And we fund over 30% of the pathetic joke.

(CNS News) — As the tenth anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks approaches, the United Nations is no closer to reaching a universal definition of terrorism than it was in 2001 — or indeed than it was five years before then, when negotiations first began on drafting a comprehensive convention on international terrorism.

The main hurdle, then as now, is the insistence by the bloc of Islamic states that any definition of terrorism should leave a loophole for “resistance” against foreign occupation.

The Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), which was established in 1969 with “liberating” Jerusalem as its primary focus, is unwilling to give ground on the issue as many of its governments believe that doing so would be tantamount to betraying the Palestinian cause.

The “occupation” exemption is usually cited in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but it would also provide cover for the anti-Indian jihad in Kashmir, a Muslim-majority territory divided between India and Pakistan and claimed by both.

India has been a major target of terrorism, both in what some Islamic states call “Indian-occupied Kashmir” and elsewhere. Not coincidentally, New Delhi has spearheaded the push for a international terrorism convention since 1996.

A U.N. General Assembly resolution passed that year established an “Ad-Hoc Committee” to elaborate on the draft convention proposed by India. It has met every year since then, for a one- or two-week period usually in the spring, but consensus on a terrorism definition remain elusive.

Its 15th session was held in New York last week.

According to Anne Bayefsky, editor of the Hudson Institute’s Eye on the U.N. project, the OIC once again raised the argument that there is a “distinction between terrorism and the struggle for the rights of self-determination by people under foreign occupation and colonial or alien domination.”