Sorus-Funded Idea Factory

[MeeMie]

Soros-Funded Idea Factory
Becomes Obama Policy Front

By Edwin Chen


Three blocks from the White House, on the 10th floor of a sleek glass building, young workers pound at computers, with giant flat-screen TVs overhead. It has the look and feel of a high-tech startup.

In many ways it is. The product is ideas.

Thanks in part to funding from benefactors such as billionaire George Soros, the Center for American Progress has become in just five years an intellectual wellspring for Democratic policy proposals, including many that are shaping the agenda of the new Obama administration.

Soros' CAP has been an incubator for liberal thought and helped build the platform that triumphed in the 2008 campaign.

CAP's president and founder, John Podesta, 59, former chief of staff to President Bill Clinton, is one of three people running the transition team for president-elect Barack Obama, 47. A squadron of CAP experts is working with them.

Some of the group's recommendations already have been adopted by the president-elect. These include the center's call for a gradual withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq and a buildup of forces in Afghanistan, a plan for universal health coverage through employer plans and proposals to create purchasing pools that allow small businesses to spread the cost among a larger group of workers. Obama has endorsed much of a CAP plan to create ``green jobs'' linked to alleviating global climate change.

CAP also is advocating the creation of a ``National Energy Council'' headed by an official with the stature of the national security adviser and who would be charged with ``transforming the energy base'' of the U.S. In addition, CAP urges the creation of a White House ``office of social entrepreneurship'' to spur new ideas for addressing social problems.

To help promote its ideas, CAP employs 11 full-time bloggers who contribute to two Web sites, ThinkProgress and the Wonk Room; others prepare daily feeds for radio stations. The center's policy briefings are standing-room only, packed with lobbyists, advocacy-group representatives and reporters looking for insights on where the Obama administration is headed.

Just eight days after the Nov. 4 election, CAP released a 300,000-word volume called ``Change for America: A Progressive Blueprint for the 44th President'' that offers advice on issues such as economic revival and fixing the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Work on the book began almost a year ago.

CAP, which has 180 staffers and a $27 million budget, devotes as much as half of its resources to promoting its ideas through blogs, events, publications and media outreach.

The center's future was far from certain in 2003, when wealthy donors such as Soros and film producer Stephen Bing gave $10 million or more to fill what they believed was an intellectual void in the Democratic Party and create a vehicle to produce an agenda for the party's eventual return to power.



So, there you loonies have it!

You've elected the Soros puppet to office, and already he has grovelled to place the Soros operatives in key cabinet positions.

 

[MeeMie]

Just incase you aren't aware of who Soros is, here are some various excerpts from various articles to familiarize you with him.


George Soros is a Hungarian speculator of bad reputation. In 1992 he broke the Bank of England by speculation: Sold 10 billion US dollars worth of pounds on a day and forced the UK to leave the European Exchange Rate Mechanism and devalue the pound. Soros earned 1.1 billion US dollars in the process. In 1997, during the Asian financial crisis, then Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir bin Mohamad accused Soros of using the wealth under his control to punish ASEAN for welcoming Myanmar as a member. Later, he called Soros a moron. Thai nationals have called Soros "an economic war criminal" who "sucks the blood from the people".

In 2002 a French court ruled him guilty of insider trading as defined under French securities laws and fined him $2 million which was the amount that he made using the insider information. His insider trading conviction was upheld by the highest court in France on June 14, 2006.

George Soros was the oil business partner of Osama bin Laden´s brother, Shafiq bin Laden, in weaponry trading, until Salem´s death in 1988.

Soros hates Pres. George W. Bush Jr. for having broken the NWO rule of secretive manipulation. "Today, there is basically a oneness of purpose in promoting U.S. imperial dominance, and in the process, attempting to solve a deepening global economic crisis by controlling diminishing petroleum and energy resources. By making U.S. superiority so clear, Bush has committed the cardinal sin of giving the game away. For years, Soros and his NGOs have gone about their work extending the boundaries of the ‘free world’ so skillfully that hardly anyone noticed. Now a Texan and his overzealous pride and courage have blown it”. Therefore, Soros has spent a ltens of millions of dollars fighting Bush's election campaigns and manipulating bad media throughout his time in office.


Soros is stated to be looking for Europe to take leadership in the further development of the New World Order.

The 6-point programme of the New World Order :
1) Abolition of the Monarchy and government.
2) Abolition of private property.
3) Abolition of inheritance.
4) Abolition of patriotism.
5) Abolition of the family, through the abolition of marriage, all morality, and the institution of communal education for children.
6) Abolition of religion.

The programme confesses to the “Internationales", dismantling borders, nationalism, patriotism. "In principle we want just that”. The "Internationales" are Marxist and therefore wanted to abolish family, inheritance and private property.


The socialist connections of Obama and the Democratic Party have certainly not been featured in the Washington Post columns of Harold Meyerson, the subject of the 2005 column, "A Socialist at the Washington Post," has praised convicted inside-trader George Soros for manipulating campaign finance laws to benefit the far-left elements of the Democratic Party. Obama's success in the Democratic presidential primaries and caucuses is further evidence of Soros's success. Indeed, Soros has financially contributed millions directly and indirectly to the Obama campaign.

The king of anti-American, leftism, George Soros, is the Chairman of the Open Society Institute. He said he is introducing new projects to promote a common European foreign policy and study the integration of Muslims in 11 European cities.

You’ll notice, Soros never has a bad word about Communists. He harps on Nazi or Faschist killings but silence on the tens of millions killed by the communists. For him Stalin and company apparently did not exist. The same can be said of Mao and the millions killed under his government. So, one can conclude that there are good slaughters and bad slaughters in the Soros view. Faschist killings are evil; Communist killings are ignored as though they never happened, which should tell us about this man’s thinking. Soros views communist mass killings as unfortunate but “necessary” for the greater good of creating a new society, one that he approves of. This is a dangerous man.

George Soros Says The World Should Pick Our President - and now, thanks to the oblivious loonies who refused to even consider that their Messiah was a marketing ploy, they have.

 

[islandman]

Two weeks later and you're still in the denial phase. Poor thing.

 

[MeeMie]

He tried the same with a less likable puppet during the previous presidential election.

See if any of this looks familiar.



The Hidden Soros Agenda:
Drugs, Money, the Media, and Political Power


Soros may be the biggest political fat cat of all time.

How many times have we heard or read stories about Vice President Dick Cheney's old firm, Halliburton, and its alleged influence over the government? A public company with more than 100,000 employees, Halliburton had revenues of $13 billion in 2001.

