albeit quietly, in November 2011. What's Douste-Blazy doing now? (Other than this hiring, on which the UN only answered Inner City Press on New Years Eve, here.)

  On bed nets, Chambers said that there had been a push for as many nets as possible in 2010, which inevitably led to a fall-off afterward. Then the Global Fund had to be “re-structured” -- a diplomat word, that -- and so there was less money to buy nets.

  But now, he said, it is turned around. In the first quarter of 2013, some 36 million nets were produced, which he projected to 140 million on the year. And they will be needed: the children who've slept under nets since 2010 now have no immunity at all.

  Chambers explained that there's a move to nets that last longer than three years, but that will require more “tensile strength” to avoid breaking when kicked at by a child. But that makes the nets heavier, and hotter to sleep under, leading some to then not use them.

Joy Phumaphi, Executive Secretary of the African Leaders Malaria Alliance, added that there's a move to standardize net size, which will make them cheaper to produce, rather than trying to tailor the size of nets to different regions and preferences. The whole ten minute exchange is here, from Minute 27:22.

  On fundraising, Chambers recounted going to Washington last week, to meet Senator Lindsey Graham and then, drum roll, Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett last Friday. 

  Chambers screened the trailer of “Mary and Martha,” a movie involving malaria that premiered on HBO on Saturday. Call it World Malaria Week, with the less tainted acronym WMW. Watch this site.

UN of Ban Ki-moon Defers & Delays on Yemen & Somalia, MassiveGood & Green Climate Fund, Sri Lanka

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, November 25 -- Even on a slow day at the UN there are questions, if few answers and even less follow-through.

On the Friday after Thanksgiving Inner City Press asked UN spokesman Martin Nesirky about Yemen and Somalia, war crimes in Sri Lanka, the Green Climate Fund and defunct MassiveGood scam now dubbed MassiveFraud by some. Video here.

The answers ranged from "we're still studying" through "not our fault" to "we'll get back to you."

On Yemen, Inner City Press asked about Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's statements Wednesday that Ali Saleh would come to New York, stepping back from power, and that Ban hadn't discussed in any detail with Saleh what's now being protested as the immunity provisions of the deal.

Nesirky noted that Inner City Press was there when Ban spoke and all Ban was doing was recounting what Saleh said: "ultimately it's up to the president to travel as he sees fit."

He said the UN "has a clear position against impunity," and that Ban's envoy -- if not Saleh -- will be in New York on Monday. But what about the at least five dead protesting the deal that Ban applauded?

On Somalia, Inner City Press asked about Ethiopia entering the country, and if Ban thought it required Security Council approval or review. Nesirky said that Ban's office won't comment on what the Security Council should discuss, "that's for the Council to decide."

Inner City Press pointed out that previous Secretaries General -- the primary reference was to Kofi Annan on Iraq -- had spoken about how the UN Charter applies to the entry into one country by another.

On reports that the US and Saudi Arabia won't sign on to the Green Climate Fund, Inner City Press asked for Ban's view. Nesirky said that beyond the Green Climate Fund, Durban's discussions will include other topics, "we need to wait and see." That is, unlike even the UK, no criticism of the Obama administration's positions.

Now that the Sri Lanka's government own Lessons Learnt & Reconciliation Commission report has been leaked, as the UN's was, to The Island, Inner City Press asked about it. "National accountability is always the most important," Nesirky said, "it remains to be seen." Really?

Finally on the MassiveGood program, which after being touted by Ban Ki-moon and Philippe Douste-Blazy as to a way to raise funds for HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis spent over $11 million to raise only $300,000, Inner City Press what Ban had learned from this fiasco.

Inner City Press previously asked Ban's office about the waste of money and illegality in MassiveGood, involving former and current French government officials pretending to be based in Geneva when they weren't, for tax purposes, and misuse of funds for, among other things, a Spike Lee directed video.

"We'll find out," Nesirky said. We'll be waiting - watch this site.

UN Slow to Act on Douste Blazy Misuse of MassiveGood Funds, Malaria in Myanmar

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, December 14 -- Former French foreign minister Philippe Douste Blazy's misuse of millions of dollars in funding from UNITAID has yet to be effectively acted on by the UN system, it emerged on December 14.

At a press conference on malaria, Inner City Press asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's special envoy on the topic, Ray Chambers, what has been done since Inner City Press' questions and expose more than five month ago.

We are watching it, Chambers said, adding later that his past work as an investor made him wary of “start ups.” But Douste Blazy presented his Millennium Foundation and its MassiveGood program as nearly a sure thing. He paid Spike Lee $500,000 to make a promotional film that featured Bill Clinton, Paul Auster and others. And then... nothing, or very little.

