Amid Privatized Talk of Syria Chemical Weapons, de Mistura Trashed, Then UN Censorship Alliance Session

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 16 -- That the Syrian chemical weapons victim and doctor who briefed the UN Security Council on April 16 did so behind closed doors, with no UN Television coverage, was a product of the Council's rules.

  It was an “Arria formula” meeting, which was not be listed in the UN Journal or even on the blue electronic signs outside it. (The sign said the meeting was about "nutrition.")

  Afterward chemical weapons victim Qusai Zakarya took some questions in the hall, before again going behind closed doors of the UN Censorship Alliance, see below.

  Inner City Press in this public space asked Qusai Zakarya what he thought of UN envoy on Syria Staffan de Mistura.

Qusai Zakarya said replied to Inner City Press, "I think Staffan de Mistura is a hypocrite. I think his very disgusting attempt to shine up the image of the regime is exposed to the Syrian poeple and to a nlot of members of the international community. His offer on freezes was a joke. If he really cared about saving lives he would have convinced the regime to stop using its fire power. We have a lot of outrage against his attempts, the deal he was trying to offer, it's just another false attempt to shine up the image of the regime."

   Inner City Press asked him if he would meet with any UN official. “I can't answer that questio right now,” he said. Then the convoy went to the clubhouse of the UN Censorship Alliance, which had sent notice only to those who pay it money: "They will have just presented their accounts in front of the UN Security Council at an Arria-formula meeting on Syria Chemical Weapons."

     But why would the doctors, in holding a supposed press conference afterward, not do so in the UN Press Briefing Room on UNTV, as can be done by any NGO or individual as long as sponsored by a member state? 

    Instead, the sequel  show was also behind closed door, in the UN Censorship Alliance (UNCA), not on UNTV. This is the same UNCA which hosted former Syrian Coalition head Ahmad al Jarba, allowing him to claim he had a “UN press briefing.”  It is a scam, and it is a scam / sham and mistake the doctors are proceeding this way.

    UNCA and its board members have, for example, sought to get other journalists thrown out of the UN, for reporting on the financial relationship of UNCA's then and now president Giampaolo Pioli with an alleged war criminal, accepting rent money from him and later agree to screen his war crimes denial film inside the UN, under the UNCA banner.  If one has a case to make, this is not the place to make it.

  Even since its outright censorship bid, the way UNCA is run gives less and less confidence. On April 10, the UN Spokesperson's Office announced over its public address system that "in a few short moments in the UNCA room there will be a press conference by a State Department official."

   But as Inner City Press immediately reported, it wasn't any "press conference" -- it was off the record spin, typical of this UNCA now known as the UN's Censorship Alliance (the invitation they send to those who pay UNCA money is below.)

  Just before 5 pm, the UN Spokesperson's Office made a second public address system announcement: it was NOT a press conference, but rather an off the record presentation by the US State Department.

  All this in the big room the UN gives to UNCA, its Censorship Alliance. Why is the UN involved in this in any way at all?

  The announcement by UNCA president Giampaolo Pioli, sent only to those who pay UNCA money (then forwarded to Inner City Press along with messages of shock and disgust) said

"For correspondents interested in an informal off-the-record meeting with [the] Deputy Director, Media Hub of the Americas, U.S. Department of State Bureau of Public Affairs, please join us in the UNCA Meeting Room, Friday, April 10th at 3:30pm.

"The meeting will be to explain the work of the State Department Public Affairs bureau that works with international media, to provide assistance in gaining better access to State Department officials and information, in addition to presenting the work done in the Media Hub of the Americas where the Director is the State Department spokesperson in Spanish and Portuguese for regional media and Spain and Portugal.

Thank you,

Giampaolo Pioli
UNCA President"

  
 Pioli's invite linked to a self-description of this US Bureau of Public Affairs, that “PA/IME works in close collaboration with State Department and interagency colleagues to create and manage tools to ensure accurate coverage of U.S. foreign policy by major international media.”

    UNCA represents only part of the UN press corps. This writer, for example, quit the group after 2012.  UNCA is said by UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric to receive the first question in the UN Press Briefing Room “by tradition,” even after UNCA's Executive Board tried to get the investigative Press thrown out of the UN for itsreporting about Sri Lanka, UN Peacekeeping and colonialism (Herve Ladsous) among other topics.

 UNCA did nothing when Ladsous adopted the policy of refusing to answer any questions from the investigative Press, and having his spokespeople physically grab the UNTV microphone to try to avoid the questions being heard.

  Now UNCA wants to facilitate “accurate coverage of U.S. foreign policy.” Does it perform this service for other countries?