However, George Soros is a single human Halliburton who will be in a position, if John Kerry is elected president, to pull the strings. He is reportedly worth $7.2 billion.

His role in buying the White House for John Kerry has received generally positive coverage. Soros, we're told, is a "philanthropist" committed to "democracy." The Republican Party, by contrast, is supposed to be run by fat cats and Big Business, such as those at Halliburton.

Soros may be the biggest political fat cat of all time. Convicted in France of insider trading, Soros specializes in weakening or collapsing the currencies of entire nations for his own selfish interests. He is known as the man who broke the Bank of England. His power is such that his statements alone can cause currencies to go up or down. Other people suffer so he can get rich. But journalists don't want to examine the questionable means by which he achieved his wealth because they share his goal of electing Kerry and the Democrats.* Curiously, once he made his fortune he became a global socialist, endorsing global taxes on the very means he employed to get rich – international currency speculation and manipulation.

The media consistently ignore the fact that this so-called "philanthropist" has had several brushes with the law as he has laid siege to national economies and currencies. Hard-working U.S. businessmen understand how Soros has made his money. In protesting a Soros appearance hosted by the University of Toledo, Edwin J. Nagle III, president and CEO of the Nagle Companies, highlighted "the immoral and unethical means by which he achieved his wealth." He added, "I certainly didn't see included in his bio the stories on how he collapsed whole country's currencies for his own self interests so that many may suffer."

Here, Soros signed a consent decree in United States District Court, in a Securities and Exchange Commission case involving stock manipulation, and was fined $75,000 by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission for holding positions "in excess of speculative limits." Stories about Soros rarely, if ever, mention any of his legal problems.

Despite his vision of an "open society," he operates an unregulated "hedge fund," open only to the super-rich, and is currently fighting a proposal from the Bush-appointed chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission to regulate and monitor these offshore entities.* House Speaker Dennis Hastert said on national television that no one really knows where the Soros money comes from.*

Soros has categorically denied receiving money from drug cartels or any form of criminal activity. The fact remains, however, that at least some of his financial operations have been based offshore, in banking and financial centers that are widely reported to be considered conducive to money-laundering.* The Soros fund is based in the Netherlands Antilles, a self-governing federation of five Caribbean islands. A CIA factbook describes the region as "a transshipment point for South American drugs bound for the US and Europe; money-laundering center."*

Soros reportedly purchased a major stake in one of Colombia's biggest banks, at a time when the Drug Enforcement Administration, in its study, "Colombian Economic Reform: The Impact on Drug Money Laundering within the Colombian Economy,"* was documenting how major drug kingpins were taking advantage of the liberalization of the economy to put illicit drug revenue into legitimate businesses. The report stated: "U.S. and Colombian Government authorities have evidence of drug proceeds being deposited in every major bank in Colombia... A Colombian source indicated that many banks and businesses are owned covertly by principal members of the Cali cartel."

His complex web of financial interests, companies and foundations makes Halliburton look like a Mom & Pop operation.

The charge we read in the press is that Halliburton gets government contracts and makes money from the Iraq war. Far less attention has been paid to the fact that the company has lost 54 employees as a result of that war. Nobody in the press mentions that Soros profits from the Kosovo war, which he supported as a preemptive strike against Yugoslavia, because he runs an investment fund that now does business there. Even though he pays big bucks to advertise his opposition to the Bush policy of democracy-building in Iraq, reporters still describe him as someone with a reputation for building democracy abroad.

However, his position on Iraq may be a diversion from the real reason he wants to get rid of Bush – his longstanding desire to adopt a national "retreat and defeat" approach to the drug problem.

Soros' long-time goal has been to subvert the national anti-drug policy of the U.S. Government, to move away from the use of national and global law enforcement resources against the drug trade.* He calls this "harm reduction," meaning that criminal activity associated with the use of drugs will supposedly be reduced if the government takes over the drug trade and provides drugs and drug paraphernalia, including needles, to addicts. But law enforcement would still be required to keep drugs out of the hands of children.* If this is not the case, then Soros intends to allow substances such as marijuana, cocaine and heroin to be distributed to children.

If Soros is able to capture the White House and implement his drug policy nationally, millions more people could be led to experiment with dangerous psychoactive substances and damage themselves, their families, and society. Even marijuana, depicted by the media as a "soft" drug, has extremely negative consequences. In the new book, "Marijuana and Madness," one of the editors, Prof. Robin Murray of Britain's Institute of Psychiatry, cites studies and evidence from around the world, some of it going back 40 years, linking the use of marijuana to mental illnesses, including schizophrenia and psychosis.

In a recent article about his growing financial and political clout, the Washington Post sanitized Soros by claiming that he "funded efforts to reform campaign laws, decriminalize marijuana and change [the] criminal justice system." All of that is misleading, if not false. His "reform" of campaign laws left a loophole that will enable him to set a record "for the most money donated by an individual in an election cycle," to quote the Post itself. So where are the investigative stories into Soros and his agenda?*

A key part of the Soros agenda -- his proposed surrender in the war on drugs -- has been carefully concealed from the American people during this campaign. The war on Islamic terrorism is front and center, to be sure, but the war on drugs is still of major concern to millions of Americans, especially parents fearful of the influence of Hollywood and the drug culture.

A Soros role in formulating national drug policy is worthy of special press attention because his pro-drug legalization campaign has been considered at odds with the vast majority of Republicans and Democrats who share the view that legalization would make the drug problem far worse.

In the current campaign, however, a major transformation has taken place. Soros is said to have "privatized" or replaced the Democratic Party by subsidizing many different liberal-left organizations that comprise its political base and creating new ones, the "527" organizations.

Among the candidates who ran for the Democratic presidential nomination, Soros financially supported John Kerry, Wesley Clark, Senator Bob Graham, and Howard Dean. He has been praised by Senator Hillary Clinton and contributed to her Senate campaign and political action committee.* He has also contributed to the political campaigns of Democratic Senators Tom Daschle, Carl Levin, John Corzine, Mary Landrieu, Debbie Stabenow, Charles Schumer, Joseph Biden, Patrick Leahy, Paul Sarbanes, Thomas Harkin, and Barbara Boxer. In 2002, Soros funded Al Gore for president and contributed $153,000 in "soft money" to the Democratic National Committee. Soros, who is also very close to Bill Clinton, was described by Clinton's Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott as a "national treasure."

