In their protest against a worldwide ban on psychotherapy that discusses your full sexual potential, the IFTTC aims its arrows against the biggest perpetrator of them all, the UN. Since 2014, a fringe of lay activists has seized hold of it. Flags wave at the New York headquarters but activists have turned it into the flagship of the Cancel Culture.

In the old days, the United Nations was designed to create a free platform to discuss cultural diversity and religious tolerance. What we now see with the current UN Council on Human Rights are efforts not to promote, but to end discussion for once and for all. Nations complain that they are not respected but manipulated for specific ideological outcomes. That was not what they had signed up for.

To achieve this, language in the UN is the leverage, phrasing is the tool, and phony victim roles have become the arsenal. For many ignorant onlookers, it works. This Council longs to become the Super-Nation with one ideological governance promoting one sole outlook on life. The resistance against this council is nonetheless great.

1. Ideology rather than science?

The IFTTC Declaration addresses this issue by saying:

“We deplore the discrimination emerging in western mental health bodies by which dissenting views of sexuality and gender are disallowed on ideological rather than scientific grounds. This has led to mono-cultures of intolerance where research and leadership are provided from only one viewpoint. As a result, this built-in bias is confirmed”.

Portraying “conversion therapy” as torture was alleged by a single testimony of activist Samuel Brinton, sponsored by the National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR), an organization that originated and continues to promote the therapy ban campaign. This was presented at the United Nation’s 53rd Committee Against Torture session, in Geneva, in 2014. There were no other testimonies, neither was any licensed therapist invited to perform cross-examination.

2. The never-ending Brinton saga

In his testimony, Brinton said he just couldn’t remember the name or location of his alleged therapist abuser; he couldn’t even describe what he looked like. Well, for sessions in a time span of six months (he later changed it to “two or three years“), that is a huge memory loss.

First, he said it was his parents and that tiny needles were stuck into his fingers at age 12 by his dad for feeling attracted to his friend; his dad also allegedly electrocuted him; later, Sam changed it into a pastoral counselor; later, this person morphed into a professionally licensed therapist, according to the Daily Mail. But no name or address comes up. Brinton cleverly gives no clues for any form of professional substantiation.

Competent forensic analysis has judged him untruthful. On youtube, we see the analysis “Conversion Therapy Ban Based on Lies“. We read:

“Body Language expert, Susan Constantine, is the founder of the Human Behavior Lab. She has been called for by many US judges to help discern the truthfulness of testimonies in court. In the Ruth Institute’s 4th Annual Summit for the Survivors she analyzes the body language and story of Sam Brinton, formerly of the Trevor Project.

His story has brought many to tears and fueled the rise of the Trevor Project and prompted Canada to ban Sexual Orientation Change Efforts. Susan Constantine’s evaluation examines his story and shows where he was being deceptive and where he was being truthful.”

She concludes that he may truthfully have had a row with his very worried father who was afraid that his erratic son may contract the HIV virus, which is always lethal at that time. However, she also showed him to be deceptive when he talks about therapy and therapy location, government killing people, heat and coils, my hands were tied down with block of ice, electrocuted, aversive therapy, needles, and suicide attempts.

Later on, he denied and rejected he ever said such a thing.

At age 12, so he claims, he realized “he was the only gay person in the country and that the government would kill him if they found out”. From the perspective of child psychiatry, this person suffers from a delusion and could very well be suffering from early-onset schizophrenia. No normal child thinks that the government is coming for you to kill you. Only in schizophrenia do we see these persistent paranoid delusions. He is clearly not in touch with reality, so he informs us.

And yet, the UN Committee on Torture, under the leadership of Madrigal-Borloz, hails him as their chief witness to change the definitions of human rights.

