57 Muslim Tyrannies have hijacked the UN: Should the US continue sponsoring it?

“The US is the main UN’s sponsor (22% of the budget, $654million in 2015). The 57 Muslim Countries of the Organization for Islamic Cooperation hijacked the UN to pass 20 anti-Israel resolutions vs only one for Iran, Syria and North Korea in 2015…”

Please contribute by emailing this article to Senator Bob Menendez (Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee) using the link below
http://www.menendez.senate.gov/contact
or Senator Ted Cruz
https://www.tedcruz.org/contact/
or Senator Marco Rubio
[email protected]

 

57 Muslim Tyrannies have hijacked the UN: Should the US continue sponsoring it?
by Ezequiel Doiny


On March 2015, Amb. Ron Prosor wrote in the NY Times “The United Nations is celebrating its 70th anniversary this year. It was intended to be a temple of peace, but this once great global body has been overrun by the repressive regimes that violate human rights and undermine international security.

In 1949, when the United Nations admitted Israel as a member state, it had 58 member countries and about half had a democratic orientation. Today, the landscape of the organization has changed drastically. From 51 member states at its founding in 1945, the institution has grown to 193 members — fewer than half of which are democracies.

The very nations that deny democratic rights to their people abuse the United Nations’ democratic forums to advance their interests. The largest of these groups comprises members from the 120-member-strong bloc known as the Non-Aligned Movement. Since 2012, the bloc has been chaired by Iran, which has used its position to bolster its allies and marginalize Israel.

In March, the United Nations closed the annual meeting of its Commission on the Status of Women by publishing a report that effectively singled out just one country for condemnation: Israel. The commission apparently had nothing to say about the Sudanese girls who are subjected to female genital mutilation. It also had nothing to say about the Iranian women who have been punished for crimes of “adultery” by stoning. These oversights may have something to do with the fact that both Iran and Sudan sit on the 45-member commission.

Then there is the United Nations Human Rights Council (the body that replaced the Commission on Human Rights in 2006). Its membership includes Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Venezuela — nations where you risk life and liberty if you express dissenting opinions. Yet these governments stand in judgment on the rest of us.

In 2007, Sudan chaired a committee overseeing human rights — even as its president, Omar Hassan al-Bashir, was being investigated for crimes of genocide and crimes against humanity in Darfur, for which the International Criminal Court later issued arrest warrants. Saudi Arabia — a regime notorious for public executions and floggings like that, most recently, of the blogger Raif Badawi — sits on the Human Rights Council, despite regularly receiving the worst possible ratings on civil liberties and political rights from the independent watchdog Freedom House.

In 2013, Iran was elected to the committee responsible for disarmament — even as it continued its nuclear expansion, support for terrorism and the destruction of Israel. Last year, an Iranian served as a vice chair of the General Assembly’s legal committee, an inexplicable choice given that Iranian citizens are routinely denied due process and fair trials.

Knowing this history, perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised that, in the 2014-15 session alone, the General Assembly adopted about 20 resolutions critical of Israel, while the human rights situations in Iran, Syria and North Korea merited just one condemnation apiece. Day after day, member states turn a blind eye to the most deplorable crimes.

Iran? Just one hostile resolution for a nation that, on average, executes citizens at a rate of two a day for “crimes” that include homosexuality, apostasy and the vague offense of being an “enemy of God.”

North Korea? Just one negative resolution even though it has imprisoned more than 200,000 citizens, throws children into forced labor camps and subjects its population to food shortages and famine as a result of government policies.

Syria? Again, just one resolution for a government that has pursued a war against its own people that has caused the deaths of at least 220,000 men, women and children — many by torture, starvation, chemical weapons and barrel bombs dropped on markets and schools.

Christians now number among the world’s most persecuted religious groups in Muslim countries, yet this human rights crisis is almost completely ignored by the United Nations. Instead, Israel, the only democracy in the Middle East and an area in the region where the Christian population is actually growing, often seems to be the only nation the United Nations cares about.

Nowhere is anti-Israel bias more obvious than in the Geneva-based Human Rights Council. The council addresses the human rights abuses of all countries in the world under a program known as Agenda Item 4. That is, all countries but one. Israel is the only nation that is singled out for criticism by virtue of a special program, known as Agenda Item 7. A result, according to the Geneva-based monitoring group UN Watch, is that more than 50 percent of all condemnatory resolutions are directed at the Jewish state.

