Showing posts with label Xinhua. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Xinhua. Show all posts

Friday, May 17, 2019

UN Journalism Awards Are Subject To Chinese Veto With Xinhua On UNCA Awards Committee Cover Up of CEFC Bribery of Guterres


By Matthew Russell Lee, CJR LetterPFTracker

UNITED NATIONS GATE, May 17 – The UN has been so corrupted and dominated by China under UNSG Antonio Guterres that now its ostensible journalist award is controlled with Chinese state media. Would stories about CEFC China Energy's proven bribery at the UN, and bid to buy an oil company linked to Guterres through the Gulbenkian Foundation, even get through a first round of review with this Chinese "journalism" veto? Fat chance. Guterres and the UN are corrupt.

  Here's from today's announcement by the pro-Guterres and now China controlled UN Correspondents Association, with its second vice president on the awards committee from Chinese state media: "2019 U.N. Correspondents Association Awards For Best Journalistic Coverage Of The United Nations And U.N. Agencies - NEWS PROVIDED BY United Nations Correspondents Association -  Winners Will Be Honored At Gala Event By The U.N. Secretary-General H.E. António Guterres... UNCA Awards Committee: Valeria Robecco (UNCA President), Giampaolo Pioli (Awards Chairman), ), Jianguo Ma (UNCA Second Vice President [from Chinese state media and Sherwin Bryce-Pease (UNCA Executive Member).
 In full disclosure, before Inner City Press quit UNCA after finding it corrupt and co-founded the Free UN Coalition for Access (FUNCA), and was then evicted from its UN work space (2016) then roughed up by Guterres' UN Security on 3 July 2018 and banned from any entry of the UN since, it was on the Executive Committee of UNCA. There, it was told by the already Permanent representative on the board of Chinese state media to NOT raise the issue of Taiwanese journalists. Guterres has gone further and covered up CEFC China Energy UN bribery and his own links. We'll have more on this.
Before Inner City Press was roughed up by UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres' Security on June 22 and July 3, 2018 and banned since then, it insistently asked for disclosure of how many of Guterres' publicly funded trips took him through his real home, Lisbon. The questions are not been answered by Spokesman Stephane Dujarric, who on 2 November 2018 simply bicycled away as Inner City Press asked about Guterres' failure in Cameroon and attempt to get even Park East Synagogue to oust Inner City Press from covering his October 31 speech about tolerance.  
 On May 14, Inner City Press asked Guterres and Dujarric, "May 14-1: On China, human rights and NYC, what is the SG's comment and action if any on that a state-owned Chinese shipping company refused to lease an office space in NYC to  Amnesty International USA? Cosco Shipping acquired Orient Overseas in 2017, and took ownership the company’s real estate investments, including the office building in question, called Wall Street Plaza.  Amnesty said the organization was told that it is “not the best tenant” for a building owned by a Chinese state-owned firm." More than a day later, no answer. One wonders the position of Mayor De Blasio and his International Affairs representative Penny Abeywardena...
  On May 15, Inner City Press asked Guterres and Dujarric, "May 15-1: On China and the UN, beyond the ban on Taiwan journalists, what is the SG's explanation and/or action on that former political prisoners in China who now reside in the United States were informed by the UN accreditation desk in Geneva that they could not enter the premises without a passport from a UN member state. As political dissidents who have fled from China, the visitors did not have valid passports from the country? Dissidents who flee their home countries due to persecution are often not issued passports from their countries of refuge but are rather issued other valid forms of identification." 
  Eight hours later, no answer. But there's this, sent to Inner City Press by several outraged UN staffers: "Scheduled demonstration outside VIC Gate 1 on Thursday, 16 May 2019, 10:00 -12:00 hours.   This is to inform VIC staff that on Thursday, 16 May 2019, between 10:00 hrs and 12:00 hrs there will be an authorized demonstration of approximately 100 demonstrators in Muhammad Asad Platz outside VIC Gate 1.  The organizers describe their demonstration message to "Support Taiwan’s participation to the World Health Organisation".  The UN Security and Safety Service, together with the host country police, will monitor this event for its duration.   Office of the Chief, Security and Safety Service United Nations Department of Safety and Security United Nations Office at Vienna." Yeah, Guterres' UN will monitor this event, and movement, for the duration. To (try to) save the UN, dump Guterres.
  While Guterres was in China banned Inner City Press in writing asked him and his spokesman Stephane Dujarric about China's crackdown in Hong Kong - no answer at all. Now even according to CNBC, tens of thousands of people marched on Hong Kong’s parliament on Sunday to demand the scrapping of proposed extradition rules that would allow people to be sent to mainland China for trial — a move which some fear puts the city’s core freedoms at risk.  Opponents of the proposal fear further erosion of rights and legal protections in the free-wheeling financial hub — freedoms which were guaranteed under the city’s handover from British colonial rule to Chinese sovereignty in 1997. Guterres said nothing. And when, CNBC reports, China censored its reporting from being broadcast in China, again nothing. Then again, Guterres has had critical Press roughed up and banned from the UN, for 298 days. He is corrupt.