    Inner City Press, like the new Free UN Coalition for Access which it co-founded after quitting UNCA, is not against "accurate coverage of US foreign policy." Last month, Inner City Press asked the US State Department about Yemen (including the decision not to evacuate Yemeni Americans from the country), Cuba (the US restrictions on its diplomats at the UN), the Maldives,Middle East and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. In each case, Inner City Press reported the answers in full, where possible with video.

  But why provide this platform for one country and not others? Earlier on April 10 UNCA will have a presentation by a former US CIA employee who served in Saipan, Korea, Vietnam and "Burma," as the UNCA notice puts it.

  What has happened to this UNCA under Pioli and presumably current Executive Committee members fromReuters, the US Broadcast Board of Governors and ANSA? And how now can the UN continue to “partner” with UNCA, exclusively, using this partial group as a proxy for the wider press corps? 

 Earlier on April 9, when the UN with little notice canceled its question and answer noon briefing in deference to a"press encounter" with Ban Ki-moon at which Dujarric handpicked the questioners and Ban notably did not call for a halt or even pause in airstrikes on Yemen, UNCA said nothing. (They will, however, have a "Prosecco toast" with Ban later in the month.)

 The Free UN Coalition spoke up in criticism, as here. We'll have more on and of this.

   

After Brahimi Spills Beans on Saudi & Khan al-Asal, UN Blurs With Chlorine

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, June 9 -- Now that Lakhdar Brahimi has quit as envoy to Syria, he is letting it all hang out. Inner City Press wrote about it on June 8, and on June 9 asked UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric, video here:

Inner City Press: The Lakhdar Brahimi interview with Der Spiegel, I’m sure you’ve seen it and among other things, he says Saudi Arabia refused to meet with him, not wanting a peaceful settlement. He said that the chemical weapons attack in Khan al-Assal was in all probability caused by the opposition, and I just wanted to know... I can keep going down this litany. I understand that he’s now a private individual, but factually speaking, let’s say on the Saudi issue, since he represented the Secretary-General as well as the League of Arab States at the time, is it true? Can you confirm that Saudi Arabia declined to meet with him and what does this say about Brahimi replacement also representing the Arab League?

Spokesman Dujarric: I think, obviously, Mr. Brahimi’s interview was done as a private citizen. He no longer is the Joint Representative. However, the Secretary-General’s own position on a number of these issues has been expressed fairly directly either by me or by the Secretary-General himself. I think Mr. Brahimi over the past, over the time of his work as the Joint Special Representative, has been fairly candid about his opinion. On the issue of the use of chlorine, that is something that the OPCW [Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons]has been looking into. And as the Secretary-General himself said here in this room, this time of sort of interim between, without an official Joint Representative, is being used as a time for stock-taking to see how that role can be best used to keep the political process moving to work for a peaceful end to the conflict in Syria.

Inner City Press: Because the Khan al-Assal was the attack that preceded the larger one so he was basically saying that the first reported, you know, use of chemical weapons, the one that Mr. Sellström was sent initially to investigate, was, he believes, done by the opposition. And since this… this seems to be a pretty major statement and it doesn’t seem to Khan al-Assal was ever fully investigated. That’s what many people said…

Spokesman: No, I understand. You know, I’m not going to go on a play by play of his comments. I think the Secretary-General’s own position has been very clear and very strong and what Mr. Brahimi expressed was his own private, private view.

 From Brahimi's interview with Der Speigel:

SPIEGEL: To what degree does this conflict pose a threat to Israel?

Brahimi: Israel is very happy. Things are going very, very well for them. If Bashar goes it's great; if Bashar stays it's great. Syria is being weakened. Syria had some kind of strategic weapon with their chemical weapons and that's gone. So Israel is doing very well, thank you very much. You don't need to worry about them.

  The UN Office of the Spokesperson refused last week to confirm what a Permanent Five member of the UN Security Council's Permanent Representative told Inner City Press, that the UN Secretariat doesn't want a Brahimi representative to also represent the Arab League. Brahimi said:

SPIEGEL: We have been told that the Saudis even refused to meet with you.

Brahimi: That's a fact. I think they didn't like what I was saying about a peaceful and negotiated settlement with concessions from both sides

  So, no Arab League it would seem. From the section on chemical weapons:

it does seem that in Khan al-Assal, in the north, the first time chemical weapons were used, there is a likelihood that it was used by the opposition.

  Brahimi's conclusion, which Der Spiegel turned into a headline:

It will be become another Somalia. It will not be divided, as many have predicted. It's going to be a failed state, with warlords all over the place.

  Just on Inner City Press note: Somalia may not be "divided," but Somaliland (and Puntland) assert independence...

   On May 13 after Syria envoy Lakhdar Brahimi publicly resigned at the UN, UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric selected who could ask him questions, with a decided slant. After Brahimi left, Inner City Press asked at the subsequent noon briefing if Brahimi will return to work for Algeria, specifically as a Bouteflika deputy. 

