In Michigan, Sanders' Upset Win Follows Focus on Bank Bailouts, Darfur Echo

By Matthew Russell Lee

PRIMARY-LAND, March 8 -- With his back to the wall after losses in Southern primaries, Bernie Sanders scored an upset win in the Michigan primary on March 8.

  It came after Sanders grew less reticent in linking front-runner Hillary Clinton with the deregulation of banks and the bailouts that followed, increasingly demanding that Clinton release the transcripts of paid speeches she gave at Goldman Sachs and elsewhere.

  While most of Sanders' program is understandably domestic, it is noted that in 2006 he was a co-sponsor of a consensus resolution supporting a peacekeeping mission in Darfur. (Sanders' views of the UNAMID mission under Herve Ladsous covering up mass rapes in Tabit, for example, are not yet known.)

  Hillary Clinton, with her stint as US Secretary of State, has a more extensive foreign policy record, as reflected in the released email Inner City Press reviewed, in mid-February 2016, here.

  Back on January 17, the Iran deal's Implementation Day, and mutual freeing of detainees including Jason Rezaian with the United States, inevitably came up in the Democratic Party debate in South Carolina, albeit late in the proceedings.

  Hillary Clinton took credit for the sanctions on Iran and called this merely one good day in 36 years. She cited what she called Iran's “bad behavior” in Yemen -- with no mention of airstrikes including on Doctors Without Borders facitilities by the Saudi-led, US-supported Coalition.

   Bernie Sanders cited Goldman Sachs a half dozen times, asking why its executives are not in jail while people caught with marijuana are; he pledged if President not to name a Treasury Secretary from Goldman Sachs, which would be a change. (Click here for Inner City Press' work on Goldman Sachs including a FOIA response showing the Federal Reserve's solicitude for Goldman, offering merger advice and pre-approval on the weekend.)

  Martin O'Malley, who has since dropped out, late in the debate brought up the mis-treatment of Puerto Rico; earlier in the campaign he wrote an op-ed about the UN's impunity for bringing cholera to Haiti. The UN barely comes up in these debates, but they will have an effect on UN Secretariat. It is, however, Obama who will have the US' veto during the selection of the Next SG in 2016. Watch this site.

Back in December the Syria resolution adopted by the UN Security Council after the closed door sessions at the Lotte New York Palace on December 18 was widely described as weak or vague by diplomats at the UN.

  But at the December 19 Democratic Party debate in New Hampshire, Hillary Clinton repeatedly cited the resolution as a new beginning. Clinton took credit for the resolution, saying it grew out of her work in Geneva.

  Martin O'Malley, who earlier tried to sputter in to contrast Leahy to Bernie Sanders, said we should “spring-board” off the UN Security Council resolution.

  This stood in contrast to the near absence of the UN from the Republican debates. There was at least one echo: Bernie Sanders' questioning of regime change in Iraq, Libya and now attempted in Syria was similar to the positions of Rand Paul and some others on the Republican side. Sanders also called out Saudi Arabia for making war on Yemen instead of ISIS, and Qatar for its spending on the World Cup.

   O'Malley used the “G-word,” genocide, with regard to Chaldean Christian in Syria. Inner City Press wondered whether Africa, other than oblique references to Libya, would come up in the Democratic Party debate, much less Burundi. We're stilll waiting. Watch this site.

In the Lotte New York Palace Hotel on December 18, ministers Lavrov and Gentiloni, Fabius and Kerry passed through with entourages; UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon left early typically without answering any questions. Hours later, the draft resolution was agreed to, then adopted 15-0 by the UN Security Council, here.

 The US day ended in a bilateral meeting between Iranian minister Zarif and John Kerry -- a photo spray was canceled -- and a low key meeting on Iraq and Turkey that we'll report on next. Now that the US has transcribed the climax of Kerry - Lavrov.

  That Kerry's spokesman John Kirby, who ran the press conference, gave the second question to the Washington Post, and the third to Russian media, was perhaps understandable. But the first question, Kirby set aside for “Al Arabiya.”  The question quickly turned into three, after being branded for “UNCA,” now the UN Corruption Association, a group which sold seats with UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon for $6000 only earlier this week.

 We now add: UNCA gave one of its prizes, a free trip to Turkey, to one of its Vice Presidents, from Agence France Presse. Even Kellogg's prohibits its employees from competing for its prizes. But not UNCA, which ignoring the Iraq - Turkey meeting in the Security Council was trying to buy people with Prosecco on December 18, after selling seats with Ban for $6,000.

  Several other UN-based journalists -- not (only) this one -- complained afterward that the first question and attempted follow up were a “Saudi circus” which made the UN press corps look bad -- as did attempt to throw out certain journalists, photographers, from the front row at the beginning.

   Afterward a photo spray of a meeting between Kerry and Iran's Zarif was declared “by invitation only” and then canceled. In the Security Council, with very few journalists still at the stakeout, the US presidency began the meeting on Iraq's complaint against Turkey being in its territory. We'll have more on this.

After the vote inside the Council Lavrov said, “The unanimous adoption today on the Council has created a broad front on the basis of the UN Charter, on the basis of all of those who are pushing back against terror, including the Syrian army, [some] armed militias, parts of the Syrian opposition, and the Russian air forces, in response to the legitimate request of the Syrian government."

Inside as Nasser Judeh of Jordan spoke, UN TV cut repeatedly to Syria's Bashar Ja'afari, looking more and more skeptical. France's Fabius spoke briefly and left. Outside at the stakeout, talk turned to a Kerry press conference, open to all.

 Italy's Paolo Gentiloni, by contrast, scheduled a press availability only for Italian media. A wag from the Free UN Coalition for Access asked, Isn't Gentiloni the foreign and not interior minister? Isn't he running for a Security Council seat? We'll have more on this.

In the  hotel lobby in the late morning a Permanent Five member of the Security Council's spokesperson briefed a gaggle of journalists in the lobby amid hissed that it was “off the record.”

  There was a gingerbread model of the NY Palace hotel which, the sign said, took 300 hours to make. All that was lacking, one wag - this one - snarked on Twitter, was a little gingerbread Laurent Fabuis.

 Back that UN, the 1 pm stakeout by the EU's Mogherini was postponed and then canceled. The Security Council scheduled for 3 pm got pushed back to 4.  Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric if Ban had spoken, what would he have said? Vine here.

On December 17, the day before Syria talks resumed at the New York Palace Hotel in Manhattan, finance ministers spoke in the UN Security Council about cutting off financing for ISIS. French finance minister Michel Sapin spoke darkly of the use of pre-paid cards for the November 13 Paris attacks; Russia's Ambassador Churkin named two Turkish companies as involved in ISIS oil sale.

  Inner City Press asked Syria's Ambassador Bashar Ja'afari, who came to take questions at the Council stakeout, about ISIS' oil. He named Turkey, then want on to name Qatar and Saudi Arabia, slamming its “Sunni coalition” recently announced.

  When US Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew, along with Sapin and the UK's George Osborne held a short press conference in the UN briefing room, Inner City Press hoped to asked Sapin about pre-paid cards, and Lew and Osborne about Bitcoin. But the question, just four, were limited to Reuters, the Wall Street Journal, the New York and Financial Times. So it goes.

