The UN is a Frankenstein monster

I may have written the following before, but it bears repeating:

The United Nations is a Frankenstein monster, an evil and vicious creature that has become precisely the opposite of what its creators intended. Rather than a vehicle to prevent war and ameliorate human suffering, to spread freedom and human rights, it has become a tool of the forces that want to propel the world back into pre-modern darkness.

From a statement released today by Hillel Neuer’s UN Watch group:

GENEVA, July 5 – The U.N.’s top human rights body defied the U.S. today by adopting a Cuban-led “right to peace” resolution that endorses resistance against “foreign occupation,” for the first time granting U.N. Human Rights Council legitimization of the terminology used by Middle East extremists to justify terrorist attacks against Americans and Israelis.

Initiated by Cuba, the resolution’s co-sponsors included Syria, Iran, North Korea, Sudan, Belarus, China, Palestine, Sri Lanka, Venezuela, Bolivia and Nicaragua.

Everyone should read the advisory committee’s repetitious, Orwellian draft of the resolution, in order to fully savor the absurdities that the occupy our UN. There is a lot of discussion of gender-sensitivity, climate change, the environment, foreign debts, disarmament, military outsourcing, etc. But there is also some language that is clearly aimed at Israel and the West.

The post-colonial paradigm is embedded  throughout, with many references to the special rights of indigenous peoples.

Article 11.      Rights of victims and vulnerable groups

1.       Every victim of a human rights violation has the right, in accordance with international human rights law, to the restoration of the violated rights; to obtain the investigation of facts, as well as identification and punishment of those responsible; to obtain effective and full redress, including the right to rehabilitation and compensation; to measures of symbolic redress or reparation; and to guarantees that the violation will not be repeated.

2.       Everyone subjected to aggression, genocide, foreign occupation, racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and other related forms of intolerance or apartheid, colonialism and neo-colonialism deserve special attention as victims of violations of the right to peace.

3.       States shall ensure that the specific effects of the different forms of violence on the enjoyment of the rights of persons belonging to groups in situations of vulnerability, such as indigenous peoples, are taken fully into account. They have the obligation to ensure that remedial measures are taken, including the recognition of the right of persons belonging to groups in situations of vulnerability to participate in the adoption of such measures.

And of course there is the assertion of a right to resist occupation:

Article 7. Resistance and opposition to oppression

1.       All peoples and individuals have the right to resist and oppose oppressive colonial, foreign occupation or dictatorial domination (domestic oppression).

2.       Everyone has the right to oppose aggression, genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity, violations of other universally recognized human rights, and any propaganda in favour of war or incitement to violence and violations of the right to peace, as defined in the present declaration.

Note that while any form of ‘censorship’ is forbidden and freedom of thought and expression is guaranteed, there is also a right to ‘oppose’ what is defined as ‘propaganda’ in favor of war or violence.

Naturally, there is also a guarantee of refugee status, not only for those who who have fled their homeland, but for those who are outside the country of [their] nationality. In other words, someone with ‘Palestinian’ nationality can be a refugee even if he or she has never been in ‘Palestine.’

And need I add that there is a ‘right of return’ for refugees?

Article 12.      Refugees and migrants

1.       All individuals have the right to seek and to enjoy refugee status without discrimination, if there is a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of one’s nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail oneself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or, owing to such fear, unwilling to return to it.

2.       Refugee status should include, inter alia, the right to voluntary return to one’s country or place of origin or residence in dignity and with all due guarantees, once the causes of persecution have been removed and, in case of armed conflict, it has ended.

And who gets to decide what is war propaganda, who is indigenous, who is a refugee, what is apartheid, neo-colonialism, racism, etc.?

Why, the UN and its Human Rights Commission of course:

                Article 13.              Obligations and implementation

1.       The preservation, promotion and implementation of the right to peace constitute a fundamental obligation of all States and of the United Nations as the most universal body harmonizing the concerted efforts of the nations to realize the purposes and principles proclaimed in the Charter of the United Nations.

5.       States should strengthen the effectiveness of the United Nations in its dual functions of preventing violations and protecting human rights and human dignity, including the right to peace. In particular, it is for the General Assembly, the Security Council, the Human Rights Council and other competent bodiesto take effective measures to protect human rights from violations that may constitute a danger or threat to international peace and security.6.       The Human Rights Council is invited to set up a body to continue discussion on and monitoring of the right to peace and to report to relevant United Nations bodies.

Today’s resolution, to continue the process of ‘promoting’ this declaration, was passed. Only one member of the council cast a ‘no’ vote: the US.

Technorati Tags: ,

2 Responses to “The UN is a Frankenstein monster”

  1. salomon says:

    These egregious decisions adopted by the UN Human Rights Council have a long pedigree going back to the 1970s when the UN passed a nomber of UNGA Resolutions aimed at delegimizing Israel and legitimizing the “Palestinian people.”

    UNGA Resolution 3236 of November 1974 embodies all the absurdities listed in today’s UNHRC Resolution. And it was followed by the creation of the “Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People” which compounded this nonsense. In the same way as UNGA Resolution 3379 (“Zionism = Racism”) was rescinded in 1991, I believe a campaign should be started against Resolution 3236, which is an even greater canard.

    For additional info on Res. 3236:

  2. Shalom Freedman says:

    The U.N. politically is as this article forcefully states the opposite of everything it should be.
    No one seems to have an appropriate response to this.
    There have been from time to time suggestions made of creating an alternative organization in which states would have to meet certain democratic criteria to belong. Nothing has come of this.
    Perhaps the U.S. can do more than it has done, but that seems unlikely under the present Administration.