  Dujarric said that should and could be posed directly at Brahimi at his question and answer media stakeout later in the day. Video here.

    Inner City Press waited. But when Brahimi came to the stakeout, Dujarric's deputy Farhan Haq selected essentially the same questioners as Dujarric picked for Brahimi at noon. What was the point? Beyond propaganda? 

  In the earlier session, Inner City Press, which on May 3 reported that former Tunisian foreign minister and Ben Ali associate Kamel Morjane was being vetted to replace Brahimi, had this and another question to ask. Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric, however, made a selection of questioners which left these out, while including the so-called “Holy Seat” of the UN Correspondents Association, become the UN's Censorship Alliance.

  Brahimi was not asked about his future plans; Ban was not asked about vetting Morjane. After the two left, Dujarric continued taking questions along the same line. When called on, Inner City Press asked about Morjane and this: is Brahimi planning to take a role in Algeria once his resignation is effective on May 31?

  Dujarric said that should be asked to Brahimi -- what a surprise -- and then said without knowing it to be true that it could be asked later in the day to Brahimi after he briefs the Security Council. As he should know there are deadlines: including two more questions pending to be written about shortly.

  On this, what sources tell Inner City Press concerns Brahimi working with Bouteflika in Algeria. Out of respect for Brahimi, Inner City Press didn't reported it, wanted to let Brahimi himself address it on camera at this resignation press availability. But no. Watch this site.

Footnote: the debate seems to be whether Brahimi's replacement should "be an Arab" -- if so, North Africa is seen as the likely but shallow pool -- or, say, Javier Solana. We'll have more on this -- and on Dujarric contradicting one of the publications he called on for Ban and Brahimi, that the UN's Martin Griffith has himself been Banned from Damascus....

   

In Syria OPCW Chlorine Investigators Attacked, on Odessa Chloroform Probe Requests, OPCW Is Silent; Of Veolia in Texas

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, May 27 -- The Organization for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons, investigating reports of the use of chlorine in Syria, came under attack on May 27. The request that OPCW probe in Ukraine reports of the use of chemicals including chloroform in Odessa remains unacted on.  As to Syria, the OPCW announced:

A convoy of OPCW inspectors and United Nations staff that was travelling to a site of an alleged chlorine gas attack in Syria came under attack this morning. All team members are safe and well and are travelling back to the operating base.

The OPCW Director-General, Ambassador Ahmet Üzümcü, expressed his personal concern for the OPCW and UN staff members and repeated his call to all parties for cooperation with the mission.

"'Our inspectors are in Syria to establish the facts in relation to persistent allegations of chlorine gas attacks,' he said. 'Their safety is our primary concern, and it is imperative that all parties to the conflict grant them safe and secure access.'"

   The question of why the OPCW  chose to dispose of Syria's chemical weapons a company Veolia which does business in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, first raised by Inner City Press on February 15, was finally put to Sigrid Kaag on May 8, 2014.

  She told Inner City Press to "ask the OPCW," which ran the tender. 

  Now the OPCW's report to the Security Council, to be issued as a document of the Security Council under symbol S/2014/368 (OPCW EC-M-42/DG.1) says "from 30 April to 2 May, a visit took place in the United States at the Veolia ES Technical Solutions, L.L.C., in Port Arthur, Texas, selected for the disposal of Priority 2 inorganic chemicals through the solicitation process conducted by the OPCW."

   But we now report and link to: Veolia's Port Arthur facility has been fined $13, 500 by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality for repeated carbon monoxide emission violations. Click here for the report, which cites other problems with equipment.

Background: In the OPCW tender, 14 companies submitted bids. On February 14 the OPCW told the press there were two winners:

Ekokem OY AB (Finland)

Veolia Environmental Services Technical Solutions, LLC (U.S.A.)

   Veolia stands accused of illegal operations in the occupied Palestinian territories, including waste disposal in the illegally occupied Jordan valley, North of the Yafit settlement; waste water treatment in the illegal Israeli settlement of Modi’in Illit; bus service to illegal settlements and Jerusalem Light Rail / tramway. h/t In April 2010 the UN Human Rights Council declared the tramway and its operations to be illegal (A/HRC/RES/13/7 of 14 April 2010).

  So how did the OPCW select Veolia? There was a one page press release sent to the media, "reported" (or merely repeated, without any of the above) by Reuters and others, not mentioning that France, where Veolia is actually headquartered at the parent level, had contributed no money at all to the OPCW or UN trust funds on destroying Syria's chemical weapons.

   On transparency back on February 6, after OPCW-UN mission chief Sigrid Kaag briefed the UN Security Council about Syria chemical weapons, Inner City Press asked her about her Mission's trust funds, as it did back on January 8.