  On April 27 from Beijing, from Guterres' second craven Belt and Road Initiative speech in as many days as he conceals his links with BRI briber China Energy Fund Committee which tried to buy the oil company of Gulbenkian Foundation which has paid Guterres: "I can assure you, Mr. President [Xi Jinping of China], that the UN will do everything possible to help towards the success of the Belt and Road Initiative... the Belt and Road Initiative, with its huge volume of investment, is an opportunity we cannot miss." Guterres will do anything to conceal his own personal financing link to UN briber CEFC China Energy, through Gulbenkian Foundation whose payments to him he omitted from his public financial disclosure covering 2016.  From Guterres's April 26 singing for supper speech: "Convened by President Xi Jinping, we come together at this forum on the Belt and Road in the face of uncertainty and unease around the globe.      I want to recognize China for its central role as a pillar of international cooperation and multilateralism... United Nations country teams stand ready to support Member States in capacity and governance building, and in achieving a harmonious and sustainable integration of the Belt and Road projects in their own economies and societies in accordance with national development plans, anchored in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The world needs to take profit of the Belt and Road Initiative to help close significant financing gaps for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals, especially in the developing world, in particular, the need for about $1 trillion needed for infrastructure investments in developing countries.... The United Nations is poised to support the alignment of the Belt and Road Initiative with the Sustainable Development Goals, to share knowledge, and to make the most of the opportunities of this large-scale initiative for maximum sustainable development dividends.      Let us work together to restore trust by making good on the shared promise of the 2030 Agenda and our common commitment to leave no one behind.     Thank you."
Before 10 am on April 25, Inner City Press asked Guterres' spokesman Stephane Dujarric, as well as Guterres' email address and that of his deputy and Alison Smale, "April 25-1: Now that SG Guterres is lavishing praise on China's "Belt and Road" please immediately provide the full transcript of Guterres' "interview with Chinese journalists" from which this propaganda came out: "UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said Tuesday that the Belt and Road Initiative is a "very important opportunity" to the world. With such a huge volume of investment for international cooperation as the Belt and Road Initiative, it is a "very important opportunity for enhancing the capacity to implement the sustainable development goals and an important opportunity to launch green perspectives in the years to come," Guterres said during an interview with Chinese journalists at the UN headquarters before leaving for the second Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation in Beijing. (Xinhua)." Immediately state how many staff of Xinhua and other Chinese state media the UN DPI/DGC has granted accreditation to to currently enter the UN.  
April 25-2: Immediately state how much Guterres and team's trip to China is costing, the size and composition of the UN delegation, and who is paying for it (given that even the PGA now discloses this information).  Again, state whether after the UN bribery conviction of Patrick Ho of CEFC, and CEFC's attempt to purchase the oil company of Gulbenkian Foundation which paid Mr. Guterres in 2016 (omitted from his online public financial disclosure covering 2016), he intends to raise corruption and UN bribery issues with China." More than seven hours later, no answer at all. But the UN South South Cooperation Office, which fronted for Chinese businessman Ng Lap Seng, was tweeting photos of its meetings in Beijing including Jorge Chediek and his (Chinese) deputy Xiaojun Grace Wang, here. China was bragging that Guterres would cravenly show up at its Belt and Road event, after Guterres refused to audit UN briber CEFC China Energy. CEFC tried to buy the oil company of Lisbon based Gulbenkian Foundation the payments of which to Guterres were not included in his public financial disclosure covering 2016. This was  days after Guterres' Alison Smale and Tal Mekel summarily denied Inner City Press application to re-enter the UN to ask questions, and after guards physically pushed Inner City Press out of the line for a press freedom event in the UN it was invited to and had a ticket for, then refused to provide the banned-by-Guterres list they said was the basis of their action.
 We'll have more on this. On March 2 with Guterres presumably in New York but not in the mansion at 5 pm - there were no UN security vehicles nearby - he nonetheless left all lights in the second floor blazing. This is pure waste, pure hypocrisy given what Guterres claims about his commitment to sustainability - all the more so because it was broad day light. On matters ranging from censorship and corruption to this, the hypocrisy gets worse and worse. On November 20, the day Guterres accepted the resignation of Erik Solheim -- which Guterres hypocritically demanded on November 19 -- for similar misuse of public funds to travel to Oslo and Paris, Inner City Press asked Guterres who his travel to Lisbon was any different. Guterres refused to answer, got into the back of his publicly funded Mercedes and drove off. Video here. On November 21 Dujarric was asked how / where Guterres would spend the next day, US Thanksgiving and replied Guterres would be "glued to his email." But past 11 am on November 21 there was none of the usual UN Security in front of the $15 million publicly funded mansion on Sutton Place where Guterres (sometimes) lives. Vine video here. Before 9 am on Monday November 26 Inner City Press in writing asked Guterres, his Deputy Amina J. Mohammed and his two spokesmen: "November 26-3: As asked November 23 without any answer at all, please immediately state where SG Guterres has been since November 21, how much it has so far cost the UN budget / public, including in light of the Spokesman's response on Nov 21 that the SG would be “scrolling his email” and in the context of officials such as previous host city Mayor and now UN official Bloomberg disclosing when he was out of town and where - and of SG Guterres now reported role in demanding Erik Solheim “pull himself, now” for just such undisclosed personal travel?" Twelve hours later this was not answered, despite the promise of answers from Guterres' Communicator Alison Smale to UNSR David Kaye. But at the day's noon briefing Inner City Press was banned front, when asked why Guterres has said nothing on Ukaine, Dujarric said: "the Secretary-General is on plane on his way back to New York as we speak.  