As Inner City Press showed, the Millennium Foundation was stocked with associates of now former French foreign minister Bernard Kouchner, recently fired by Nicolas Sarkozy. Chamber on December 14 said that “to the best of our knowledge,” UNITAID gave some $8 to $10 million to Douste Blazy's Millennium Foundation, which has been hampered by “software problems.” Video here, from Minuyte 37:20

But where is the accountability? To fight malaria is laudable. But who approved this transfer of funds?

In the rest of the press conference, from which WHO chief Margaret Chan left without taking any questions, Inner City Press asked about the UN's response to malaria in Pakistan after the floods, and about WHO's involvement in a company's work with genetically modified mosquitoes.

WHO's Doctor Rob Newman, in Chan's absence, acknowledged WHO's engagement with genetically modified mosquitoes. Video here, from Minute 45:07. Inner City Press was not allowed a follow up question about the specifics.

On Pakistan, Newman said that WHO sent a situation assessment team from its Eastern Mediterranean office, and has procured and shipped the “commodities” needed. But how will malaria spread in Pakistan?

How is are resistant strains of malaria spreading along the borders of Thailand with Cambodia and, more recently, Myanmar? Watch this site.

Footnote: WHO's Newman says he wrote to 39 companies to urge stopping production of single drug malaria products, and got only two responses. It seems that these, targeted by African leaders as recounted to his credit by Ray Chambers, are mostly based in India, which is joining the UN Security Council next month.

Notably, as Inner City Press reported last week from India's Mission to the UN, India argues that Myanmar is NOT a threat to international peace and security, and should not be on the Security Council's agenda. But if resistant malaria is spreading, isn't THAT a threat to international peace and security?

MassiveGood, Praised by UN's Ban, Bill Clinton & Douste-Blazy, Called MassiveScam, $525,000 Spike Lee Film Yields $200,000

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive
www.innercitypress.com/un1itaid071110.html

UNITED NATIONS, July 11 -- To raise money for the fight against AIDS and other diseases during the purchase of an airplane ticket: it sounds like, or as the UN calls it, “MassiveGood.”

Back on March 4, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon praised the program, and made the first donation. Inner City Press asked Ban's envoy on “innovative finance for development,” Philippe Douste-Blazy, about how the program would be transparent. Rather than directly answer, Douste-Blazy handed out copies of his book.

After four months and $11 million dollars in spending, including $525,000 for a 60 second Spike Lee promotion film featuring brief appearances by Samuel Jackson, Susan Sarandon, Paul Auster and a recording of former President Bill Clinton's voice, questions have arisen. Inner City Press asked the UN on July 8

Inner City Press: UNITAID allocated $22 million to something called the Millennium Foundation, which is also headed by Mr. Douste-Blazy, for this thing called MassiveGood, where for every plane ticket people were going to click. It was estimated that it would raise hundreds of millions of dollars [but] it’s raised much, much less than that. Given that Ban Ki-moon was the first clicker and used the UN platform to promote this idea, what does he think about the article and of the use of $22 million that should have gone to, actually, antiretrovirals, to pay Spike Lee to do an ad for something that’s raised so little money? And what is Mr. Ban Ki-moon going to do to clean up this scandalous use of funds?

Associate Spokesperson: We’ll check with our colleagues dealing with this about what kind of response there is on that.

The following afternoon, this response was proffered:

Date: Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 2:22 PM
Subject: Your question on MASSIVEGOOD
From: UN Spokesperson - Do Not Reply
To: Matthew Lee @innercitypress.com

Our colleagues at UNITAID wish to stress that MASSIVEGOOD is a private-public partnership in the first stages of development.

Three months after the initiative was launched at the United Nations, MASSIVEGOOD has raised $200,000 in micro-contributions from travelers and corporate donations, a figure which is completely in line with the original fundraising projections.

UNITAID adds that it is already seeing an impressive number of donation “clicks” coming from travelers this summer, only four weeks after its operational launch. The Millennium Foundation will be holding its operational launch in the USA this October and it is sure to be fully deployed throughout the travel industry there.

Once fully deployed in the USA and in several European countries, MASSIVEGOOD will allow travelers to make a micro-contribution towards the three health-related Millennium Development Goals, as is already the case in Spain. The Millennium Foundation will continue to secure partnerships within the travel and tourism industry, and to ultimately ensure that each of us who travel can help the world reach the Millennium Development Goals.

