The useless corrupt despicable UN

Where's the outrage from the US government

Tainted African ruler may get UN prize in his name

DAKAR, Senegal (AP) -- The African heads of state who converged on the capital of Equatorial Guinea this summer are used to life's finer things - yet even they were impressed.

The minuscule nation located on the coast of Central Africa spent several times its yearly education budget to build a new $800 million resort in which to house the presidents attending this summer's African Union summit.

Besides an 18-hole golf course, a five-star hotel and a spa, the country built a villa for each of the continent's 52 presidents. Each one came with a gourmet chef and a private elevator leading to a suite overlooking the mile-long artificial beach that had been sculpted out of the country's coast especially for them.

Western diplomats say that the charm offensive worked, and on Friday the United Nations' cultural arm may be forced to create a prize named after Equatorial Guinea's notoriously corrupt president, due to a resolution passed in June by the presidents staying at the lavish resort.

If that happens President Teodoro Obiang Nguema, a man whose regime is accused of gross human rights violations, will be associated with an organization whose stated mission is the promotion of peace and human rights through cultural dialogue.

During the AU summit this summer, Obiang succeeded in getting the body to pass a motion calling on UNESCO to approve a prize named in his honor.

Armed with this resolution, the 13 African delegates on UNESCO's executive board are threatening to force a vote on the UNESCO-Obiang Nguema Mbasogo Prize for Research in the Life Sciences as early as Friday when the board meets in Paris, said five officials taking part in the discussion.

The $3 million prize was first proposed in 2008 and UNESCO initially agreed to create it, only to suspend it as outrage erupted over the provenance of the money and accusations of abuses by Obiang against the people of his Maryland-sized nation.

A senior Western diplomat in France who is close to the negotiation, said that Obiang, as the rotating chairman of the African Union, forced through a resolution during the AU summit that unified the African position.

"In the past our ability to keep the prize in the deep freezer depended on divisions within the African group," said the diplomat, who asked not to be named because of the sensitivity of the matter. "At UNESCO on the executive board, the African group makes up a large percentage of the board - and when they are completely unified they can always count on complete support from the Arab group."

Together, the Arab and African delegations account for 20 out of 58 votes. Thirty is needed for the measure to pass; fewer if some governments abstain. The diplomat said the Equatoguinean delegation has been hanging out in the halls outside of the board's meeting room in Paris, trying to influence the vote of undecided delegates when they step outside. Among the ambassadors from Africa, there are misgivings about the prize and several have privately said they feel embarrassed voting for it, but believe their hands are tied due to the African Union resolution.

"What Obiang has been able to set up here is a dynamic by which the ambassadors are constrained - their backs are against the wall because their position has been mandated by their heads of state," said the official.

The diplomat's account of the situation was confirmed by a senior European diplomat who is also on the UNESCO executive board, as well as by leading rights groups including New York-based Human Rights Watch and London-based Global Witness which have been at the forefront of trying to stop the creation of the prize.

The Western nations opposing the measure are hoping to avoid a vote on Friday, the diplomats say, on the argument that forcing one is against UNESCO's tradition. They fear that if it goes to a vote, the measure will pass, forcing the body to implement the prize.

Obiang seized power in a coup 32 years ago after toppling the former leader, who was executed. The United Nations Rapporteur on Torture toured the country's prisons in 2008 and determined that torture is systematic, including using electroshocks through starter cables attached to the detainees' body with alligator clips.

In February, the government imposed a blackout on news regarding the Arab Spring uprising. A disc jockey who dared refer to Libya during his music program had his microphone cut off minutes into his show and the program was pulled off the air for two months.

Another concern is the provenance of the $3 million that Obiang has said he will donate to endow the prize. The Obiang family has become fabulously wealthy during the president's reign and is accused of pilfering the nation's oil wealth.

The United States Senate's Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations held hearings to discuss how Obiang's son used lawyers, realtors and bankers to help him transfer $110 million of suspect funds to the U.S. The money was used to purchase a $30 million mansion in Malibu and a $38 million plane, according to a separate Justice Department inquiry.