   Inner City Press noted that the Organization for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons put online a January 24 press release about Canada donated 10 million CAD, but that it had no link to any over-all chart.

  Kaag said, "I knew you'd ask that," and said it should go online soon. Video here and embedded below.  After 6 pm, Inner City Press ran an update with the chart, which shows for example that to the UN Trust Fund, Japan has pledged $9 million -- but has as of yet provided no money.

  In terms of cash, Kaag's native Netherlands has provided more (barely) that the United States:  $2,062,500 versus $2 million from the US.
 
  The OPCW Trust Fund for Syria is denominated in Euros. The European Union is the largest donor, and several EU members have also contributed in their own name - but not France.

  A separate OPCW Syria Trust Fund for the Destruction of Chemical Weapons has more in unpaid pledges then monies actually paid. Among those yet to come through are once again Japan, the aforementioned Canada, the EU, Australia, India, Italy and South Korea.

   There is the maritime component (see chart) and then this:

In addition to their contribution to the OPCW trust fund for the Destruction of Chemical Weapons, Canada contributed another CAD 5 million (almost US$ 4.7 million) for the destruction operations on board the vessel MV Cape Ray. Italy has indicated that the port of Gioia Tauro will be made available for transloading of priority chemicals from the cargo vessels onto the MV Cape Ray. Germany has indicated it will dispose of approximately 370 tons of effluent generated through the hydrolysis of the priority chemicals. The United Kingdom has indicated that it will destroy two binary chemical weapon components at a commercial facility.

    And so the only Permanent Five member of the Security Council not to contribute... is France.

  Inner City Press continues to await from the UN a response to repeated questions submitted about the Joint Mission's chief of staff Abdullah Fadil. Sources say he has asked UNTSO, where he worked before the Joint Mission, to respond in some way. 

  But the Office of the Spokesperson for the Secretary General, which has had these questions in writing since before Christmas 2013, has provided no answers at all. And there are more questions ready, particularly in light of a motion for disclosure to force the SG represented by ALS to give us access to the reports of OIOS, the Ombudsman Office and CDU that has been filed in the UN Dispute Tribunal.

For now, consider the issued raised, below and in this unresponded to follow up question:

"As a follow up to the not-answered [earlier question, see below], please confirm or deny that Michael Antoine has also transferred from UNTSO to the UN-OPCW joint mission on chemical weapons in Syria, but that he is in Cyprus; please explain his duties to jump from FS4 to FS6; please describe the Joint Mission's interview and recruitment practices."

  This question has not been answered; a question Inner City Press submitted about the tension between South Korea and Japan, including in South Sudan, caused by Japan's prime minister's visit to a shrine for the country's World War Two dead was answered in a statement apparently given to other media, on a regional or political basis, 13 hours before today's "first" Note to Correspondents. The Free UN Coalition for Accessis challenging these practices.

   Previously Inner City Press had asked, without answer:

"Please confirm or deny that Abdullah Fadil is with the UN-OPCW joint mission on chemical weapons in Syria, that while at UNTSO he managed to have Ministry of Foreign Affairs cards from both Israel and Lebanon, and separately that he is under investigation by OIOS and/or other UN bodies for recruitment irregularities and SEA."

  Five days later the question has not even been acknowledged, much less answered. Questions submitted and re-submitted to Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's top two spokespeople on the morning of December 21, about civilians at risk, have not been acknowledged. 

  By stonewalling, and by the practices described in the below, which are evident elsewhere and to the very top of the UN system, the UN credibility is being damaged. At least questions should be answered.

  While we have more, here's from the underlying whistleblower's initial complaint giving rise to the question, about the current chief of staff of UN - OPCW mission for Prohibition of Chemical Weapons in Syria:

I am an avid reader of the Inner City Press. My numerous Missions with the UN can confirm what your many articles state: rampant corruption, nepotism, and recruitment manipulation at all levels in the UN. Sadly, this conduct is only increasing. Within the Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO) it is not "what you know" but it’s "who you know." There is an absolute absence of accountability. It is often said that nobody gets fired unless you are a whistle-blower or suspected of bringing the UN into disrepute by exposing corruption; usually after becoming exasperated trying to deal with it via due process. After speaking to many staff members, I am compelled to report a matter that concerns me. The mission/UN is failing to take action and I feel that it is time that external scrutiny is required.

1. Mr. Abdullah Fadil, a Somali (now Canadian), is a member of the UNTSO Mission in Israel. He is an international staff Member at the level of Director (D1) and occupies the position of Chief Mission Support (CMS). He is the most senior civilian in the mission. As CMS he has control over all administrative functions, most notably, finance, procurement, and recruitment. He previously held similar positions in Kosovo, Khartoum and Darfur... He is well known in the DPKO system and there are numerous allegations against Mr. Fadil presently being investigated by the Office of Internal Oversight (OIOS), Ombudsman Office, and the Complaints and Discipline Unite (CDU). These allegations range from sexual harassment, Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (SEA), to manipulating recruiting to allow friends (internally) and externally to jump recruitment rosters. This includes managing recruiting panels and overseeing the selection process.

