As Michael Bloomberg Reclaims His Company Full-Time, Inner City Press Asks Again, Can He Still Keep Ban's UN Post?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, September 3 -- Michael Bloomberg, to whom UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon gave a UN post on climate change and cities earlier this year, will be returning to run Bloomberg LP full-time, it has been reported.

  Not yet addressed is whether Bloomberg could keep a UN post while heading full-time a for-profit business. Ban allowed Alexander Downer to working for a "consultancy," Bespoke Approach, while serving as his Good Offices envoy on Cyprus. Tony Blair works for JP Morgan Chase and Kazakshan, among others, while holding the UN / Quartet's jobs on Palestine.

  But a full time job, including selling stock trading terminal to high frequency traders, while holding a UN post? Inner City Press will have more on this.

  Back on February 21, just three weeks after the UN first announced a "climate change and cities" post for Michael Bloomberg, Inner City Press again asked about any safeguards against conflicts of interest, after Bloomberg held a photo op with Secretary General Ban Ki-moon in Ban's 38th floor conference room.

  Inner City Press asked Ban's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq for a read-out of what Ban discussed with Bloomberg and then the two with Jen Stoltenberg; no read-outs were given by six pm. Haq said UN officials make disclosures; Inner City Press asked if Bloomberg's will be public, as Ban says he wants his officials to do. Haq said that's what Ban urges. We'll see. Video here and embedded below.

  Earlier, Inner City Press was told there would be "remarks," but that it could ask no questions. (Stop and frisk, practiced on the way up to the photo op, came to mind.)

  Ban said that Super Storm Sandy impacted the UN, and that a climate agreement by 2015 is key.  Bloomberg's remarks, after a joke about the blue UN pass he had just received, included thanking Ban for his comments on February 20 about "The Ukraine."

  As Inner City Press reported, Ban's comments were scripted and came as one of three pre-selected questions Ban took at a stakeout ostensibly about the Central African Republic. (Another question was about Syria.)

 This is the increasingly controlled way in which Ban's UN tries to communicate. On February 21, Stephane Dujarric who is slated to become Ban's new spokesperson on March 10 was up on the 38th floor already. The day before, outgoing spokesperson Martin Nesirky told Inner City Press there would be no overlap between UN Media Accreditation, which Dujarric has been overseeing, and the role of UN spokesperson. Video here.

    At the February 21 noon briefing, Inner City Press asked Haq in what capacity Dujarric was there. Haq said Dujarric is still the head of the Department of Public Information's News and Media Division and he was there in that capacity. Video here and embedded below.

  Another photographer remarked to Inner City Press that Dujarric is "never" seen at these photo ops, so why now, after he's been named spokesperson? And what does it mean in terms of Nesirky's statement that the post of Spokesperson is completely divorced from the DPI post that oversees Media Accreditation? We'll have more on this.

   More generally, if the UN wants to communicate, it should answer what safeguards it will put in place to ensure that Bloomberg's business interests somehow don't create conflicts of interest with his UN role. Only three days after getting the UN post, Bloomberg was in the news on his own Bloomberg Africa TV, which covers such issues as Air France and mining on The Continent.

   So Inner City Press went to the February 3 UN noon briefing and asked for whom Bloomberg is speaking, the UN or himself?  Video herefrom Minute 14:52. UN spokesperson Martin Nesirky replied that his deputy Farhan Haq had answered on this on January 31. 

  But Haq on January 31 after citing "terms of reference" said they are not public, instead to look at a press release which, it turns out, contains no safeguards. Nesirky said this is an early stage, and that is true. But it already seems clear that safeguards will be necessary. For now:UNIFEED video of Ban Ki-moon and team dining with Bloomberg, here.

  On January 31 Inner City Press asked Haq if any thought had been given to possible conflicts of interest, or restrictions on how information or access from the post could be used, given Bloomberg's businesses.

  The UN's Haq replied, "I believe appropriate terms of reference have been worked out with former Mayor Bloombeg, that should be an acceptable arrangement devised between them." Video here and embedded below.

  Inner City Press asked if these "terms of reference" were public and could be seen. Haq said "No... What's public is a lengthy press release available in our office."

  But the press release does not address any safeguards on conflict of interest at all. 