He is being fully briefed on the situation." So that's admitting Guterres was gone - while refusing to say where or how much it cost. And so much for being "glued to his email." Today's UN is corrupt. On Friday November 23 when the Spokesperson's Office was open, people getting paid, Inner City Press submitted five written questions including, beyond Cameroon, DRC and India, this: "November 23-3: Please immediately state where SG Guterres is, how much it is costing the UN budget / public, including in light of the Spokesman's response on Nov 21 that the SG would be “scrolling his email” and in the context of officials such as previous host city Mayor and now UN official Bloomberg disclosing when he was out of town and where." Even by the next day, not one of the questions was answered, including about a Kenyan priest killed by Biya's army in Cameroon, despite UK USG Alison Smale's promise to UNSR David Kaye that questions would be answered. This on the eve of a trial that will show how irresponsible and corrupt Guterres has been as UNSG.  And Friday evening, still the empty mansion, Vine here.Seems Guterres has taken off again. Even Trump tells the public where he is going (Florida). Even billionaire NYC Mayor Mike Bloomberg, who unlike Guterres didn't use public money for his travel, ended up disclosed he was going to the Caribbean. How untransparent and arrogant can Guterres get, while having roughed up and still banned the Press that asks? Guterres has had Inner City Press banned from the UN for life, by his Alison Smale. But Inner City Press, even banned, on August 28 published the first in an exclusive and detailed series. Now on November 3 with this total lack of transparency from the UN Secretariat itself, Inner City Press can exclusively report that Guterres' current four day trip to Lisbon, his 16th as Secretary General, was only booked on October 24, making it more expensive, and is entirely paid for by the public. What was the pretext for the trip? A 15 minute "Web Summit" speech; Guterres' spokesman Stephane Dujarric said it would be live streamd - free, one assumed - on the Web Summit platform. But there, to see it, members of the public had to "pre-register" for €850 for the 2019 Web Summit (purchased by Lisbon for 10 years). Now we can report that on each of his 16 publicly-funded junkets to Lisbon Guterres has taken two UN Security with him. How much does it cost? The UN refuses to answer, prefers to rough up and ban the Press that asks. This time they have refused to confirm - or attempt to deny - that Guterres staffer Aguinaldo Baptista went as well. Inner City Press asked, 23 hours ago: "November 5-1: Please state the cost to the UN budget of the SG's current trip to Lisbon, deny or confirm that staffer Aguinaldo Baptista has also traveled there and if so the cost and rationale for that, Web Summit (?) or CPLP, and what the benefit to the UN and public is of travel to receive this CPLP award. What other UN staff and security went, for how long, and how much has it cost the public?" No answer. Totally unaccountable, not unlike Paul Biya's use of funds from Cameroon's coffers to pay hotel bills in Geneva in cash. Birds of a feather. As to the Lisbon speech, Inner City Press immediately put a how to see it question to Dujarric and his deputy - no answer on that. So clicking the obligatory "yes" to pre-register and accept Web Summit promotions, even then just as Guterres began blathering about medical devises and dating apps the screen was cut off and the promotion blocked it again, unable to be moved. Vine video here. Guterres has put the UN up for sale, sometimes intentional, sometimes because he just has contempt. Also at the Summit, behind this promotional paywall, is Tony Blair. Inner City Press also raised the issue to Guterres' Global Censor Alison Smale, Deputy SG Amina J. Mohammed, her chief of staff Nelson Muffuhand staffer Aguinaldo Baptista, who along on the public dime. Was this justified by Guterres' personal Prize from the Community of Portuguese Speaking Countries, CPLP - previously awarded to, among others, the currently incarcerated Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva? The decision to give it to Guterres was made months ago in July in Cabo Verde, where Guterres' son Pedro Guimarães e Melo De Oliveira Guterres does UNdisclosed business; no recusals or safeguards from Guterres, only the roughing up and banning of the Press which asks. On November 5, Inner City Press asked: "it was said that the SG's speech in Lisbon will be streamed on Web Summit platform. But there, after a mere minute, it says To continue watching, pre-register for the 2019 Web Summit. So it is for-pay? Question Nov 5-1 is reiterated: “November 5-1: Please state the cost to the UN budget of the SG's current trip to Lisbon, deny or confirm that staffer Aguinaldo Baptista has also traveled there and if so the cost and rationale for that, Web Summit (?) or CPLP, and what the benefit to the UN and public is of travel to receive this CPLP award. What other UN staff and security went, for how long, and how much has it cost the public?” And as Guterres' 15 minutes speech, ostensibly justifying all this public spending, approached there was no answer.We'll have more on this. Back on September 7 Inner City Press reported that Guterres intends to use even Kofi Annan's death and the September 13 event in Ghana as a pretext to again fly to Lisbon. He'll turn it into a five day junket, leaving New York on September 11 (when he's arranged a Myanmar white washing CPPF meeting, also reported exclusively by banned Inner City Press, here), offer praise sure to be ironic of Kofi Annan who Rest in Peace never had a critical journalist roughed up and banned - then fly to Lisbon on the public dime, until September 16. How much will it cost? The UN refuses to answer. But it is not their money. And the climate of cover up includes Guterres not disclosing his own son Pedro Guimarães e Melo De Oliveira Guterres' business links in Africa and elsewhere. We'll have more on this: it is what journalism is supposed to do, hold institutions and those who lead them accountable. Here from multiple member state sources and open source are the dates of Guterres' first 14 -- 30% of total UN trips - through Lisbon for each of which Inner City Press has asked, and not been answered, and live-stream Periscope of the UN's empty massion on 57th Street and Sutton Place for which it was roughed up and banned:
1/13/2017-1/20/2017    NY->Lisbon->Geneva->Davos Platz->Zurich