All UNTSO staff recruited in the UNTSO Mission in the three years he has been the CMS are either former girlfriends, absolute loyal friends from former missions, or family members. The method of control is to provide the Chief Personnel Officer (CPO) with his handpicked short list along with a verbal directive as to whom he wished to be selected. This practice tended to exclude competent staff as he put loyalty to himself as the primary selection criteria. This allowed him to have a foundation of very loyal staff that he could rely upon. Senior managers within the mission could not recruit competent staff. Managers who voiced their concern were either moved sideways or resigned.

4. Due to these many complaints he was asked to take a temporary assignment to Syria (OPCW) to reduce the level of discontent in the mission.

5. The allegations include obstructing an investigation by the Special Investigation Unit (SIU) into the fraudulent use of tax free PX fuel cards (Israel) by national staff and some international staff. His obstruction included briefing the suspect prior to being interviewed by investigators. His intent was cover up the extent of the fraud by International Staff (friends) who had aided and abetted the fraud. This allegation also included misuse of duty free products (alcohol) to pay rent in disputed territories.

6. A most egregious act that must be investigated, and which should result in his termination from the UN, is the fraudulent acquisition of a MOFA card from the government of Lebanon. The circumstances are that Mr. Fadil is located in Jerusalem and holds a valid Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) card which grants him residency in Israel. To qualify for this status, one is required to reside/hold residency in that country due to one’s UN official status. The process requires that one file a signed request to the Host Government for a MOFA card as an official of the United Nations. The signature verifies the accuracy of the document and information provided. One must include an address, UN letter of appointment, and photographs. The MOFA card grants certain privileges and benefits as a member of the UN.

In addition to the Israeli MOFA card provided to Mr. Fadil by the Israeli Government, he was recently found to have a MOFA card from the Government of Lebanon. Inquiries confirm that two years ago he fraudulently applied for MOFA status in Lebanon stating that he was a resident in Lebanon. This is not true as he and family reside in Jerusalem. He has also misrepresented himself to the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Mr. Fadil has been using that same Lebanese MOFA card in Lebanon to obtain benefits. In short, he has two MOFA cards; one for Israel and one Lebanon. When this fraud becomes known to the governments of Israel and Lebanon they might apply a high level of scrutiny to new legitimate applicants. This could have a significant impact on UN staff members and UNMOs applying for MOFA cards within Lebanon and Israel. He has placed us all at disadvantage by giving both governments cause to delay and further investigate applications. He has placed the UN in a difficult position. Hence the cover up.

We will have more. There are a number of other Press questions long-pending in Ban Ki-moon's Office of the Spokesperson, never responded to, stonewalled. Watch this site.

   

Syria PR Ja'afari Says Brahimi Made Mistakes, Of OPCW and Chlorine Timing, Censors Barge

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 23 -- After the Organization for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons told the UN Security Council on April 23 that Syria has removed or destroyed 88% of supplies, the questions were mostly about new reports of chlorine gas use.

  Inner City Press asked April's Security Council president Joy Ogwu of Nigeria about any investigation by the OPCW. She said, they could play a role. Inner City Press asked, But will they? 

   Next, Syria's Ambassador Bashar Ja'afari came out, denied that his government used the "mundane" chemical chlorine but said the timing of the allegation was too convenient.

    Inner City Press asked him of the Syria Coalition's statement it would not resume Geneva talks in the foreseeable future given the announcement of elections in June. Ja'afari replied that his government is still waiting to hear back from mediator Brahimi, who he added has "made many mistakes."

   There was more interest than usual in asking Ja'afari questions. Some grabbed the boom microphone; Reuters bureau chief barged into the roped off area of the UN Television cameraman, according to the cameraman himself. Instead of apologizing, the Reuters bureau chief demanded, What are you looking at.

  We note this because we are against a two or three tier UN and it's the same character who who filed "for the record" but "private" anti-Press complaints with the UN he-- one of them saying he couldn't do his job with the Press around -- then got one of them censored from Google's Search claiming it was copyrighted the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Click here for that. This is how the UN works, or doesn't.

  Back on April 17, Homs in Syria was the topic when the UN Security Council met at 5:30 pm. France called the meeting but most who left called it a failure. 

 What was agreed to were vague "elements to the press" about supporting Brahimi's call for local ceasefire talks in Homs.  

  Inner City Press asked April's Council president Joy Ogwu of Nigeria why no reference to wider "Geneva 3" talks was included. It is not in there, she indicated. Video here.