  As Inner City Press noted before the UN's announcement, when Michael Bloomberg was Mayor of New York, in light of obvious conflicts of interest he stepped back from Bloomberg News. He was criticized on issues ranging from stop-and-frisk to defending banks against minimal City community reinvestment standards.

  Now, according to one gushing report, he is poised to move to the United Nations, as envoy on cities and climate change. What about new conflicts of interest, and the above critiques?

  To give what credit is due, on the evening of January 30 Reuters' UN bureau issued a breathless "exclusive" with nothing but praise of Bloomberg -- not a word of any criticism, nothing on the conflict of interest with Bloomberg News purporting to cover the UN and Secretary General Ban Ki-moon. Given the percentage of the piece praising Bloomberg, that would seem to be the (anonymous) sourcing.

  Meanwhile at the UN on January 30, Inner City Press on climate change asked Ban's acting deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq of documents leaked by Edward Snowden showing that the NSA spied on the Copenhagen talks in 2009:

Inner City Press: there’s one of the [Edward] Snowden-released documents, but there’s a reason I’m asking you is it’s published in a Danish website “Information” and it talks about the Copenhagen climate change talks of 2009. And this seems to be the document and it says that the NSA [United States National Security Agency] was involved in monitoring communications at the discussions in order to advise the United States on the position of other Governments and presumably at the UN. So, I’m wondering, this seems to get more closely into things that are of much import to the UN, to the Secretary-General. Is there any response as to this memo coming out and the propriety of such surveillance?

Acting Deputy Spokesperson: Well, we wouldn’t have any specific response to this because ultimately, again, this is a case where we’d need to know what the basic facts are and whether there was any such surveillance that’s happened. However, our basic point that we’ve articulated many times in recent months still holds: that the inviolability of diplomatic premises needs to be respected by all States.

   Watch this site.

Footnote: While giving what credit is due to Reuters' UN bureau, despite their history, it must be noted that the bureau chief has not onlyspied for the UN -- he has also misused the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act to get Google to block from its search a leaked documentshowing him trying to get the investigative Press thrown out of the UN. All of this.. is how this UN works, or doesn't.

   

UN Pulls Mary Robinson from Great Lakes Post, Won't Say If She Will Be Replaced

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, July 14, more here -- When the UN at an ill-attended briefing on July 14 announced it is making Mary Robinson its envoy on climate change, Inner City Press immediately asked if that means she's out as UN envoy on the Great Lakes.

  Yes, UN deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq replied, pointing at a canned statement that didn't explicitly say she is leaving. (The UN Climate post is vacant because its previous occupant, Jens Stoltenberg, is tellingly going on to head NATO.)

  Will Robinson be replaced by the UN, with the M23 "neutralized" but FDLR issues continuing, including Robinson's recent request to UN Peacekeeping's Ladsous that the UN flight a sanctioned FDLR leader?

  The UN not only did not have a replacement ready - Haq did not even say that there WILL be a replacement. Even if there is, this shows this UN's priorities.

  Here is the statement the UN sent out at 12:19 pm on July 14:

United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon announced today the appointment of Mary Robinson of Ireland as his Special Envoy on Climate Change. Mrs. Robinson will continue to serve as President of the Mary Robinson Foundation-Climate Justice. Building on her work on climate justice, she will emphasise the urgency from a people centred perspective and work closely with Special Envoys John Kufuor and Michael Bloomberg in mobilizing political will and action before the 2014 Climate Summit in New York on 23 September 2014.

Mrs. Robinson will succeed Jens Stoltenberg of Norway who was recently appointed as Secretary General of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. The Secretary-General expressed his gratitude for Mr. Stoltenberg’s commitment in engaging Heads of State and Governments to promote ambitious announcements and action on climate change in advance of the 2014 Climate Summit.
       
In asking Mrs. Robinson to take on this mandate, the Secretary-General commended her for her work as Special Envoy for the Great Lakes Region of Africa, in particular for her efforts in bringing cohesion and international awareness to the challenges in the Great Lakes region. With her international stature, she was able to galvanize the international community to support the efforts of the Great Lakes region in conflict resolution, socio-economic development and mainstreaming of marginalized groups including women.
       