Following last summer’s conflict in Gaza, the Human Rights Council established a Commission of Inquiry and selected William Schabas, a Canadian law professor, to chair the investigation. In February, Mr. Schabas was forced to resign after documents came to light revealing that, in 2012, he had done consulting work for the Palestine Liberation Organization. Surprisingly, this fact slipped Mr. Schabas’s mind during his vetting process.

It was clear from the outset that Mr. Schabas was not an impartial arbiter since he had a record of public statements suggesting that Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, and the former president, Shimon Peres, should face trial at the International Criminal Court. When Israel protested, however, the United Nations ignored it.

I am often asked how I can stand the tide of hatred aimed at Israel. Our response to the United Nations’ accusations is to speak tirelessly for those who are denied a voice in most of the Middle East — women, minorities, the L.G.B.T. community — and to fight daily efforts by totalitarian regimes to undermine democratic societies. Based on the fact that Israel is a thriving society, I believe we are winning.

Later this year, chairmanship of the Non-Aligned Movement will transfer to Venezuela, Iran’s ally. For the foreseeable future, we can expect more of the same.

The problem with the United Nations is that the leaders of many of its member states do not rule with the consent of the governed. Instead, they use the body as a forum to deflect attention from their own ruthless rule. In so doing, they turn a stage for courageous statecraft into a tragic theater of the absurd.”

According to un.org, during 2015 the United States was the maximum contributor to the UN regular budget — 22%, the assessed amount is $654 million. Nine countries (United States, Japan, Germany, United Kingdom, France, Italy, Canada, Spain, China) contributed 75% of the UN’s budget. Saudi Arabia contributed 0.86%.
http://www.un.org/en/ga/contributions/budget.shtml

In Case You Missed It:  PROXY WAR: Biden’s $235M funding of Palestine in 2021 contributed to Hamas’ violent attacks on Israel

The 57 Muslim States members in the UN supported 20 pro-Palestinian resolutions   against the only  Jewish State. The US, main sponsor of the UN, shares responsibility for the bullying against the Jewish State for continuing to provide  funds to the UN despite its anti-Israel bias.

The Palestinians have automatic majority in any UN vote because there are 57 Muslim Countries (see members of Organization of Islamic Cooperation) but only one Jewish State.

When the UN votes for a Jewish-Muslim dispute such as the Arab-Israeli conflict, it is obvious that the dozens of Muslim Nations are going to support their Muslim brothers in Palestine and their vote is going to be biased.

To avoid religious bias in the UN, in any dispute involving different religions, the UN should weight the votes based on the religion of the Nation voting. Since the Jews have only one vote, the representative of all the Muslim Nations combined should have only one vote, the representative of all the Christian Nations combined should have only one vote, the Bhuddist Nations should have only one vote, etc…that way all religions will have a proper weight in the UN.

Israel is always condemned in the UN because all 57 Muslim Nations gang together against the only Jewish State. Not taking the nation’s religion in consideration in the UN vote is a FRAUD.This must change.

The Charter of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation which was signed by all 57 member States says:

“In the name of Allah, the most Compassionate, the most Merciful
We the Member States of the Organisation of Islamic
Cooperation, determined:…

to be guided by the noble Islamic values of unity and fraternity, and affirming the essentiality of promoting and consolidating the unity and solidarity among the Member States in securing their common interests at the international arena;

to endeavour to work for revitalizing Islam’s pioneering role in the world while ensuring sustainable development, progress and prosperity for the peoples of Member States;

to enhance and strengthen the bond of unity and solidarity among the Muslim peoples and Member States;

…to support the struggle of the Palestinian people, who are presently under foreign occupation, and to empower them to attain their inalienable rights, including the right to self-determination, and to establish their sovereign state with Al-Quds Al-Sharif (JERUSALEM) as its capital, while safeguarding its historic and Islamic character, and the holy places therein;

to create conducive conditions for sound upbringing of Muslim children and youth, and to inculcate in them Islamic values through education for strengthening their cultural, social, moral and ethical ideals;

to assist Muslim minorities and communities outside the Member States to preserve their dignity, cultural and religious identity;

…To protect and defend the true image of Islam, to combat defamation of Islam and encourage dialogue among civilisations and religions;