On Thursday, French officials in Paris seized 16 luxury cars, including a Bugatti Veyron worth more than $1.3 million allegedly belonging to Obiang's son, in a probe into claims that the Equatoguinean leader had misspent public funds in France. And earlier this month, a lawyer close to former French President Jacques Chirac claimed in a memoir that Obiang had tried to give the French government suitcases of cash in order to secure favor.

Equatorial Guinea's Minister of Information Jeronimo Osa Osa Ecoro told The Associated Press by telephone from his nation's capital that the claims of theft, corruption and abuse by Obiang and his entourage are unfounded.

"They want to dirty the image of our country. This is a nation that wants to share $3 million of its money for a UNESCO prize that will save human lives - this is a gift to humanity!" he said, adding: "There is no poverty in Equatorial Guinea, and as for the respect of human rights, which country can say that it respects human rights 100 percent of the time?"

In an Op Ed piece published Thursday online in Think Africa Press, Nobel Peace laureate Desmond Tutu said that the people of Equatorial Guinea need justice, not a $3 million science prize funded by their president.

"In numerous speeches to international audiences, including many in his role as the rotating African Union chair, President Obiang has stated his commitment to democracy, human rights, and good governance. His words, however, ring hollow since they are often not applied inside his own country," Tutu wrote. "It is unfortunate that the time and resources expended by President Obiang to establish the prize are not directed at implementing the reforms that he regularly mentions."

In Equatorial Guinea, the new town of Sipopo was built for nearly $800 million. It's an investment that the country's opposition leader Placido Mico said is an insult to the nation's population. He points to the country's 2011 budget, where only $40 million is allocated in the line for education. He said it appears that the sole purpose of the resort was to impress the heads of state of AU nations, and possibly to lure tourists.

Equatoguineans who have tried to go there after the end of the summit were turned away and told that they needed a special authorization.

---

West Africa Bureau Chief Rukmini Callimachi is based in Dakar. She was in Malabo, Equatorial Guinea in July to cover the African Union summit. Associated Press writer Pierre-Antoine Souchard in Paris contributed to this report.

The status quo Democrats who refuse reasonable;e change

GOP lawmaker says Dems pressured to 'stay away' from UN reform legislation

By Pete Kasperowicz -

The Obama administration is telling Democrats to stay away from a GOP bill to reform the United Nations, according to the Republican chairwoman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

Chairwoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.) says the Obama administration is pressuring House Democrats not to co-sponsor her legislation, which would cut off U.S. funding for the U.N. unless it ensures at least 80 percent of its programs are funded through voluntary contributions.

"We have no Democrat co-sponsors, and as far as I have heard … they have been asked to stay away from the bill," Ros-Lehtinen told The Hill this week. "And of course, if you ask administration officials, they will tell you, 'Of course we don't do that.' "

Ros-Lehtinen said the opposition won't stop her from pushing forward next month with the legislation, which she casts as a response to an organization that allows countries like China, Cuba, Saudi Arabia and others to control the Human Rights Council.

The bill, which has 98 GOP co-sponsors, threatens to withhold half of the $3 billion the U.S. contributes to the U.N. every year until 80 percent of all U.N. programs are funded through voluntary contributions. It is meant to allow countries to only fund the U.N. programs that they support.

Ros-Lehtinen said she has tentatively planned a markup of her legislation on Oct. 13, when she expects House Democrats to propose their own reform ideas. Democrats have not officially offered a bill, but Foreign Affairs Committee ranking member Howard Berman (D-Calif.) made it clear in April that while he supports more accountability at the U.N., he opposes Ros-Lehtinen's approach.

"By withholding a significant portion of our assessed dues unless a nearly impossible list of conditions is met, this bill would severely hinder our ability to pursue U.S. foreign policy and national-security interests, support our allies and achieve the reforms that both the chairman and I think are necessary," he said.

Earlier this month, a State Department official agreed that the bill would threaten to undercut U.S. influence at the U.N., and ignores the "significant and sustained success" the U.S. has had in pushing for reforms.