   It seems there will be no Press access at the New York Palace; Ja'afari has said he will speak, at the UN, and whatever ISSG press availability there is should be at the UN, with a 3 pm meeting on December 18 scheduled. Watch this site.

Back on December 8, Inner City Press put thee questions to  Turkey's Ambassador Cevic. Video here.   Here's fast transcript byInnerCityPro.com:
Inner City Press: On Syria, do you think the Vienna process meeting should take place in New York on the 18th? Are you satisfied with the Saudi process for choosing the opposition?

Amb Cevik: The plans, I don’t know how fixed, I mean how clear it is, but we are making our preparations for the meeting.

Inner City Press: Are there any groups invited to Saudi Arabia that you think shouldn’t be part of the opposition delegation?

Amb Cevik: I think so far, in our view, they are working on the right concept. Let’s see if they succeed. Having a coalition group that would be able to take part in the process is one of the most important things.
Inner City Press: [Russia] said the group that killed their pilot should be put on the terror list. Do you have any view on that?

Amb Cevik: If they know the specifics, I don’t know. But to our knowledge, there was no terrorist organization, no extreme Daesh, Nusra, in that area. They are the Turkomens, and we know them, they are moderate people.

  This may be an issue. Watch this site.

Inner City Press First Reported South Africa Left Darfur For Violation, Gave Weapons In Jan Near Kutum

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive Series

UNITED NATIONS, March 7 -- UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous was willing to use Congolese troops in Central African Republic who ended up engaging in child rape and other abuses. Then they were given ample time to repatriate or leave the country; some twenty are still there.

  But there are other inconsistencies in Ladsous' peacekeeping, for example in Darfur. There, Ladsous more forcefully demanded the repatriation of South Africa's troops -- not for sexual abuse, but for “tactical” issues. Inner City Press exclusively learned of this and how last week, just before the UN threw Inner City Press out on February 19, and declared it Banned from all UN premises on February 22. Petition here.

  Here, exclusively reported by Inner City Press and again today, is the outrage. Unlike with “his” Congolese rapists in CAR, Ladsous very much wanted the South African troops to leave Darfur. Inner City Press' sources, on the last day it was able to move freely and without Ban Ki-moon's minders around the UN's second floor, was told the UN accused the South African contingent of a "tactical" violation.

Inner City Press was exclusively informed of this on February 19, hours before being physically thrown out of the UN; it exclusively published the news, from the park in front of the UN, on February 24, then re-entered on a muhc reduced access pass and in order to ask about it on February 25 (others then reported the departure, without credit.)

But what could the tactical violation be? In another seemingly scripted Q&A colloquy, Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Dujarric lavished praise on South Africa's battalion - even as DPKO threw them out.

Inner City Press is exclusively informed that the basis of Ladsous' anger, leading to his insistence that the South African unit involved be repatriated, in reaction to which South African pulled out all of its troops and the UN and media dissembled, was the performance of South African troops in early January in Anka, near Kutum.

 While UNAMID (as on Ladsous' cover up of rapes in Tabit) and thenUN News Center, then SABC and Ban Ki-moon's spokespeople dissembled, Inner City Press' sources say the South African unit in the incident gave up weapons to their attackers, showed themselves unable or unwilling to protect civilians, and didn't even inform UNAMID for six hours.

  In anger -- Ladsous has his own murky history with ICC-indicted Omar al Bashir -- Ladsous insisted the South African unit leave. But in typical Ladsous fashion, he never said WHY they should leave.

So, as with rapes in the Central African Republic, call it another Ladsous cover up.

 This time assisted by the UN Spokespeople (that's the norm) and the country's media (natch). The SABC correspondent, on the board of the UN Censorship Alliance which is again trying to get Inner City Press out of the UN, was when Inner City Press was physically ousted from the UN on the evening of February 19 standing pre-positioned at the gate, laughing and filming. Ambush indeed.

On March 2, even as South Africa is leaving UNAMID, Ban Ki-moon and the AU have named South Africa's UN Ambassador as head of UNAMID: "United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and African Union Commission Chairperson Nkosazana Dlamini Zuma announced today the appointment of Jeremiah Nyamane Kingsley Mamabolo of South Africa as Deputy Joint Special Representative for the African Union-United Nations Hybrid Operation in Darfur (UNAMID). "

 This was never done for, for example, earlier South African Ambassador - and sometimes UN skeptic - Kumalo. We'll have more on this.

Ladsous, as Inner City Press has reported, has no problems with war crimes -- see his favors for Burundi's military -- nor even with Bashir, with whom he met without giving any read-out. But with this exposed, and Ladsous unable to open his mouth without, for example, linking rapes to R&R, the answer was to throw the South Africans out for making it clear how weak and craven to Bashir's Sudan Ladsous' DPKO is.

We'll have more on this -- even with the restricted access to which Ban Ki-moon, protested in Sri Lanka today, has confined Inner City Press.

  This is the lack of oversight of UN Peacekeeping, that money can be used this way. Is is the same lack of oversight which allows Ladsous to cover up rapes, from Darfur to CAR, then to openly refuse to answer Inner City Press questions about the cover ups. But this one involves money, public money

  On February 25 after filing a legal letter with the UN to not touch its office and papers, Inner City Press entered and asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric, UN transcript:

Inner City Press: In Darfur, the… South Africa has said that it's re… you know, pulling its entire force back, 1 April, and what I wanted to ask is whether… I've heard and published that it's due to something called a tactical violation by the South African battalion.  And I've also heard that DFS [Department of Field Support] is, unlike in other repatriation cases, stands to pay for the entire repatriation to South Africa.  Can you, one, state why they're being repatriated, and two, why DFS would pay for it?

Spokesman:  I do confirm that they are being repatriated.  I will get you some… I have some detail… I thought I had some details here, but we'll see what I can get you right after the briefing.

Inner City Press:  I guess my question is, given this… although this doesn't appear to be a case of sexual abuse repatriation, does Ban Ki-moon's stated commitment to transparency and repatriations cover repatriations like this?  And I want to insist to know who's paying, and if the UN is paying, why it's paying.

Spokesman:  I will get some… I will get more detail…

  We'll stay on this.

Amid a litany of rape charges against UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous, Inner City Press exclusively obtained and on February 12 published UN emails showing another round of sexual abuse of minors in Ouaka prefecture in the Central African Republic by UN Peacekeepers from the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Click here to view.

 While the story continues, we note that Reuters UN bureau first triest to undermine the story, then stole it without credit - and on February 18 tried to undermine Inner City Press live-streaming Periscope video from the UN Security Council stakeout. Welcome to the UN Censorship Alliance.

  After Inner City Press on February 15 asked about the email its had published - and Reuters' UN bureau chief Louis Charbonneau, notably,tried to dismiss and then stole the story - on February 16 UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq in the noon briefing read out a statement confirming nearly all of the email Inner City Press had published: that there were four new victims, minors, troops from DR Congo.