3. UN committees replaced by a single “expert”

The UN organization is flooded by so-called “independent experts” who, on their own, advise the Human Rights Council on issues. Normally, one would at least appoint a whole committee at this global level, but the UN appoints solely ONE individual to address a whole topic. They do not get paid by the UN, therefore we can assume that they receive salaries from their lobby groups. The UN Council on Human Rights does no fact-checking on these “Independent Expert” reports and all member states are urged to take his/her word for it.

The IFTCC Declaration says:

“Their reports are not authoritative. The 2020 independent SOGI (Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity) “expert”, Madrigal-Borloz who has no background in mental health but in activist law mitigation, submitted an anti-change-allowing therapy report to the Human Rights Council (HRC) called, “Practices of So-Called ‘Conversion Therapy’; Report of the Independent Expert on Protection Against Violence and Discrimination Based on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity”.

“This report does not represent the position of the United Nations. There are 192 UN Member States and they have not as a whole adopted or accepted his report as policy. Yet the International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims (IRCT), of which he was the Secretary-General until June 2019, published a statement in 2020, “It’s Torture, not Therapy: a Global Overview of Conversion Therapy: Practices, Perpetrators, and the Role of States”.

“In section 62, the report claims “The United Nations anti-torture machinery has concluded that they can amount to torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment”. However, we know of no UN machinery or even binding treaty that mentions therapy regarding sexual orientation or gender identity.

“Despite the hysterical insinuations of torture, there are no court cases where a licensed professional has been found to have administered torture or abusive treatment when addressing unwanted SSA. There is no substantiation.

Linking therapy bans and torture appears to be aimed at ensuring such bans cannot be contested under any circumstances. We call on those reporting alleged abuse, to provide a robust analysis of the evidence-base linked to the torture which they cite.

“Valid therapeutic interventions are, by definition, client-driven, non-aversive and evidence-based. It is malicious and ideologically motivated to proclaim that abuse would be the norm when dealing with clients. Standard claims of torture are without substantiation. These are employed as convenient and emotionally loaded defamation. They are meant to put an end to freedom in the contact between a mental health worker and his/her client.”

4. Follow the money

If the UN doesn’t pay his salary, we wonder, how can he/she be independent of all external parties and pressure groups? Where then is the cash coming from?

In this case of Madrigal, it is the LGBT radical lobbies and law firms with an annual budget exceeding 1 billion dollars. 158 activist organizations in the world, united in the ILGA (International Lesbian and Gay Association) lobbied for his being installed in 2016. They dictated his mandate and after he was appointed, gave him the input for his report.

The Council says that the subject is mental health. But it takes years of training to understand and to perform this profession. And then to take a closer look, they appoint, of all people, a lawyer?

The conclusions of his report were already spelled out in his Call for Input in 2016. He said he wanted to ban all forms of initiatives that challenge the notions of “orientations” and “gender identities”. He begged for input to help crush therapy. Then he published a report which, to no surprise, reiterates his Call for Input.

He stigmatizes private and public mental health-care providers, faith-based organizations, and State agents, calling them “perpetrators” of this “intervention” instead of speaking about “client-centered on-demand help”. The guilt is already baked into the pottery before being glazed in the furnace.

There is no mention of the huge amount of scientific data which has contradicted his activist stances. We are witnessing Cancel Culture at its finest.

5.Who is Madrigal?

Madrigal rose to power in 2014 after he presided over a subcommittee at the UN in Geneva on a possible revision of the Treaty Against Torture. The National Center of Lesbian Rights of San Francisco, a small activist law firm, approached him as a colleague (lawyer and gay). He started cooperating with lawyer Samantha Ames to promote a single testimony from their favorite performer, Samuel Brinton.

On Youtube, Brinton was the first person to come up with the word “torture”, saying “it felt like, sort of, like, I reckon, like torture, I guess”. The NCLR changed the narrative to “I was tortured”.

In this Youtube video, we notice how Samantha stands next to him during his testimony at the UN in Geneva in 2014, making sure he sticks to her lines which were all written out, not to his spontaneous thoughts.