But Ros-Lehtinen says these arguments ignore the growing frustration most Americans have with the U.N. Aside from allowing countries with poor human-rights records to control the Human Rights Council, she has said the U.N. has an anti-Israel slant, as seen in the 2009 "Goldstone Report," which the bills says "falsely accused Israel of deliberately attacking Palestinian civilians." The bill clarifies that U.S. policy is to repudiate the Goldstone Report, and sets U.S. policy in a range of other areas.

"The administration is wanting very much to not have this be a bipartisan bill, and that's too bad because there are a lot of U.N. apologists out there," Ros-Lehtinen told The Hill. "What I've been finding out when I talk to average Americans about the U.N. problems is, they're outraged."

She adds that while U.N. reform in itself is a laudable goal, she purposefully coupled it with the idea of withholding contributions in light of the dire fiscal reality the U.S. government is facing.

"Now that we're broke, we really need accountability and reform more than ever," she said. "So I'm keying my bill onto the dismal economic picture that we're facing now, and I don't see in the foreseeable future that will change."

She also rejected what she called criticism from the "sophisticates" who oppose her bill, saying that they reflect a status-quo mentality that seems to imply it's not worth trying to win needed reforms at the U.N.

"I don't think it's a backwards bill as the sophisticates have said," she said. "I know it's sophisticated to be pro-U.N. no matter how crazy they are, but I think there are better uses for our money."

Urban renewal

Open Thread: The Tragedy of Urban Renewal

Hmmm...

Two-thirds of Californians support death penalty, poll finds

Wishful thinking does not make for good statistics

Census Bureau Admits It 'Artifcially Inflated the Number of Same-Sex Couples'

(CNSNews.com) - The Census Bureau admitted Tuesday that it had “artificially inflated the number of same-sex couples” in the United States, initially reporting a number that was about 40 percent higher than what it now believes is accurate.

The original data published by the 2010 Census set the number of same-sex households in the U.S. in 2010 at 901,997, including 349,377 same-sex married couple households and 552,620 same-sex unmarried partner households.

But the Census Bureau said in a Tuesday conference call with reporters that it has revised these numbers downward “because Census Bureau staff discovered an inconsistency in the responses in the 2010 Census summary file statistics that artificially inflated the number of same-sex couples.”

The Census Bureau now says the 2010 Census found that there were 131,729 same-sex married couple households and 514,735 same-sex unmarried partner households in the United States--for a total of 646,464 same-sex-couple households.

Given that the Census Bureau says there were 116,716,292 total households in the United States in 2010, that means same-sex households made up only 0.55 percent of the total. Had there actually been 901,997 same-sex households in the United States--the "artificially inflated" number the Census Bureau originally reported--that would have equaled ony 0.77 percent of the households in the country.

According to the Census Bureau, the problem with the Census data on same-sex couples was due to “data capture errors” that were caused by the confusing layout on the 2010 Census forms--“the matrix format”--where entering a person’s sex often did not accurately reflect that person’s gender.

Households are identified as same-sex based on the sex of the responder and the relationship of the household members, as either unmarried partner or husband or wife, according to the Census Bureau.

Boxes on the Census form for “male” and “female” were stacked on top of each other, making it more likely for a person to mark the wrong gender or make erroneous lines, changing the results.

“After discovering the inconsistency, Census Bureau staff developed another set of estimates to provide a more accurate way to measure same-sex couple households,” the news release said.

“The revised figures were developed by using an index of names to re-estimate the number of same-sex married and unmarried partners by the sex commonly associated with the person's first name,” the Census Bureau said.

The Census Bureau “Names Index” matched common names to their corresponding genders, such as identifying “John” or “Thomas” as male and “Elizabeth” and “Virginia” as female. The index helped solve the “name-sex inconsistencies” which had increased the numbers of same-sex couples.

After it accounted for the “data capture errors,” the number of same-sex couples in the country was revised to 646,464 from 901,997. Thus, the Census Bureau had "artificially inflated" the number of same-sex couples by 255,533--or 39.5 percent.

The Census Bureau said that the errors were not realized until it was too late to alter the 2010 forms.

But the inaccuracies prompted the Bureau to devise a “Preferred Estimate,” revealed Tuesday, to more accurately depict the incidences of same-sex households, according to Martin O’Connell, chief of the Fertility and Family Statistics Branch of the U.S. Census Bureau, during a conference call to highlight the new data.