2/9/2017-2/20/2017            NY->Istanbul->Riyadh->Dubai->Abu Dhabi->Muscat->Doha->Cairo->Frankfurt->Bonn->Munich->Lisbon

2/24/2017-2/27/2017    NY->Lisbon->Geneva

3/25/2017-3/31/2017    NY->Lisbon->Amman->Baghdad->Arbil->Gaziantep

5/9/2017-5/22/2017            NY->London->Beijing->Strasbourg->Geneva->Lisbon

5/25/2017-5/29/2017    NY->Catania->Lisbon

6/20/2017-6/26/2017    NY->Entebbe->Lisbon

6/27/2017-7/4/2017            NY->Washington DC.->Geneva->Lisbon, (30/06/2017 - 04/07/2017 in Lisbon)

11/3/2017-11/7/2017    NY->Lisbon

2/12/2018-2/19/2018    NY->Kuwait->London->Munich->Lisbon

3/14/2018-3/16/2018    NY->Rome->Lisbon

5/11/2018-5/19/2018    NY->Lisbon->Vienna->Brussels->Washington DC

5/23/2018-5/31/2018    NY->Geneva->Lisbon->Paris->Bamako

7/6/2018-7/11/2018        NY->Lisbon->Addis Ababa->Kinshasa
  Do the member states paying for this - whom Guterres' Smale quotes without name as supporting the roughing up of and permanent ban on Inner City Press, agree with this? Do they know this? How arrogant or out of touch a self-styled world leader is has been revealed in the Leader's contemptuous approach to freedom of the press and whose who even gently chide him on it, including a Nobel Peace Prize winner. No, this is not a reference to Donald Trump, but to UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres. The Nobel Peace Prize winner who has sought the reversal of Guterres' outrageous 56 day and counting ban on Inner City Press even entering the UN is Jose Ramos Horta of Timor Leste, still serving Guterres' UN, who told Inner City Press on August 27, "Dear Matthew I did reach the very inner sanctum of the UN system reporting on your case to no avail. Apologies but I don't know what else I can do." Later on August 27 an independent journalist asked Guterres' spokesman Stephane Dujarric why things are not fixed with Inner City Press' access, since it "looks bad" given other attacks on press freedom. Video here. Dujarric tried to cut the journlist off, insisting to say this is about freedom of the press would be wrong. (Then why is it in the Press Freedom Tracker, here, and the Columbia Journalism Review, amongothers for example in the UKJapanItaly and Cameroon?) Dujarric changed the earlier reference to Inner City Press being in a "garage ramp" - something Guterres' Grand Inquisitor Alison Smale never asked Inner City Press about - to being in the "parking lot." (Inner City Press' pass worked to get there, many use it as a way to exit, and several senior UN official, anti-Guterres sources of Inner City Press ask to meet it and give it documents there. Maybe that's the reason.) Dujarric then said that Inner City Press creates a "hostile environment" for the diplomats, some times correspondents and always UN officials it covers. Seems clear the ban is entirely about freedom of the Press, freedom to question, and a Secretary General and vindictive team of holdovers who seek to retaliate against questions and coverage, including live streamed covering, with a lifetime ban with no appeal. Here is an example of Inner City Press' August 28 questioning at the Delegates Entrance, since Guterres and Alison Smale have banned it from the Security Council stakeout. Is this hostile?  Would Guterres, former NYT bureau chief Smale and former former Dujarric like to write Inner City Press' questions? Its articles? Perhaps to omit all refernce to Cameroon and what Guterres did and didn't do? On August 28 during an empty noon briefing Inner City Press was again banned from, it asked in writing Dujarric, Alison Smale, Amina J. Mohammed and others 13 questions including: "At yesterday's noon briefing you said I am banned because I was “found in the parking lot.” Since no one spoke to me about this, please state when and where, and explain how that is a violation if non resident correspondents' passes open those doors, unlike the bathrooms on the 4th floor, and how this Trumped up into so serious a violation as to ban me, including from the upcoming UNGA week. Also, again, name the diplomats (and UN staff and journalists) you yesterday publicly said I created a hostile environmental for. Honestly, that was not my intent. But I have a right to know. And it sounds troublingly similar to questioning and critique: free press. August 28-2: This is again a request to be informed -- including if the question is view as hostile - of the reason on the SG's Public Financial Disclosure page USG Smale is not listed, while Natalia Gherman who was named to her position later than USG Smale is listed and has made public disclosure - and for an explanation why Smale did not recuse herself as was clearly called for from banning me." While two other questions were answered on August 28, these were not touched. This is censorship.  For now, though, Nobel Peace Prize winner who has worked for the UN has been rebuffed. What they say Trump is, Guterres is as well and more so - only Guterres has actually roughed up and banned a critical journalist for 55 days, with total impunity. Hence this story. After having covered the UN since 2005 for Inner City Press, and pursued stories of UN under-performance from Sri Lanka to Darfur and Haiti to Yemen and most recently Secretary General Antonio Guterres' failure and conflict of interest on Cameroon, at 4 pm on Friday August 17 I got a four page letter from Under Secretary General Alison Smale, formerly the New York Times' Berlin bureau chief. We've put the letter on ScribherePatreon download here