 But Haq did not say that two of the victims had children from the statutory rape. So Inner City Press asked Haq to confirm that, and asked who would pay: the UN or the DRC soldiers? Haq said there are meetings in Ban's office to respond to just such issues, after December's Deschamps report. Video here.

 And then Reuters, even while its editor Dan Grebler said the first theft was being looked into, just retyped and stole it again, this time by its UN correspondent Michelle Nichols, here.

  It was this same Nichols who, at the UN Security Council stakeout on February 18 while Inner City Press was live-streaming after asking about a draft statement on Palestine, cut in loudly with "I see you Periscoping!"  And? So what? UN missions and the UN itself are broadcasting inside the UN on Periscope. Why would one media try to censor others?

  On February 15, Reuters first tried to claim these were "old" rapes, here -- then when shown otherwise, simply stole the story with no credit.This is apparently policy.

  So Inner City Press raised the issue of theft of exclusives (and lack of objectivity, at least at the UN) to Reuters itself. For now, we've received this, cc-ed also not only to the (repeat) offender but also to Reuters' genial seeming Brian Moss and Clive McKeef:

"Thank you for bringing this matter to my attention. The appropriate Reuters staff will look into it and get back to you as soon as feasible.

Regards,
Dan Grebler
Desk Editor, Americas Desk"

  But but February 18, still no response. It's not that complicated.  Or was the Reuters correspondent's "intervention" the response? We'll have more on this too.

 The underlying emails, dated February 11, 2016, describe at least four underage victims, two of whom were impregnated by the rapist UN peacekeepers -- "in the locality Ngakobo in the Ouaka prefecture."

  On February 15, after emailing questions for two days to UN spokespeople in CAR and New York, Inner City Press at the UN's noon briefing asked UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq about the rapes, and the email it published on February 12. Haq answered, dodging on part of the email but not denying it. Video here.

 Then Associated Press asked, what about these new allegations? Video here. Haq answered - and from that, AP wrote its own derivative and belated story -- without credit, and without any mention of the critique of the UN in the emails. This is how it works, or doesn't.

 This too - Reuters UN "bureau chief" on Monday evening first reflexively came to the UN's defense saying that "Alleged Central African Republic rapes UN spox talked about today are same ones UN CAR said Feb 4 it was probing," citing (what else) a Reuters story of February 4 -- about a Human Rights Watch report about rapes in Bambari. But read the February 11 emails Inner City Press exclusively published, here:

“Herewith sharing with you a report I have just received from UNICEF indicating four minor girls aged between 16 and 17 years were victims of sexual exploitation and abuse allegedly committed by members of the DRC battalion in the locality Ngakobo in the Ouaka prefecture.”

  Up the email chain, Mercedes Gervilla in UN headquarters writes that “it would seem that many among the troops concerned, including Commanding officers were well aware of the abuse to which these children were being subjected. I also regret to inform you that in addition to these new 4 cases, there will likely be two more...”.  [We'll have more on this.]

  This is called... spinning for the UN. This is a trend at Reuters, even last week, here.



And there is a history: this same Reuters UN Bureau Chief Lou Charbonneau, when challenged, wrote to Stephane Dujarric, UN Spokesman, trying to get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN, here.

  When this was exposed, Charbonneau cited Reuters to get his email to the UN taken out of Google's search, saying he never meant for it to be public and it was somehow copyrighted. (See his filing here, made public by EFF's ChillingEffects.org). That's censorship... by Reuters.

  This this case, after being shown this reflexive defense of the UN was wrong, Reuters simply re-wrote the story and stole it, with no credit.

 And now we must go back: Charbonneau announced a policy of not crediting Inner City Press, see here.

 This was raised at the time to Reuters, including to Stephen J. Adler. What kind of company is this?

  (Inner City Press previously asked the decaying UN Correspondents Association, while it tried to censor Press coverage of its boss, to promulgate a best practice for media at the UN to credit others' exclusives; it never happened. AP at the UN speaks for this UNCA, and apparently it for AP.)

  

Exclusive: UN Emails Show New Rapes in CAR, Ladsous' Contingents by Matthew Russell Lee

 


Having been told by sources of more rapes by peacekeepers in the Central African Republic, Inner City Press on January 26 reported them and on January 27 asked the UN's spokesperson Stephane Dujarric to confirm them - but he wouldn't. UN transcript here. Video here.




  So what is the protocol of UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous, who linked the rapes to "R&R," here? How many more do they know about?

The UN report on rapes in the Central African Republic, released on December 17, found that UN Peacekeeping's Under Secretary General Herve Ladsous “illustrate[s] the UN's failure to respond to allegations of serious human rights violations in the meaningful way.”

 Ladsous has yet to take any questions about the report...

  When the Panel's three members held their December press conference, Inner City Press asked about Ladsous' failure to vet and his linking of rapes to “R&R.” Video here.  Marie Deschamps said pointedly she wouldn't comment on Ladsous' remarks; Yasmin Sooka said these are crimes for punishment, not recreation.

  As the last question, Inner City Press asked what it had wanted to ask Ban, and tried to ask Dujarric: what does this say about Ban's management? Video of Q&A here. Didn't Ban's chief of staff Malcorra, criticized in the report, do it for Ban? Didn't the “senior official” who ostensibly let the rape information die on the vine in the 38th floor work in an atmosphere created by Ban's nine years? We will pursue this.

  In December 2015, Ban allowed those who cover him, at least the UN Correspondents Association, to sell seats with him for $6,000. And it is these same who have airbrushed out Ladsous and others. We'll have more on this.

Inner City Press First Reported South Africa Left Darfur For Tactical Violation, Now SA Ambassador Gets UNAMID Post Deputy

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive Series

UNITED NATIONS, March 2 -- UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous was willing to use Congolese troops in Central African Republic who ended up engaging in child rape and other abuses. Then they were given ample time to repatriate or leave the country; some twenty are still there.

  But there are other inconsistencies in Ladsous' peacekeeping, for example in Darfur. There, Ladsous more forcefully demanded the repatriation of South Africa's troops -- not for sexual abuse, but for “tactical” issues. Inner City Press exclusively learned of this and how last week, just before the UN threw Inner City Press out on February 19, and declared it Banned from all UN premises on February 22. Petition here.

  Here, exclusively, is the outrage. Unlike with “his” Congolese rapists in CAR, Ladsous very much wanted the South African troops to leave Darfur. Inner City Press' sources, on the last day it was able to move freely and without Ban Ki-moon's minders around the UN's second floor, was told the UN accused the South African contingent of a "tactical" violation.

But what could it be? In another seemingly scripted Q&A colloquy, Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Dujarric lavished praise on South Africa's battalion - even as DPKO threw them out.

  Now here's the possibility: the South Africans in Darfur allowed themselves to be surrounded by the Sudanese Army SANDF when it seemed Omar al Bashir might belatedly be arrested in South Africa on his ICC genocide warrant. See here; h/t.

