After
UN Cocaine
Exclusive
Press Asks of
Bomb Squad
Inaction,
"Noose Cover
Up"
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
Jan 30,
updated Jan
31, 10:40 am
-- With the UN
yet to answer
the questions
of
Inner City
Press, which exclusively
broke last
week's story
about 14
kilograms of
cocaine in the
UN mail room,
other UN
Security
whisteblowers
have come
forward with
troubling
tales, of
racism and
what they call
lax response
to packages
identified by
bomb sniffing
dogs.
Inner
City Press
was informed,
and at
Monday's UN
noon briefing
asked, about
an
incident this
month in which
three separate
UN bomb
sniffing dogs
"sat down" --
conveying
suspicious --
about a
package
brought in by
a courier
service by the
name of TNT.
But,
the UN
Security
whistleblowers
say, "the bomb
squad was
never called
by
the command."
Rather, the
TNT courier
was allowed or
told to
take the
suspicious
package out of
the UN, out
onto the
streets of
New York.
Last
week after
breaking the
cocaine story
on the morning
of January 26,
Inner City
Press asked
the UN why
instead of
waiting to see
who might come
and
pick up the 14
kilograms of
cocaine in the
UN mail room,
it was
spirited so
quickly out of
the building
with the UN
claiming it
had
"no UN
connection."
That question,
and follow up
or even
admission of
the arrest in
2006 of an
employee in
the UN mail
room
after an
indictment for
drug
trafficking,
has still not
been
answered.
In
light of the
UN's failure
to provide any
answers about
the bomb
threat, five
hours
and counting
after the
Q&A
transcribed
below, Inner
City Press
now posts as a
matter of
public concern
another
complain
received
from inside
the UN:
"In
the
month of
January 2012 a
Security
officer in the
UN in New York
discovered a
'hangman's
noose'... in
an office in
the North Lawn
Building... in
view of other
staff members
and visitors
to the UN.
The UN.... is
trying to keep
it out of the
media. Is this
the respect
for diversity
and human
rights the UN
is practicing
at
headquarters?
They why
should the
world listen
to them?"
We'd
like
to have
Ban Ki-moon's
spokesperson's
office's (or
DSS') answer
to these
charges, but
there seems to
be a back-up
in answers, or
the patterns
of cover-ups
alleged in the
complaint
above.
DSS
Greg Starr
& bags:
bomb dogs etc
not shown (c)
MRLee
As
background, in
2006 a UN
staffer was
said to have
drawn
swastikas but,
UN insiders
say, was
"protected by
Bruno Henn" of
UN Security,
and only
given
sensitivity
training.
From
the UN's
transcription
of its January
30 noon
briefing:
Inner
City
Press: I want
to ask a
security
question, it’s
following up
on
last week’s 14
kilograms of
cocaine story.
First, some
other
security
individuals
have stepped
forward and
said that this
month,
January, there
was three
separate UN
bomb sniffing
dogs sat down,
i.e.,
identified a
package that
arrived in the
mail room as
being
problematic
and asked that
the bomb squad
be called, and
rather than
that happen,
the package
was allowed to
drive off to
parts unknown.
They have a
deep concern
that there is
something
wrong with the
way
in which
security is
dealing with
the mail
thing, it is
the same
question of
why the 14
kilograms of
cocaine were
spirited out
of the
building
before waiting
to see who
would pick
them up... The
final
thing is I got
the answer,
there is a
2006
indictment of
a UN mail
room employee,
it was a
pretty big
case in which
he was
distributing
khat from
Somalia
throughout the
United States,
it’s a federal
indictment. So
I wondered,
you said that
they were
unaware of any
arrests, maybe
they didn’t
understand,
was there some
limited time
frame they
were looking
at or are they
unaware that
that took
place?
Spokesperson
Martin
Nesirky: Do
you recall
what was the
outcome of
that case,
Matthew?
Inner
City
Press: No, he
was arrested;
my question
was [about
arrests,] you
wrote back and
said they are
unaware of any
arrests.
Spokesperson:
As I said, I
would like to
ask further
about that,
and that’s
what
I did. When I
have
something, I
will let you
know.
Inner
City
Press: On this
other one,
they have a
concern and
apparently
they are not
able to
address it
internally for
whatever
reason. And
it seems [it
could impact]
all of us. I
am saying this
idea that if
a package
identified as
potentially
containing
explosives is
identified by
UN security,
is the
protocol to
actually check
the
package or
just let it
go, you know,
continue on
freely on the
streets of New
York?
Spokesperson:
Let me check,
Matthew. Okay,
thanks very
much.
But
after
nine hours and
counting,
there was no
answer at all.
Watch
this site.
Update
of January 31,
2012, 10:45 am
-- more than
twenty hours
after the
questions were
asked, this
came in which
we publish in
full:
Date:
Tue, Jan 31,
2012 at 10:05
AM
From:
UN
Spokesperson -
Do Not Reply
[at] @un.org
Subject: Your
question on
security
To:
Matthew.Lee
[at]
innercitypress.com
On your
questions
yesterday on
security:
- We do not
discuss the
specifics of
security
screening for
rather obvious
reasons.
- The Security
and Safety
Service has
made it clear
that no
package that
is identified
as potentially
hazardous by
dogs or other
screening
methods is
allowed into
the premises
or to proceed
without
further
investigation.
In all such
cases action
is taken.
We'll
have more on
all this.
, 