It all sounds very nice. But consider:

- the Millennium Foundation (MF) is headed by Philippe Douste-Blazy. It has been established in Nov. 2008 as a private Swiss Foundation. Its purpose is to collect "voluntary contributions" (i.e., donations) to support global health initiatives. The key idea is to encourage travel agents, individual travelers and corporate companies to routinely donate a small sum of money (2 €, 2 $ or 2 £ per ticket) each time they book an airplane ticket online, thanks to the cooperation of the main companies part of the Global Distribution System (GDS). The MF was created with the assumption that those main companies - top three being Sabre, Travelport and Amadeus - would fully cooperate with the above-mentioned donation scheme. Under a set of favorable assumptions, a McKinsey report was predicting the scheme could raise a fair amount of money, in the few hundreds of millions $ per year.

- Philippe Douste-Blazy, UN Secretary General Ban's Special Adviser on "innovative financing", has lobbied for such a donation scheme given his close ties with the travel industry (notably French businessman Jean Francois Rial). As Chairperson of UNITAID Executive Board, he came to realize that certain governments, notably the US government, would never support UNITAID and implement an airline tax similar to the French tax himself had created when he was a member of the French government. UNITAID is a big UN procurement agency for HIV/AIDS drugs hosted by the World Health Organization in Geneva.

- Mr. Dousteblazy has used his position as UNITAID Chairperson to have UNITAID granting a substantial budget ($22 million) for the creation of the MF, while we was simultaneously taking up the presidency of the newly created entity (thus cumulating the two presidencies : UNITAID, MF). This entered into force in Nov/Dec. 2008 with the establishment of the MF, recorded by the Swiss government, and the first wire of funds from UNITAID to the MF.

- the MF quickly recruited his own secretariat, starting with a Director General, another Frenchman named Bernard Salome. An Executive Board of the MF was set up, with representatives of most countries already involved in UNITAID (notably France and the UK), but also representatives of prominent NGOs (Oxfam). The MF's HQ was officially located in Geneva, in the commercial zone by the city airport.

- the MF has designed its collecting scheme on 2 main tasks : i/ having the GDS companies developing the software enabling their customers (e.g., travel agencies) to make the routine online donation ; ii/ launching massive media and advertisement campaigns in targeted countries representing a great potential of air travelers : the US and selected European countries (Germany, Switzerland, UK, Spain).

Eighteen Months Later, This is the Situation

- approximately half of the UNITAID grant, i.e. 11 M$, has been spent or engaged. The MF spends an additional 500,000 $ a month minimum. At the current pace of spending, most insiders think the MF will run out of funding by end 2010, Q1 2011

- the donation scheme ("Massivegood") has been launched in 2 countries only : the US (early March 2010) and Spain (1 June 2010)

- the donation situation is dire : after 4 months targeting the US market (i.e., the key market), the amount of donations is about 14,000 $, and only a few hundreds of people have donated. Some sources actually suspect those donors to be employees of one of the GDS companies partner to the donation scheme, inviting its staff to make a donation to get the process started.

- none of the main GDS companies (Amadeus, Travelport, Sabre) has implemented the online donation software with its own customers (travel agencies), for various (legal, technical) reasons. It seems that as little as 5 out of 150,000 travel agents in the US have individually and voluntarily responded to the call for donation.

- in 2009, the MF has contracted an advertising consortium (led notably by French advertising firm Fred & Farid) for its media and ad campaign, labeled "Massivegood". According to sources, the contract would amount to 9 M$. Today, at least 3 M$ have been spent for the Massivegood campaign and the US launch in particular. A very big expenditure ($525,000) has been the making of a 60 second promotional movie by Movie Director Spike Lee, featuring brief appearances by Samuel Jackson, Susan Sarandon, Paul Auster and a recording of former President Bill Clinton's voice. This (fairly ordinary) movie has generated little interest on the Internet.

To summarize : 11 M$ of HIV/AIDS funding have already evaporated, and more is at risk ; the launch of the Massivegood brand on the most critical market (US) has been a failure ; unable to ensure the dissemination of the donation software, the MF seems irreversibly unable to achieve the two elements of its initial strategy, i.e. organizing a vast network of online donations through the GDS companies, and promoting its brand vis-a-vis the citizens and travelers in key countries.

Beyond the incompetence, the most striking and shocking factor is that UNITAID funding should legally be used to scale up access to HIV/AIDS and malaria drugs for the poorest countries. Today, UNITAID, the Global Fund against HIV/AIDS and all organizations fighting global pandemics are struggling with declining resources. How many doses of anti retrovirals, how many bed nets against malaria, how many packs of therapeutic food could have been bought with those wasted 11 M$ ? Is it worth waiting for the remaining 11 M$ to disappear into thin air ?