24 hours after his testimony, Brinton and Ames flew back to the US with an updated Treaty Against Torture in their hand luggage. No one else than Brinton was allowed to testify, no form of cross-examination was permitted. No opposition was even invited by Madrigal. The glee was great,

Brinton received awards from the NCLR in lavish ceremonies for the in-crowd. His star rose evermore; he became a social media celebrity. For these radical lawyers at the NCLR, Madrigal was a gift from heaven. And they wanted more.

In 2016, the International Lesbian and Gay Association (ILGA) wrote a letter to the UN Human Rights Council to try their luck. Could it be possible to also change more treaties and charters in the UN? Could it be possible to use some more fear-mongering? They tried and succeeded. In their plea, they used Brinton’s successful tricks and resorted to un-heard-of hysterics.

We read Madrigal’s proze:

“Around the world, individuals experience grave human rights violations on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. These include murder, rape, assault, torture, arbitrary arrest, discrimination in access to health care, employment, housing and education, repression of freedom of expression and association, attacks and restrictions on human rights defenders, denial of police services, extortion, bullying, denial of one’s self-defined gender identity, and other abuses”.

“Other abuses”? So, there is more to come? Talk of fear-mongering! Talk of drama school!

6. The underlying agenda

Dramatic as this may seem, readers may not be aware that almost all of these “violations” are already covered by law in each and every country. No country lets murderers, rapists, and torturers get away with anything. It is a fake argument. It is like kicking an open door in.

The catch of this move is situated in the terms which indeed are not covered by national laws: the terms at the end of the staggering array, terms which you probably did not notice, dumbfounded as you were.

The agenda that is being pushed consists of the two terms “access to health care” and “denial of one’s self-defined gender identify”. Check it out.

7. “Denial of one’s self-defined gender identity”

This reproach means that someone has the nerve to challenge the transdelusion. We maintain that in instances of transdelusion, we are not dealing with a single identity but with an identity conflict. There are two opposing feelings of identity battling for dominance in the individual: on the one hand, the genetically induced and strongly pervasive normal identification (a hardware issue) and on the other hand, the flimsy and weak doubt about identity.

The person becomes estranged and hostile toward his/her body, saying “this thing” was merely “assigned to me”. This statement is due to software.

It is an acquired auto-aggressive state of mind, comparable to anorexia nervosa, a disorder where the individual equally loathes his/her own body image. Activists uphold the deluded notion that the subjective feelings in the transdelusion unequivocally reflect your deepest core, your being “who you are”.

However, gender identity conflict is a duality, not a singularity. There are two emotions under the hood, not just one. Since 2019, we know for sure.

We are not denying the existence of one’s self-defined gender identity. But this is a Putin Putsch of theirs: it is the other way around. The afflicted client is denying the co-existence of his equally present normal identity, a deeply felt conflict. That is where the “denial” is located. Not in the shrink but in the client! If there were no internal conflict, then no one would bounce back to normal. But 98% does as long as the flimsy software doubts are not affirmed.

The client denies the paradox that he/she is living in. And the shrink refuses to blindly go along with the delusion, as he/she does with all delusions for that matter.

Most of these clients ultimately experience a melt-down in their never-ending inner strife; it is only a matter of time. We see it leading to 100 to 150 suicide attempts on average, with a 35% lethal suicide rate (in anorexia nervosa, it is 20%). The median age that they reach is no more than 35 years.

And then mainstream psychiatrists have no right to be concerned? No, not according to Madrigal. They need to keep out of it, so activists like him insist.

8. The second term: “Access to health care”.

What do they mean? Is it your not being able to go to your general practitioner or not being able to go to the ER unit when you need it? Fake News Alert: these activists subliminally are referring to something else, something you do not realize that you have given consent to until it is too late.

What these activists are passing on to you are interventions with plastic surgery and hormones to affirm the delusion. “Health care” means: getting that awful and wrong body fixed, nice and proper.