It is significant that Soros and two of his sons have contributed $2000 each to Brad Carson, the Democratic Senate candidate in Oklahoma. His Republican opponent, Dr. Tom Coburn, was a member of the U.S. House for six years, where he developed a reputation as a leading opponent of efforts to legalize marijuana and fund needle exchange programs that facilitate illicit drug use.* Coburn exposed Soros-style "harm reduction" as a backdoor approach to legalization of illicit drugs. Coburn was also a strong supporter of drug testing and even fought to require drug testing of members of Congress. Coburn and his staff voluntarily underwent drug testing. If elected to the Senate, say his supporters, Coburn would be the chamber's leading voice for protecting children from the dangers of drug abuse and a scientific voice of reason against the Soros-supported movement that seeks to legalize drugs. It's no wonder that Soros and his sons have targeted Coburn for defeat.

Soros has also contributed to Barack Obama, running for the Senate as a Democrat from Illinois. CNSNews.com reports that, "Not only did Soros donate to Obama's campaign, but four other family members - Jennifer, sons Jonathan and Robert and wife Susan - did as well. Because of a special provision campaign finance laws, the Soroses were able to give a collective $60,000 to Obama during his primary challenge."




The drug culture magazine, Heads, calls him "Daddy Weedbucks," ran an excerpt from his book, Soros on Soros, and declared that "he drops the bucks exactly where they're needed."* The September-October issue of the drug culture magazine High Times recognizes the stakes, noting that there are "ten reasons to get rid of Bush" and that one is that there will be "No legalization of pot" under Bush. The implication of the article was that the situation would change under Kerry.

None of this is being reported, however, by the major media.

His partner, Peter Lewis, whitewashed by the Post as "one of the country's 10 most generous philanthropists," was actually arrested in New Zealand for "importing" drugs, including hashish and marijuana.

The Human Halliburton

The media call him a billionaire "philanthropist" who "promotes democracy" and "democratic institutions" abroad.* He has been invited to address the National Press Club on October 28, 2004, just before the election. But admitted marijuana user George Soros, who says he tried marijuana "and enjoyed it," doesn't just "give" money away. He spends money for a purpose because he wants to remake America and the world.* He is depicted in a recent lengthy New Yorker article by Jane Mayer as well-intentioned, not that concerned about money, the victim of scurrilous attacks, and someone who simply wants his "ideas" to "be heard." This is typical of the fawning coverage of Soros. Mayer made a brief reference to his collaborator, Peter B. Lewis,* and his funding of "efforts to decriminalize marijuana," but she failed to explore how Soros is himself committed to legalizing dangerous drugs. Mayer did disclose that a meeting was held in August, after the Democratic Party convention, of what critics call a "billionaire conspiracy" to defeat Bush.* Soros and Lewis were among the participants in the meeting, which was supposed to be kept private.*

Soros' strong opposition to President Bush's effort to create democratic institutions in Iraq contradicts his alleged support for democracy. But the media don't point this out because they oppose Bush's Iraq policy. Mayer, who interviewed the billionaire at length, suggests that Soros may be "looking for influence [in a Kerry Administration] to get out of Iraq" but that to pursue such an objective in exchange for his financial support to the candidate might be deemed "not appropriate" by some observers.

It would be unwise for the public to dismiss the idea that he would not demand implementation of his other "ideas," including drug legalization.

Sometimes described as an atheist or agnostic, Soros has announced a vision of a secular "open society." However, his agenda of drug legalization has remained largely hidden from public view during the current campaign.

While Soros may not want to openly talk about what he would expect out of a Kerry Administration, his allies have obviously been giving it much thought.

At the 2004 conference of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML), Ethan Nadelmann of the Soros-funded Drug Policy Alliance* was asked about his association with Soros and the billionaire's attempt to put John Kerry in the White House. The questioner asked, "Are we going to get some Supreme Court justices out this?" Nadelmann modestly answered, "We will see," and cautioned that it may be difficult to deliver "all the goods."

This is critical because the U.S. Supreme Court is already considering the matter of the several U.S. states that have laws on the books permitting some form of "medical marijuana" use, a violation of federal law, and could return to the subject in the future. The Court is expected to rule by June 2005 on a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision, challenged by the Bush administration, that bars federal agents from interfering with the growing and use of marijuana by two women in California.

Hollywood has already been captured by the illegal drug lobby.

At the 2004 NORML conference, Allen St. Pierre of the NORML Foundation described how various U.S. television programs "have previewed marijuana in a way ultimately positive." He named them as ER, Chicago Hope, the Practice, Sybil, Murphy Brown, Sports Night, Becker, West Wing, Roseanne, Sex in the City, Six Feet Under, Whoopi, Montel, That 70s Show,* and the Larry David Show. "These shows are seen by tens of millions of people," he said. "So that's what it's so crucial that we're able to capture—and to demonstrate the change in—culture."

The challenge for the drug culture is now to capture the U.S. Government. Soros is their front man.

Bloomberg.com quoted Strobe Talbott, U.S. deputy secretary of state from 1994 to 2001, as saying, "Whenever George Soros called and asked to meet, I would move heaven and earth to do so. I treated him like the foreign minister of another country because of all that he had done." Even under the Bush Administration, Soros has been considered an important and influential figure. He gave a September 16, 2003, speech at the State Department on "America in the Global Community: Building Long-Term Security."*

So think about the clout he would have if he almost single-handedly buys the White House for John Kerry and plays a role in the election of several new Senators.

Rather than investigate the source of the Soros money, Washington Post columnist Harold Meyerson has praised Soros for engineering the "privatization" of the Democratic Party through funding of the "527" political groups and bypassing what he calls an incompetent Democratic Party apparatus.* At the far-left "Take Back America" forum in June, Soros was photographed greeting Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, who introduced him to the group. She told the crowd that, "we need people like George Soros, who is fearless and willing to step up when it counts." He stepped up with his money.

However, Meyerson and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman* have attacked House Speaker Dennis Hastert for raising questions about where Soros gets his money.*

A professed believer in democracy, Soros has used the "527" loophole in a campaign finance law that he promoted to restrict the political activities of "special interests." He has set a record "for the most money donated by an individual in an election cycle."* Those "special interests" turned out to be other people — not him.* He has since poured millions of dollars into anti-Bush groups and voter registration drives, some marked by alleged fraud, for the Democratic Party.*

His commitment to democracy is never questioned. Typical of the pro-Soros media coverage was a USA Today story on June 1 that gave Soros credit for freeing millions of people from communism and "supporting democracy." The story ignored his insider trading conviction. While Soros provided some funding to anti-communist groups during the Cold War, his career has been designed to make money and extend his influence over nations and people. Communism was a threat because it was not hospitable to his investments.

