After
Somalia Expels
Guterres Rep
Haysom China Delays UNSC
Regret But Guterres Covers For
CEFC China Energy
By Matthew
Russell Lee, CJR Letter
PFT Q&A, NY
Post
UNITED NATIONS
GATE, January 4 –
For weeks the UN of
Secretary General Antonio
Guterres has refused to
answer Press questions about
Somalia. Now after Guterres'
representative Nicholas
Haysom was
ordered to cease operations
in, and presumably leave,
Somalia, Guterres on
January 4 has said the
country CANNOT declare
Haysom
Persona Non
Grata, since the
UN "is not a
state." Why then can
Guterres rough up and
ban a journalist
and claim
immunity? Now even
a mild UN
Security
Council
statement to
regret
Somalia's
expulsion of
Haysom has
been delayed
by China,
Guterres
continues to
debase himself
and the UN to
defend and not
audit CEFC
China Energy,
which bribed UN
PGA Sam Kutesa and
sought to buy
Partex Oil
from Gulbenkian Foundation
of which
Guterres was
an (UNdisclosed)
paid
board
member... And
Inner City
Press, which
Guterres had roughed
up on 3
July 2018 and
banned
since, had
before that
asked
Guterres' Spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric
about a
PNG-ing of UN
staff by
Burundi and
Dujarric said,
"I don’t know
what the
status of the
staff member
who was 'PNG-ed.' We
can check." Video
here.
And Sierra Leone
PNG-ed Michael
von der
Schulenburg,
of whom Inner
City Press also asked
before being roughed
up and banned
under
Guterres - who
claims
immunity for
all of this.
We'll have
more on this.
Guterres'
deputy
spokesman
Farhan Haq
said Guterres
will
nevertheless
replace Haysom
"in due
course." This
is Guterres' full
statement via Haq:
"The
Secretary-General
deeply regrets
the decision
of the
Government of
the Federal
Republic of
Somalia to
declare the
Special
Representative
of the
Secretary-General
for Somalia
and Head of
the United
Nations
Assistance
Mission in
Somalia
(UNSOM),
Nicholas
Haysom,
persona non
grata.
The
Secretary-General
has full
confidence in
Mr. Haysom, an
experienced
and respected
international
civil servant
who has
distinguished
himself in
numerous
senior
leadership
roles, in the
field and at
UN
Headquarters.
The doctrine
of persona non
grata does not
apply to, or
in respect of,
United Nations
personnel.
As described
in the 1961
Vienna
Convention on
Diplomatic
Relations, the
doctrine
applies to
diplomatic
agents who are
accredited by
one State to
another in the
context of
their
bilateral
relations.
The United
Nations is not
a State and
its personnel
are not
accredited to
the States
where they are
deployed, but
work under the
sole
responsibility
of the
Secretary-General.
At the same
time the
Secretary-General
is totally
committed to
ensuring that
the needs of
the Somali
people are at
the forefront
of the work of
the United
Nations in
Somalia. UNSOM
needs to be
able to carry
out in the
most effective
manner its
mandate to
support the
country.
Therefore, he
intends to
appoint in due
course a new
Special
Representative
for Somalia
and Head of
UNSOM.
The
Secretary-General
remains
strongly
committed to
assisting
Somalia in its
efforts to
achieve peace,
stability and
prosperity for
all."
While
Guterres' spokesmen refused
to answer banned Inner
City Press' written
questions on January
2, including about
Somaliland,
in the briefing room
Deputy Spokesman
Farhan Haq said
"at
this stage, I
can’t officially
confirm it.
What I can say is
that we’re looking
into the
matter.
We’re trying to
get the various
details
corroborated, and
we’re going to
see, based on
that, what further
steps are
needed.
Question:
Fink was due to
address the
Council tomorrow,
was he not?
Deputy
Spokesman:
Yes, and he is
going to address
the Security
Council, and I
believe he’s also
scheduled to meet
with the
Secretary‑General
tomorrow." But
there is nothing
on Guterres'
public schedule,
for the second day
in a row after a
ten day junket
with location and
costs undisclosed.