These activists speak of “gender-affirming” surgery. What they mean is “delusion-affirming” surgery. No doctor in his/her right state of mind has medical ethics on his side to collude with delusional thoughts. These clients need to be protected against themselves, as it is with all deluded sufferers.

The transdelusion is a serious mental condition by all medical standards. And worldwide, we see mental health associations cowardly backing away from this subject, letting their clients down. Let’s face it: is any doctor prepared to stand up to battle gross suicide rates at their root causes and then lose his/her license while doing so due to activism?

Therefore, the NCLR smells blood, just like wolves can sniff out the weakest members of the herd while attacking them.

9. The orchestrated cheering squads

In 2019, Mamba-online.com writes:

“Victory as UN renews LGBTIQ watchdog role”.

But if the UN says it is independent, how can Madrigal’s re-instatement be called a “victory”? Over whom? Over member states? You mean the UN policy is to crush member states? And they need to agree? Because we are, quote, “united”? Surely this website proves he is working for his constituency and there is nothing united about it! We insist: the UN has been hijacked.

In 2020, we read on the UN website:

“UN Independent Expert on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity, Victor Madrigal-Borloz, will present his findings to the global human rights body, during what is celebrated across the world as LGBT Pride Month”.

What a convenient moment. Are we sure this is an independent researcher and not an activist? And if he isn’t an activist, then why choose a moment “celebrated across the world as LGBT Pride Month”? The entire world? Is that term even more propaganda? What world? The “entire” world?

Madrigal writes:

“Some 69 States around the world currently criminalize homosexual relations between consenting adults. This means that in just this one area of human rights violations, two billion people are being discriminated against daily – a third of the world’s population”.

A staggering “33%”, he says! But the statistic figures on homosexual feelings or behavior are only as high as 3% in any given society at the most. And if you take just 69 states into account, then only a mere 1% remains.

Having said that, aggressive Madrigal feels that when as many states as possible criminalize talks about the opposite sex between consenting adults and discriminate against those adults, then we are doing the world a great service. Madrigal says: ‘don’t say straight, don’t mention the possibility of bisexual doubts’.

10. Worldwide opposition to Madrigal

Concerning the resolution to appoint Madrigal, it was only adopted by a recorded vote of 23 in favor, 18 against, and 6 abstentions. Therefore, the majority (24) was not unequivocally in favor of this document. It is a minority stance.

The opposition against Madrigal is huge. For instance, the Islamic Organization for Cooperation (IOC), a multi-state advisory group to the UN representing 20% of the world population, wrote:

“We believe that the concepts of “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” are not recognized under any international instruments, and run counter to the values and teachings of many religions and beliefs including Islam.

We are further concerned that these concepts which are controversial have the potential of being a divisive factor among members of the international community. Hence, the imposition of these notions in resolutions will go directly against global human rights values.

We are concerned at the attempts made by some countries to involve the Human Rights Council in controversial domestic issues outside the internationally agreed human rights legal framework. The Human Rights Council should promote consensus on human rights issues, with a cooperative and constructive approach”.”

11. Conclusion

The UN Council on Human Rights has been hijacked by ILGA; their puppet, Madrigal-Borloz, serves his masters by writing dubious and unscientific terms into the framework and backbone of the UN.

He achieves this with the absurdest array of allegations ever published anywhere and he relies solely on hear-say from activist groups.

This array serves to cover up his real agenda, namely to criminalize psychiatric interviews with gender-confused youngsters and adults. He seeks to redefine ‘health care’ along delusional lines, to bring human bodies in line with delusions. The troubled state of mind is then to be regarded as a fixed and immutable property of certain individuals, occurring for no apparent reason at all.

Healthy thought is rearranged to fit the delusion, healthy bodies are fixed to pass as real. All other views and evidence to the contrary are duly deleted. With ILGA, the Cancel Culture is going global.

To be continued.

Job Berendsen, MD.