Now on March 2, even as South Africa is leaving UNAMID, Ban Ki-moon and the AU have named South Africa's UN Ambassador as head of UNAMID: "United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and African Union Commission Chairperson Nkosazana Dlamini Zuma announced today the appointment of Jeremiah Nyamane Kingsley Mamabolo of South Africa as Deputy Joint Special Representative for the African Union-United Nations Hybrid Operation in Darfur (UNAMID). "

 This was never done for, for example, earlier South African Ambassador - and sometimes UN skeptic - Kumalo. We'll have more on this.

Ladsous, as Inner City Press has reported, has no problems with war crimes -- see his favors for Burundi's military -- nor even with Bashir, with whom he met without giving any read-out. But with this exposed, and Ladsous unable to open his mouth without, for example, linking rapes to R&R, the answer was to throw the South Africans out for making it clear how weak and craven to Bashir's Sudan Ladsous' DPKO is.

We'll have more on this -- even with the restricted access to which Ban Ki-moon, protested in Sri Lanka today, has confined Inner City Press.

  This is the lack of oversight of UN Peacekeeping, that money can be used this way. Is is the same lack of oversight which allows Ladsous to cover up rapes, from Darfur to CAR, then to openly refuse to answer Inner City Press questions about the cover ups. But this one involves money, public money

  On February 25 after filing a legal letter with the UN to not touch its office and papers, Inner City Press entered and asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric, UN transcript:

Inner City Press: In Darfur, the… South Africa has said that it's re… you know, pulling its entire force back, 1 April, and what I wanted to ask is whether… I've heard and published that it's due to something called a tactical violation by the South African battalion.  And I've also heard that DFS [Department of Field Support] is, unlike in other repatriation cases, stands to pay for the entire repatriation to South Africa.  Can you, one, state why they're being repatriated, and two, why DFS would pay for it?

Spokesman:  I do confirm that they are being repatriated.  I will get you some… I have some detail… I thought I had some details here, but we'll see what I can get you right after the briefing.

Inner City Press:  I guess my question is, given this… although this doesn't appear to be a case of sexual abuse repatriation, does Ban Ki-moon's stated commitment to transparency and repatriations cover repatriations like this?  And I want to insist to know who's paying, and if the UN is paying, why it's paying.

Spokesman:  I will get some… I will get more detail…

  We'll stay on this.

Amid a litany of rape charges against UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous, Inner City Press exclusively obtained and on February 12 published UN emails showing another round of sexual abuse of minors in Ouaka prefecture in the Central African Republic by UN Peacekeepers from the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Click here to view.

 While the story continues, we note that Reuters UN bureau first triest to undermine the story, then stole it without credit - and on February 18 tried to undermine Inner City Press live-streaming Periscope video from the UN Security Council stakeout. Welcome to the UN Censorship Alliance.

  After Inner City Press on February 15 asked about the email its had published - and Reuters' UN bureau chief Louis Charbonneau, notably,tried to dismiss and then stole the story - on February 16 UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq in the noon briefing read out a statement confirming nearly all of the email Inner City Press had published: that there were four new victims, minors, troops from DR Congo.

 But Haq did not say that two of the victims had children from the statutory rape. So Inner City Press asked Haq to confirm that, and asked who would pay: the UN or the DRC soldiers? Haq said there are meetings in Ban's office to respond to just such issues, after December's Deschamps report. Video here.

 And then Reuters, even while its editor Dan Grebler said the first theft was being looked into, just retyped and stole it again, this time by its UN correspondent Michelle Nichols, here.

  It was this same Nichols who, at the UN Security Council stakeout on February 18 while Inner City Press was live-streaming after asking about a draft statement on Palestine, cut in loudly with "I see you Periscoping!"  And? So what? UN missions and the UN itself are broadcasting inside the UN on Periscope. Why would one media try to censor others?

  On February 15, Reuters first tried to claim these were "old" rapes, here -- then when shown otherwise, simply stole the story with no credit.This is apparently policy.

  So Inner City Press raised the issue of theft of exclusives (and lack of objectivity, at least at the UN) to Reuters itself. For now, we've received this, cc-ed also not only to the (repeat) offender but also to Reuters' genial seeming Brian Moss and Clive McKeef:

"Thank you for bringing this matter to my attention. The appropriate Reuters staff will look into it and get back to you as soon as feasible.

Regards,
Dan Grebler
Desk Editor, Americas Desk"

  But but February 18, still no response. It's not that complicated.  Or was the Reuters correspondent's "intervention" the response? We'll have more on this too.

 The underlying emails, dated February 11, 2016, describe at least four underage victims, two of whom were impregnated by the rapist UN peacekeepers -- "in the locality Ngakobo in the Ouaka prefecture."

  On February 15, after emailing questions for two days to UN spokespeople in CAR and New York, Inner City Press at the UN's noon briefing asked UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq about the rapes, and the email it published on February 12. Haq answered, dodging on part of the email but not denying it. Video here.

 Then Associated Press asked, what about these new allegations? Video here. Haq answered - and from that, AP wrote its own derivative and belated story -- without credit, and without any mention of the critique of the UN in the emails. This is how it works, or doesn't.

 This too - Reuters UN "bureau chief" on Monday evening first reflexively came to the UN's defense saying that "Alleged Central African Republic rapes UN spox talked about today are same ones UN CAR said Feb 4 it was probing," citing (what else) a Reuters story of February 4 -- about a Human Rights Watch report about rapes in Bambari. But read the February 11 emails Inner City Press exclusively published, here:

“Herewith sharing with you a report I have just received from UNICEF indicating four minor girls aged between 16 and 17 years were victims of sexual exploitation and abuse allegedly committed by members of the DRC battalion in the locality Ngakobo in the Ouaka prefecture.”

  Up the email chain, Mercedes Gervilla in UN headquarters writes that “it would seem that many among the troops concerned, including Commanding officers were well aware of the abuse to which these children were being subjected. I also regret to inform you that in addition to these new 4 cases, there will likely be two more...”.  [We'll have more on this.]

  This is called... spinning for the UN. This is a trend at Reuters, even last week, here.



And there is a history: this same Reuters UN Bureau Chief Lou Charbonneau, when challenged, wrote to Stephane Dujarric, UN Spokesman, trying to get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN, here.

  When this was exposed, Charbonneau cited Reuters to get his email to the UN taken out of Google's search, saying he never meant for it to be public and it was somehow copyrighted. (See his filing here, made public by EFF's ChillingEffects.org). That's censorship... by Reuters.

  This this case, after being shown this reflexive defense of the UN was wrong, Reuters simply re-wrote the story and stole it, with no credit.

 And now we must go back: Charbonneau announced a policy of not crediting Inner City Press, see here.

 This was raised at the time to Reuters, including to Stephen J. Adler. What kind of company is this?

  (Inner City Press previously asked the decaying UN Correspondents Association, while it tried to censor Press coverage of its boss, to promulgate a best practice for media at the UN to credit others' exclusives; it never happened. AP at the UN speaks for this UNCA, and apparently it for AP.)

  

Exclusive: UN Emails Show New Rapes in CAR, Ladsous' Contingents by Matthew Russell Lee

 


Having been told by sources of more rapes by peacekeepers in the Central African Republic, Inner City Press on January 26 reported them and on January 27 asked the UN's spokesperson Stephane Dujarric to confirm them - but he wouldn't. UN transcript here. Video here.