Fink, indeed. Somaliland's
government issued a
statement that
“Somalia’s decision
to expel UN Rep
doesn’t concern
Somaliland;"
its Upper House
has invited Haysom
to relocate
there. Guterres
was on a
junket
location
UNdisclosed
for more than
ten days; on
January 2
there is
nothing on his
public
schedule. And
he has still
said nothing,
including on
this: Somalia's
foreign ministry is
notifying United Nations
Secretary General that Mr
Nicholas Haysom is banned
and cease all operations
within the country. This
decision comes after Mr
Haysom deliberately and
intentionally interfered in
state affairs." And,
typically, from the UN of
Guterres, nothing. This
remained the case even many
hours later when Guterres
robo-issued a statement
about what Haysom had called
an indirect attack on the UN
compound: "The
Secretary-General strongly
condemns today’s attacks
against the United Nations
compound in Mogadishu. He
wishes a speedy recovery to
the injured
colleagues.
The Secretary-General
recalls that intentionally
directing armed attacks
against United Nations
personnel may constitute a
violation of international
humanitarian law. He urges
the Somali authorities to
investigate the attacks and
swiftly bring those
responsible to
justice.
The Secretary-General
reaffirms that such acts
will not diminish the strong
resolve of the United
Nations to continue
supporting the people and
Government of Somalia in
their efforts to build peace
and stability in the
country." Guterres, whose
spokespeople have declined
10 days of questions as to
where the UNSG is and how
much it costs, refuses
Inner City
Press'
questions about
why it is
not a conflict
of interest to
refuse to
audit CEFC when in
2018 it
tried to buy Partex
Oil & Gas
from the
Gulbenkian
Foundation of
which Guterres has
been a
paid
board member...
The UN supports and funds
AMISOM in Somalia but rarely
answers when AMISOM kills
people. But this time AMISOM
has stepped in it, and the
UN should be required to
answer the Press, even as
corrupt Secretary General
bans it for the 166nd day.
Our correspondents told us:
"the Ethiopian contingent
under AMISOM abducted
Mukhtar Robow Ali, former Al
Shabab number 2 and
candidate to Southwest state
of Somalia. The amisom
handed over to Somalia
federal government who was
not happy to his candidacy.
As result people took to the
street and at least 10
people was killed by
Ethiopian/Amisom.
Amisom works under U.N.
Peacekeeping framework
(outsourced project) and is
funded by EU and US. Somalia
police participated the
killing is under the payroll
of UNDP. Hours past
still no words from UN
bosses [because they are
corrupt]. The city is
preparing to more riot and
conflict. Robow is no
longer under U.N. or
International sanctions and
recently met the U.N. envoy
however the government of
Somalia is exploiting the
weaknesses of Amisom through
corruption to the highest
officials. Dozen
Somali federal MPs accused
the Amisom envoy as taking
sides and may have benefited
financially from the
government." On December 14
banned Inner City Press in
writing asked the UN, before
a noon briefing it was
banned from and in which no
one allowed in asked any
question about anything in
Africa, much less Somalia,
asked "December 14-3:
On Somalia, what is the SG's
comment and action on the
deadly violence triggered by
the arrest of Mukhtar Robow
while seeking the presidency
of South West state in next
week's election? Separately,
what role including
logistical support did the
UN play?" At 2:40 pm deputy
UN Spokesman Farhan Haq
responded, "Regarding
question December 14-3, we
can say the following:
Together with international
partners, we underscore the
importance of respecting the
electoral process and the
rule of law. We do not
endorse or reject individual
candidates.
We are concerned about
developments in South West
State. We deplore all
violence and any other acts
that could exacerbate the
humanitarian situation.
We underscore our support
for the agreed framework
governing the elections, and
urge all parties to respect
the integrity of the
electoral process. We
encourage constructive
dialogue to resolve
political differences in
order to advance the
political and economic
progress of the country."
But after more questions
arose, including
resignations, on December 17
before Guterres' lead
spokesman Stephane Dujarric
held a briefing he banned
Inner City Press for, Inner
City Press asked Guterres
and him in writing,
"December 17-1: On Somalia,
what is the SG's comment and
action now that Somali
authorities say Mukhtar
Robow has been disqualified
from contesting in this
week's regional elections?
Also, what is the UN's
knowledge of any role by UN
supported AMISOM and/or
Ethiopian troops in the
arrest of Mukhtar Robow?"
And more then five hours
later at close of business,
no answer by Dujarric to
this or any other Press
question asked. Totally
corrupt. Uganda was recently
shown in the US v Patrick Ho
trial to be soliciting
bribes at the UN, at least
its foreign minister Sam
Kutesa, soliciting a
$500,000 "campaign
contribution" to the
President. We'll have more
on this. In November the UN
Secretariat merely passed
the buck through its
spokesmen when banned Inner
City Press asked about
"peacekeepers" from Burundi
supported by the UN killed
at least four civilians in
Somalia. Here was the second
question, from Inner City
Press which after covering
the UN from inside for 10
years has been banned by SG
Antonio Guterres for 132
days and counting: "November
12-3: On the Burundian
troops shooting civilians in
Somalia, while all your
office answered was to look
at AMISOM's press release,
Inner City Press' question
is how this is impact the UN
continuing to take/pay
Burundi soldiers as UN
Peacekeepers, or if at a
minimum those involved in
the Somalia reprisals will
be barred from UN “service,”
given that “Burundian troops
serving under the African
Union Mission in Somalia
(Amisom) are alleged to have
opened fire on four
civilians on Tuesday after
their convoy was targeted by
a roadside bomb. Three of
the men died at the scene,
while the fourth died later
in hospital. Witnesses
interviewed by Amnesty
International reported that
the troops drove over an
improvised explosive device
that detonated as they
travelled through a district
in the north of Mogadishu.
In response, the troops are
alleged to have exited their
vehicles and “arbitrarily
shot” the four men, who were
named as Ali Shire Ugas,
Hassan Yusuf Siyad, Qasim
Dahir Khayre and Ahmed
Mohamud Basey. Three of the
men were lorry drivers,
while Basey was a tuk-tuk
driver." To this, on
November 13, the UN
answered: "On question Nov.
12-3, we are aware that
AMISOM is conducting an
investigation into the
incident. UNSOM has
shared relevant information
with AMISOM as it proceeds
with its investigation."
What information? Why keep
deploying these troops? Back
on "November
7-4: On
Somalia (and
Burundi) what
is the SG's
comment and
action on that
“African Union
soldiers in
Somalia have
been accused
of killing
four civilians
in the
capital,
Mogadishu.
Witnesses say
the soldiers
opened fire on
locals when
their convoy
was hit by a
roadside bomb.
The incident
happened in
the Huriwa
district in
the north of
the city.On
its Twitter
account, the
African Union
mission said
its convoy had
come across
explosions but
made no
mention of the
shooting,
alleged to
have involved
Burundian
troops”? Hours
later, the UN
told Inner
City Press
only that
AMISOM had a
statement. But
that wasn't
the question -
it was passing
the buck
regarding
killings by
force the UN
Secretariat
supports. Here
is today's UN Security
Council statement: "The members of the
Security Council condemned
in the strongest possible
terms the terrorist
attacks of 9 November
2018, which killed and
injured innocent Somalis.
The members of the
Security Council expressed
their deepest sympathy and
condolences to the
families of the victims,
as well as to the people
and Government of
Somalia. The members
of the Security Council
wished a speedy recovery
to those injured.
The members of the
Security Council commended
the swift response of
Somalia’s security and
first responders.
The members of the
Security Council
reaffirmed that terrorism
in all its forms and
manifestations constitutes
one of the most serious
threats to international
peace and security.
The members of the
Security Council
underlined the need to
bring perpetrators,
organizers, financiers and
sponsors of these
reprehensible acts of
terrorism to justice and
urged all States, in
accordance with their
obligations under
international law and
relevant Security Council
resolutions, to cooperate
actively with the
Government of Somalia and
all other relevant
authorities in this
regard.
The members of the
Security Council
reiterated that any acts
of terrorism are criminal
and unjustifiable,
regardless of their
motivation, wherever,
whenever and by whomsoever
committed.
The members of the
Security Council
reaffirmed the need for
all States to combat by
all means, in accordance
with the Charter of the
United Nations and other
obligations under
international law,
including international
human rights law,
international refugee law
and international
humanitarian law, threats
to international peace and
security caused by
terrorist attacks.
The members of the
Security Council paid
tribute to all Somali and
international actors
working to bring peace and
stability in
Somalia. The members
of the Security Council
reiterated their
determination to support
peace, stability and
development in
Somalia. They
underlined that neither
this nor any other
terrorist attack would
weaken that
determination." UN Deputy Spokesman
Farhan Haq has not answereed
a single one of Inner City
Press' dozen questions
submitted on November 8 and
9. Inner City Press on July
5 was banned from entering
the UN, the day after it
filed a criminal complaint
against UN Security for
physically removing it from
covering the meeting about
the UN Secretary General
Antonio Guterres' $6.7
billion peacekeeping budget,
as witnessed and essentially
cheered on by senior UN
official Christian Saunders,
tearing its reporter's
shirt, painfully and
intentionally twisting his
arm and slamming shut and
damaging his laptop. On
August 17, Guterres' Global
Communicator Alison Smale
issued a letter banning
Inner City Press from the UN
- for life. With no due
process. She and Guterres
have put the UN in the US
Press Freedom Tracker, here.
Smale said, again, that the
UN would answer Press
questions to the Spokesman
Stephane Dujarric and his
Office.
USG Smale,
also now on
three week
vacation, has
claimed that
the SG's
spokesmen are
answering
Inner City
Press' email
questions.
First, for
example, none
of the four
questions
submitted
yesterday
morning, 24
hours ago, has
been answered.
Second, even
if these
e-mailed
questions were
all being
answered it
does not make
up for denying
Inner City
Press the
right not only
to attend the
noon briefing
and other
press
conferences,
but the
stakeouts at
the Security
Council and
elsewhere,
such as the
Budget
Committee
meeting
stakeout I was
physically
ousted from on
July 3. It's
19 days of
outright
censorship,
and counting.
July
23, 2017
Alison Smale,
Under
Secretary
General for
Global
Communications
United Nations
New York, New
York
10017
Dear Ms.
Smale:
Thank you for
your letter of
July 19th
concerning the
actions of the
United Nations
with respect
to
Matthew
Russell Lee, a
US journalist
who has been
covering the
UN since 2006.
Unfortunately,
it is not
possible to
determine from
your response
what guideline
or regulation
Mr. Lee
violated that
resulted in
his expulsion
from the
premises.
First, your
letter tells
us that you
consider the
withdrawal of
Mr. Lee’s
accreditation
as a resident
correspondent
closed because
the US
government was
informed of
the
circumstances
concerning
this
action. Mr.
Lee tells GAP
that he has
not been
informed and
was not
consulted
about this
decision.
Was there some
form of due
process
surrounding
the decision
to withdraw
Mr. Lee’s
resident
correspondent
credentials in
2016, and if
so, who
participated
and of what
did it
consist?
Second, you
explain Mr.
Lee’s two
expulsions by
dispositive
statements
asserting that
he violated
the
scope of his
permissions.
Ms. Smale, the
operative
question is
which of the
media
guidelines did
Mr.
Lee violate,
and what
action was in
violation of
the
guidelines? If
you cannot
identify the
specific
regulation
broken, we
cannot address
your response.
Mr. Lee tells
GAP that UN
Security
officials
accused him of
exceeding the
time limits
allowing a
non-resident
correspondent
to access the
UN
premises, but
he presents
evidence
clearly
demonstrating
that the
meeting he was
covering was
still in
session when
he was
evicted.
According to
the
guidelines,
non-resident
correspondents
may access the
premises for
two hours
after the
adjournment of
the event they
are covering.
Third,
according to
your letter,
Mr. Lee
behaved in a
confrontational
manner when
approached by
United Nations
Security
officials, who
were therefore
entitled to
expel him.
However, it
was Mr. Lee’s
shirt that was
torn and it
was his laptop
that was
damaged by the
UN officials.
Mr. Lee
asserts that
it
was the
officials who
behaved
uncivilly, and
the videos he
recorded
illustrate
this fact.
Fourth, your
letter informs
us that the
matter is
under review,
but prior to
the release of
conclusions of
the review,
you inform us
of what this
exercise will
find: “As a
result of Mr.
Lee’s recent
actions in
violation of
the Media
Guidelines and
his
unacceptable
comportment
when dealing
with United
Nations
Safety and
Security
officials, Mr.
Lee’s
privileges of
access to the
premises of
the United
Nations as a
non-resident
correspondent
have been
suspended.
Those
privileges of
access will
remain
suspended
pending a
review of this
matter to
determine what
further
actions, if
any, should be
taken with
respect
to such
privileges.”