An excellent example of how he operates is Kosovo. As indicated earlier, it is relevant to note that, after the Soros-supported war on Kosovo,* a province of Yugoslavia, a Soros fund announced in 2000 that it was investing $150 million -- with loan guarantees from the U.S. Overseas Private Investment Corporation -- in the Balkans. It was called the "Southeast Europe Equity Fund." By 2002, the OPIC-supported size of the investment had risen to $200 million and OPIC announced that Soros Investment Capital, Ltd. Fund Yugoslavia had acquired a controlling stake in Eksimbanka, a private commercial bank in Serbia, and had financed the start-up of Serbia Broadband Networks, the leading cable television and broadband services company in Serbia.

What's more, his "open society" doesn't extend to himself. His unregulated "hedge funds," open only to the super rich, are beyond public scrutiny or the interest of the press.*

As noted, in another curious development, the global capitalist has become a global socialist advocating a global tax, known as the Tobin Tax, on the means by which he exploited the global capitalist system and became rich – international currency speculation and manipulation. Soros has declared that the Tobin Tax is a "valid suggestion" for raising international revenue and that opposition to implementing the tax can be overcome. What has not been reported* is that Thomas Palley, the director of the Globalization Reform Project at Soros' Open Society Institute, was a featured speaker at a January 2003 event in Washington, D.C. to discuss how to implement the tax. (See Obama's Global Poverty Fund)

"He made his money the old-fashioned way, on Wall Street," wrote Post columnist Harold Meyerson. In fact, he made his money through investment techniques that are not available to ordinary investors, and his financial interventions can affect nations and their economies.

Soros claims that the "527" organizations he funds "file detailed and frequent reports with government regulators." On the January 9 NOW With Bill Moyers program on PBS, Charles Lewis of the Soros-funded Center for Public Integrity argued that while Soros was funding 527 groups, Soros was disclosing these contributions and that the money could be tracked.*

Again, that begs the question of where he gets his money.

His use of that loophole -- in a law that he promoted to restrict the influence of outside "special interests" on political campaigns -- is suspicious and curious on its face. Equally curious, Soros claims that the Bush Administration's reaction to 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq caused him to spend millions of dollars through these "527" organizations to defeat Bush.* However, Soros favored the Clinton Administration's preemptive attack on Yugoslavia, in the absence of any threat to the U.S. and without U.S. Congressional authorization.

While Soros runs around the country talking about defeating Bush, mostly because of his Iraq policy, he is using his money to target other candidates who have prosecuted the war on drugs.

The pro-Soros national media have refused to examine the implications of a ruling by New York State Supreme Court Justice Bernard Malone. He ruled that it was improper for the Soros-backed Working Families Party to get involvement in a Democratic primary for District Attorney and he referred the case to local prosecutors and New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer for a possible criminal investigation.* Thanks to the money provided by Soros, David Soares defeated incumbent District Attorney Paul Clyne in the Democratic primary. At the time of Clyne's defeat, Ethan Nadelmann of the Soros-funded Drug Policy Alliance Network said he was proud that his group had "contributed to this race" and that "what happened in Albany" has "national resonance." That suggested to some that Soros, if he is successful in putting John Kerry in the White House, would change the nation's anti-drug policy.

The Criminals Lobby

Soros, who lives in New York, has also contributed $150,000 to a California ballot measure, proposition 66, to overturn the three-strikes law, which mandates prison terms of 25-years-to-life for defendants convicted of a third felony. The ballot measure is opposed by the state's district attorneys and law enforcement agencies.

In other unsavory connections, a Soros grant was given to Linda Evans, who was pardoned by Bill Clinton for her involvement in the Weather Underground terrorist group. The Weather Underground was involved in the 1981 Brinks robbery, in which three murders were committed, and a series of bombings, including the bombing of the U.S. Capitol in November 1983.

The Baltimore, Maryland, branch of the OSI on May 12 hosted Bernardine Dohrn, another former member of the Weather Underground who once expressed solidarity with mass murderer Charles Manson,* at a forum on criminal justice issues.* Speaking to a Weather Underground "war council" in Michigan in 1969, Dohrn gave a three-fingered "fork salute" to Manson. As noted by Ami Naramor of The Claremont Institute,* "Calling Manson's victims the 'Tate Eight,' Dohrn gloated over the fact that actress Sharon Tate, who was pregnant at the time, had been stabbed with a fork in her womb. 'Dig it. First they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them, they even shoved a fork into a victim's stomach! Wild!'" Dohrn, now an associate professor and director at Northwestern University's Children and Justice Center, was a member of the advisory committee of the "children's rights watch" project of Human Rights Watch,* funded by Soros.

Not coincidentally, the drug culture has embraced the Weather Underground. High Times magazine has called David Gilbert, a Weather Underground member now in prison, an "anti-imperialist political prisoner" and has hailed his book, No Surrender.* High Times says Gilbert works behind bars for "prisoners' rights" – a favorite cause of Soros.

The latest development is creation of "Cannabis Consumers," a bizarre organization of out-of-the-closet illegal pot smokers, formed to celebrate and glorify the drug. Director Mikki Norris, who says her group received a grant from the Soros-funded Drug Policy Alliance, says, "we honor George Soros."

The Soros-supported Drug Policy Alliance supports "marijuana clubs" currently dispensing the drug, supposedly on "medical" grounds. The federal government has tried to close down these clubs—a policy that could change if Soros gains access to and influence over the White House. Several states have passed "medical marijuana" initiatives, funded by Soros, attempting to provide the drug under the cover of treating illnesses. But the American people have been kept in the dark about whether the Soros campaign to weaken drug laws would be embraced and implemented on a national basis by a Kerry Administration.

One of the few reporters to question the Soros agenda is John Berlau of Insight magazine,* who asked whether Soros would benefit financially from his huge expenditures on political activity. Michael Vachon, the spokesman for Soros Fund Management in New York City, said,* "I have no faith in the ability or desire of Insight magazine to portray George Soros' activities in an unbiased manner." Pressed, he said, "There's no relationship between the policy prescriptions George Soros recommends and his own financial holdings. He doesn't make policy recommendations to increase his own personal wealth. That's not what motivates him."*

There can be no doubt, however, that if the Soros plan for drug legalization goes forward, there would have to be an official infrastructure in place to finance drug production and distribution and handle the enormous profits that will be made from legalization. Legalization will not eliminate drug profits, it will only transfer some of them to government and "legitimate" industries. Soros could be poised to invest in those industries and companies.

