On Fox News, Assad Tells Kucinich 15,000 Syrian Soldiers Killed, 85% of Rebels Jihadists, Charlie Rose Left in Dust

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, September 18 -- It was surreal, when Dennis Kucinich for Fox News interviewed Syria's President Bashar al Assad. His questions got Assad to say that 15,000 government soldiers have been killed, and to estimate that now 80 to 90 percent of rebels are jihadists. Did Charlie Rose get that?

Fox, so often skeptical of the UN, had its reporter Greg Palkot asking questions as if any UN report is credible. It was as if Oil for Food, and more recently the UN's self-exoneration of bringing cholera to Haiti, never happened.

In the introduction it was argued that Kucinich was not there as a Fox journalist. But he asked the first questions, better than Charlie Rose did. He pushed Assad to acknowledge that Syria has chemical weapons. He brought up Gaddafi, if only by reference, a virtual sub-tweet.

Then Greg Palkot, whose presence in Syria Inner City Press tweet-covered back on Sunday, got into the specifics of a Chapter 7 resolution at the UN. Assad said, that is up to the great powers. He was focused on the OPCW process, saying it might take up to a year. But he said he would provide all the information. Others are sure to agree. But to what end? Watch this site.

   

On Syria, Charlie Rose Ignores Qatar, Saudi & Bahrain, Leers about Gaddafi, Russia's Churkin's Response

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, September 10 -- On Syria, PBS at 11 pm on Monday belatedly ran the full hour of Charlie Rose's Sunday morning interview with Bashar al-Assad. Much had changed in the interim, not least the proposal that Syria let the UN oversee or destroy chemical weapons. 

  But there was Charlie Rose, reading questions off a list with little follow up. And here Inner City Press is putting online a transcript -- with a few lines in Russian -- of Russian Ambassador Vitaly Churkin's response. Talk about weird timing.

   Rose repeated that Syria delayed the UN inspectors, with Inner City Press' follow up questions with the UN showed that the UN only formally requested access to Ghouta on August 24, granted the next day.

   In a telling moment, when Assad noted that the US used depleted uranium in Iraq (the effect in Fallujah were shown by VICE last season) and Israel used white phosphorus in Gaza, Rose just moved on to the next question. Next!

   Same when Rose intoned that people don't want one family running a country. What about Saudi Arabia? What about Qatar? What, as one Inner City Press follower chimed in, about the Bushes?

   Rose seemed to leer when he asked Assad if he was worry about what happened to Gaddafi -- visions of gun butts dancing in his head. Is this the West's accountability?

Showing his crack knowledge of Syria's divisions, Rose called it a minority sect dictatorship. But what about Bahrain?

Anyway, the news cycle had moved on. Here though is a transcript of Churkin with some Russian. Watch this site.

   

On Syria at UN, Ban Ki-moon Holds UNbalanced 5-Question Presser With Jarba's Host & Little New: Bid for TV, Race for Relevance

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, September 9 -- When the UN announced Ban Ki-moon would hold a press conference Monday at 11:30 am, some understandably assumed that he had news on Syria.

But with the room full of correspondents, Ban said "I have not yet received the report from Dr. Sellstrom, nor do I know what it will contain."

  Someone softly asked, then why are we here? The breaking news of the morning was Russia's Sergey Lavrov proposing that Syria give its chemical weapons stockpiles to the UN. But Ban's statement had nothing on that.

  After Ban's canned statement, he took a total of five questions. This was more than the two questions he took last Tuesday, also canceling the day's UN noon briefing on places the UN actually has an impact, like in Eastern Congo where the UN is selectively targeting some armed groups (M23) and not others (FDLR).

  Inner City Press had put its name on the question list. But only five were taken, and it was far from balance. The first question, by some unwritten and now archaic and indefensible rule, went to Pamela Falk of CBS, as the president of the UN Correspondents Association.