“There is no dispute that same-sex couple population increased between 2000 and 2010," said O’Connell, during the briefing.

“What we tried to do was try to get a better grip on exactly what the numbers were and what the actual increase was,” he said. "We tried to eliminate population numbers that seemed artificially high using this estimate, and that's what we came up with."

In 2000, the number of same-sex households, as calculated by the 2000 Census, was 594,391.

The Gibson Raid: Much to Fret About

Pat Nolan has an excellent primer on prosecutorial misconduct and overreach. Another step toward tyranny and loss of freedom.

...The Gibson assaults are further evidence that America’s criminal-justice system has strayed far from its central purpose: stopping the bad guys from harming us. SWAT-team raids were designed to arrest notoriously violent gangsters, and stop them from destroying evidence. Now, the police powers of the state are being used to attack businesses. (Were the feds afraid that the Gibson workers would flush the guitars down the toilet?)

It is time to get the criminal law back to basics. Fighting terrorism, drug cartels, rapists, and murderers is enough to keep law enforcement busy. To expand that fight to include such esoteric social causes as protecting Indian workers dilutes the resources needed to fight real crime. Why do we care who finishes the wood on guitars? And why are we applying the power of the state in its rawest form to enforce Indian labor laws?

Prosecutors who are looking for an easy “win” know that businesses roll over. A public raid on its offices, or an indictment of its officers, can destroy a business’s reputation and viability. That makes the owners easy to intimidate into a plea bargain.

If they choose to fight, they face the full wrath and fury of the feds. In the Gibson raids, the SWAT teams were deployed even though Gibson had offered its full cooperation to investigators. Such raids are increasingly used to intimidate citizens under suspicion. The orchid importer, a 65-year-old with Parkinson’s, was shoved against a wall by armed officers in flak jackets, frisked, and forced into a chair without explanation while his home was searched.

The government also attempts to get low-level employees to “finger” their bosses. For example, the feds threatened Gibson employees with long prison sentences. This is not a search for truth, but an immoral attempt at extortion to win convictions. Investigators examine the lives of “little fish” and use minor, unrelated violations (smoking a joint, or exaggerating income on a loan application) to pressure them to back the government’s case against their employers. Mobsters have experience with threats like this, but a secretary or an accountant is scared to death by the threat of prosecution.

A favorite ploy of prosecutors in these cases is to charge defendants with false statements based on their answers to the investigators. The sentence for this can be five years in prison. No recording is made of the interviews — in fact, the feds prohibit taping the interviews — and the agents are not stenographers. They cannot possibly recall the exact wording of the questions and the answers. Yet after the interview, they will produce a “transcript” replete with quotes throughout. And if a witness says he did not actually say what the agent put in quotes, it is the witness’s word against a fine, upstanding federal agent’s. Staring at a five-year sentence will get most people to say whatever the government wants them to.

The feds also pile up charges. According to Juszkiewicz, the Justice Department warned Gibson that each instance of shipping a guitar from its facility would bring an added charge of obstruction of justice. Prosecutors routinely add extra counts to stack potential prison sentences higher. For instance, faxing invoices for the wood would be charged as wire fraud. Depositing the check for the sale of the guitars would be money laundering. The CEO’s telling the press he is innocent would bring charges of fraud or stock manipulation. The intent is to threaten such long sentences that the targets plead guilty rather than risk decades in prison.
Prosecutors further tighten the screws by seizing the assets of the company, a tactic once used against pirates and drug lords but now routinely used to prosecute white-collar crimes. The federal agents seized six guitars and several pallets of ebony during their initial 2009 raid against Gibson. Federal law allows assets to be seized not just from convicted criminals, but also from those never charged. Owners must prove that the forfeited property was obtained legally; otherwise, the government can keep it. That gives the government incredible leverage, because without the seized inventory and bank accounts, the business will most likely go under. How can Gibson make guitars if the wood is being held by the government? How can it service customers when the government took its computers as evidence? How can it pay lawyers when its bank accounts were seized? Asset forfeitures bring to mind a similar twist on the law uttered by the Queen of Hearts in Alice in Wonderland: “Sentence first, verdict afterwards.”