He is laying the groundwork for the creation of a system under which government and corporations would legalize, dispense and advertise hard drugs, much like tobacco or alcohol, and supply addicts with needles and drug paraphernalia. In effect, Soros appears to be financing drug legalization for the purpose of creating a new market for federal payments to underwrite drug purchases for addicts.* Soros appears to favor an indoor version of "Needle Park," where addicts come to government offices to inject or smoke their drugs at taxpayer expense.

His position is also reflected in his funding of the ACLU,* which itself favors the legalization of all drugs—even heroin and crack cocaine—and opposes virtually all measures taken to curtail drug use. In another example of its extremist approach, the group has rejected funds from the Ford and Rockefeller Foundations, and participation in the Combined Federal Campaign, because acceptance of the money would require adopting measures to make sure it does not employ terrorists or support terrorist activity.

Soros hired Aryeh Neier as president of his Open Society Institute (OSI) in 1993. Neier worked for the ACLU for 15 years, including eight as national director.*

Typically, Soros and his cronies present the current "war on drugs" as draconian, a huge waste of money and a threat to civil liberties. Legalization is then presented, usually couched in terms of reducing the harm associated with illegal use and procurement of drugs. The audience is never presented with a third option—eradication of drug crops at home and abroad, an intensified military/intelligence effort against drug lords abroad, tougher sentences for users and dealers, and more drug testing.

In 1995, Soros made a major contribution to the Council on Foreign Relations,* which two years later, under the leadership of Mathea Falco,* released a comprehensive report on U.S. international drug control strategy, entitled, Rethinking International Drug Control. However, A.M. Rosenthal of the New York Times, who participated in the task force that drafted the report, declined to endorse it, saying that it "is so negative in substance and tone about United States efforts to stem drug use, production and distribution that it amounts to an invitation to drop those efforts…"

Soros clearly has his sights set on global policy on drugs. Soros was a signer of a 1998 letter to U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan urging a radical revamping of global anti-drug policies. Another signer was Morton H. Halperin, a former Department of Defense and National Security Council Official.*

In a typical laudatory article about Soros, USA Today author Rick Hampson made a brief reference to his belief in "liberalized drug laws." Nothing was said, however, about how Soros has managed to liberalize or weaken those laws across the country, and how he has his sights set on national anti-drug policy. The National District Attorneys Association says that since 1996 "incremental changes in state drug laws have continued at an alarming rate across our nation" and they are designed to "ultimately legalize drugs." Soros was identified in this report as one of the wealthy individuals behind this "very well financed" drug legalization movement that is "highly adept at manipulating the media."*

In an October 18 Newsweek story, "Can a Billionaire Beat Bush?"* writer Marcus Mabry* said that Soros will "be there" even if Bush wins, ready to "build a new left…" Soros and other " wealthy progressives," he says, "will set about assembling the infrastructure," including think tanks, foundations, and civic groups, of this "new left."

But Soros has already done this. The late left-wing writer, Walt Contreras Sheasby, noted that the Soros influence "is one of those hushed secrets inside the left…" and that he has subsidized "many of the activist groups, luminaries and publications of the American left…"*

Mabry completely ignored his pro-drug legalization agenda and erroneously claimed that his involvement in this year's presidential campaign is "his first significant involvement in American electoral politics." Mabry ignored Soros's funding of at least 19 initiatives to weaken drug laws.

Journalists carefully conceal their own conflicts of interest. On the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) NOW With Bill Moyers program on January 9 of this year, Moyers interviewed Charles Lewis of the Center for Public Integrity about the big money supporting the presidential candidates. But little time and attention was paid to how Soros was trying to buy the White House and pouring millions of dollars into groups such as MoveOn.org to bring this about. Moyers, former press secretary to President Lyndon Johnson, failed to tell his viewers that he is on the board of Soros' Open Society Institute and that it has funneled $1.7 million into Lewis and his Center for Public Integrity. Moyers had conducted and aired an interview with Soros on September 12, 2003, where he declared, "The Republican Party has been captured by a bunch of extremists…" Soros was presented as an opponent of unchecked capitalism and a supporter of democracy and nation-building abroad.

The power of the Soros-supported media network was demonstrated in mid-October when a controversy emerged over Sinclair Broadcasting airing parts of Stolen Honor, a film raising questions about the detrimental impact of John Kerry's 1971 anti-war testimony on U.S. Vietnam POWs being held by the communists. Kerry had branded U.S. soldiers as war criminals, and POWs interviewed in Stolen Honor said this resulted in more torture to them. The Democratic Party, the Kerry campaign, and various groups denounced Sinclair for planning to air Stolen Honor. MediaChannel.org, Common Cause, the Alliance for Better Campaigns, Media Access Project, Media for Democracy, and the Office of Communication of the United Church of Christ held an anti-Sinclair news conference. They denounced Sinclair for allegedly abusing the public airwaves by planning to air "propaganda."* All of these organizations -- except for the possible exception of the Office of Communication of the United Church of Christ -- are funded by Soros.

Media Matters, a left-wing media watchdog group that was also pressuring Sinclair to abandon plans to air the testimony of the former POWs, was "developed" with help from the Center for American Progress, funded by Soros.

The attack on Sinclair had the effect of diverting attention away from the extensive and controversial media connections of Soros, his foundations, and the organizations they subsidize, and legitimate questions about the Soros-supported candidate John Kerry.* These groups – and the many prominent journalists who serve on their boards – make Sinclair look penny ante.

Pro-Soros media coverage dates back many years and continues to the present day, as detailed in this report.* In 1996, Dan Rather's CBS Evening News highlighted him as a philanthropist and humanitarian, someone who had made a fortune but was now making a difference. The story by correspondent Anthony Mason ignored his commitment to legalization of drugs.

That same year, Judith Miller of the New York Times wrote that he was "bringing his philanthropy home." While she made a brief reference to his drug legalization agenda, the headline over the piece said he was committed to "social justice." His close adviser, Aryeh Neier, a longtime ACLU official, was described merely as a "human rights advocate."

On the far left, The Nation magazine and its Nation Institute have been supported by OSI. The magazine published a generally flattering piece about the Soros-funded Center for American Progress.