…To safeguard the rights, dignity and religious and cultural identity of Muslim communities and minorities in non-Member States;”

source OIC: Organisation of Islamic Cooperation

http://www.oic-oci.org/oicv2/page/?p_id=53&p_ref=27&lan=en

Below is  a list of  the members of the of the Organization for Islamic Cooperation Member States

Republic of AZERBAIJAN
Hashemite Kingdom of JORDAN
Islamic Republic of AFGHANISTAN
Republic of ALBANIA
State of The UNITED ARAB EMIRATES
Republic of INDONESIA
Republic of UZBEKISTAN
Republic of UGANDA

Islamic Republic of IRAN

Islamic Republic of PAKISTAN

Kingdom of BAHRAIN

BRUNEI-DARUSSALAM

People’s Republic of BANGLADESH

Republic of BENIN

BURKINA-FASO (then Upper Volta)

Republic of TAJIKISTAN

Republic of TURKEY

Turkmenistan

Republic of CHAD

Republic of TOGO

Republic of TUNISIA

People’s Democratic Republic of ALGERIA

Republic of DJIBOUTI

Kingdom of SAUDI ARABIA

Republic of SENEGAL

Republic of The SUDAN

SYRIAN Arab Republic

Republic of SURINAME

Republic of SIERRA LEONE

Republic of SOMALIA

Republic of IRAQ

Sultanate of OMAN

Republic of GABON

The Islamic Republic of The Gambia

Republic of GUYANA

Republic of GUINEA

Republic of GUINEA-BISSAU

State of PALESTINE

Union of The COMOROS

KYRGYZ Republic

State of QATAR

Republic of KAZAKHSTAN

Republic of CAMEROON

Republic of COTE D’IVOIRE

State of KUWAIT

Republic of LEBANON

Libya

Republic of MALDIVES

Republic of MALI

MALAYSIA

Arab Republic of EGYPT

Kingdom of MOROCCO

Islamic Republic of MAURITANIA

Republic of MOZAMBIQUE

Republic of NIGER

Federal Republic of NIGERIA

Republic of YEMEN

http://www.oic-oci.org/oicv2/states/

________________________________________

(see also the article below)
Saudi Arabia forbids Christianity, spends billions to sponsor Islam’s expansion

by Ezequiel Doiny
Christians do not have freedom of religion in Saudi Arabia. In an article published in Fox News by Benjamin Weinthal “Saudi anti-Christian sweep prompts calls for US involvement” on September 12, 2014 “Some 28 people were rounded up… by hard-line Islamists from the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice in the home of an Indian national in the eastern Saudi city of Khafji, and their current situation is unknown, according to human rights advocates.

“Saudi Arabia is continuing the religious cleansing that has always been its official policy,” Nina Shea, director of the Washington-based Hudson Institute’s Center for Religious Freedom, told FoxNews.com. “It is the only nation state in the world with the official policy of banning all churches. This is enforced even though there are over 2 million Christian foreign workers in that country. Those victimized are typically poor, from Asian and African countries with weak governments.”

In Friday’s crackdown, several Bibles were confiscated, according to reports from the Kingdom.

Rep. Frank Wolf, R-Va, told FoxNews.com he will press the U.S. ambassador in Riyadh and the State Department to assist the arrested Christians.“I hope our government will speak up,” said Wolf, adding that the anti-Christian raid was not surprising given that the Saudi regime “did not want our soldiers to wear crosses during the Desert Storm” operation in 1991…

“Such actions are especially dangerous in the current situation, where the world is seeing the rise of extreme Islamist groups in Iraq, Syria, Nigeria, Somalia and elsewhere,” Shea said. “The West should demand that its strategic ally, Saudi Arabia, release the Christians at once and allow them to pray according to their own faith traditions. Otherwise, Riyadh will appear to be validating the practices of the Islamic State in northern Iraq and Syria.””

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/09/14/saudi-anti-christian-sweep-prompts-calls-for-us-involvement/

“Saudi Arabia spent more than $75 billion to fund the International Expansion of Islam.”