And so informed sources want to know:

- is the UN Secretary General Ban aware of the failure of the Massivegood scheme ? Why did he decide to support it by making publicly the first online donation himself on March 4th ? Was he briefed on the fact that the software wasn't ready ? Does he intend to keep Mr. Dousteblazy as his Special Adviser ? Does he intend to take full responsibility for his adviser's initiatives ? Would his attitude have anything to do with his wish to retain French support in view of a second mandate ?

- what is Mr. Douste-Blazy reaction in front of this situation ? Does he consider resigning from his position of Chairperson of UNITAID Executive Board for having distracted resources of this organization ? How could he plea ignorance as he chaired both organizations (the grantor and the grantee) ? Did he consider he exerted objective control and defended UNITAID's interest ? Can he display the exact and detailed account of all travel expenses incurred by UNITAID and the MF for him to "promote" the Massivegood scheme ? He is supposedly an unpaid UN adviser ("one dollar contract") : who pays for his income,secretariat and office(s) located in Paris, not in Geneva ? Some say the Paris office rent would be as high as 10,000 € a month : is it correct ? Is Mr. Dousteblazy using this office only for UN or MF related purposes, or for his participation to French politics ?

-Why was Mr. Salome, like Douste-Blazy a Frenchman, appointed Director General without any transparent and competitive process, post publication and selection panel ? Why is the amount of his salary not published or disclosed even to the members of the MF Board ? What is the amount of travel and other expenses incurred by the MF on Mr. Salome's behalf ? Could this complacent situation have something to do with the fact that Mr. Salome is a former adviser and very close friend to Bernard Kouchner ?

- why did WHO, UNITAID's hosting entity, validate the "transfer" of $22 million from a UN HIV/AIDS fund to a non-UN, opaque private entity such as the MF, entirely created from scratch and specifically designed for a dubious fund-raising scheme, without raising questions or demanding guarantees ? Especially since this operation did not enter into UNITAID's legal purposes ? Would it have something to do with the fact that the WHO lawyer in charge of this scrutiny process (Ms. Donna Catliota) has been recruited by the MF as a lawyer immediately after she validated the transfer of funds from UNITAID to the MF ? And why did such an obvious conflict of interest remain unnoticed by WHO upper management ?

- what is the level of administrative expenses of the MF ? how many people are actually employed by the MF : some say 25 staff, is it true ? it is true that at least 6 of them perceive net salaries in excess of 10,000 € a month after tax ? The MF website mentions that the MF has its offices in Geneva but also maintains a "satellite office" in Paris : what are the expenses linked with this Paris office ? How many people do work in Paris for the MF ? Some say that the Geneva office, actually located inside the airport zone, is a "ghost office" : how many people do actually work there on a daily basis ? And above all, why does a private Swiss law foundation have an office in Paris, while planning operations in the US or Spain and not in France ? Would it have something to do with the possibility for some French, Paris-based staff to evade from French tax laws, receiving tax-free salaries under Swiss laws while enjoying Paris ?

- why did Mr. Douste-Blazy prefer to use UNITAID funding for the MF/Massivegood scheme instead of leveraging private philanthropic funds or even turning to (development) banks to provide the seed funding ? After all, the McKinsey study had predicted a certain potential for the donation scheme (under a set of precise assumptions though) : with appropriate guarantees, the initial capital could have been borrowed and reimbursed as quickly as a 2 or 3 years. Why then distracting UN HIV/AIDS funding ? Would it have something to do that Mr. Douste-Blazy wanted to avoid any external scrutiny over "his" scheme, be it from a philanthropist, a bank or a UN body, whereas such scrutiny could have prevented the current mismanagement of funds ?

- how was the advertisement company for the Massivegood campaign chosen ? Was there a competitive tender for the 9 M$ contract ? Why was a French company chosen, notwithstanding the fact that the donation scheme had to be launched in the US primarily ? Did the French company enjoy early information and contact from the MF and its Chairperson, ahead of the contract ? How does the firm explain the mediocre success of its campaign in the US ?

- why did Director Spike Lee bill the MF 525,000 $ for such a short promotional material ? Was it non-profit ? Did he and all the actors involved work pro-bono ? What is the detail of expenses incurred by this movie ? How does he explain the movie has generated so little interest ?

- are the CEOs of the main GDS companies (Amadeus, Travelport, Sabre) aware of such financial mismanagement by the MF ? If yes, is it why they have refused to cooperate further with the MF, notwithstanding the fact that they had signed a letter of intent ? If yes, again, why then didn't they alert political and administrative authorities?

And what of Bill Clinton, Paul Auster, Spike Lee, Samuel L. Jackson and Susan Sarandon.

Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/un1itaid071110.html