In 1994 Soros received the Burton Benjamin Memorial Award at an International Press Freedom Awards dinner, sponsored by the Committee to Protect Journalists. Five years earlier, OSI gave 4 grants, totaling $220,000, to the Committee to Protect Journalists. Benjamin was senior executive producer at CBS News and served briefly as chair of the Committee to Protect Journalists before his death in 1988.*

The Soros media connections include:

•An investor in the Times Mirror Company, Soros funded the Project on Media Ownership, headed by Professor Mark Crispin Miller at New York University. Whose purpose was expose "media concentration." A total of $300,000 over several years came from George Soros' Open Society Institute (OSI). In 1999, a survey commissioned by the Project on Media Ownership and the Benton Foundation and paid for by OSI* found that seventy-nine percent of adults would favor a law requiring commercial broadcasters to pay 5 percent of their revenues into a fund for public broadcasting.


•Eric Alterman of The Nation has hailed Soros for spending millions on "education campaigns with America Coming Together, voter mobilization drives with MoveOn.org and research activities with the Center for American Progress (CAP)--where I am a senior fellow…" Alterman says his own magazine, The Nation, is viewed as out of the mainstream in part because of "the continued appearance in its pages of a long-time Stalinist communist, Alexander Cockburn, whose unabashed hatred for both America and Israel ... tarnish the reputation of its otherwise serious contributors." Alterman's mentor, I.F. Stone, was a paid agent of the KGB and a Stalinist.*


•In the Los Angeles Times Book Review, Orville Schell said that Soros had written a*"succinct and well-reasoned book," The Bubble of American Supremacy, which ought "to provide a welcome template for how the candidates might begin to think their way through to a more coherent view of America's place in the world." Soros had spoken on March 3 at the Goldman Forum on the Press and Foreign Affairs, sponsored by UC Berkeley's Graduate School of Journalism.* The event was a conversation between Soros and Journalism Dean Orville Schell.


•OSI gave $60,000 to the Independent Media Institute , whose executive director, Don Hazen, is a former publisher of Mother Jones.* Hazen has called Soros a "progressive philanthropist." A story carried by the Independent Media Institute on its AlterNet project says Soros "believes in democracy, positive international relations and effective strategies to reduce poverty, among other things."


•OSI gave a $75,000 grant to the Center for Investigative Reporting. The group's board of advisers includes prominent journalists.


•OSI gave $246,528 to the Center for Public Integrity, headed by former CBS News producer Charles Lewis, "to support the continuing expansion of the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists."* A total of $1 million went for "the Global Access Project." In total, it is estimated that the group has received $1.7 from Soros.


•OSI gave $200,000 to the Fund for Investigative Journalism.* This group, too, features prominent journalists on its board.


•OSI's "Network Media Program" gave $22,157 to Investigative Reporters & Editors.


•Soros Foundations have provided $160,000 to MediaChannel.org, a so-called "media issues supersite, featuring criticism, breaking news, and investigative reporting from hundreds of organizations worldwide." The executive editor is Danny Schecter, a former news program producer and investigative reporter at CNN and ABC. It was created by Globalvision News Network, whose board includes "Senior executives from the world's leading media firms."


•OSI has contributed $70,000 toward the far-left Independent Media Center, or Indymedia, known as an "independent newsgathering collective," whose servers were seized by a federal law enforcement agency on October 7. The action was apparently related to an investigation into international terrorism, kidnapping or money laundering.


•OSI provided $600,000 to the Media Access Project, a so-called telecommunications public interest law firm critical of conservative influence in the major media.


•OSI provide $30,000 to the Media Awareness Project, a "worldwide network dedicated to drug policy reform" and promoting "balanced media coverage" of the drug issue.


•OSI provided $200,000 to the Association for Progressive Communications, "an international network…working for peace, human rights, development and protection of the environment…"

Considering all of the money that Soros or his organizations have provided to news organizations, it should be no surprise to learn that journalists love him.* His web site*advises visitors to "read about George Soros from The New York Times, USA Today, Time Magazine, et al.," all of which are reprinted on the site and highly favorable. His new web site*features several complimentary statements about Soros from articles in the press and media figures.

Either the media fear his wealth and power, they favor his positions on the issues, or they want access to his money. The people have a right to know.




LOOK WHAT YOU HAVE DONE!

You just wouldn't listen. You just couldn't be bothered informing yourselves with factual sources.

You sold our country to the communist "World Order" George Soros by electing his puppet.

Maybe now you will pay attention and not allow the worst to happen. Become watchdogs. Carry a big stick. Make a lot of noise. Be honest with yourselves. Open your friggin eyes! Or, get the fuck out of the way.

 

[bronzeage]

Maybe you could get a job there if you cut and pasted a resume to them.

 

[KingOrfeo]

I've never understood the RW paranoia about so unusual a figure as Soros. I'm sure if you totaled up all the money given annually to LW or liberal causes and think-tanks and foundations by Soros and a handful of rich Hollywood celebs on one side of the ledger, and all that given to RW causes and think-tanks and foundations by Richard Mellon Scaife and his ilk and the National Association of Manufacturers, etc., on the other, the sum on the right side would be orders of magnitude larger. "Limousine liberals" exist in plenty, but most really rich and politically engaged persons (and corporations, and business associations) support the RW with their money if they support anyone. David Horowitz' "Discover the Networks" site represents a world-view almost completely inverted from reality in this regard.

In any case I'm not getting the outrage in the OP. If I were to demonstrate W got "elected" in 2000 with the support of any of the multitude of well-funded RW think-tanks in DC, such as the American Enterprise Institute or the Heritage Foundation or the Project for a New American Century, and some of the scholars from those institutions then found places in his administration, would you regard that as scandalous? Or even unusual?

 

[MeeMie]

Senator Goldwater once said, "any government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take it away." That is what communism and socialism is about. Both doctrines believe the State is all powerful. Both believe the individual is owned by the State.

On the existence of socialism or communism, both are theories for textbooks.

In the real world, if a nation has communist or socialist polices, they are actually a totalitarian State. Government controls your lives, your speech, your religion. Doctors, teachers and all workers are owned by the State. Everything is given to the citizens by first taking everything from them. All of this at the point of a gun. That is a totalitarian State.

And this is how it begins.



So Why Did We Fight the Cold War?

By Richard Geno, Chronwatch.com, 10/19/08

From the end of World War II until the Iron Curtain collapsed, two generations of Americans were raised in fear that we may be attacked by a nuclear weapon from the Soviet Union. Some of us were taught how to position ourselves under our desks at school. I never really understood how hiding under one’s desk would protect us from an atomic bomb; but we all learned how to effectively get under our desk.