Although Saudi Arabia does not allow freedom of religion at home, they spend billions financing the international expansion of Islam. According to Stephen Schwartz, Director of the Center for Islamic Pluralism, “…As to how much money Saudi officials have spent since the early 1970s to promote Wahhabism worldwide, David D. Aufhauser, a former Treasury Department general counsel, told a Senate committee in June 2004 that estimates went “north of $75 billion.” The money financed the construction of thousands of mosques, schools and Islamic centers, the employment of at least 9,000 proselytizers and the printing of millions of books of religious instruction.
According to a major investigation by Washington Post reporter David B. Ottaway published on August 19, 2004, the Saudi government’s Ministry of Islamic Affairs, Endowment, Call and Guidance pays the salaries of 3,884 Wahhabi missionaries and preachers, who are six times as numerous as the 650 diplomats in Saudi Arabia’s 77 embassies. Saleh Sheik, a direct descendant of Ibn Abdul Wahab, leads the ministry – the most important Saudi institution for exporting Wahhabism. Ministry officials in Africa and Asia often have had more money to dispense than Saudi ambassadors, according to several Saudi sources. The Islamic affairs officials also act as religious commissars, keeping tabs on the moral behavior of the kingdom’s diplomats, Ottaway reported. In the United States, a 40-person Islamic Affairs Department established in the Saudi Embassy in Washington acted autonomously from the ambassador.”

In Case You Missed It:  Too late and no apologies: Hospital begs fired workers who refused mRNA vaccines to come back to work 2 years later

http://www.islamicpluralism.org/532/al-qaeda-other-terror-groups-swim-in-global-sea-of-saudi#

Today the nations with a majority of Christian population do not officially finance the expansion of Christianity yet there are 57 Muslim Nations, members of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, that officially sponsor the international expansion of Islam.

Below are parts of the Charter of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation which was signed by all 57 member States:

“In the name of Allah, the most Compassionate, the most Merciful
We the Member States of the Organisation of Islamic
Cooperation, determined:…

to be guided by the noble Islamic values of unity and fraternity, and affirming the essentiality of promoting and consolidating the unity and solidarity among the Member States in securing their common interests at the international arena;

to endeavour to work for revitalizing Islam’s pioneering role in the world while ensuring sustainable development, progress and prosperity for the peoples of Member States;

to enhance and strengthen the bond of unity and solidarity among the Muslim peoples and Member States;

to foster noble Islamic values concerning moderation, tolerance, respect for diversity, preservation of Islamic symbols and common heritage and to defend the universality of Islamic religion;

to advance the acquisition and popularization of knowledge in consonance with the lofty ideals of Islam to achieve intellectual excellence;

to support the struggle of the Palestinian people, who are presently under foreign occupation, and to empower them to attain their inalienable rights, including the right to self-determination, and to establish their sovereign state with Al-Quds Al-Sharif as its capital, while safeguarding its historic and Islamic character, and the holy places therein;

to create conducive conditions for sound upbringing of Muslim children and youth, and to inculcate in them Islamic values through education for strengthening their cultural, social, moral and ethical ideals;

to assist Muslim minorities and communities outside the Member States to preserve their dignity, cultural and religious identity;

CHAPTER I

Objectives and Principles

Article 1
The objectives of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation shall be:

8. To support and empower the Palestinian people to exercise their right to selfdetermination and establish their sovereign State with Al-Quds Al-Sharif as its capital, while safeguarding its historic and Islamic character as well as the Holy places therein;

9. To strengthen intra-Islamic economic and trade cooperation; in order to achieve economic integration leading to the establishment of an Islamic Common Market;

11. To disseminate, promote and preserve the Islamic teachings and values based on moderation and tolerance, promote Islamic culture and safeguard Islamic heritage;

12. To protect and defend the true image of Islam, to combat defamation of Islam and encourage dialogue among civilisations and religions;

16. To safeguard the rights, dignity and religious and cultural identity of Muslim communities and minorities in non-Member States;

source OIC: Organisation of Islamic Cooperation http://www.oic-oci.org/oicv2/states/

CAIR complains about persecution of Muslims in America yet they never condemned Saudi Arabia for forbidding Christianity.  No NGO  calls for BDS against Saudi Arabia, the EU does not boycott Saudi products, Obama never threatened a UNSC resolution against Saudi Arabia for its persecution of Christians.

