The “Commission” Rules

The other day, in consideration of its vote to endorse the Goldstone Mission Report, I did a casual analysis of the character of the United Nations Human Rights Council. I measured the  current members against their recorded votes on the infamous United Nations Resolution 3379, which declared that “Zionism [Jewish nationalism] is a form of racism.” I also measured where they stood in 1991 during the vote to rescind 3379. You know, all to get some sort of inkling of whether there might be any record of prejudice against Israel by the nations that devised the mandate of the Goldstone Mission and then accepted its report.

iKibbutz (Oy.) iKibbitz has gone a little deeper:

I divided the UNHRC members into 3 groups to better explain its vote on the Goldstone report. The first group (A), the countries that voted against the resolution endorsing the Goldstone report and those that refused to vote summed up to 8 UNHRC members. The second group (B) were countries that abstained or were not present for the vote totaling 13 UNHRC members. And lastly, the 25 UNHRC members (C) that voted for the resolution.

Then, I used Freedom House’s 2009 Freedom Index average rating of each country, summed them up into their 3 groups, and got the average of each group. Free countries have a rating between 1 and 2.5, partly free countries have a rating between 3 and 5, and not free countries have a rating between 5.5 and 7.

Group A had an average rating of 1.25, with the worst rating attributed to Ukraine with 2.5 . Group B had an average rating of 2.77 with countries ranging any where from 1 to 6. Group C had an average rating of 3.82.

Maybe if we give them Philly and the numbers rackets. You think?

AJA

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.