During the 1950’s, the left in America coined the phrase, "Better red than dead." This was the ultimate pacifist motto. In the early part of that decade, we witnessed many treasonous acts, and a growing membership in the Communist Party USA. President Eisenhower was vigilant, and we prevailed over Communism in the 1950’s. As we moved into the 1960’s, President John Kennedy stood up to the Communists of the Soviet Union as they attempted to establish a beachhead in Cuba with the help of their new leader, Fidel Castro.

Kennedy’s successor, Lyndon Baines Johnson, sent over a half million Americans 8,000 miles from our shores to fight the Communist threat, resulting in over 58,000 American deaths, and an estimated 3-4,000,000 Vietnamese casualties. Five years later, a dedicated anti-Communist president, Richard Nixon, attempted to reduce the tension between the United States and world Communism by breaking bread with Mao Zedung and Zhou Enlai of Communist China.

A decade later, President Ronald Reagan stood firm against all aggression against the Soviet Union, inisting that the Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev "tear down the wall" between East and West Germany. That action would free more than a dozen countries that lived under the tyranny of people like Joseph Stalin, Nikita Khrushchev and Leonid Brezhnev for four decades. It is no wonder that the countries formerly under the influence of the Soviet Empire and its Communist system - countries like Poland, Ukraine, Georgia and Romania - are the most anti-Communist nations on earth, and are so enamored with freedom.

Sure enough, shortly after President Reagan left office, the Berlin Wall came tumbling down; and a new breath of peace and freedom engulfed Eastern and Central Europe, and the world. Exactly what was it that our presidents from Truman to Reagan were working so hard to conquer? Was it just a war of words? Was it Us against Them on the world stage?

No, we fought for freedom, liberty and free markets. They were protecting the rights that Thomas Jefferson, John Adams and all of the 18th Century American heroes established for the citizens of the United States. They also provided hope and a shining model for the rest of the world.

Eight presidents from both political parties protected our precious system of government that provides the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Included in those rights is the right to individually own property. One of the primary purposes of the government is to protect an owner’s right to consume, sell, mortgage, transfer and exchange his or her property, whether that be real property or personal property. These rights have their origins in both morality and natural law.

We paid a tremendous price - both in people and treasure - to preserve our freedom-oriented system of government. After all of that sacrifice, we now have one of our country’s major political parties wanting to implement the very system we fought so very hard to avoid. Taking advantage of difficult financial times, the Democrat Party now wants to fundamentally change our system of government in order to "spread the wealth around."

The United States was founded on the private enterprise system where all resources are privately owned. Adam Smith, in his book "The Wealth of Nations," indicated that private interests would promote the social interest. For over two hundred years, the United States has created more wealth than any other country by organizing and allocating economic resources based on free markets and individual property rights. Not only has this system provided an exceptional lifestyle for Americans; but it has also enabled us to feed much of the world, and provide an improved standard of living for every person on earth.

Conversely, Communism is a socioeconomic structure that promotes the establishment of an egalitarian and classless society based on common ownership of the means of production and property. In other words, government does everything in its power to "level the playing field." The government will decide how much one should earn, take from those above a certain level, and "spread the wealth around." This is exactly what both the Democrat candidate for president, Barack Obama, and the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, have advocated in 2008.

Senator Barack Obama’s policies are communist, pure and simple.

Recently, he has advocated his version of the Karl Marx Communist Manifesto of "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need." With the collusion of the media, history has demonstrated that these communist societies have led to totalitarian states. Senator Obama is doing everything to assure that as well by training, funding and working closely with organizations like ACORN. He has called for a national citizen military force. He has sent government agents to intimidate American citizens who have said they don’t agree with him, and to those will not vote for him. He also tried to use the offices of state Attorneys General to silence any opposition or dissent. This sounds remarkably like Joseph Stalin’s Soviet Union.

This tendency should not be a surprise since from the time he was a teenager, Barack Obama has consorted with Communists, socialists, terrorists and anti-Americans. His entire life has been surrounded by anti-American radicals, from the early days of his first mentor, Communist Party USA member Frank Marshall Davis, to the kickoff of his political career in the living room of the homegrown terrorist, William Ayers. His spiritual advisor for twenty years was a racist, anti-American, black supremacist bigot by the name of Reverend Jeremiah Wright. As soon as he moved to Chicago, Barack Obama immersed himself into the philosophy of Saul Alinsky, who wrote the book, "Rules for Radicals."

That is his past, but what about right now. On the stump in 2008, he has told crowds that as president, "we’ll ensure that ’economic justice’ is served; that is what this election is about." Economic justice simply means punishing the successful and redistributing their wealth by government fiat. It’s a euphemism for the communist branch of socialism.

Here are just a few of his communistic proposals: * Universal guaranteed health care * Free college tuition * Universal national service similar to what is practiced in Cuba * Wage Insurance where dislocated workers will be supplemented by the government to their old levels * Free Child care and universal preschool * Increased earned income tax credit for the working poor Normally, an American Congress would block most, if not all, of these efforts. However, with expected Democrat gains in the upcoming November elections, the US Congress will be led by Nancy Pelosi, who will be empowered by the election results. Congresswoman Pelosi has suggested a Windfall Tax on retirement income. She has recommended a Windfall Tax on all stock market profits, including pensions, 401K plans and mutual funds.

Nancy Pelosi has said, "We need to work toward the goal of equalizing income in our country, and at the same time limiting the amount the rich can invest." When asked how these new tax dollars would be spent, she replied, "We need to raise the standard of living of our poor, unemployed and minorities. For example, we have an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in our country who need our help along with millions of unemployed minorities. Stock market windfall profits taxes could go a long way to guarantee these people the standard of living they would like to have as Americans." This is classic Marxism.

We may be facing the first democratically elected Communist government in world history. If you think it can’t happen here, what gives you that sense of confidence? Adolf Hitler was elected as a nationalist Socialist candidate after financial calamity occurred in Germany. Barack Obama has consistently referred to our current financial crisis as the worst since that Hitler Era. Desperate times cause desperate people to reach for desperate measures. Just because Communism has failed everywhere else does not mean that George Soros, MoveOn.org, Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi won’t attempt to implement it in the United States. Pay close attention to their current words and their past history.

 

[off2bed]

I've never understood the RW paranoia about so unusual a figure as Soros.

So you're ok with what ACORN did in the election?

 

[KingOrfeo]

So you're ok with what ACORN did in the election?

Yes.