  One problem here is that under Falk, UNCA sponsored a faux "UN briefing" in late July by Saudi sponsored Syria rebel boss Jarba. The UN has refused to clarify on what basis it gives UNCA the big room it was held in, publicized only to those who pay money, and if it was a "UN briefing."

  Next was an UNCA Executive Committee member from L'Orient le Jour on whom we will not comment. Then Al Jazeera, which alongside excellent reporting on Haiti and the like totes the Qatari royal family's line on most things Middle East. Then two US media, Fox and Associated Press. And that was it.

  What was the goal of this exercise? It seems to have been to get Ban Ki-moon some face time on television, on the day Obama goes on six times, and Charlie Rose' interview with Assad (reviewed here by Inner City Press) goes on PBS. 

  It was like the UN's Saturday briefing on August 31 - because it was an hour and a half before Obama spoke, or was scheduled to start, in the Rose Garden, it was picked up all over. The UN has a built-in bully pulpit. But how is it being used? Watch this site.

   

On Syria, Obama's Six and Assad's Charlie Rose Interviews Teased as in Sweeps Week, Social Media War

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, September 9 -- On Syria on Sunday morning, CBS breathlessly announced that Charlie Rose had interviewed Bashar al Assad. But they wouldn't show any of it until Monday morning.

  At 7 am Monday, there is was: Assad asking Rose to tell Obama and Kerry to show their evidence to the public.

  Rose replied, as in elementary school, You don't show your evidence.

  But who's the one who said he'd make a public case? CBS flashed to a current opinion poll for bombing Syria. Can the number by brought up, Sweeps Weeks style, for a vote in the House of Representatives next week?

(Nor does Charlie show his interview: Monday morning was only an excerpt, the rest withheld until Monday night on PBS and, it seems, Bloomberg Television.)

  Predictably, Assad brought up Colin Powell's evidence-show to the Security Council before the US went into Iraq. Powell has written that he regrets that, but can't do anything now. Who in today's Sweeps Week may feel that way later?

  CBS showed a clip of John Kerry in the UK citing social media -- verified by "technology," of course -- as proving who used chemical weapons.

From the UN, after @InnerCityPress was named one of two"Twitterati 100" covering the UN by Foreign Policy magazine, and after InnerCityPress.com ran articles questioning how the US is doling out information and questions to those on the UN Correspondents Association Executive Committee who sponsored a faux "UN briefing" by Saudi sponsored Syria rebel boss Jarba, those insiders launched two counterfeit social media accounts.

  The goal is confusion - they've followed diplomats, reporters and others, including a Western "humanitarian" NGO communications chief who has retweeted obviously counterfeit messages, knowingly or unknowingly -- and to undermine Inner City Press and questions being asked. But questions and reporting will continue. Watch this site.

   

On Syria, US Denis McDonough Says Vote Is Really on Iran, Assad Interview Teased for PBS, Media Games

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, September 8 -- Selling a military strike on Syria, US official Denis McDonough hit the Sunday talk shows. On CBS's Face the Nation he said that those who've seen the American evidence are convinced.

  That's not the case at the UN. As Inner City Press reported late last week, responses from those who'd gone to the US Mission to see the evidence included "not convinced" to "the same as shown in the capital." 

 A European country, in the meeting with those who asked the UN to probe the August 21 incident, grilled the US. Does McDonough know this? Or think that the public doesn't?

  On ABC's show This Week, McDonough said he's "outraged" at the suggestion that the US would be operating as Al Qaeda's air force. Is it outrageous to suggest that a strike might help the armed opposition, including Al Qaeda?

  On Face the Nation, McDonough announced that this vote is really a vote on Iran. Really?

  Drama occurred on Face the Nation, when Bob Schieffer put Charlie Rose on to say he'd had an interview with Bashar al Assad, but wouldn't show it until Monday night on PBS. Rose said Assad referred to Aleppo. But what did he say? Commercial tease (for an ostensibly non-commercial network) in the run up to war?

