Is UN's schizophrenia incurable?

History repeats itself

While UN is taken over by islamofascists archbishop Justin Welby in his pathetic medieval speech for the Queen’s coronation 60th anniversary had the nerve to state “We live in a hierarchy of liberty under authority that ascends to God. Here is the model of liberty and authority. Liberty is only real when it exists under authority. Liberty under authority  begins with our duty to God"

Klevius: However, as an atheist I'm less interested in God than in the humans staying on the steps just below God. Dear Justin, you've got it all wrong! The very idea of basic Human Rights is to defend our all freedom against authorities. We are our own authority and the system is called democracy. Or maybe you've already abandoned Human Rights because of your "inter-faith" duties!

Read about Negative Human Rights and cure your ignorance!


Turkish OIC Fuhrer Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, who is proposed by Saudi Arabia to be UN's next secretary general (sic), asks the West to bomb Syria.

The fascist symbol of German National-socialism (aka "Nazism") was actually less totalitarian than OIC's islamofascist world embracing Umma nation symbol.

OIC's islamofascist Sharia declaration concealed as "islamic human rights" within UN

By 1) using the the concept 'islamic human rights' (sic) instead of Sharia, and 2) by creating a Sharia zone within the UN, OIC has managed


We now live with a schizophrenic UN thatis based on Human Rights yet harbors its very opposite!

OIC, consisting of 57 more or less muslim member states, created the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in islam (Sharia). Article 24 states that "[a]ll the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the islamic Sharia" and Article 25 follows with "[t]he islamic Sharia is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification of any of the articles of this Declaration." Attempts to have it adopted by the United Nations Human Rights Council have met increasing criticism, because of its contradiction of the UDHR.

Critics of the CDHR state bluntly that it is “manipulation and hypocrisy,” “designed to dilute, if not altogether eliminate, civil and political rights protected by international law” and attempts to “circumvent these principles [of freedom and equality].”

According to Human Rights Watch OIC has “fought doggedly” and successfully within the United Nations Human Rights Council to shield states from criticism, except when it comes to criticism of Israel. For example, when independent experts reported violations of human rights in the 2006 Lebanon War, “state after state from the OIC took the floor to denounce the experts for daring to discuss Hezbollah as well.” OIC demands that the council “should work cooperatively with abusive governments rather than condemn them.” HRW responds that this works only with those who are willing to cooperate; others exploit the passivity.

The OIC has also been criticised for failing to discuss the treatment of ethnic minorities within member countries.

Along with the revisions of the OIC’s charter in 2008, the member states created the Independent Permanent Human Rights Commission (IPHRC).

The IPHRC has the power to monitor "human rights" (i.e. OIC's Sharia) within the member states and facilitates the integration of "human rights" (i.e. OIC's Sharia) into all OIC mandates. The IPHRC also "aids" in the promotion of political, civil, and economic rights in all member states.

LGBT rights are rejected by OIC as "licentious behaviour ... against the fundamental teachings of various religions, including islam".

Violent islamic jihad terrorism is, according to OIC, not terrorism

 OIC's definition of terrorism in article 1 describes “any act or threat of violence carried out with the aim of, among other things, imperiling people’s honour, occupying or seizing public or private property, or threatening the stability, territorial integrity, political unity or sovereignty of a state.” This is vague, ill-defined and including much that is outside the generally accepted understandings of the concept of terrorism. It is subjective and ambiguous and opens up for abusive use of terrorist prosecutions against political opponents and others. It also labels, or could easily be used to label, as terrorist actions, acts of peaceful expression, association, and assembly. Not to mention criticism against islam or its islamofascist leaders.

OIC doesn't recognise as terrorism acts that serve causes endorsed by their member states.

Not surprisingly contradictions between OIC's and other UN members' understanding of terrorism has stymied efforts at the UN to produce a comprehensive convention on international terrorism.

OIC also rejects any description of muslims attacking Israel as terrorism.

However, OIC calls non-violent defense of Human Rights "islamophobia" and "the worst form of terrorism" 

At the 34th Islamic Conference of Foreign Ministers (ICFM), an OIC section, in May 2007, the foreign ministers termed islamophobia the worst form of terrorism.