  Then Syrian Ambassador Bashar Ja'fari came to speak. Inner City Press asked him about US-made BGM-71 TOW missiles now in Syria, of the group Harakat Hazm. They are with Al Nusra, Ja'afari said.

  Inner City Press asked on what basis Ja'afari said the US approved their transfer to Syria, if they could have come through Turkey. Ja'afari said there is no way they could come in without approval from Washington. Video here -- this is Inner City Press YouTube video.

  Unlike other stakeouts, the UN did not put on its UN Webcast archive Ja'afari's long April 17 stakeout including on TOW missiles. Inner City Press asked about it on April 22 at the noon briefing, and later another UN individual acknowledged it had not gone up. But why?  Now, only after asking, it is up. Click here (TOW question and answer from Minute 15:17.) This is how the UN works, or doesn't.

  Ja'afari was asked by Voice of America, on whose Broadcast Board of Governor's US Secretary of State John Kerry serves, why Syria doesn't use Russia or China to get a meeting about Kassab. Ja'afari responded to the question; he did not say as France Ambassador Gerard Araud did on April 15 to Al Mayadeen, "You are not a journalist, you are an agent."

  By Araud's logic, is not Voice of America an agent? Is not France 24, also called on by Ja'afari? Ah, freedom of the press. Here is what the Free UN Coalition for Access has done so far.

   When outgoing French Ambassador Araud scheduled a press conference on human rights for April 15, he began to receive many questions, here, about blocking human rights monitoring in Western Sahara. 

  It is a policy Araud is particularly associated with, since Javier Barden quoted him calling Morocco France's "mistress." Araud spoke of suing, but hasn't.

   But when during the April 15 press conference, in which Inner City Press and the Free UN Coalition for Access were not called on, Araud was asked about France having killed people in Algeria, Araud told the questioner, You are not a journalist, you are an agent. Video here.

  The French run press conference gave the first question to Al Arabiya, for UNCA (now known as the UN's Censorship Alliance), then France 24.  By Araud's spokesperson Frederic Jung, a  Voice of America affiliate was given a question. 

  Syria "Caesar" report panelist David Crane was asked who funded it and answered on camera merely that he was paid. (The photographs, Inner City Press noted and notes, are extremely troubling - all the more reason that taking Qatar's funding and denouncing the only critical question were unwise.)

  Afterward, Inner City Press asked Crane to confirm the payment was from Qatar. He confirmed it. Inner City Press asked, did you seek any other, less compromised funding? The answer was no. In fact, Crane said he gave his recommendations to the Syrian National Council. Afterward Inner City Press asked him if he meant the Turkey based group headed by Ahmed Al Jarba, and Crane said yes, than added, "The resistance" writ large.

     When Qatar sponsored an event at the UN in New York on March 21 featuring the Syrian Coalition headed by Ahmad al Jarba, a group calling its the Syrian Grassroots Movement held protests seeking to oust Jarba.

   By March 22, the group stated that some 40,000 people in 58 cities inside Syria had participated in demonstrations to get Jarba out of his post, saying "it is time to put an end to political corruption."

  Back in September 2013, France sponsored an event in the UN and called Jarba the sole legitimate representative of the Syrian people. French Ambassador Gerard Araud was the first questioning at Qatar's March 21 Syrian Coalition event. What is France's position now? Who chooses the leaders?

  Likewise, back in July 2013 and earlier this month, the Jarba-led Syrian Coalition held faux "UN" events in the clubhouse Ban Ki-moon's Secretariat gives to the largely Gulf and Western UN Correspondents Association. How does that now appear, in light of the anti-Jarba protests?

   Qatar's March 21 event was not listed in the UN Journal nor in the UN Media Alert. It was not on the UN's publicly available webcast.

  Select media outlets were there, when Inner City Press came in at the end to ask a question: Al Jazeera on the podium in Qatar's event, Al Arabiya like a Saudi diplomat -- not the Permanent Representative -- in the audience along with Al Hayat, even Al Hurra, on whose Broadcasting Board of Governors US Secretary of State John Kerry serves.

   The new Free UN Coalition for Access is against faux UN events, in the clubhouse the Secretariat gives to what's become its UN Censorship Alliance or elsewhere.

   On March 21 Inner City Press put these questions, also on behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access, to the UN's top two spokespeople:

"there is an event in Conference Room 4 right now, sponsored by Qatar, which is no listed in today's UN Journal, nor is it on UN Webcast http://webtv.un.org/ but it appears to be being filmed. Please explain the legal status of this meeting, if there are any sponsored beyond Qatar, how it was publicized and if any request to have it webcast was made. Thanks, on deadline."