The letter informed me, without a single opportunity to be heard and offer rebuttal, that “your accreditation is hereby withdrawn pursuant to the Guidelines.” It cited what it called three previous warnings. But on further inspection there is no there, there. See below. In the middle of the now 55 day ban, Jose Ramos Horta who has known and answered Inner City Press for years wrote to it, somewhat comedicly, "I am puzzled by such an extreme DPI decision of banning you for life from UNHQ for reporting purposes. Here in Timor Leste our Govt never ever barred a journalist from entering a public space and reporting even though our Media has never been friendly with Govt officials.I cannot imagine how serious an offense you may have committed that may have justified such an extreme action by DPI. Did you throw a bomb, rotten eggs, tomatoes, spaghetti at some guy? I shall try to reach the SG." And then, on August 27, "Dear Matthew I did reach the very inner sanctum of the UN system reporting on your case to no avail. Apologies but I don't know what else I can do." This is how arrogant and out of touch Guterres is, Lusophone or not. People would report this about Trump, whole profiles of those they say should have spoken out - Mattis, Kelly, members of Congress and the Senatre - and isolation and rage. But what about Guterres? Jose Ramos Horta, who has never had a problem being public, is a man of integrity, on the right side on this one when all is said and done. What about others? We'll have more, much more, on this - there has been other outreach, and more to come. One individual, even with a former NYT Global Communicator like Alison Smale, cannot be allowed to censor like this, to impose a ban on a journalist for the first time in 40 years, an active journalist Guterres and Smale and UNnamed others want to prevent or hinder Inner City Press from covering this UN General Assembly High Level Week and the UN going forward. We will not rest. Watch this site.
  In her lifetime ban letter, Smale also claimed that Guterres' spokesmen would answer Inner City Press' e-mailed questions. But this it false. Of the fourteen question Inner City Press e-mailed to them, and Smale, and Deputy SG Amina J. Mohammed and others on August 23 and 24, not one was answered. Not one. Including: "August 24-3: Given that Deputy Spokesman Haq told IPS “we respect his press rights, but we also want to respect other’s press rights. And some journalists feel their press rights have been impeded by his actions” - state, since this is the basis of me being banned, who these are, and how they feel their press rights have been impeded by my actions. Also all video and other evidence that Haq alluded to to IPS should be produced, today, since it is the basis of my being banned." Nothing has been provided, eight hours later, bSpokesman Stephane Dujarric who was drawinpay all day after having essentially ordered or passed on from his boss the order to rough up Inner City Press. From the IPS article: "Lee has been known for asking thought-provoking questions during daily briefings and at press stakeouts. He has reported on global conflicts such as those in Sri Lanka, Congo, Somalia, and others..However, the incidents with Lee started back in 2012, when he was warned by the DPI to treat his fellow journalists with respect." That's not the case. In 2012, the President of the UN Correspondents Association Giampaolo Pioli, who had rented one of him Manhattan apartments to one Palitha Kahona then unilaterally granted his request or demand for an UNCA screening of the war crimes denial film of the Sri Lanka government he represented at the UN, ordered Inner City Press to remove from the Internet its article about the conflict of interest. Inner City Press declined but offered to publish any response, at any length. Pioli and the UNCA board demanded removal of the article, and ultimately Inner City Press quit UNCA and co-foundedFUNCA, the Free UN Coalition for Access. The UN claimed it was uninvolved - instead, then head of Accreditation Stephane Dujarric tried to condition Inner City Press' re-accreditation as a resident correspondent on more positive coverage of the Secretariat, specifically his fellow Frenchman Herve Ladsous, the head of Peacekeeping who famously said peacekeepers would rape less if they had more "R&R." So from 2012 it was the UN trying to strong arm positive coverage of its officials, and using the aura of "other correspondents" in UNCA as the leverage - making UN the UN Censorship Alliance.