  Schieffer delivered his view, that strikes should go forward because the US said they would. Oh. Then he said, Some of our stations are leaving us now. Some of your viewers, too.

  From the UN, after @InnerCityPress was named one of two "Twitterati 100" covering the UN by Foreign Policy magazine, and after InnerCityPress.com ran articles questioning how the US is doling out information and questions to those on the UNCA Executive Committee whosponsored a faux "UN briefing" by Saudi sponsored Syria rebel boss Jarba, those insiders launched two counterfeit social media accounts. 

  This hostility was noticed, overseas and in Washington.

 The goal is confusion - they've followed diplomats, reporters and others -- and to undermine Inner City Press and questions being asked. But questions and reporting will continue. Watch this site.

   

On Syria, Saudi Resolution Cites Chemical Weapons, ICP Obtains Draft, Puts Online Here

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive

UNITED NATIONS, July 27 -- An hour after Saudi Arabia's Permanent Representative Abdallah al-Mouallimi told Inner City Press that the Syria resolution he is drafting will be presented to the General Assembly "next week, Monday," Inner City Press obtained the draft, and is now putting it online here.

  The draft resolution, of course, deplored and denounced, and mentions chemical weapons:

"7. Demands that the Syrian authorities strictly observe their obligations under international law with respect to chemical and biological weapons, including the Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or Other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare, signed at Geneva on 17 June 1925"

  This 1925 signing was cited by Russian Ambassador Vitaly Churkin this week on the Charlie Rose show. TheSaudi draft goes on and

"further demands that the Syrian authorities refrain from using, transferring, producing, developing or otherwise acquiring any chemical or biological weapons or any related material, and that the Syrian authorities meet their obligation to account for and secure all chemical and biological weapons and any related material."

Again, the General Assembly cannot impose sanctions or authorize any use of force. Its credential committee can withdraw accreditation, as it did for diplomats representing Gaddafi's Libya and the Cote d'Ivoire of Laurent Gbagbo.

In Syria, UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous is already dismantling the observer mission which the Security Council extended for a month back on July 20.

Both Saudi Arabia and Qatar, whose former Permanent Representative is now President of the General Assembly, are widely reported to be arming the rebels in Syria. They stand accused, too, of involvement with the extremist who are destroying mausoleums in Timbuktu in northern Mali. Whatever the legality, they now have another GA resolution.

Saudi's Ambassador also spoke on July 25 at the UN stakeout about Palestine. Inner City Press asked him about the effectiveness of the Quartet and whether it should continue. He stopped and said, on camera, it should continue, but take up its responsibilities. Watch this site.

For UN's Ban, the Hits Just Keep On Coming, Bad First Half Reviews Trigger Fight Back

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at UN
www.innercitypress.com/ban1reviews070109.html

UNITED NATIONS, July 1 -- Halfway through a torrent of less than favorable reviews of the first half of his five year term as UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon and those around him have suddenly sought more and more tightly controlled press coverage. Outlandish claims of accomplishment are made, that Ban saved 500,000 people in Myanmar, that he is the second most trusted leader in the world, and number one on climate change.

The strategy is viewed as risky, even by UN supporters. On June 30 a senior Security Council diplomat told Inner City Press that Ban should just "lie low" for the rest of the summer and use the time to replace some of the advisers and officials who have brought him to this point, who "don't seem to be able to tell Ban what is really going on."

While the first part of this advice is not being followed, perhaps the latter will be, or some officials will simply leave for their own reasons.

The current spate of reviews of Ban's performance began with a report card in The Economist, ranking Ban three out of ten for "speaking truth to power" and two out of ten for management. Inner City Press asked Ban to respond, during his last press conference.

Showing rare passion, Ban lashed out at his critics, saying he needs more resources, he needs more support. What followed were even more negative reviews, in the Financial Times and Foreign Policy.

