Serious Violations Admitted By the UN Human Rights Council
When President Bush told the United Nations General Assembly this week “the American people are disappointed by the failures of the Human Rights Council,” his words could not have been more timely or deserved. He pointed out “This body has been silent on repression by regimes from Havana to Caracas to Pyongyang and Tehran — while focusing its criticism excessively on Israel.” On Friday, the Council piled the dung heap higher. It wrapped up another session in Geneva by adopting two more resolutions against Israel and no resolutions critical of the human-rights record of any of the other 191 U.N. member states.
This brings the total of anti-Israel resolutions and decisions adopted by the “Human Rights” Council — in only the first 15 months of its operation — to 14. Another four very weak decisions and resolutions have been applied to Sudan. And the Council finally decided to hold a special session of the Council on Myanmar. So adding up the highly selective concerns of the U.N.’s lead human-rights agency: 74 percent of the Council’s moves against individual states have been directed at Israel, 21 percent at Sudan, 5 percent at Myanmar, and the rest of the world has been given a free pass.
UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Louise Arbour, in orange scarf, sits with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at US & Israel bash. (EYE on the UN)
EYE on the UN released this information this week on the recent actions by the UNHRC and it is shocking:
Today, 74% of Council moves against individual states have been directed at Israel, 21% at Sudan, 5% at Myanmar, and the rest of the world has been given a free pass.
“Human Rights” Council Resolutions and Decisions Critical of the Human Rights Records of Specific States
TOTAL: Israel — 14 (74%). Sudan — 4 (21%). Myanmar — 1 (5%). Rest of the world — 0
Israel: 10 resolutions, 4 decisions, in addition to holding 3 special sessions; Sudan: 1 resolution, 3 decisions, in addition to holding 1 special session;
Myanmar: 1 decision to hold a special session (to be held Tuesday, October 2)
The word “criticism” is taken to mean any suggestion, however weak, that a specific country is responsible for human rights violations. It does not imply an equally negative condemnation of the states listed. In particular, the resolutions and decisions on Sudan do not contain the same direct condemnation leveled in the resolutions and decisions on Israel. More background. Decisions to hold a special session of the Council are included since they imply a negative assessment of human rights protection by that state, although they are procedural resolutions. Decisions to provide technical assistance to specific states concerning human rights problems are not included.
The anti-Semitism at the UN is so obvious today that even the council’s president Doru-Romulus Costea admits it.
The Jerusalem Post reported:
The United Nations Human Rights Council has not managed to deal fairly with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the council’s president Doru-Romulus Costea told a Spanish newspaper on Saturday, according to Israel Radio.
Doru admitted that he was dissatisfied with the fact the council had overly focused on the degree of human rights violations by Israel.
“The body which I head must examine the actions of both sides equally, and we have not done that,” said Costea. “Clearly, from now on things need to change.”
Israel Radio reported that earlier this week, US President George Bush criticized the UN Human Rights Council, saying that it had put too great an emphasis on Israeli actions.
But, don’t hold your breath for any changes from this bunch.
The institutional hatred of Israel runs deep at the UN.
Even though President Bush was bold enough to point out the issue, the thugocracies won’t be be changing their tune any time too soon.
Don’t forget that Libya, Iran & Cuba are planning the next UN Racism Conference!