 

[MeeMie]

Some paid attention:

Glenn Beck was right on top of it back in February.

ttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQ9Io6Qe-k0&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PePbtEABzGk&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24OQtVekrT8&feature=related

 

[MeeMie]

I've never understood the RW paranoia about so unusual a figure as Soros.

You never understood because you refused to open your mind to the facts.

Did you even read any of those posts up there?

No, of course not. You would much rather believe in the fallacy of Soros' good influence on this country's policies, rather that to see in plain black and white print what the man is.

Open your eyes to the truth, instead of being manipulated by media owned/operated by the evil Soros enterprises.

 

[KingOrfeo]

We may be facing the first democratically elected Communist government in world history.

1. Salvador Allende was a Marxist.

2. Barack Obama ain't.

 

[KingOrfeo]

You never understood because you refused to open your mind to the facts.

Did you even read any of those posts up there?

No, of course not. You would much rather believe in the fallacy of Soros' good influence on this country's policies, rather that to see in plain black and white print what the man is.

Open your eyes to the truth, instead of being manipulated by media owned/operated by the evil Soros enterprises.

Thank you, I know all about George Soros. There's nothing "evil" about him. He is simply an enlightened capitalist who perceives clearly some of the basic problems with contemporary capitalism, which does not mean he is scheming to destroy it.

 

[MeeMie]

This is the real cause for the fall of communism around the globe. No communist country has ever been able to feed itself long term, ultimately collapsing under the weight of its own lack of productivity which always results in a lack of resources.

This is the reason America was designed to be a society which protects the Rights of the individual over the collective group or groups.


But there is a strong movement in America today to replace our forefathers design with a collective bargaining system in which the central federal government collects an increasing amount of private resources, grabs responsibility of deciding everyone’s worth, and provides the government sanctioned benefits demanded by the people.

This is collective bargaining, union mentality, socialism at first, and communism in the end. As you have already seen, the public demand for government services never ends, once it begins. Already, the government controls approximately 43.8% of America’s wealth, and it isn’t enough, they continue to outspend that.


True socialists/communists understand this, so do many politicians who promote these ideas under the guise of Democracy and equality. However, many unsuspecting bedfellows are unaware of what they are supporting. They focus on immediate needs (often with good intentions), and shortcut fix’s of allowing government to solve individual challenges, without considering the long term implications.

The tactics used to promote communism and socialism have changed dramatically since the days of Stalin. America’s military superpower provided a formidable resistance to the spread of communism around the globe, so new tactics were required.

Today their tactics are more subtle, and in many ways more devious, as they fly (for the most part) below anyone’s radar. Their methods have been adjusted to win the hearts and minds of the people, who would then demand an ever increasing socialist government responsible for caring for its people’s daily needs.


You can clearly align the platform of today’s Democratic Party with that of either the communist or socialist agenda, but most people have never looked and compared. Many of the grassroots workers in the DNC are from the socialist and communist party’s. They realize that you would never knowingly vote for their candidate, so they adopt the next best thing, the DNC candidate, and they push the DNC further and further to the left.

Communists predicted long ago that they would achieve success in America without ever firing a shot. This is what they meant, and they are well on their way to that success. Some of the politicians who promote these ideas know exactly what they are promoting, and some are simply unsuspecting bedfellows themselves, pandering to the electorate for votes by the best means available. Either way, they are selling America out for personal power.

The American people need to understand that our nations division is no accident. It was systematically designed, diligently deployed, as a means of eliminating individuals and creating voting blocks instead. Voting blocks that could be manipulated into casting certain votes for narrow reasoning, groups pitted against one another, in order to cause single issue voting, an electorate that could be swayed by policy promises geared towards the ideals of the voting blocks.

The system has been brilliantly employed. So much so, that today, we are more divided and fragmented than ever before in history. No amount of evidence seems to sway people’s opinions either. It’s almost a Jim Jones style grip that this ideology has on people. Most search only for facts that support what they choose to believe.

It’s easy enough to document the agenda of a George Soros, (who attempted to buy the Whitehouse for John Kerry and succeeded to do so for Obama), and his hatred for America’s world power. It’s easy enough to debunk the rantings and misleading statements of a Michael Moore or a liberal media. But blind Party loyalists won’t hear the message, despite a mountain of evidence. Even conservatives now find themselves cornered into pandering in order to just slow the tide.


This presents the largest threat to America, more so than all the world terrorists combined. Party loyalists need to realize that loyalty to country, honor, truth and American principles are of greater value. Partisans need to understand that it does not matter who gets the credit, as long as the right thing gets accomplished. Who gets the blame won’t matter either, if we don’t turn this trend around. We need to face the fact that our forefathers had it right and that we are about to relive the mistakes of centuries past.

As the saying goes, you have to watch what you wish for, because it might come true!

 

[KingOrfeo]

Who says the John Birch Society is dead?

 

[Wrong Element]

This thread needs to be preserved as a time capsule of clinical paranoia. Someday we'll all look back and laugh. Hell, I'm laughing already. See?

 

[off2bed]

There's a bit more to learn about Soros than you'll find on Wikipedia.

 

[KingOrfeo]

There's a bit more to learn about Soros than you'll find on Wikipedia.

If you can enlighten us by some means other than mindless cut-and-pasting from zero-credibility RW blogs, please do so.

 

[off2bed]

This thread needs to be preserved as a time capsule of clinical paranoia. Someday we'll all look back and laugh. Hell, I'm laughing already. See?

Yeah, it's a funny as the paranoia about Bush.

 

[bronzeage]

Who says the John Birch Society is dead?

I'm not sure, but John Birch was dead before they had the first meeting.

 

[KingOrfeo]

From SourceWatch:

George Soros

Center for American Progress

 

[Sean]

Soros is stated to be looking for Europe to take leadership in the further development of the New World Order.

By whom?

 

[Sean]

If you can enlighten us by some means other than mindless cut-and-pasting from zero-credibility RW blogs, please do so.

The fact that he's a capitalist market speculator par excellence and uses the profits to build schools, hospitals and orphanages in Eastern Europe seems to have been missed off the list for some reason.

 

[KingOrfeo]

By whom?

Also, what exactly is this New World Order, and why does anybody have anything against it?

 

[MeeMie]

There's a bit more to learn about Soros than you'll find on Wikipedia.

They'll never bother to see the truth.

When someone asks why anyone would have an objection to Soros' New World Order plans for the US, his power over politicians in office, his manipulation of policies to suit his financial and ideological interests, his Marxist leaning to Communist background, his history of decimating world currencies for his own purpose....... why would they even bother to read articles that show him for what he is.

Ignorance is bliss.