  But no answer was provided. Inner City Press ran to the event and from the back of a three quarters empty Conference Room 4 asked why the event was so stealth: not in the UN Journal, not webcast.

  The Permanent Representative of Qatar answered, saying it was a "special event" to which Qatar had invited (some) member states and groups, and (some) media. There is a UN Media Alert, but this event was not put in it.

  Perhaps it was publicized by the Gulf & Western United Nations Correspondents Association, which has twice hosted faux "UN" events by the Syrian National Coalition or Syrian Coalition. (In both cases, the Free UN Coalition for Access suggested that the SNC hold its events in the UN briefing room, accessible to all journalists.)

  Since French Ambassador Gerard Araud, the first questioner flanked by representatives of Saudi Arabia and of Turkey which earlier in the day banned Twitter, has spoken about "fakes" and others about accountability, Inner City Press asked if the groups Al Nusra and ISIS, and those who fund them such as private individuals in Qatar alluded to at the US State Department briefing earlier in the day, could or would be held accountable.

  The SNC representative emphasized what he called links between the Assad regime and ISIS, saying it was too easy to blame the Gulf countries.

Here's from the March 21 US State Department briefing transcript:

Question: you have concerns about the withdrawal of the ambassadors. Do you also have concerns about the reasons that these countries said that they withdrew their ambassadors from Qatar? In other words, do you – if you have concerns about the withdrawal of the ambassadors, do you also have concerns about Qatar’s behavior, which – alleged behavior, let’s say – which led to these countries withdrawing their ambassadors?

MS. PSAKI: Well, I know one of the issues that has been mentioned is the issue of private donations to extremists – and that’s something that some have mentioned – operating in Syria and elsewhere. It remains an important priority in our high-level discussions, and one that we also certainly raise with all states in the region, including Qatar, including the Government of Kuwait, wherever we have concerns.

After Inner City Press asked about the sponsorship of the event, a one-page "Joint Statement by the Co-Organizers" was passed out, listing among the co-organizers France, the UK, US, Belgium, the Netherlands, Saudi Arabia and Turkey. Inner City Press tweeted it. 

   Even 24 hours later, the UN's top two spokespeople had not answered the simple questions put to them, above. Watch this site.

   

France's Fabius & Australia's Bishop Are Asked of Syria Chlorine & WW1: Real Journalists, in Fabius' and Araud's Definition?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 23 --  When French foreign minister Laurent Fabius and Australia's Julie Bishop took media questions, the first one looked all the way back to World War I, allowing Bishop to speak of an "interpretive center on the Western Front." Video here.

  The next and last question was to see if Fabius wanted to make threats about chlorine gas in Syria. Then it was over. One would have liked to know, particularly in light of recentvituperative responses on human rights by France's outgoing Ambassador to the UN Gerard Araud, about the two countries' current position on human rights monitoring in Western Sahara. 

  But no. It was Fabius who in September 2013, at teh UN Security Council stakeout, answered a critical question by turning away to find a "real" journalist. This has now beenrepeated by Araud in the UN, in its Press Briefing Room, in fact.

  On April 16, the day after Araud cut off a reporter's question about Qatar funding and also on French killing in Algeria by saying "You are not a journalist, you are an agent," Inner City Press asked UN Spokesperson Stephane Dujarric about it.

   Dujurric replied in part that UN accredited correspondents should be treated with respect. Video here.

   Inner City Press, on behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access, noted that French foreign minister Laurent Fabius did the same thing last September, cutting off a question about Algeria by saying, let me call on a real journalist. (An irony in Araud's "agent" talk is that he called on France 24, his government's media.)

    Dujarric would not say if he would convey this to the French Mission. Araud is slated to leave in July. But what about Jacques Audibert? We'll have more on this - and on whether and how Dujarric's statement that UN accredited correspondents should be treated with respect applies to UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous, see this and April 7 video, here, compilation here.

    During Araud's April 15 press conference, he began to receive many questions, here, about blocking human rights monitoring in Western Sahara. 

  It is a policy Araud is particularly associated with, since Javier Barden quoted him calling Morocco France's "mistress." Araud spoke of suing, but hasn't.

   But when during the April 15 press conference, in which Inner City Press and the Free UN Coalition for Access were not called on, Araud was asked about France having killed people in Algeria, Araud on camera told the questioner, You are not a journalist, you are an agent. Video here.

  The French run press conference gave the first question to Al Arabiya, for UNCA (now known as the UN's Censorship Alliance). An UNCA board member also wanly asked on April 16 - but this same individual not only did nothing whenHerve Ladsous, as head of UN Peacekeeping, said he wouldn't answer any of the Press' questions -- he supported UNCA board efforts to get Inner City Press to remove from the Internet its reporting about Sri Lanka, and also about Ladsous. So, no.