Read the whole thing here.

We are only believe we still live in a free country because these abuses still only affect a small number of people or businesses. But as Mark Steyn has pointed out, if you lived under one of the great tyrant kings of old, it had very little effect on the lives of most, unless you crossed someone in power. That's the situation we are in now. As long as you keep your head down, pay your protection money, you will be left alone. But cross someone, write something too critical of the wrong politician or bureaucrat and there's always something that can be found to hound you into submission or prison. Don't confuse this with rule of law, which implies commonly agreed to and understandable rules. The German's love rules, even under Hitler they made sure all the proper laws were passed and the proper forms were filled out before shipping Jews off to death camps. And don't invoke Godwin's Rule, I'm not comparing the present situation in the US with Germany in the 1930's except to make the point that being charged with breaking actual laws on the books is not a big advantage over being arrested without charge, if the number of laws on the books is unknowable and incomprehensible to any citizen (or legislator or regulator).

We have a Constitution that is designed to create a small and limited government and through years of 'creative' interpretations from pro-big-government courts and aggressive legislators and executive politicians, those built-in protections against government control have been eroded to the point of being non-existent. When a court, which should read the 'public use' requirement of the 5th amendment very narrowly, instead expands its view to include any vague public benefit, the idea of private property protection is gone. Likewise stretching the commerce clause powers to include anything that might conceivably affect, sometime, any aspect of interstate commerce, has given Congress control of things that must be causing the founders to spin in their graves fast enough to affect the rotation of the planet. As I've written previously, except for the 3rd amendment, of which I'm aware of no breech, but which may just be a lack of knowledge on my part, the Federal government has violated a clear reading of every amendment, with the full approval of the SCOTUS many times in the history of the nation (including the 9th and 10th which are almost completely ignored).

What goes unsaid is that the problem was caused by big government socialism in the first place.

Q&A: Eurozone rescue proposals

Pakistan is Islamist at heart and we will be at war with them because of it.

Pakistan PM Gilani rejects US Haqqani pressure

Well then not bless you teacher. The leftist authoritarian impulse

Teacher penalizes students for saying "bless you"

Thursday, September 29, 2011

TAGS:

california, state

• Comment Now
• Email
• Print
• Report a typo
• 

FRESNO, Calif. (KFSN) -- A Northern California teacher says he doesn't want to hear a common courtesy in his classroom.

He's even lowering students' grades if they say "bless you" after someone sneezes.

Steve Cuckovich says the practice is disrespectful and disruptive. He's banned saying "bless you" in his high school health class in Vacaville.

He even knocked 25 points from one student's grade for saying the phrase in class.

Cuckovich says the policy has nothing to do with religion, but says the phrase is just a outdated practice and disrupts class time.

"When you sneezed in the old days, they thought you were dispelling evil spirits out of your body," Cuckovich said. "So they were saying, 'god bless you' for getting rid of evil spirits. But today, I said what you're doing doesn't really make any sense anymore."

After parents complained about students losing points for saying "bless you", Cuckovich says he decided to stop the practice.

However, the teacher says he will just find another way to discipline students for saying "bless you" in class.

$737 million and 45 permanent jobs...good grief

Crony Socialism: Obama Gives $737 Million to Solar Firm Linked to the Pelosi Clan

It’s as if Solyndra never happened. The Obama Administration is giving $737 million to a Tonopah Solar, a subsidiary of California-based SolarReserve. PCG is an investment partner with SolarReserve. Nancy Pelosi’s brother-in-law happens to be the number two man at PCG.

Obama admires solar panels during a trip to Florida. (Yahoor)

Team Obama is spending $737 million to create 45 permanent jobs.
The Hill reported, via Free Republic:

The Energy Department announced Wednesday that is has finalized a $737 million loan guarantee for a Nevada solar project.

The decision comes several weeks after a California-based solar manufacturer that received a $535 million loan guarantee from the Obama administration in 2009 filed for bankruptcy and laid off 1,100 workers, setting off a firestorm in Washington.