  So what is the protocol of UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous, who linked the rapes to "R&R," here? How many more do they know about?

The UN report on rapes in the Central African Republic, released on December 17, found that UN Peacekeeping's Under Secretary General Herve Ladsous “illustrate[s] the UN's failure to respond to allegations of serious human rights violations in the meaningful way.”

 Ladsous has yet to take any questions about the report...

  When the Panel's three members held their December press conference, Inner City Press asked about Ladsous' failure to vet and his linking of rapes to “R&R.” Video here.  Marie Deschamps said pointedly she wouldn't comment on Ladsous' remarks; Yasmin Sooka said these are crimes for punishment, not recreation.

  As the last question, Inner City Press asked what it had wanted to ask Ban, and tried to ask Dujarric: what does this say about Ban's management? Video of Q&A here. Didn't Ban's chief of staff Malcorra, criticized in the report, do it for Ban? Didn't the “senior official” who ostensibly let the rape information die on the vine in the 38th floor work in an atmosphere created by Ban's nine years? We will pursue this.

  In December 2015, Ban allowed those who cover him, at least the UN Correspondents Association, to sell seats with him for $6,000. And it is these same who have airbrushed out Ladsous and others. We'll have more on this.

On UN's Murky Repatriation to S. Africa from Darfur, Inner City Press Asks Why DFS Is Paying

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive Series

UNITED NATIONS, February 25 -- UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous was willing to use Congolese troops in Central African Republic who ended up engaging in child rape and other abuses. Then they were given ample time to repatriate or leave the country; some twenty are still there.

  But there are other inconsistencies in Ladsous' peacekeeping, for example in Darfur. There, Ladsous more forcefully demanded the repatriation of South Africa's troops -- not for sexual abuse, but for “tactical” issues. Inner City Press exclusively learned of this and how last week, just before the UN threw Inner City Press out on February 19, and declared it Banned from all UN premises on February 22. Petition here.

  Here, exclusively, is the outrage. Unlike with “his” Congolese rapists in CAR, Ladsous so wanted the South African troops to leave Darfur that the UN Department of Field Support is paying for their repatriation, unlike in cases of other, poorer countries.

  This is the lack of oversight of UN Peacekeeping, that money can be used this way. Is is the same lack of oversight which allows Ladsous to cover up rapes, from Darfur to CAR, then to openly refuse to answer Inner City Press questions about the cover ups. But this one involves money, public money.

  On February 25 after filing a legal letter with the UN to not touch its office and papers, Inner City Press entered and asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric, UN transcript:

Inner City Press: In Darfur, the… South Africa has said that it's re… you know, pulling its entire force back, 1 April, and what I wanted to ask is whether… I've heard and published that it's due to something called a tactical violation by the South African battalion.  And I've also heard that DFS [Department of Field Support] is, unlike in other repatriation cases, stands to pay for the entire repatriation to South Africa.  Can you, one, state why they're being repatriated, and two, why DFS would pay for it?

Spokesman:  I do confirm that they are being repatriated.  I will get you some… I have some detail… I thought I had some details here, but we'll see what I can get you right after the briefing.

Inner City Press:  I guess my question is, given this… although this doesn't appear to be a case of sexual abuse repatriation, does Ban Ki-moon's stated commitment to transparency and repatriations cover repatriations like this?  And I want to insist to know who's paying, and if the UN is paying, why it's paying.

Spokesman:  I will get some… I will get more detail…

  We'll stay on this.

Amid a litany of rape charges against UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous, Inner City Press exclusively obtained and on February 12 published UN emails showing another round of sexual abuse of minors in Ouaka prefecture in the Central African Republic by UN Peacekeepers from the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Click here to view.

 While the story continues, we note that Reuters UN bureau first triest to undermine the story, then stole it without credit - and on February 18 tried to undermine Inner City Press live-streaming Periscope video from the UN Security Council stakeout. Welcome to the UN Censorship Alliance.

  After Inner City Press on February 15 asked about the email its had published - and Reuters' UN bureau chief Louis Charbonneau, notably,tried to dismiss and then stole the story - on February 16 UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq in the noon briefing read out a statement confirming nearly all of the email Inner City Press had published: that there were four new victims, minors, troops from DR Congo.

 But Haq did not say that two of the victims had children from the statutory rape. So Inner City Press asked Haq to confirm that, and asked who would pay: the UN or the DRC soldiers? Haq said there are meetings in Ban's office to respond to just such issues, after December's Deschamps report. Video here.

 And then Reuters, even while its editor Dan Grebler said the first theft was being looked into, just retyped and stole it again, this time by its UN correspondent Michelle Nichols, here.

  It was this same Nichols who, at the UN Security Council stakeout on February 18 while Inner City Press was live-streaming after asking about a draft statement on Palestine, cut in loudly with "I see you Periscoping!"  And? So what? UN missions and the UN itself are broadcasting inside the UN on Periscope. Why would one media try to censor others?

  On February 15, Reuters first tried to claim these were "old" rapes, here -- then when shown otherwise, simply stole the story with no credit.This is apparently policy.

  So Inner City Press raised the issue of theft of exclusives (and lack of objectivity, at least at the UN) to Reuters itself. For now, we've received this, cc-ed also not only to the (repeat) offender but also to Reuters' genial seeming Brian Moss and Clive McKeef:

"Thank you for bringing this matter to my attention. The appropriate Reuters staff will look into it and get back to you as soon as feasible.

Regards,
Dan Grebler
Desk Editor, Americas Desk"

  But but February 18, still no response. It's not that complicated.  Or was the Reuters correspondent's "intervention" the response? We'll have more on this too.

 The underlying emails, dated February 11, 2016, describe at least four underage victims, two of whom were impregnated by the rapist UN peacekeepers -- "in the locality Ngakobo in the Ouaka prefecture."

  On February 15, after emailing questions for two days to UN spokespeople in CAR and New York, Inner City Press at the UN's noon briefing asked UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq about the rapes, and the email it published on February 12. Haq answered, dodging on part of the email but not denying it. Video here.

 Then Associated Press asked, what about these new allegations? Video here. Haq answered - and from that, AP wrote its own derivative and belated story -- without credit, and without any mention of the critique of the UN in the emails. This is how it works, or doesn't.

 This too - Reuters UN "bureau chief" on Monday evening first reflexively came to the UN's defense saying that "Alleged Central African Republic rapes UN spox talked about today are same ones UN CAR said Feb 4 it was probing," citing (what else) a Reuters story of February 4 -- about a Human Rights Watch report about rapes in Bambari. But read the February 11 emails Inner City Press exclusively published, here:

“Herewith sharing with you a report I have just received from UNICEF indicating four minor girls aged between 16 and 17 years were victims of sexual exploitation and abuse allegedly committed by members of the DRC battalion in the locality Ngakobo in the Ouaka prefecture.”

  Up the email chain, Mercedes Gervilla in UN headquarters writes that “it would seem that many among the troops concerned, including Commanding officers were well aware of the abuse to which these children were being subjected. I also regret to inform you that in addition to these new 4 cases, there will likely be two more...”.  [We'll have more on this.]

  This is called... spinning for the UN. This is a trend at Reuters, even last week, here.



And there is a history: this same Reuters UN Bureau Chief Lou Charbonneau, when challenged, wrote to Stephane Dujarric, UN Spokesman, trying to get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN, here.

  When this was exposed, Charbonneau cited Reuters to get his email to the UN taken out of Google's search, saying he never meant for it to be public and it was somehow copyrighted. (See his filing here, made public by EFF's ChillingEffects.org). That's censorship... by Reuters.

  This this case, after being shown this reflexive defense of the UN was wrong, Reuters simply re-wrote the story and stole it, with no credit.

 And now we must go back: Charbonneau announced a policy of not crediting Inner City Press, see here.

 This was raised at the time to Reuters, including to Stephen J. Adler. What kind of company is this?

  (Inner City Press previously asked the decaying UN Correspondents Association, while it tried to censor Press coverage of its boss, to promulgate a best practice for media at the UN to credit others' exclusives; it never happened. AP at the UN speaks for this UNCA, and apparently it for AP.)

  

Exclusive: UN Emails Show New Rapes in CAR, Ladsous' Contingents by Matthew Russell Lee

 


Having been told by sources of more rapes by peacekeepers in the Central African Republic, Inner City Press on January 26 reported them and on January 27 asked the UN's spokesperson Stephane Dujarric to confirm them - but he wouldn't. UN transcript here. Video here.




  So what is the protocol of UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous, who linked the rapes to "R&R," here? How many more do they know about?

The UN report on rapes in the Central African Republic, released on December 17, found that UN Peacekeeping's Under Secretary General Herve Ladsous “illustrate[s] the UN's failure to respond to allegations of serious human rights violations in the meaningful way.”

 Ladsous has yet to take any questions about the report...

  When the Panel's three members held their December press conference, Inner City Press asked about Ladsous' failure to vet and his linking of rapes to “R&R.” Video here.  Marie Deschamps said pointedly she wouldn't comment on Ladsous' remarks; Yasmin Sooka said these are crimes for punishment, not recreation.

  As the last question, Inner City Press asked what it had wanted to ask Ban, and tried to ask Dujarric: what does this say about Ban's management? Video of Q&A here. Didn't Ban's chief of staff Malcorra, criticized in the report, do it for Ban? Didn't the “senior official” who ostensibly let the rape information die on the vine in the 38th floor work in an atmosphere created by Ban's nine years? We will pursue this.

  In December 2015, Ban allowed those who cover him, at least the UN Correspondents Association, to sell seats with him for $6,000. And it is these same who have airbrushed out Ladsous and others. We'll have more on this.

Exclusive: In UN's Murky Repatriation to S. Africa from Darfur, UN DFS Is Paying, Tactical Errors

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive

UNITED NATIONS, February 24 -- UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous was willing to use Congolese troops in Central African Republic who ended up engaging in child rape and other abuses. Then they were given ample time to repatriate or leave the country; some twenty are still there.

  But there are other inconsistencies in Ladsous' peacekeeping, for example in Darfur. There, Ladsous more forcefully demanded the repatriation of South Africa's troops -- not for sexual abuse, but for “tactical” issues. Inner City Press exclusively learned of this and how last week, just before the UN threw Inner City Press out on February 19, and declared it Banned from all UN premises on February 22. Petition here.

  Here, exclusively, is the outrage. Unlike with “his” Congolese rapists in CAR, Ladsous so wanted the South African troops to leave Darfur that the UN Department of Field Support is paying for their repatriation, unlike in cases of other, poorer countries.

  This is the lack of oversight of UN Peacekeeping, that money can be used this way. Is is the same lack of oversight which allows Ladsous to cover up rapes, from Darfur to CAR, then to openly refuse to answer Inner City Press questions about the cover ups. But this one involves money, public money. We'll have more on this.

Amid a litany of rape charges against UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous, Inner City Press exclusively obtained and on February 12 published UN emails showing another round of sexual abuse of minors in Ouaka prefecture in the Central African Republic by UN Peacekeepers from the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Click here to view.

 While the story continues, we note that Reuters UN bureau first triest to undermine the story, then stole it without credit - and on February 18 tried to undermine Inner City Press live-streaming Periscope video from the UN Security Council stakeout. Welcome to the UN Censorship Alliance.

  After Inner City Press on February 15 asked about the email its had published - and Reuters' UN bureau chief Louis Charbonneau, notably,tried to dismiss and then stole the story - on February 16 UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq in the noon briefing read out a statement confirming nearly all of the email Inner City Press had published: that there were four new victims, minors, troops from DR Congo.

 But Haq did not say that two of the victims had children from the statutory rape. So Inner City Press asked Haq to confirm that, and asked who would pay: the UN or the DRC soldiers? Haq said there are meetings in Ban's office to respond to just such issues, after December's Deschamps report. Video here.

 And then Reuters, even while its editor Dan Grebler said the first theft was being looked into, just retyped and stole it again, this time by its UN correspondent Michelle Nichols, here.

  It was this same Nichols who, at the UN Security Council stakeout on February 18 while Inner City Press was live-streaming after asking about a draft statement on Palestine, cut in loudly with "I see you Periscoping!"  And? So what? UN missions and the UN itself are broadcasting inside the UN on Periscope. Why would one media try to censor others?

  On February 15, Reuters first tried to claim these were "old" rapes, here -- then when shown otherwise, simply stole the story with no credit.This is apparently policy.

  So Inner City Press raised the issue of theft of exclusives (and lack of objectivity, at least at the UN) to Reuters itself. For now, we've received this, cc-ed also not only to the (repeat) offender but also to Reuters' genial seeming Brian Moss and Clive McKeef:

"Thank you for bringing this matter to my attention. The appropriate Reuters staff will look into it and get back to you as soon as feasible.

Regards,
Dan Grebler
Desk Editor, Americas Desk"

  But but February 18, still no response. It's not that complicated.  Or was the Reuters correspondent's "intervention" the response? We'll have more on this too.

 The underlying emails, dated February 11, 2016, describe at least four underage victims, two of whom were impregnated by the rapist UN peacekeepers -- "in the locality Ngakobo in the Ouaka prefecture."

  On February 15, after emailing questions for two days to UN spokespeople in CAR and New York, Inner City Press at the UN's noon briefing asked UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq about the rapes, and the email it published on February 12. Haq answered, dodging on part of the email but not denying it. Video here.

 Then Associated Press asked, what about these new allegations? Video here. Haq answered - and from that, AP wrote its own derivative and belated story -- without credit, and without any mention of the critique of the UN in the emails. This is how it works, or doesn't.

 This too - Reuters UN "bureau chief" on Monday evening first reflexively came to the UN's defense saying that "Alleged Central African Republic rapes UN spox talked about today are same ones UN CAR said Feb 4 it was probing," citing (what else) a Reuters story of February 4 -- about a Human Rights Watch report about rapes in Bambari. But read the February 11 emails Inner City Press exclusively published, here:

“Herewith sharing with you a report I have just received from UNICEF indicating four minor girls aged between 16 and 17 years were victims of sexual exploitation and abuse allegedly committed by members of the DRC battalion in the locality Ngakobo in the Ouaka prefecture.”

  Up the email chain, Mercedes Gervilla in UN headquarters writes that “it would seem that many among the troops concerned, including Commanding officers were well aware of the abuse to which these children were being subjected. I also regret to inform you that in addition to these new 4 cases, there will likely be two more...”.  [We'll have more on this.]

  This is called... spinning for the UN. This is a trend at Reuters, even last week, here.



And there is a history: this same Reuters UN Bureau Chief Lou Charbonneau, when challenged, wrote to Stephane Dujarric, UN Spokesman, trying to get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN, here.

  When this was exposed, Charbonneau cited Reuters to get his email to the UN taken out of Google's search, saying he never meant for it to be public and it was somehow copyrighted. (See his filing here, made public by EFF's ChillingEffects.org). That's censorship... by Reuters.

  This this case, after being shown this reflexive defense of the UN was wrong, Reuters simply re-wrote the story and stole it, with no credit.

 And now we must go back: Charbonneau announced a policy of not crediting Inner City Press, see here.

 This was raised at the time to Reuters, including to Stephen J. Adler. What kind of company is this?

  (Inner City Press previously asked the decaying UN Correspondents Association, while it tried to censor Press coverage of its boss, to promulgate a best practice for media at the UN to credit others' exclusives; it never happened. AP at the UN speaks for this UNCA, and apparently it for AP.)

  

Exclusive: UN Emails Show New Rapes in CAR, Ladsous' Contingents by Matthew Russell Lee

 


Having been told by sources of more rapes by peacekeepers in the Central African Republic, Inner City Press on January 26 reported them and on January 27 asked the UN's spokesperson Stephane Dujarric to confirm them - but he wouldn't. UN transcript here. Video here.




  So what is the protocol of UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous, who linked the rapes to "R&R," here? How many more do they know about?

The UN report on rapes in the Central African Republic, released on December 17, found that UN Peacekeeping's Under Secretary General Herve Ladsous “illustrate[s] the UN's failure to respond to allegations of serious human rights violations in the meaningful way.”

 Ladsous has yet to take any questions about the report...

  When the Panel's three members held their December press conference, Inner City Press asked about Ladsous' failure to vet and his linking of rapes to “R&R.” Video here.  Marie Deschamps said pointedly she wouldn't comment on Ladsous' remarks; Yasmin Sooka said these are crimes for punishment, not recreation.

  As the last question, Inner City Press asked what it had wanted to ask Ban, and tried to ask Dujarric: what does this say about Ban's management? Video of Q&A here. Didn't Ban's chief of staff Malcorra, criticized in the report, do it for Ban? Didn't the “senior official” who ostensibly let the rape information die on the vine in the 38th floor work in an atmosphere created by Ban's nine years? We will pursue this.

  In December 2015, Ban allowed those who cover him, at least the UN Correspondents Association, to sell seats with him for $6,000. And it is these same who have airbrushed out Ladsous and others. We'll have more on this.

On Darfur, US Concerned at Violence in Jebal Marra, Ladsous' UNAMID Silent

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 18 -- Even the UN's audit unit finds that its joint peacekeeping mission in Darfur, UNAMID, is unsatisfactory. This was the rating in a UN Office of Internal Oversight Services audit that Inner City Press has uploaded on November 4, 2015 here. 

 Nor surprisingly, UNAMID's unsatisfactory performance resulted in loss of confidence in it by local populations, in the UN's parlance, and in IDPs taking to protecting themselves. 

Now on February 18, the US has issued this:

"The United States is deeply concerned about the increased violence against civilians and the grave humanitarian situation in and around Jebel Marra, Darfur.  Initial attacks by the Sudan Liberation Army-Abdul Wahid opposition group on Sudanese armed forces prompted a response by Sudan’s military that included aerial bombardments despite the UN Security Council demand that Sudan cease offensive military flights over Darfur.  These attacks have forced 73,000 people to flee their homes, and thousands more are trapped in the conflict zone of Jebel Marra without access to aid.

The United States calls on both the Government of Sudan and the armed movements of the Sudanese Revolutionary Front (SRF) to re-commit to their cessation of hostilities declarations for Darfur and in South Kordofan and Blue Nile states.  We welcome the recent absence of major offensive action in South Kordofan and urge all parties to show the same restraint in Darfur and also in Blue Nile state, where government and opposition forces each carried out attacks last month.

There is no military solution to Sudan’s internal conflicts.  We call on the Government of Sudan and the SRF to de-escalate the violence and work with the African Union and others to agree to a comprehensive cessation of hostilities agreement that will allow immediate and unfettered humanitarian access for Darfur, South Kordofan, and Blue Nile.  We also urge the government to create an environment conducive to the participation of armed movements and other political opposition parties in a comprehensive and inclusive national dialogue that addresses systemic governance issues in Sudan. "

Back on November 9, 2015, Inner City Press asked the UN about other reports of under-performance by UNAMID under Herve Ladsous. From the UN transcript:

Inner City Press: The Tabit [rape question] is very simple.  You may have seen the Independent article.

Spokesman:  I did, but I have nothing to add to what we've said on Tabit.

Question:  And the underlying report they're reporting on by the NGO [non-governmental organization] in the U.K. makes various recommendations that UNAMID (United Nations-African Union Hybrid Operation in Darfur) have community liaisons that they don't leave West Darfur.  If there's… is there a DPKO (Department of Peacekeeping Operations) response?

Spokesman:  I do not have one with me.

  How surprising. Inner City Press is informed of belated discussions among Permanent Five members of the Security Council of Ladous being a liability, whether he can even stay to the end of Ban Ki-moon's term. Watch this site.

Back in late September during the UN General Assembly frenzy week in New York, in Darfur another UN Peacekeepers was killed and four wounded. Meanwhile Sudan said that its Foreign Minister Ibrahim Ghandour will meet with the State Department on UNGA's margins.

  The UN's Herve Ladsous met with Omar al Bashir; more recently on September 11, 2015, Ladsous linked Peackeepers' rapes with "R&R." When will this be addressed and acted on?

That human rights abuses continue in Darfur with cover-ups by the Peacekeeping mission UNAMID should be shouted from the rooftops. Instead, Human Rights Watch on September 9 the issue behind closed doors with the UN's Censorship Alliance.

   That was at 11 am. But at the UN noon briefing, no one from UNCA asked any questions about Darfur, or Sudan, to the UN. Inner City Press asked this:

Inner City Press: the press inside Sudan is carrying a lot of the coverage of President [Omar al] Bashir saying that he's going to end, you know, by force if necessary or by force certainly all rebellions within Sudan in 2016.  This is viewed as a kind of a… an end of the discussion process and the beginning of a purely military process.  Is… is the… the joint Special Representative aware of it?  Is there any response by the UN to this statement by the President?

