Now
after that
dodge, the US
Senate by a
voice vote
says it is
barring Iran's
nominee as
ambassador.
The New
York Times
reports it,
but does not
get into the
Host Country
agreement.
But under
that, even
Serbia's
Milosevic came
to 42nd
Street, as did
Sri
Lanka's
Mahinda
Rajapaksa.
Does this mean
the US or the
US Congress
endorsed them?
With the Iran
nuclear P5+1
talks now
resuming in
Vienna, a US
Senior
Administration
Official on
April 4 told
the press they
are "on pace"
to begin
"drafting in
May."
But what about
the US
position on
Iran's
reported new
Permanent
Representative
to the UN,
about whom
Inner City
Press asked
the UN on
April 3? (The
UN called it
"bilateral"
and would not
comment on the
US' duties
under the UN
Host Country
Agreement).
The US Senior
Administration
Official
called the
reported
nomination
troubling, but
would not say
how it may
impact the
P5+1 process.
Nor would the
Official
comment on
moves to
impose
non-nuclear
sanctions on
Iran pitched
by Eliot Engel
(D-NY) here.
The official
declined
comment on yet
unseen
legislation.
There are also
unseen
transactions,
only rumored,
like a $20
billion oil
for goods deal
between Iran
and Russia.
Concern was
expressed, but
there is no
evidence the
deal is taking
place.
So: on pace to
begining
drafting in
May? We'll
see.
Way back in
October, the spokesperson
of Catherine
Ashton,
European Union
High
Representative
for Foreign
Affairs,
Michael Mann,
canceled a
briefing for
journalists in
Geneva
covering those
talks. His
Twitter feed
went silent
for 15 hours
in the middle
of the talks,
after Ashton's
belated
condemnation of
a deadly
attack on UN
peacekeepers
in Darfur four
days previous.
Inner
City Press asked
if this was
"on delay."
The document Mann
linked to
does not even
MENTION Darfur
or UNAMID.
Inner City Press noted the incongruity, for
example, of
Reuters
covering the
Geneva talks
with four
separate
scribes even
as editor
Stephen Adler
speaks of five
percent
newsroom cuts.
(Perhaps
relatedly, as
Fars got
scoops Reuters
tweeted the
price of
hamburgers in
Geneva. It is
true, as
this internal
UN post-Sri
Lanka proposal
exclusively
published
Friday by
Inner City
Press puts
it, that New
York is viewed
as a cheaper
"duty station"
than Geneva.)
But
Iran is the
big one for
Reuters: at
the UN in New
York, they
festooned
their office
door proudly
with copies of
complaints
about their
reporting from
Iran's Mission
to the UN. Was
this for
gumshoe
reporting or
simply getting
leaks from the
UK and France?
(The irony of
Reuters and
leaks is that
the agency's UN bureau
chief has used
a Digital
Millennium
Copyright Act
filing,
here, to get
Google to ban
from its
search a
leaked copy of
the Reuters
chief's "on
the
record"anti-Press
complaint to
the UN, with
the same
strategy
Erodgan used
to declare his
leaked phone
calls
"copyrighted.")
In
Geneva back in
October, a
first scoop
came from
Iran's Fars
agency. As
noted, when
Iranian
foreign
minister Javad
Zarif met with
UN Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon in New
York, the only
journalists
who went up to
Ban's 38th
floor office
to cover it
were with
Iranian media
and Inner City
Press.
Up
there, Iranian
foreign
minister Javad
Zarif quipped
to UN Syria
envoy Lakhdar
Brahimi that
he would see
him soon in
Tehran.
Downstairs,
the so-called
UN
Correspondents
Association
used UN
resources to
celebrate
themselves,
having hosted
a faux
UN briefing by
Saudi-sponsored
Syria rebel
boss Ahmad al
Jarba.
This is how it
works -- UNCA
or its first
vice president
from Reuters
also in
essence spy
for the UN,
click here for
story, audio, document.
This has yet
to be
explained.
It is
at the level
of foreign
ministers that
Iran wants the
November
talks. There
are sure to be
questions to
the US State
Department's
Jen Psaki and
Marie Harf,
present at the
talks, about
this. Harf was
tweeting, even
as other
parts of the
US State
Department
said they
stopped,
including on
the UN
Security
Council's
recent Africa
trip, due
to or to
highlight the
US
government
shutdown.
Ah, politics.
Watch this
site.
, 