Daniel Pipes wrote an interesting article about Saudi Arabia’s funding of CAIR “A couple of items from the Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia in Washington concerning its support for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) are worth noting and pondering. The first dates from August 15, 1999, and is listed under “IDB Approves New Projects Worldwide“:
President of the Islamic Development Bank (IDB) Dr. Ahmad Ibn Muhammad Ali announced today that the bank has approved a number of new grants for Muslim minorities in non-Muslim countries worldwide. These include U.S. $395,000 to build a school in Tanzania, $250,000 as a contribution to the purchase of land in Washington DC to be the headquarters for an education and research center under the aegis of the Council for American Islamic Relations, and $30 million for Islamic associations in India.

For those not familiar with the Islamic Development Bank, it appears to be an international institution but is in fact an arm of Saudi foreign policy.

The second item, “MWL Delegation In Washington DC,” is dated July 8, 2002, and concerns a visit to the American capital by Abdullah bin Abdulmohsin Al-Turki, Secretary-General of the Muslim World League (MWL) – an organization which, despite its name, is openly a tool of the kingdom. The report indicates what Al-Turki did on July 5, 2002:
During a visit on Friday evening to the headquarters of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) he advocated coordination among Muslim organizations in the United States. Expressing MWL’s readiness to offer assistance in the promotion and coordination of Islamic works, he announced plans to set up a commission for this purpose.

The official Saudi newpspaer, Ain al-Yaqeen, offered a slightly more complete take on Turki’s visit to CAIR:
The Secretary General of the Muslim World League (MWL), Dr. Abdullah Ibn Abdul Mohsin Al Turki, has stressed the necessity of promoting effective coordination among Islamic organisations in the United States of America. During a visit to the Headquarters of the Council of American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), Dr. Al Turki said: “This coordination will achieve the best results for the future of Muslims in the U.S., strengthen relations between them, and highlight the comprehensive principles of Islam.” Dr. Al Turki and members of his accompanying delegation conducted a tour of different sections of the CAIR, during which its Director General, Dr. Nihad Awad, briefed them. Dr. Al Turki expressed the League’s readiness to offer assistance in the promotion and coordination of Islamic works, and noted that it will establish a Commission for this purpose.

In addition, Prince al-Walid Bin Talal in November 2002 gave $500.000 to CAIR.

One can only guess what these discreet and implication-laden notes are hiding, but between funds officially donated and occasional visits from Saudi officials, it’s probably correctly to figure that CAIR is yet another instrument of the Wahhabis’ foreign aspirations. (July 5, 2003)

Jan. 1, 2004 update: Muqtedar Khan stated in an interview posted today that CAIR “recently took 5 million dollars from a Saudi prince.”

In Case You Missed It:  BREAKING: Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. throws down the gauntlet on rigged DNC, promises to “look at other options” if democrat party bosses won’t allow a fair and free election

http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2003/07/cairs-saudi-masters

In 2014 Adam Savit reported in counterjihadreport.com  that “Terror-tied Muslim Brotherhood front group the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is hawking a new “resource” to keep journalists from running afoul of politically sanctioned speech codes when reporting on Islam and Muslims.

As with CAIR’s much-heralded “Islamophobia Report” release last October, the only TV news outlet to cover the story–at least the only one CAIR saw fit to post on their YouTube channel–was KSA-2 TV, the official English-language network of the regime of Saudi Arabia, owned and operated by the Saudi Ministry of Culture and Information.

“Islam for Journalists” is co-edited by Lawrence Pintak, whose works include Seeds of Hate: How America’s Flawed Middle East Policy Ignited the Jihad.  The journalist primer recommends “Experts” including Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf and Daisy Khan, the married duo behind the push to erect a mega-mosque adjacent to Ground Zero (p.274, ASMA).

While a second party produced this guide, CAIR has released many similar publications meant to sanitize speech and render criticism of Islamist activities and goals impossible.  They include guides for health care workers, employers and educators.

The guide for employers, meant to create a “culturally-sensitive work-place environment,” is perhaps most disturbing.  One need look no further than Fort Hood jihadist Nidal Hassan to see the results of employers and supervisors cowed by political correctness and unable to make the most simple judgments about who or what they deem to be threats to their employees.

The shackles put on journalists, though seemingly less acute, serve to deny policymakers and the public the opportunity to examine the most critical threats to our society and devise policies to counter them.  This inability to describe the threat neuters a free citizen’s ability to confront the threat.  It seems this is what CAIR is banking on.