Then began the publish counter offensive. Ban appeared on the Charlie Rose television show, where he made his claim to have saved half a million Burmese. This exact phrase had earlier been deployed in interviews with publications now preparing their own Ban first half reviews.

Two major newspapers are now competing on who will come out first, while a third -- a ailing West Coast daily which no longer covers Ban's UN day to day -- has been brought in on little notice with the expectation that its verdict will be more positive. In the interim, UN supporters have been countered with mostly online pro-Ban pieces.

Before his current trip beginning in Japan then Myanmar, Ban did a separate sit-down with Japanese reporters. Rather than tell the whole UN press corps about the Burma trip, his Spokesperson's Office pre-selected not only the organizations which would be allowed to come, but even the particular reporters.

The fear, as one of Ban's 38th floor advisers told Inner City Press, is that Burma may become "Sri Lanka Two," an embarrassment in which the re-imprisonment of Aung San Suu Kyi, like the bombardment then internment of Tamils, is legitimated by a seemingly hapless UN Secretary General. But if that is what happens, who can it be reported differently?

The shifting ways Ban dealt with Kosovo -- going silent when asked about the legality from the UN perspective of recognizing the theretofore Serbian provinces' unilateral declaration of independence -- and then with Abkhazia and South Ossetia are fodder for forthcoming reviews, as is Ban's claim to have been responsible for the deployment of UN peacekeepers in Darfur. There are pieces in the works, unless destructive deadline competition curtail them, to assess and take apart even Ban's claims on climate change.

Team Ban's recently reach-out to selected media is undermined, meanwhile, by anti-press initiatives by his management and Capital Master Plan officials. These were summarized in a "Dear Colleague" letter circulated to the 435 members of the House of Representatives earlier this week, the text of which is below.

"Angered by past and continuing media reports of corruption, mismanagement and inaction at the United Nations, the UN is again seeking to cover up evidence and stifle freedom of the press.

Meeting on May 8 about 'reporting by the press,' high level UN officials discussed sending threatening letters to several press agencies and other bodies, as well as complaining to Google News about a small, independent news agency that has uncovered numerous UN scandals. Last year, a similar complaint resulted in that agency's temporary removal from Google News. In response to a question about that meeting, the Secretary General's spokeswoman furiously retorted, 'I don't have to account to you for meetings I participate in.'

The UN's Department of Management is also reportedly pushing to obstruct press coverage, seeking to charge media outlets $23,000 to maintain office space, and to move journalists covering the UN into open, un-walled offices -- deterring whistleblowers from coming forth and preventing oversight.

These UN efforts to restrict press freedom and oversight directly contravene the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which recognized that 'Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression... and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.' Once again, the UN is actually undermining the principles on which it was founded."

The May 8 meeting, involving Under Secretaries General Angela Kane (Management), Kiyo Akasaka (Public Information) and Patricia O'Brien (Legal Affairs), as well as Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's speech writer Michael Meyer and Spokesperson Michele Montas, was memorialized in a memo from Ms. Kane to Ban.

Inner City Press was shown the memo, wrote and asked Ban's spokeswoman Michele Montas about it by email, along with the three USGs, none of whom has yet to explain how their participation is consistent not only with the First Amendment, which they say does not apply, but even to the cited Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Ban's Spokesperson Michele Montas is widely reported to be leaving in November. His speech writer is said to still review to his previous employer, Newsweek, as "we." Angela Kane, who convened and summarized the anti-Press meeting, is said by Staff Union sources to be leaving. The UN's top lawyer is rarely if even seen in the building, having done only one press conference in all her time on the job.

Ban's senior adviser Kim Won-soo has yet to do any on the record press conference, although he speaks extensively on background for the forthcoming Ban reviews. He and Ban are joined at the hip. Whether the press strategy adopted by the 38th floor is working is in serious doubt, as is whether Ban will take the symptomatic advice offered Tuesday, to in essence lay low, shake up and start over. Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/ban1reviews070109.html