In other
words, the
review is not
a process to
determine what
actually
happened on the
dates in
question. It
is instead an
exercise to
determine what
further
actions can be
taken against Mr.
Lee. Our
question is,
why is this
matter under
review? Are
you not
enfranchised
to decide what actions
shall be taken
against a
journalist who
has violated
the terms of
his
privileges? A
more basic question
is, why is
there no due
process to
consider a
violation and
evidence
regarding what
actually
happened in
Mr. Lee’s case
(and more
generally)?
Ms. Smale, if
we are allowed
to argue this
dispute before
an objective
decision-maker,
in reference
to
specific
guidelines,
allegations of
violations and
production of
evidence, we
can
demonstrate
that Mr.
Lee’s
expulsion from
UN premises
was
unprovoked,
and most
likely
retaliatory
for articles
he has written
critical of UN
operations.
If, however,
we are subject
to an exchange
of letters, in
which you
respond to
us and to Mr.
Lee with
dispositive
statements,
without
reference to
specific
guidelines
violated or
evidence of
the violation
cited, we
cannot
prevail.
In short, the
United
Nations, and
in particular
your office,
is deciding
who will be
accredited to
inform
the public
about the
operations of
the United
Nations. This
practice, in
itself, is a
violation of
Article 19
of the
Universal
Declaration of
Human Rights,
which the UN
was
established to
uphold.
Once again,
GAP is
requesting
information
about the
specific
guidelines
that Mr. Lee
violated on
June
22nd
and on July
3rd of this
year that
caused his
eviction from
the premises
of the UN. And
most urgently,
we
respectfully
request
immediate
access to the
premises, so
that Mr. Lee
can do his
job. Today, we
are
informed that
the UN
Security
Council is
meeting about
Afghanistan,
Lebanon,
Eritrea,
Ethiopia and
Myanmar, and
Mr. Lee cannot
access any of
those meetings
or the
stakeouts.
Please respond
by e-mail
this
afternoon, if
possible.
Finally, GAP
is aware you
are on
vacation for
three weeks,
but response
(and full
reinstatement)
should
not and cannot
defer to that
schedule...
Cc: Officer in
Charge,
Department of
Global
Communications
Matthew
Russell Lee,
Inner City
Press
US Senator
Patrick Leahy
US
Representative
Chris Smith
US
Representative
James McGovern
David Banisar,
Article
19"
Dujarric
called on his
stooges;
we'll have
more on that. And still
these
from July 20,
when Guterres
refused to
answer on his
censorship: "July
20-1: On
Western
Sahara, what
is the comment
of the SG and
separately his
envoy /
adviser Kohler
on “Morocco
and the
European Union
concluded on
Thursday
negotiations
held to renew
the 2014
fisheries
agreement, a
diplomatic
source told
Yabiladi. The
treaty
includes the
Western Sahara
waters.”
July 20-2:
Yesterday in
SDNY court,
Patrick Ho who
is charged
with using UN
NGO CEFC for
bribing then
PGA Sam Kutesa
failed in
getting any of
the
indictement
counts against
him dismissed,
and failed in
suppressing or
excluding from
the case his
texts and
emails. What
is the SG's
comment, why
hasn't the SG
called for or
commissioned
an OIOS audit
as even his
predecessor
did, and who
in the UN
system is the
UN aware of as
being in Ho's
seized
messages?
July 20-3:
Please confirm
or deny that
“Atul Khare,
while meeting
with the Prime
Minister Dr.
Ruhakana
Rugunda in
Kampala, said
evaluations
carried out by
the UN did not
show cause for
an urgent move
of the base to
Kenya as
earlier
reported.”
July 20-4:
What is the
SG's comment
on the already
completed
Frontline
documentary
S36 E11: "UN
Sex Abuse
Scandal" - “An
investigation
of sex abuse
by United
Nations
peacekeepers
in the world's
conflict
zones. The
film traces
allegations
from Boston to
Congo to the
Central
African
Republic, with
firsthand
accounts from
survivors,
witnesses, and
officials.”"