The $737 million loan guarantee will help finance construction of the Crescent Dunes Solar Energy Project, a 110-megawatt solar-power-generating facility in Nye County, Nev. The project is sponsored by Tonopah Solar, a subsidiary of California-basedSolarReserve.

Crescent Dunes is the latest solar project to receive a loan guarantee from the Energy Department in recent weeks. The department announced a $1.2 billion loan guarantee to Abengoa Solar for a solar generation project in California and a $150 million loan guarantee to 1366 Technologies for a Massachusetts solar manufacturing project earlier this month.

The Energy Department says the project will result in 600 construction jobs and 45 permanent jobs.

Update:

Solyndra director tied to $737m loan guarantee

The joys of being ruled by academics...

GOP's Solyndra probe threatens to ensnare Energy Secretary Chu

The government chooses you pay

Report Knocks “Big Battery” Plug-In Subsidies, Will The DOE Notice?

The locations in California are in the central valley where water has been cut off to farmers. Thanks to the government for a man-made disaster

Cities with the highest, lowest unemployment rates

Unemployment rates fell in roughly two-thirds of large U.S. cities in August, despite zero job growth nationwide.

Here are the cities with the highest and lowest rates:

Best and Worst Metro areas

Figures are in percentages

Highest unemployment rates August 2011

El Centro, Calif. 32.4

Yuma, Ariz. 29.4

Merced, Calif. 17.5

Yuba City, Calif. 17.0

Stockton, Calif. 16.1

Modesto, Calif. 16.0

Fresno, Calif. 15.8

Visalia-Porterville, Calif. 15.7

Hanford-Corcoran, Calif. 15.3

Palm Coast, Fla. 14.9

Lowest unemployment rates August 2011

Bismarck, N.D. 3.0

Lincoln, Neb. 3.6

Fargo, N.D. 3.9

Portsmouth, N.H. 4.4

Rapid City, S.D. 4.5

Sioux Falls, S.D. 4.5

Omaha-Council Bluffs, Neb. 4.6

Burlington, Vt. 4.6

Midland, Texas 4.8

Houma-Bayou Cane-Thibodaux, La. 4.9

Hypocrite leftist media caught

Independent.co.uk

Microsoft, Red Cross and UN sucked into global news fixing row

Investigation by The Independent reveals conflict of interests over coverage promised by media firm to software giant

By Ian Burrell
Thursday, 29 September 2011

Microsoft has been sucked into the row surrounding a London-based media company currently under investigation by broadcasters for making editorial programmes without declaring it had a commercial relationship with some of those it featured.

Both the BBC and the US-owned broadcaster CNBC are investigating FBC Media following an investigation by The Independent which showed it had made numerous factual programmes about Malaysia after being allocated millions of pounds by the country's government to promote it.

This newspaper has evidence that Microsoft was "guaranteed" coverage on a flagship programme which FBC was commissioned to make for CNBC – which is screened in Britain – for a major launch that the global technology company was planning in Europe. CNBC recently suspended the show, World Business, pending the outcome of its investigation.

The Independent has seen a nine-page letter written to Microsoft's senior communications managers, in which FBC promised coverage of its opening of the European Microsoft Innovation Center in Aachen, Germany, and a second project in St Petersburg, Russia.

The document referred to World Business under the heading "FBC Guaranteed Distribution Placement". It told Microsoft: "Our flagship programme, World Business, is a weekly half-hour business news magazine, which covers the trends shaping business, particularly from a European perspective.

"We can foresee placing coverage of the Aachen opening within the programme the weekend of May 1&2, which means guaranteed placement on CNBC Europe, PBS-TV in the US, Star World Asia and 12 national broadcast markets in Western and Eastern Europe." PBS is America's public service broadcaster and Star World is part of Rupert Murdoch's global News Corp media empire.

In its letter to the Microsoft PR chiefs, FBC pointed out: "Due to our distribution agreements with each of the broadcasters, FBC maintains final editorial control over the reports featured within any of its broadcast programmes."

Last night CNBC said: "We have suspended all broadcasts of the World Business programme indefinitely. We cannot comment further for legal reasons."