Wednesday, March 20, 2013

On Chemical Weapons in Syria, UN Dysfunction: of Cuba, UNCA & Reuters' Iranian Scalps


By Matthew Russell Lee

UNdisclosed Location, March 20 -- The dysfunction and division in the UN are for all to see, even on TV.
  Wednesday morning at the Security Council stakeout, Syrian Permanent Representative Bashar Ja'afari announcedhis county had requested “a few minutes ago” that Secretary General Ban Ki-moon send a specialized, independent and neutral technical mission to look into the use of chemical weapons, he said by the opposition.
  In his twelve minute stakeout, the only questioner -- in Arabic -- is one viewed as pro-Assad. No one else came, or asked.
  At the day's noon briefing, Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Martin Nesirky said he had just briefed Ban on what Ja'afari said at the stakeout. Then when and how did Syria make the request “a few minutes ago” to which Ja'afari referred?
  The questions Nesirky got, or took, were all slanted the other way, to the extent of asking if ANY use of chemical weapons in Syria, even by the opposition, would be the government's fault.
  The questioners came from Al-Arabiya, An-Nahar and Turkish media, all three on the Executive Committee of the UN Correspondents Association, increasingly known at the UN's Censorship Alliance.

  As fate would have it, Cuba this week filed a complaint with Ban Ki-moon against not only UNCA but Falk personally. Asnoted, those on UNCA's Executive Committee -- perhaps with the silence disagreement of Mr Gu of Xinhua -- will try to take the criticism by Cuba as a badge of honor. 

  UNCA first vice president Louis Charbonneau has festooned the door to Reuters UN office -- decidedly NOT raided by this UN -- with documents showing how angry Reuters has made Iran. Scalps not scoops: this is Reuters at the UN.

   This is dysfunction, this is the UN's Censorship Alliance -- and circus of decay. Watch this site.

Footnote: It was also notable -- literally, footnoteable -- that at Wednesday's post-raid noon briefing, there were no questions about Africa, where 70% of the UN's work is. 

  And UN Peacekeeping, which under Herve Ladsous covers up rapes by his partners, uses peacekeepers to pursue French goals in Cote d'Ivoire and prospectively Mali, and has highly selective vision in the two Sudans, likes it that way -- no questions about this African empire...

Monday, March 18, 2013

Behind UN Raid on Press Office Are UN Censorship Alliance Leaders, Named Here



By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, March 18 -- Behind the UN raid on Inner City Press' office on Monday (photovideo), beyond the UN officials who entered, search and photographed the Press office without any notice or consent are those who created the atmosphere: the UN's Censorship Alliance, which continues to call itself the UN Correspondents Association.
  Freedom of Information Act documents obtained from Voice of America show that it was UNCA that “met with UN officials (very quietly)” in 2012 to try to get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN. Louis Charbonneau of Reuters, then and now UNCA's First Vice President, has refused to state his role in this meetings (audio here), as has UN official Stephane Dujarric.
But who leads this UN Censorship Alliance, whose president Pamela Falk of CBS took photographs of the raid on Inner City Press' office?
On the Executive Committee of the UN's Censorship Alliance are:
Masood Haider of Pakistan's Daily Dawn, who voted repeatedly in 2012 to get Inner City Press thrown out;
Tim Witcher of Agence France Presse, who asked UNCA to act against Inner City Press about an article it publishedabout Herve Ladsous, the fourth Frenchman in a row to head UN Peacekeeping, then supported Voice of America's exposed request to get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN, then filed his own false complaint about a March 8 verbal encounter which he initiated by cutting into a conversation to hiss about “lies and distortions;”
Denis Fitzgerald of Saudi Press Agency, who in connection with false allegations that Inner City Press must be funded by the terrorist Tamil Tigers because it asked questions about Sri Lanka, browbeat Inner City Press and offered to serve on a panel to judge it;
Sylviane Zehil of L'Orient le Jour, who went shown news articles from government press in Sri Lanka saying Inner City Press should be jailed for what it had written, and related anonymous death threats triggered by the UNCA proceeding, said “that is not my problem;”
Ban Ki-moon's UNCA Lunch of the Lost, Feb 7, 2013, credit Evan Schneider, UNPhoto. From left: OSSG's Del Buey; Denis Fitzgerald of Saudi Press Agency; OSSG's Nesirky; Melissa Kent of CBC; Sylviane Zehil of L'Orient le Jour; Tim Witcher of AFP; Ali Barada of An-Nahar; Ban Ki-moon, Kahraman Halicelik of Turkish Radio & TV; Pamela S. Falk of CBS; Lou Charbonneau of Reuters; Bouchra Benyoussef of Maghreb Arab Press; Yasuomi Sawa of Kyodo News; Masood Haider of Dawn; Unknown; Zhenqiu Gu of Xinhua; Stephane Dujarric of UN DPI
Bouchra Benyoussef of Maghreb Arab Press, who voted against Inner City Press every time and, once seeing Inner City Press rushing to try to ask a question of a Moroccan official at a UN stakeout, gestured that the microphone should be turned off, the stakeout ended;
Zhenqiu Gu of Xinhua, who voted every time against Inner City Press, told Inner City Press that it did not respect authority enough and placed his Xinhua underling Bill Reilly as the chair of the panel to judge Inner City Press, despite conflict of interest;
Ali Barada of An-Nahar, who filed his own false complaint against Inner City Press (deemed even by UN authorities to be “bogus”) and served on panel to judge Inner City Press but refused to respond to legal requests to see “evidence” alluded to;
Kahraman Halicelik of Turkish Radio & TV who claimed he would drop off the board if UNCA tried to get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN-- then when that was proved, under FOIA, didn't leave, and remains on the board;
Louis Charbonneau of Reuters, who filed a stealth complaint in 2012, had Reuters support Voice of America's move to thrown Inner City Press out of the UN (according to VOA documents), and on February 22 told Inner City Press, “the fundamental problem is your website” (his colleague Michelle Nichols joined in Witcher of AFP's false February 22 complaint); and
Pamela Falk of CBS, who screamed at Inner City Press on February 22 “mugger” and “you call yourself a journalist” and “just don't write about me,” before taking pictures of the raid on Inner City Press' office on March 19. UN Censorship Alliance indeed. Watch this site.