*******************

CAIR’s Guide to Media Manipulation,  by Ryan Mauro at Clarion Project on October 17, 2013

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity and unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation trial, is a master media manipulator. And it is passing on its skills to aspiring activists in ways that should offend and wake up every journalist.

The Investigative Project on Terrorism obtained a CAIR presentation about influencing the media and presented it in an online video (see below). The presentation bears the name of Ibrahim Hooper, CAIR’s communications director.

In 1993, Hooper was working for CAIR’s predecessor when he said, “I wouldn’t want to create the impression that I wouldn’t like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future. In 2003, he allegedly said on a radio program that sharia law would replace the Constitution if Muslims became the majority.

One of the slides titled, “Characteristics of a Journalist,” displays the condescending attitude that CAIR has towards the media. The characteristics are as follows:
•“They will expect you to do their work. Let them.”
•“Does little primary research.”
•“Under extreme deadline pressure.”
•“Fears charges of inaccuracy.”

CAIR recognizes that journalists have to turn their stories in on time. They are often juggling multiple stories and are not encouraged to indefinitely pursue stories to their ultimate end, digging up every fact and following every lead. After all, most articles are short and are designed to only give a basic overview.

CAIR has offices around the country and staff members whose job is to develop personal relationships with media sources. Once CAIR convinces the media source that it is the authoritative spokesperson of the Muslim-American community, it becomes the spokesperson.

Through this relationship, CAIR can pitch stories complete with accompanying “facts” and quotes, offering the journalist or radio/TV producer a much-needed shortcut. The result is that CAIR, to a large degree, gets to write the narrative.

This relationship is best articulated by the words of Sarwat Husain,Vice Chair of CAIR. In 2008, she spoke at the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) South Central Conference in San Antonio, Texas. ISNA is CAIR’s fellow U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity and, along with CAIR, is an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terror-funding case in U.S. history which involved the Holyland Foundation.

According to the Investigative Project online video, she said:

“Media in the United States is very gullible, ok? And they will see that if you have something, especially as a Muslim, if you have something to say, they will come running to you—and take advantage of that.”

According to her bio on the CAIR website, Husain serves on the Texas Media Empowerment Project, publishes the largest Muslim newspaper in the state and frequently writes for San Antonio Express News. She even used to sit on the FBI Regional Advisory Council.

In 1993, the FBI wiretapped a secret U.S. Muslim Brotherhood/Hamas meeting in Philadelphia that was attended by two of CAIR’s future founders. One of the topics was the need to build a new front with clean hands that could influence the media, with deception as a primary tactic.

“Forming the public opinion or coming up with a policy to influence … the way the Americans deal with the Islamists, for instance. I believe that should be the goals of this stage,” said Hamas operative Abdel Haleem al-Ashqar.

CAIR was born the following year.

A Muslim Brotherhood document written as far back as 1982 (but seized in a 2001 raid by authorities in Switzerland) emphasized the need for a media offensive. Titled “The Project,” a stated goal was to “diffuse Islamic policy so that it is largely and efficiently covered by the media.”

A 1991 U.S. Muslim Brotherhood memo, seized in 2004 in Virginia, defines its “work in America as a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within.”

The memo states that the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood has a “Media and Art Organization” that is tasked with making newspapers, magazine, radio and television programs, audio/visual centers and building a recording studio. It even says that it has producers, journalists and program anchors ready.

An undated Muslim Brotherhood document also captured in the 2004 Virginia raid and called the “Phases of World Underground Movement Plan” lists the phases of Brotherhood operations in general (not referring to America exclusively). All are done with the utmost secrecy and deception. The media plays a central part.

Phase 2, described as the “phase of gradual appearance on the public scene,” is focused on “gaining public support and sympathy.”

Phase 3, described as the “Escalation Phase, prior to conflict and confrontation with the rulers,” focuses on “utilizing mass media.” Another objective is “containment of the remaining influential elements in the society in preparation for the whole shake-up stage.”

The final fifth phase is, “Seizing power to establish their Islamic Nation under which all parties and Islamic groups become united…”

The internal Brotherhood documents agree: The media is a top-tier target. And based on the statements made by CAIR officials, they are happy with the results.

http://counterjihadreport.com/tag/saudi-funding-of-cair/

Posted in Freedoms.