Mrs. Robinson brings with her more than four decades of political and diplomatic experience, including as President of Ireland from 1990 to 1997 and as a member of the Irish Senate from 1969 to 1989.  She was the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights from 1997 to 2002. 

  Back on June 27 amid reports that the UN flew a sanctioned militia leader of the FDLR on a UN aircraft in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Inner City Press asked UN spokesman Stephane Dujurric about it at the UN noon briefing:

Inner City Press: why did MONUSCO [United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo] fly him to Goma to Kisangani and then to Kinshasa when, in fact, I think there’s an arrest warrant for him?

Spokesman Dujarric: I’m not aware of any other services provided to him by MONUSCO.

  When other sources indicated to Inner City Press that this flying service WAS provided by MONUSCO, Inner City Press asked Dujarric again at UN noon briefing on June 30:

Inner City Press: I asked you on Friday a pretty straightforward question, which is whether MONUSCO [United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo] used its helicopters to, prior to the denial by the Security Council’s 1533 Sanctions Committee, to transfer this… the FDLR’s [Forces démocratiques de libération du Rwanda] leader within the [Democratic Republic of the Congo]? And I’m wondering if you have an answer on that?

Spokesman Dujarric: I don’t have anything to add.

Inner City Press: Does that mean --

Spokesman Dujarric: If I had something to add, I would tell you. Yes, in the back?

So Dujarric had nothing to add to his June 27 statement that “I’m not aware of any other services provided to him by MONUSCO.” So did he still think that was true? Had he even asked UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous -- who sitting beside Dujarric had refused Press questions on the DRC, video here -- or MONUSCO under Martin Kobler?

On July 1, Inner City Press asked Dujarric again:

Inner City Press: why did MONUSCO undertake to fly to Goma, to Kisangani and Kinshasa? And the reason why I keep asking about this is it seems like it’s a use of UN resources, just knowing why this flight took place.

Spokesman: Sure, if I have something on that I will share it with you

  For Dujarric to have nothing to supplement his statement ofJune 27 that “I’m not aware of any other services provided to him by MONUSCO,” he either did not ask Ladsous' DPKO or they lied to him.

  On July 2, after Martin Kobler belatedly disclosed that yes, under him MONUSCO flew the FDLR leader, Inner City Press asked Dujarric. Laughably, given Ladsous' refusal to answer Press questions, Dujarric said, you could pick up the phone. UN Video here, from Minute 7.

Dujarric first said he never denied the flight. But he's said, even according to the UN's own transcript, “I’m not aware of any other services provided to him by MONUSCO,” and then said nothing when asked twice more about this.

Inner City Press asked, can we assume that when a question is asked in his briefing room, you at least try to get an answer? When did you get this information? Dujarric did not answer this.

Footnote: Dujarric was asked if he will participate in the softball soccer game of the UN Correspondents Association, to which Dujarric sets aside the first questions in briefings and has defended in meeting(s) with the new Free UN Coalition for Access -- which, to put it mildly, is “deeply concerned” by inaccurate answers in the UN Press Briefing Room. Softballs with scribes? We'll have more on this.

   

At UN in Geneva, US Dodges on Drones and Spying, Stop & Frisk and Haiti Deportations

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 14 -- When the US delegation to the UN Human Rights Committee in Geneva took the floor on March 14, it was a full court press. A Native America staffer of the Mayor of Salt Lake City sung the US' praises, assurances were given about "so-called drones or remotely piloted aircraft."

  But of the elephant in the room, NSA spying, the speaker from the Civil Rights Division of the US Department of Justice used a single line: DOJ is "monitoring" a number of private action. You don't say.

  The head of the US delegation, Mary McLeod, said but did not explain why the US Administration has "no current expectation to become a party to the optional protocol" to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights -- which the US says does not apply to its actions outside of its borders. 

 This seems noteworthy right now as the US talks of Russian actions in Crimea.

  On the New York City stop and frisk program, the DOJ speaker acknowledged that the Department had taken no position on the facts; he noted the appeal filed by former Mayor -- and now UN official -- Michael Bloomberg, but that Bill De Blasio as withdrawn the appeal.

On immigration, Alabama House Bill 56 on immigration verification came up, with the US saying it was "on the ground" in Alabama to make sure it didn't block undocumented children from schooling. One almost expected to hear that NSA surveillance could help in these local goals.

The morning session closed with a slew of questions: Walter Kalin asked why the US deports people to Haiti even amid the cholera epidemic -- for which, Inner City Press notes, the US has said the UN should be immune. 

 Others questioned forced medication of those detained, lack of legal protection for farm workers and abuses in the guest worker program and, yes, Prism and NSA spying. And they they broke for a Geneva lunch. This is the UN. Watch this site.

   

World Urban Campaign, Sponsored by GDF Suez & Veolia, Wants a Cities Sustainable Development Goal

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 4 -- UN HABITAT unveiled"The City We Need" booklet on Tuesday at the UN, in advance of an event at the nearby Ford Foundation. 

  Inner City Press, when able, asked about the corporate sponsors listed in the booklet, including GDF Suez (protested for example about a hydro-electric dam in Brazil), Siemens (Western Sahara) and Veolia, a French firm recently contracted on Syria chemical weapons which does business in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

After thanking the panel including HABITAT's Joan Clos on behalf of the new Free UN Coalition for Access, Inner City Press asked: how were these corporate sponsored vetted?

  The answer, from Nick Yu of the World Urban Campaign, was as is so often the case at the UN that the private sector is important, is a stakeholder. Yes, but what about these particular companies? What is the process? And what is their involvement, beyond paying to be listed in promotional materials?

A goal of the campaign seems to be to try to get a holistic "Cities" Sustainable Development Goal. Inner City Press has reported on a similar move, involving Palau, to get an Oceans SDG. The list is growing.

A panelist who was also a New Yorker, Eugenie Birch, answered Inner City Press question about the last and the current New York City mayors. Bill de Blasio, Birch said, is a corrective on issues of affordable housing and free kindergarten (what about pre-K?). Michael Bloomberg, whose meeting with US Secretary of State John Kerry has yet to be summarized by the UN as Inner City Press has requested, will be at the Ford Foundation. Watch this site.

   

At UN, Mike Bloomberg Meet Ban Ki-moon With No Read-Out or Safeguards Against Conflict of Interest; No Disclosure, Stealth Spox

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 21 -- Three weeks after the UN first announced a "climate change and cities" post for Michael Bloomberg, Inner City Press again asked about any safeguards against conflicts of interest, after Bloomberg held a photo op with Secretary General Ban Ki-moon in Ban's 38th floor conference room.

  Inner City Press asked Ban's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq for a read-out of what Ban discussed with Bloomberg and then the two with Jen Stoltenberg; no read-outs were given by six pm. Haq said UN officials make disclosures; Inner City Press asked if Bloomberg's will be public, as Ban says he wants his officials to do. Haq said that's what Ban urges. We'll see.Video here and embedded below.

  Earlier, Inner City Press was told there would be "remarks," but that it could ask no questions. (Stop and frisk, practiced on the way up to the photo op, came to mind.)

  Ban said that Super Storm Sandy impacted the UN, and that a climate agreement by 2015 is key.  Bloomberg's remarks, after a joke about the blue UN pass he had just received, included thanking Ban for his comments on February 20 about "The Ukraine."

  As Inner City Press reported, Ban's comments were scripted and came as one of three pre-selected questions Ban took at a stakeout ostensibly about the Central African Republic. (Another question was about Syria.)

 This is the increasingly controlled way in which Ban's UN tries to communicate. On February 21, Stephane Dujarric who is slated to become Ban's new spokesperson on March 10 was up on the 38th floor already. The day before, outgoing spokesperson Martin Nesirky told Inner City Press there would be no overlap between UN Media Accreditation, which Dujarric has been overseeing, and the role of UN spokesperson. Video here.

    At the February 21 noon briefing, Inner City Press asked Haq in what capacity Dujarric was there. Haq said Dujarric is still the head of the Department of Public Information's News and Media Division and he was there in that capacity. Video here and embedded below.

  Another photographer remarked to Inner City Press that Dujarric is "never" seen at these photo ops, so why now, after he's been named spokesperson? And what does it mean in terms of Nesirky's statement that the post of Spokesperson is completely divorced from the DPI post that oversees Media Accreditation? We'll have more on this.

   More generally, if the UN wants to communicate, it should answer what safeguards it will put in place to ensure that Bloomberg's business interests somehow don't create conflicts of interest with his UN role. Only three days after getting the UN post, Bloomberg was in the news on his own Bloomberg Africa TV, which covers such issues as Air France and mining on The Continent.

   So Inner City Press went to the February 3 UN noon briefing and asked for whom Bloomberg is speaking, the UN or himself?  Video here from Minute 14:52. UN spokesperson Martin Nesirky replied that his deputy Farhan Haq had answered on this on January 31. 

  But Haq on January 31 after citing "terms of reference" said they are not public, instead to look at a press release which, it turns out, contains no safeguards. Nesirky said this is an early stage, and that is true. But it already seems clear that safeguards will be necessary. For now: UNIFEED video of Ban Ki-moon and team dining with Bloomberg, here.

  On January 31 Inner City Press asked Haq if any thought had been given to possible conflicts of interest, or restrictions on how information or access from the post could be used, given Bloomberg's businesses.

  The UN's Haq replied, "I believe appropriate terms of reference have been worked out with former Mayor Bloombeg, that should be an acceptable arrangement devised between them." Video here and embedded below.

  Inner City Press asked if these "terms of reference" were public and could be seen. Haq said "No... What's public is a lengthy press release available in our office."

  But the press release does not address any safeguards on conflict of interest at all. 

  As Inner City Press noted before the UN's announcement, when Michael Bloomberg was Mayor of New York, in light of obvious conflicts of interest he stepped back from Bloomberg News. He was criticized on issues ranging from stop-and-frisk to defending banks against minimal City community reinvestment standards.

  Now, according to one gushing report, he is poised to move to the United Nations, as envoy on cities and climate change. What about new conflicts of interest, and the above critiques?

  To give what credit is due, on the evening of January 30 Reuters' UN bureau issued a breathless "exclusive" with nothing but praise of Bloomberg -- not a word of any criticism, nothing on the conflict of interest with Bloomberg News purporting to cover the UN and Secretary General Ban Ki-moon. Given the percentage of the piece praising Bloomberg, that would seem to be the (anonymous) sourcing.

  Meanwhile at the UN on January 30, Inner City Press on climate change asked Ban's acting deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq of documents leaked by Edward Snowden showing that the NSA spied on the Copenhagen talks in 2009:

Inner City Press: there’s one of the [Edward] Snowden-released documents, but there’s a reason I’m asking you is it’s published in a Danish website “Information”and it talks about the Copenhagen climate change talks of 2009. And this seems to be the document and it says that the NSA [United States National Security Agency] was involved in monitoring communications at the discussions in order to advise the United States on the position of other Governments and presumably at the UN. So, I’m wondering, this seems to get more closely into things that are of much import to the UN, to the Secretary-General. Is there any response as to this memo coming out and the propriety of such surveillance?

Acting Deputy Spokesperson: Well, we wouldn’t have any specific response to this because ultimately, again, this is a case where we’d need to know what the basic facts are and whether there was any such surveillance that’s happened. However, our basic point that we’ve articulated many times in recent months still holds: that the inviolability of diplomatic premises needs to be respected by all States.

   Watch this site.

Footnote: While giving what credit is due to Reuters' UN bureau, despite their history, it must be noted that the bureau chief has not only spied for the UN -- he has also misused the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act to get Google to block from its search a leaked document showing him trying to get the investigative Press thrown out of the UN. All of this.. is how this UN works, or doesn't.

   

At UN, New Envoy Mike Bloomberg Thanks Ban Ki-moon on "The Ukraine," Climate Post and Business Conflicts of Interest UNanswered

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 21 -- Three weeks after the UN announced a "climate change and cities" post for Michael Bloomberg, and Inner City Press asked about conflicts of interest, Bloomberg held a photo op with Secretary General Ban Ki-moon in Ban's 38th floor conference room.

  The Press was told there would be "remarks," but that it could ask no questions. (Stop and frisk, practiced on the way up to the photo op, came to mind.)

  Ban said that Super Storm Sandy impacted the UN, and that a climate agreement by 2015 is key. (Strangely, the Press was told to leave before Ban's and Bloomberg's 9:40 am meeting with the UN's Special Envoy on Climate Change, Jens Stoltenberg.)