Saturday, February 9, 2013

At UN, 13 Opaque Apostles on Ban Ki-moon's Social Calendar, Secret DRC, No Haiti, Sudan in Passing

By Matthew Russell Lee
 
UNITED NATIONS, February 9, updated below* – When UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon doled out lunch and some quotes Thursday to 13 pre-selected people who are on the Executive Committee of the UN Correspondents Association, at first it seemed like just a sloppy anachronism.

   As some UN officials have been pointing out more and more frequently since the Free UN Coalition for Access was launched on December 7, 2012, UNCA has been around “since the League of Nations” and so it has a special, even monopolistic, position in the UN system.

   FUNCA wasn't formed for a free lunch, or for a $250 a plate ball like the one that is UNCA's main focus each year.

  And so FUNCA intended to let this anachronistic lunch pass, and remain focused on issues of fair treatment in accreditation, freedom of expression and due process for journalists.

   But then it became clear that not only did Ban Ki-moon dole out quotes to the 13 UNCA Executive Committee members present – even the summary or “highlights” of what he said wasn't sent because those 13 until after 6 pm.

  (Nesirky tells Inner City Press it took that long to prepare the four paragraph highlights, and thus that the resulting headstart to AFP and Xinhua was unintentional.)

  And even then, at least one major wire service, a FUNCA member, wasn't sent even the highlights. (Nesirky tells Inner City Press this was just a "technical glitch.)
  
  After receiving complaints from members of FUNCA, UNCA and both, Inner City Press on February 8 decided to ask Ban's spokesman Martin Nesirky for an on the record explanation, before asking the other questions it had for the day, concerning Sudan, Congo, Haiti and other countries with UN Missions.

   But in an exchange from which the UNTV webcast abruptly cut away, Nesirky insisted that Ban Ki-moon “does not have to justify or explain his social calendar,” and refused to provide even on a delay the transcript of what Ban doled out to the UNCA Executive Committee, saying some was off the record. See here, at Minute 13.

   Inner City Press had just rushed to the UN and its noon briefing from an off the record briefing at a Security Council member's mission.

  Does Ban believe that only the 13 he met with, at least five of whom took their post with no competition or vetting, can abide by off the record rules? Are all other UN correspondents other than these untrustworthy?

   Here as shown in the UN's own photograph, re-tweeted by UNCA president Pamela Falk, is a list of the UNCA (now Ban Ki-moon) thirteen:

Tim Witcher of Agence France Presse; Pamela S. Falk of CBS; Lou Charbonneau of Reuters; Ali Barada of An-Nahar; Denis Fitzgerald of Saudi Press Agency*; Melissa Kent of CBC; Sylviane Zehil of L'Orient le Jour; Kahraman Halicelik of Turkish Radio & TV; Bouchra Benyoussef of Maghreb Arab Press; Yasuomi Sawa of Kyodo News; Zhenqiu Gu of Xinhua and Masood Haider of Dawn (as noted, see video here from Minute 16:45).

   Nesirky in a response he called carefully worded acknowledged that none of the UNCA 13 had raised any Haiti question, despite the UN's role in bringing cholera there.

  There was a discussion of the Democratic Republic of Congo, Nesirky said, but none of it was in the summary, and no transcript was provided. Was it like the UN's previous anonymous declaration of war in the Congo, through many of these same correspondents?