Deputy Spokesman:  Well, we would take seriously any threats to continue or to exacerbate the conflicts on the ground in Sudan.  You… you've seen the efforts we've made on the ground diplomatically and through our peacekeeping and humanitarian offices to deal with the situation, and we do not want to see any further deterioration of a conflict which, as you know, has been running for many, many years already.  [Video here.]

  What was the point of doing this briefing about Darfur, where the UNAMID mission is covering up, not in the UN briefing room - where on September 10 another NGO holds a briefing, sponsored by Canada -- but in the Censors' Club?

  Neither organization has offered any criticism of UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous, as he sought to cover up rapes in the Central African Republic (and Darfur and DRC before), and openly refuses to answer Press questions about it.

 As to Darfur, Ladsous met with Sudan's ICC-indicted Omar al Bashir, something HRW was notably silent about as on the cover up of the French troops' rapes in Central African Republic by Ladsous - as reflected in UN Dispute Tribunal rulings.

  Wouldn't one want to ask the UN about its (in)action on Darfur? Otherwise, why do the press "in" the UN?

  To hold a press conference in the UN's actual Press Briefing Room requires only the sponsorship of a single member state; then the event is on UN Webcast and journalists who decline to support the UN's Censorship Alliance participation. But this is HRW's choice, just as they refused to provide even a summary of the issues they raised when granted a meeting with Ban Ki-moon -- contrary to the approach of other human rights groups.

  In terms of holding accessible press conferences in the UN, not going behind closed doors and off UN Webcast with the UN Censorship Alliance, consider in the same week, on September 10 at 10:30, a press conference in the UN Press Briefing Room on the plight of children in the Central African Republic; we'll cover it.

  The past and present head of UNCA, back after a long vacation, has yet to ask any questions of the UN. Previously, he sought to censor coverage of his renting one of his apartment to Sri Lanka's then Ambassador Palitha Kohona. (Running a letter he could write about when he rented the apartment, and its relations or not to UNCA's screening of the Sri Lankan government's war crimes denial film Lies Agreed To, was not enough: he demanded all coverage be removed from the Internet: censorship.) These are HRW's partners? We'll have more on this. This event, in any case, conflicts with a Security Council meeting about Syria. So it goes.

Background:  In February 2015 with UN Peacekeeping underLadsous still providing few to no updates on its UNAMID mission's November 9 covering up of rapes in Darfur, just as Ladsous stonewalled about mass rapes in Minova in the DR Congo, here, some soft on the UN try to raise the issue without blaming those responsible for the cover-up.

  The report put out by Human Rights Watch had 48 pages, but does not mention UN Peacekeeping boss Ladsous once, nor his similar cover up of rapes in Minova in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, video here. What kind of report is this?

 Tellingly, in trying to "launch" this soft-on-Ladsous report inside the UN, Human Rights Watch instead of holding a regular press conference in the UN Press Briefing Room as other NGOs do has chosen to partner with the UN Censorship Alliance, a group whose board has tried to get investigative Press thrown out of the UN, including for its reporting on Ladsous. 

 On February 11, added to the UN's "Media Alert" is a meeting between Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and this Sudanese government official: "Ibrahim Ghandour, Assistant to the President and Deputy Chairman of the National Congress, Republic of Sudan."

  So will Ban be demanded access -- second access, after Ladsous' initial cover up -- to Tabit?

  While some claim that Ladsous' UN Peacekeeping is trying to get back to Tabit, on Feburary 10 a Sudanese diplomat told Inner City Press he had met with Ladsous on February 9 and "it was nice." How's that, for Ladsous' supposed commitment to get to the bottom of rapes and rights abuses?

 Instead, in order to NOT move against the FDLR militia, Ladsous' UN Peacekeeping is now claiming to care too much for human rights to support the Congolese Army's supposed offensive against the FDLR -- which, the UN belatedly acknowledged to Inner City Press, has not even begun.

  But on the Tabit rapes, that the Sudanese diplomat without irony described his February 9 meeting with Ladsous has "nice" is telling.

  It is easy and appropriate, of course, to blame Sudan, as it was and is to blame the Congolese Army and government for the rapes in Minova. But there is a pattern, and until UN Peacekeeping's senior leadership's cover up of these incidents - and even silence on dead peacekeepers for more than a week -- nothing will improve.

  So why is Human Rights Watch, which alongside its detailed work goes out of its way not to criticize the UN and especially Ladsous, for example on Central African Republic, as Inner City Press reported here, partnering to hold a privatized event on Tabit, not in the UN Press Briefing Room but among friends, as they say?

 Why have HRW and its hosts said nothing about posts in UN Peacekeeping under Ladsous being sold for money, exclusively exposedby Inner City Press on February 7, asked about February 9, and partially answered by the UN on February 10, here? 

  Any country can sponsor such a briefing in the UN Press Briefing Room. But HRW hides behind and in the clubhouse of the UN Censorship Alliance, Board members of which in the past have ordered changes to articles about Ladsous - and about Sri Lanka, more here. Human rights? Hardly.  Look how Human Rights Watch's selectively distributed invitation whitewashes UN Peacekeeping's and Ladsous' role:

"Between October 30 and November 1, 2014, Sudanese government forces entered Tabit, North Darfur, and carried out massive abuses against the town’s residents, including a mass rape of women and girls. Sudan responded by denying the abuses and has refused to allow international peacekeepers and other independent monitors to investigate the crimes."

  This is misleading - Ladsous' UNAMID was in Tabit on November 9, and put out a press release whitewashing the rapes and saying the people there like the government's security forces. This was shameful.

 More publicly, Inner City Press on January 26 asked Security Council ambassadors Mark Lyall Grant of the UK and Raimonda Murmokaite of Lithuania, "what happened with UNAMID going back for real investigation of rapes in Tabit?"

  Lyall Grant replied, "We continue to press DPKO to encourage UNAMID to revert on the Tabit allegations."

   Murmokaite added, "have been raising the issue at consultations, will continue."

 And so Inner City Press at the January 26 UN noon briefing asked Spokesman Stephane Dujarric, video here:

Inner City Press: two of the Security Council ambassadors this morning said they continued to ask DPKO to ensure that the Tabit site of alleged mass rapes is revisited. I want to know has any action been taken on that? Has there been any move by UNAMID?

Spokesman Dujarric: The request to visit Tabit stands. There's nothing to report.

 Nothing to report? Back on January 8 Inner City Press asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, video here:

Inner City Press: what has the UN system done in order to get access again to Thabit in Darfur, where there were allegedly 200 rapes, and then the Government didn’t allow any inspectors. What have you done since we last spoke on it? 

SG Ban: As for the first part of the question, as you know, we tried to have a thorough investigation. This report might not have been sufficient because of the lack of full cooperation of the authorities on the ground. That has really hampered our authorities to go into the field and get a thorough investigation. It is important that we have to have a thorough investigation and as a matter of principle, there should be a clear accountability process and justice. I am firm about this matter. And we will, in the course of time, have better information on this matter. 

  While appreciated, it is widely recognized that the more time goes by, the more difficult a credible rape investigation becomes. So why did UNAMID issue a cover-up November 9 press release?