   Bloomberg's remarks, after a joke about the blue UN pass he had just received, included thanking Ban for his comments on February 20 about "The Ukraine."

  As Inner City Press reported, Ban's comments were scripted and came as one of three pre-selected questions Ban took at a stakeout ostensibly about the Central African Republic. (Another question was about Syria.)

 This is the increasingly controlled way in which Ban's UN tries to communicate. On February 21, Stephane Dujarric who is slated to become Ban's new spokesperson on March 10 was up on the 38th floor already. The day before, outgoing spokesperson Martin Nesirky told Inner City Press there would be no overlap between UN Media Accreditation, which Dujarric has been overseeing, and the role of UN spokesperson. Video here.

   If the UN wants to communicate, it should answer what safeguards it will put in place to ensure tha Bloomberg's business interests somehow don't create conflicts of interest with his UN role. Only three days after getting the UN post, Bloomberg was in the news on his own Bloomberg Africa TV, which covers such issues as Air France and mining on The Continent.

   So Inner City Press went to the February 3 UN noon briefing and asked for whom Bloomberg is speaking, the UN or himself?  Video here from Minute 14:52. UN spokesperson Martin Nesirky replied that his deputy Farhan Haq had answered on this on January 31. 

  But Haq on January 31 after citing "terms of reference" said they are not public, instead to look at a press release which, it turns out, contains no safeguards. Nesirky said this is an early stage, and that is true. But it already seems clear that safeguards will be necessary. For now: UNIFEED video of Ban Ki-moon and team dining with Bloomberg, here.

  On January 31 Inner City Press asked Haq if any thought had been given to possible conflicts of interest, or restrictions on how information or access from the post could be used, given Bloomberg's businesses.

  The UN's Haq replied, "I believe appropriate terms of reference have been worked out with former Mayor Bloombeg, that should be an acceptable arrangement devised between them." Video here and embedded below.

  Inner City Press asked if these "terms of reference" were public and could be seen. Haq said "No... What's public is a lengthy press release available in our office."

  But the press release does not address any safeguards on conflict of interest at all. 

  As Inner City Press noted before the UN's announcement, when Michael Bloomberg was Mayor of New York, in light of obvious conflicts of interest he stepped back from Bloomberg News. He was criticized on issues ranging from stop-and-frisk to defending banks against minimal City community reinvestment standards.

  Now, according to one gushing report, he is poised to move to the United Nations, as envoy on cities and climate change. What about new conflicts of interest, and the above critiques?

  To give what credit is due, on the evening of January 30 Reuters' UN bureau issued a breathless "exclusive" with nothing but praise of Bloomberg -- not a word of any criticism, nothing on the conflict of interest with Bloomberg News purporting to cover the UN and Secretary General Ban Ki-moon. Given the percentage of the piece praising Bloomberg, that would seem to be the (anonymous) sourcing.

  Meanwhile at the UN on January 30, Inner City Press on climate changeasked Ban's acting deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq of documents leaked by Edward Snowden showing that the NSA spied on the Copenhagen talks in 2009:

Inner City Press: there’s one of the [Edward] Snowden-released documents, but there’s a reason I’m asking you is it’s published in a Danish website “Information”and it talks about the Copenhagen climate change talks of 2009. And this seems to be the document and it says that the NSA [United States National Security Agency] was involved in monitoring communications at the discussions in order to advise the United States on the position of other Governments and presumably at the UN. So, I’m wondering, this seems to get more closely into things that are of much import to the UN, to the Secretary-General. Is there any response as to this memo coming out and the propriety of such surveillance?

Acting Deputy Spokesperson: Well, we wouldn’t have any specific response to this because ultimately, again, this is a case where we’d need to know what the basic facts are and whether there was any such surveillance that’s happened. However, our basic point that we’ve articulated many times in recent months still holds: that the inviolability of diplomatic premises needs to be respected by all States.

  If Bloomberg is named on Friday, or is named at all, what will the coverage of criticism and conflicts of interest be? Watch this site.

Footnote: While giving what credit is due to Reuters' UN bureau, despite their history, it must be noted that the bureau chief has not only spied for the UN -- he has also misused the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act to get Google to block from its search a leaked document showing him trying to get the investigative Press thrown out of the UN. All of this.. is how this UN works, or doesn't.