Nothing. On July
19 when the
UN Webcast of
which had no
audio, nearing the
very
definition of
censorship,
Inner City
Press asked
Haq questions
including: "July
19-2: I saw
that at the
July 18 noon
briefing when
asked if there
is a deadline
or timeline to
complete this
supposed
investigation
of July 3
(when I was
physically
roughed up and
ousted from
covering the
5th Committee
meetings as I
have the last
ten years
including the
last two as a
non resident
correspondent,
under the MALU
Access
Guidelines).
How is that
lack of
timelines - 16
days and
counting -
consistent
with your call
for “swift and
transparent”
investigations,
for example in
Cameroon? What
is the
timeline?
Given that I
have not been
contacted in 9
days, what is
the delay? Why
was I not
allowed to
speak, 9 days
ago, about the
June 22 ouster
and my June 25
email to the
SG, USG Smale
and others?
Haq told Fox
News "Matthew Lee [i]s a
repeat offender, having been
similarly removed from the
building on 22 June 2018,
Matthew Lee has been
temporarily barred from the
premises pending a full
review of this incident."
There is no offense by Inner
City Press: the rules permit
Inner City Press to cover
meetings after 7 pm, on June
22 a speech by Secretary
General Antonio Guterres and
on July 3 a meeting about
Guterres' $6.7 billion
budget. So since no one from
the UN contacted Inner City
Press on July 5 about any
review, Inner City Press
wrote to Haq and his boss
Stephane Dujarric (out of
the office again). Haq
replied, "Receipt is
confirmed. For questions
about security issues, you
will need to be in touch
with security and with DPI."
But neither Department has a
spokesperson - Haq is the
spokesperson for the
Secretariat -- and Inner
City Press has written six
times to the head of DPI
without a single response.
The head of DPI ordered an
investigation of him own
staff after Inner City Press
published a leaked email
about him "burying" a threat
to another UN system
official, Irina Bokova (who
may, some say, become High
Commissioner for Human
Rights). So Haq's "answer"
is Orwellian. We will have
more on this. Guterres was
informed on June 25 by Inner
City Press of the escalating
targeting by his UN Security
Lieutenant Ronald E.
Dobbins. In fact, Guterres
deputy spokesman Farhan Haq
on July 3 essentially gave
the green light for that
evening's Security violence.
On July 5, Guterres' lead
spokesman Stephane Dujarric
refused to answer press
questions about the ouster
before "his" noon briefing.
Afterward, when Saunders
sauntered out of the UN in
black sunglasses and was
informed that Inner City
Press was now banned, his
response was to complain
about some of the written
coverage of him. Video here.
So is that why he cheered on
the twisting of the Press'
arm? Will this obviously
biased official be witness
in the "full review of the
incident" pending which
Inner City Press is
indefinitely banned? Brenden
Varma the Spokesperson for
the President of the General
Assembly Miroslav Lajcak
(whose chief of staff and
under-staffer were also
informed of the Press ban)
said, as his office
summarized, "This afternoon
at 3:00, the General
Assembly’s Fifth Committee,
which handles administrative
and budgetary matters, will
formally take action on all
outstanding issues,
including United Nations
peacekeeping budgets and the
Secretary-General’s
management reform and peace
and security architecture
reform proposals.
It will then close the
second part of its resumed
session.
Following that, the General
Assembly plenary will meet
to consider the report of
the Fifth Committee." Inner
City Press was banned from
this meeting and vote. While
the UN has told Inner City
Press nothing, Guterres
spokesman Farhan Haq told FOX
News' Adam Shaw that
"security followed up, they
found Matthew Lee to be in
the building past 9 p.m.,
well after the hours for a
non-resident correspondent,
and they informed him that
he was not allowed to roam
around the UN compound at
that hour. They informed him
that he would be required to
leave the premises. At that
point, Mr. Lee became loud
and belligerent, and
resisted the instructions of
UN security officers. He was
then escorted outside the
building, along with his
laptop and backpack. Based
on his unacceptable
behavior, and the fact that
he was a repeat offender,
having been similarly
removed from the building on
22 June 2018, Matthew Lee
has been temporarily barred
from the premises pending a
full review of this
incident." And the review was
a scam - while Guterres
claims immunity.
***
Feedback:
Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
UN Office: S-303,
UN, NY 10017 USA
Reporter's mobile (and
weekends): 718-716-3540
Other, earlier Inner City
Press are listed here,
and some are available in the ProQuest
service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.
Copyright 2006-2018 Inner
City Press, Inc. To request reprint or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com for
|