  On April 15,  Syria "Caesar" report panelist David Crane was asked who funded it and answered on camera merely that he was paid. (The photographs, Inner City Press noted and notes, are extremely troubling - all the more reason that taking Qatar's funding and denouncing the only critical question were unwise.)

  Afterward, Inner City Press asked Crane to confirm the payment was from Qatar. He confirmed it. Inner City Press asked, did you seek any other, less compromised funding? The answer was no. In fact, Crane said he gave his recommendations to the Syrian National Council. Afterward Inner City Press asked him if he meant the Turkey based group headed by Ahmed Al Jarba, and Crane said yes, than added, "The resistance" writ large.

     When Qatar sponsored an event at the UN in New York on March 21 featuring the Syrian Coalition headed by Ahmad al Jarba, a group calling its the Syrian Grassroots Movement held protests seeking to oust Jarba.

   By March 22, the group stated that some 40,000 people in 58 cities inside Syria had participated in demonstrations to get Jarba out of his post, saying "it is time to put an end to political corruption."

  Back in September 2013, France sponsored an event in the UN and called Jarba the sole legitimate representative of the Syrian people. French Ambassador Gerard Araud was the first questioning at Qatar's March 21 Syrian Coalition event. What is France's position now? Who chooses the leaders?

  Likewise, back in July 2013 and earlier this month, the Jarba-led Syrian Coalition held faux "UN" events in the clubhouse Ban Ki-moon's Secretariat gives to the largely Gulf and Western UN Correspondents Association. How does that now appear, in light of the anti-Jarba protests?

   Qatar's March 21 event was not listed in the UN Journal nor in the UN Media Alert. It was not on the UN's publicly available webcast.

  Select media outlets were there, when Inner City Press came in at the end to ask a question: Al Jazeera on the podium in Qatar's event, Al Arabiya like a Saudi diplomat -- not the Permanent Representative -- in the audience along with Al Hayat, even Al Hurra, on whose Broadcasting Board of Governors US Secretary of State John Kerry serves.

   The new Free UN Coalition for Access is against faux UN events, in the clubhouse the Secretariat gives to what's become its UN Censorship Alliance or elsewhere.

   On March 21 Inner City Press put these questions, also on behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access, to the UN's top two spokespeople:

"there is an event in Conference Room 4 right now, sponsored by Qatar, which is no listed in today's UN Journal, nor is it on UN Webcast http://webtv.un.org/ but it appears to be being filmed. Please explain the legal status of this meeting, if there are any sponsored beyond Qatar, how it was publicized and if any request to have it webcast was made. Thanks, on deadline."

  But no answer was provided. Inner City Press ran to the event and from the back of a three quarters empty Conference Room 4 asked why the event was so stealth: not in the UN Journal, not webcast.

  The Permanent Representative of Qatar answered, saying it was a "special event" to which Qatar had invited (some) member states and groups, and (some) media. There is a UN Media Alert, but this event was not put in it.

  Perhaps it was publicized by the Gulf & Western United Nations Correspondents Association, which has twice hosted faux "UN" events by the Syrian National Coalition or Syrian Coalition. (In both cases, the Free UN Coalition for Access suggested that the SNC hold its events in the UN briefing room, accessible to all journalists.)

  Since French Ambassador Gerard Araud, the first questioner flanked by representatives of Saudi Arabia and of Turkey which earlier in the day banned Twitter, has spoken about "fakes" and others about accountability, Inner City Press asked if the groups Al Nusra and ISIS, and those who fund them such as private individuals in Qatar alluded to at the US State Department briefing earlier in the day, could or would be held accountable.

  The SNC representative emphasized what he called links between the Assad regime and ISIS, saying it was too easy to blame the Gulf countries.

Here's from the March 21 US State Department briefing transcript:

Question: you have concerns about the withdrawal of the ambassadors. Do you also have concerns about the reasons that these countries said that they withdrew their ambassadors from Qatar? In other words, do you – if you have concerns about the withdrawal of the ambassadors, do you also have concerns about Qatar’s behavior, which – alleged behavior, let’s say – which led to these countries withdrawing their ambassadors?

MS. PSAKI: Well, I know one of the issues that has been mentioned is the issue of private donations to extremists – and that’s something that some have mentioned – operating in Syria and elsewhere. It remains an important priority in our high-level discussions, and one that we also certainly raise with all states in the region, including Qatar, including the Government of Kuwait, wherever we have concerns.

After Inner City Press asked about the sponsorship of the event, a one-page "Joint Statement by the Co-Organizers" was passed out, listing among the co-organizers France, the UK, US, Belgium, the Netherlands, Saudi Arabia and Turkey. Inner City Press tweeted it. 

   Even 24 hours later, the UN's top two spokespeople had not answered the simple questions put to them, above. Watch this site.