   It is to many, including the UNCA members who did not get any transcript but saw their Executive Committee's stories, a stretch to characterize this as just an item on Ban Ki-moon's "social calendar."

   Sudan, tellingly, came up “only in passing.” These are Ban Ki-moon's 13, who later on Friday mocked an alleged victim of sexual abuse on their anonymous social media account.*
 
These are the Ban Ki-moon 13 – apostles, but apostles of what? Certainly not of transparency.

* -- update of Feb. 9, 11:11 am: after publication of the above, one of the 13, Denis Fitzgerald, wrote in at 10:55 am to say he was not at the referenced off the record briefing and that "I am not part of a false social media account."

  Noted, though given that account's content, it is attributable to the group. Certain formal requests were made by the Free UN Coalition for Access to Fitzgerald, regarding his claim to not be a "part" of the anonymous social media account and anti-free speech campaign, and to "release any and all recordings of the February 7 session with Ban Ki-moon to all reporters accredited at the UN."

  On that, it appears there are still 13, and not the claimed 12, apostles of opacity.  Watch this site.
 
Here is a transcription, the last part in brackets was not shown on UNTV:
 
Inner City Press: Some people have had questions: yesterday around 6:00 p.m., there was an e-mail sent out by your office containing highlights for answers about apparently what was a discussion earlier in the day with a select group of correspondents. And I wanted to know, and I believe a major wire service, actually a member of the Free UN Coalition for Access, has asked you as well, what was the basis of selecting those 13 journalists, and what was the arrangement? Were they under some embargo until you put it out, or was this giving to 13 media outlets a jump-start on the answers? And I also want to know whether he said anything in this session with the UNCA Executive Committee concerning either Sudan, the Democratic Republic of Congo or Haiti, and if so, if we can get a transcript of it?
 
Spokesman Martin Nesirky: I’m going to choose my words very carefully, Matthew.
 
Inner City Press: I did, as well.
 
Spokesperson: I know you did. That’s why I’m trying to reciprocate. The first thing is that the Secretary-General does not have to justify or explain his social calendar. Full stop. Secondly, the information that was provided — the highlights, as you put it, that were provided — were not somehow embargoed or held back. My colleagues in my office worked extremely hard to transcribe that information. As soon as it was transcribed, it was put out. And there was no question of waiting until someone had filed a story. So you should understand that. The third point is that this information that was provided was an attempt to provide all correspondents, all correspondents, who receive our e-mails, to cover those aspects which were evidently newsworthy. And was there some discussion of [Democratic Republic of the Congo]? Yes, there was. Was there discussion of Haiti? No, there was not. Was there discussion of Sudan? In passing. And, finally, no, we will not provide a full transcript. Part of the conversation was on the record, part of the conversation was off the record. And I would also want to say that, just to reiterate what I said at the beginning, we don’t have to justify or explain the Secretary-General’s social calendar. Okay?
 
Inner City Press: Then I’m going to ask one follow-up --
 
Spokesman Nesirky: One thing, one thing I forgot. There appears to be a technical glitch: two people did not receive the e-mail, to our knowledge, that contained that information. One of the people was the person who came and spoke to you, it would seem.
 
Inner City Press: Okay. Here’s what I wanted to ask you, and we’ve had this discussion once before, maybe more than once. But, in one discussion, you’d said your office doesn’t play favorites, that you simply announce UNCA events as a courtesy. But, this is an event, as you may know, there’s some controversy here, whether there’s only one organization representing journalists or more. Social calendar’s one thing; the Department of Public Information, at the highest levels, has said it’s looking at this issue of whether there’s a need to be responsive to more than one organization. So, it is a choice, so my question to you is--
 
Spokesman Nesirky: Matthew, Matthew, what is your question?
 
Inner City Press: basically, you’re creating a situation in which wire services are encouraged to join UNCA in order to get this head-start, or this information off the record, and if they don’t, they don’t get the information, even in summary fashion, [and it’s not fair. That’s my question.
 
Spokesman Nesirky: Here’s an interesting thing, Matthew: one of the key global wire services was not at the lunch. And, if you look at the coverage of the comments that were made, a lot of the stories were by that wire service. And I don’t recall getting a complaint by that wire service. But, rather than belabor the point here, I do just want to underscore that these two things are not mutually exclusive. The Secretary-General’s social calendar does not need to be explained. Any efforts there may be to be even more embracing beyond taking many questions from you, here, every day, for example, there may be efforts under way to do that. The two things are not mutually exclusive. Other questions? No? Thanks very much. Have a good afternoon. Thank you very much.]

   Actually, there were more questions, but Nesirky ended the briefing and walked out.

  The last minute, in brackets and italics, were not included in the UNTV archive – the video was cut off. See here, at Minute 13. The wire service Nesirky referred to, that same day, mis-identified UK Ambassador to the UN Mark Lyall Grant as “Mary” Lyall Grant.

  Perhaps they were too focused on retyping the late-provided Ban summary. Some system. Watch this site.