FBC, which ran a hybrid business combining public relations work with factual programmes, featured the Microsoft founder Bill Gates in its publicity material. Alongside his picture, FBC said "clients include heads of state, governments and ministries, special economic zones and property projects, companies and international organisations".

The FBC letter to Microsoft, dated 2 March 2004, is jointly authored by John Defterios, until recently FBC's former Group Vice President for Content and host of CNBC's World Business between 2000 and 2007.

He is now a presenter on the global news network CNN. The document is set out as a "proposal outlining the broadcast/production strategy" for Microsoft's European initiatives, which included a good news story of Microsoft working with the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) and Red Cross to provide technology for refugees.

Microsoft in Russia

"The project event April 15th in St Petersburg tells a wonderful story of how technology can enhance the everyday lives of those who need it the most, immigrants and refugees trying to establish a foothold in society after economic and social displacement or upheaval," said the FBC document. "The UNHCR-Red Cross initiative is a perfect example of public-private partnership, which often goes unnoticed within the daily news flow of any given day."

FBC promised "to provide a 'daily news hook' to what in essence is a rich feature story linked to one of the most pressing issues today: how to help those in need make a fresh start. We believe this story, enhanced by similar project partnerships by Microsoft in the region, can be of particular interest."

It offered Microsoft "guaranteed" coverage of the St Petersburg event on Tech Watch, a monthly technology programme it produced for airlines to show as part of their in-flight entertainment.

It is unclear whether UNHCR or Red Cross knew of the Microsoft/FBC PR campaign associated with this initiative. In a statement, Microsoft said it had had a commercial relationship with FBC Media from 2003 until March this year. "Where FBC guaranteed that news items would appear in their World Business programme, we understood this was based on the content meeting FBC editorial selection criteria in line with their agreements with CNBC and other broadcasters and subject to final editing before transmission," it said.

FBC promised to make every effort to obtain coverage for the St Petersburg project on the BBC, including on the respected technology format Click, which is shown on the BBC News Channel and BBC World News. "FBC would deliver 'same day' coverage of the event...and couple that effort with feature story placement on the major Pan-European and national broadcasters who have specialised programming highlighting technology and economic development," it said.

FBC denies any impropriety in its programme making. Its lawyers have told The Independent that the company ran production and commercial divisions, which "are and always have been quite separate and distinct". The programmes it has made "have always been fair, balanced and impartial".

Malaysia

The BBC, which declined to comment on the Microsoft letter, continues to investigate FBC after screening a series of programmes on BBC World News made by the company and covering controversial Malaysian issues, especially its contentious palm oil industry.

The BBC said FBC had not told it of its commercial relationship with the Malaysia government. The Independent has established that entries in the Malaysian government's Supplementary Budget 2010 show that FBC Media (UK) was allocated 28.35m Malaysian Ringgit (MYR) – nearly £6m – for work on a "Global Strategic Communications Campaign" ordered by the Malaysian government in 2009. In a previous statement, the BBC said: "FBC has now admitted that it has worked for the Malaysian government. That information was not disclosed as we believe it should have been when the BBC contracted programming from FBC."

The BBC has decided to stop showing any FBC programmes while it reviews their relationship.

Indonesia

FBC is also being investigated by US news magazine The Atlantic, for which the FBC founder Alan Friedman produced a blog from the World Economic Forum in Davos this year. Friedman wrote a favourable review of the "statesmanlike debut" performance of the Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, while the FBC powerpoint presentation lists Indonesian Tourism and Tourism Malaysia as past clients.

The US website Politico noted how other commentators at Davos focused on the Arab Spring and largely ignored Mr Yudhoyono's speech, which Friedman, a former Financial Times journalist, hailed "the most impressive, crisp and even visionary speech given by any world leader here in a long time".

Paper trail

Microsoft began its commercial relationship with media firm FBC in 2003. A nine-page strategy document written in 2004 obtained by The Independent contains excerpts which show that when the technology giant launched its European Microsoft Innovation Centre in Germany in 2004, FBC drew up a plan for Microsoft to target broadcasters with its "corporate messaging" and gave a guarantee to Microsoft that it would "place" coverage of the launch event on World Business, the weekly programme it made for the CNBC network. CNBC has suspended the show and is investigating FBC.

Query: