The Soros Saga

This is the written version of the Soros Saga project I did with Brittany Pettibone.

First off — here’s a forward note from her:

“When I agreed to collaborate with Nick Monroe on a series about George Soros, I in no way understood the magnitude of the project I was signing on for, and I mean this in the best possible way. The ‘rabbit-hole’, so to speak, with regard to George Soros is far deeper than even I had previously imagined. The goal upon finishing this six-part series is to have the viewer walk away not only informed, but enraged — enraged at just how much George Soros has lent and continues to lend a hand in the destruction of Western Civilization. I sincerely hope Nick and I have succeeded in this goal. Throughout the course of working on this series, we’ve found that we work very well as a team, so you can certainly expect more projects from us in the future. Regards — Brittany Pettibone”

Round and round we go. Our infinite loop of insanity. Nice of you to invite me back Brittany.

The main reason this video is happening in the first place is that when we were editing our last video about Soros and DefendEurope together, I had rewritten the entire Soros section from scratch. I showed it to Brittany and insisted we refilm it. She was able to talk me down from that, but also she liked what I had presented enough to basically justify doing an entirely separate video on it instead.

Most people have never even heard of Soros. If they have, it’s usually written off as some sort of myth or conspiracy. But he’s an actual person funding actual groups. What he does manipulates and twists the balance of the world in a way that’s technically legal under current law. **George Soros believes money shapes culture.** In the United States, he funnels it through his organizations to influence the reporting of the New York Times, Newsweek, and NBC. It’s a seemingly elaborate operation designed to buy influence among political leaders and smear his enemies. If a politician doesn’t fall in line with Soros, he cuts off their funding. In the 2016 Presidential Elections, Soros dumped all his money into Hillary Clinton and ended up losing a ton of cash after she lost to Trump. George is able to get around campaign finance laws and move chess pieces around like big businesses used to.

And that’s the sort of gusto rhetoric he practices around the world.

To some, the Soros family seems like a shadowy superpower. I mean just last month he named the former U.S. ambassador to South Africa the new 2018 head of the Open Society Foundation. The month before that, his son Alex was hanging out with Alec Baldwin and doing panels talking about climate change. This George guy seems to know EVERYBODY. It’s a mystery that’s hard for people to wrap their mind around. But at the end of the day, he’s still a person like everyone else.

All it takes is a little extra elbow grease to understand the ins-and-outs of his empire.

I asked people on Twitter if George Soros looks scary or adorable. The most common response was it reminded people of Emperor Palpatine from Star Wars. I’m surprised nobody mentioned Bob Kelso from Scrubs, though.

It’s a battle of two definitions.

Recently Hungarian MP Andras Aradszki called out Soros and his allies. He stated they want to destroy the independence of nation states. That this is an attack on their values, and an attempt to water down Europe’s Christian spirit.

“But the fight against Satan is a Christian duty. Yes, I speak of an attack by Satan, who is also the angel of denial, because they are denying what they are preparing to do — even when it is completely obvious. They frantically try to prove that there is no [refugee] quota, there is no compulsory settlement, and the Soros Plan does not exist,” Aradszki noted.

Soros in the past has seen himself as a god. According to an old LA Times article on the matter:

It seems that Soros believes he was anointed by God. “I fancied myself as some kind of god …” he once wrote. “If truth be known, I carried some rather potent messianic fantasies with me from childhood, which I felt I had to control, otherwise they might get me in trouble.”

When asked by Britain’s Independent newspaper to elaborate on that passage, Soros said, “It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.”

I won’t sugarcoat this or lie to anyone watching. George Soros is the man at the center of shaping world events and their direction. Politics, economics, technology. He wants the final word on it all. For too long now, the public has been doing this dance around embracing this discussion. We’ve made spooky conspiracy videos with an ominous atmosphere. What that does is turn away the common man from looking at the presented facts. They write it off. Push Soros out of their minds and focus on their own day to day lives. Those lucky few that manage to see the truths within what’s presented, face other problems. More often than not, they either submit to the inevitability and powerlessness of it all. What can they do? In the face of global politics, those people see how futile it’d be to act.

The LA Times article had one more noteworthy thing.

“Next to my fantasies about being God, I also have very strong fantasies of being mad,” Soros once confided on British television. “In fact, my grandfather was actually paranoid. I have a lot of madness in my family. So far I have escaped it.”

The best way to understand George Soros is by looking at his roots.

SOROS UPRISING

Understanding how Soros became one of the most powerful men in the world starts with his birth.

George Schwartz was born on August 12, 1930 in Hungary. Born to non-practicing Jews. The timing of it was interesting, given that’s when the rise of antisemitism in Europe first took off. From “The World According to Soros.” The New Yorker, January 23rd 1995. Pg. 5:

“My mother was quite anti-semitic, and ashamed of being jewish. Given the culture in which one lived being Jewish was a clear-cut stigma. Disadvantage, a handicap — and, therefore, she always had the desire to transcend it. to escape it.”

By age 6 he became George Soros. This was partially done in an effort by his family to hide their Jewish background. His name means “George will fly high” in Esperanto. George’s father was into the freedom from nationalities and Open Society leanings himself. He was a prisoner of war in Russia who lived through the Russian revolution and escaped. George’s parents were rich and affluent. “My father does not work. He just makes money,” A young Soros answered to people who asked what his father did.

We can actually get some sense of why George is the person he became, by looking at the behaviors of his father. His name was Tivadar. An October 2001 New Yorker article takes us back to what was clearly the climax of his life. Plus, by extension Masquerade: Dancing Around Death in Nazi-Occupied Hungary, Tivadar’s memoir. The thing about Tivadar is he kept his composure, even in the turbulent wartime of German occupation in Hungary.

Referring to the Elder Soros:

“Even the new threat of summary execution, like all bad things, had its good side,” Soros wrote some years later. “Cafe and restaurant owners were so terrified about food hoarding that they opened up again. Even though they kept their shutters closed, one door was always open, and, if nothing else, you could always get a cup of hot tea, though sometimes without sugar.”

George’s father saw the incoming Nazi advancement and knew takeover was inevitable. So he bribed a government official to take George Soros in and pretend he was his Christian godson. To keep him safe from the Nazi occupation. It also taught George to be something else than who he actually was. Obscure the truth.

Another source claims authorities instructed young Soros to give slips of paper to the Jews in his hometown. They were notices that they needed to report to the local Rabbi. Soros’s father told George to tell everyone not to go. As it was the Nazis rounding people off to ship to the camps. That all seems like a more heroic recollection of events. Nonetheless, it’s worth noting the article I read that from discloses a bias. According to the author themselves, George helped fund many of the activism campaigns the writer of the piece had worked on.

It’s best to directly read this transcript from the 1998 60 Minutes interview with George Soros and Steve Kroft. To get a better understanding of how Soros felt back then.

Soros: Right. I was 14 years old. And I would say that’s when my character was made.

Kroft: In what way?

Soros: That one should think ahead. One should understand and anticipate events when one is threatened. It was a tremendous threat of evil. I mean — it was a very personal experience of evil.

Kroft: My understanding is that you went out with this protector of yours who swore that you were his adopted godson.

Soros: Yes. Yes.

Kroft: Went out, in fact, and helped in the confiscation of property from the Jews.

Soros: Yes. That’s right. Yes.

Kroft: I mean, that’s — that sounds like an experience that would send lots of people to the psychiatric couch for many, many years. Was it difficult?

Soros: Not — not at all. Maybe as a child you don’t — you don’t see the connection. But it was — it created no, no problem at all.

Kroft: No feeling of guilt.

Soros: No.

This is an often contested part of the discussion when talking about George Soros. People assume he was a Nazi collaborator in a more official sense than the actual circumstances. As far as we know, George wasn’t some sort of killing machine hellbent on serving Hitler’s will. His family came under the same wave of Nazi attacks as the rest of their country. However, it’s certainly unusual that Soros doesn’t have the typical reaction of grief and regret for having to witness such monstrosities take place in his homeland. Even more so, given the fact he had some role to play in carrying that fear out.

George fled the now Communist-controlled Hungary by 1947. By 1948 he was attending college at the London School of Economics over in England. Soros fell under the influence of Austrian-British philosopher Karl Popper. His theories of history helped lay the groundwork for George’s ideological leanings.

Boiled down: Humans are inherently flawed. The truth of social matters (political systems, stock markets, love) is unobtainable. People have a biased view of social events and it’s faulty by design. Human thought changes the state of the world, operating in an uncertain and reflexive state. It’s the Empiricism philosophy which reduces people to identical units of economic production.

Popper taught a brand of that deemed acceptable in the austere postwar Europe era. But Soros would take the concept further. He says small social events are “near equilibrium,” and large are “far from equilibrium.” The latter can either be stable or unstable. If unstable, it needs a solution quicker and more violent than what created it. Things Soros would say in one of his interviews reflect Karl Popper’s influence. He claims it’s closer to the truth to say the markets are wrong than to say they are always right. Understanding the role of misconceptions is critical to grasping a sense of economic reality.

In a sense, we can apply this to the European Union. He saw a chance to manipulate their system of government. To change their focus and directions of interest to where he wished. “Ultimately Soros’s mind is far more attracted to what works than what is true. “ It’s lucky for me that we live in this world of imperfect understanding,” he says. “If it came to knowledge, I wouldn’t flourish. I would not be good at science. I was no good at doing economics at college because you have to be methodical. I was no good at practicing a discipline. Therefore I questioned the foundations of the discipline. And I’m good at that.”

Soros doesn’t balance the world, he imbalances it. And that’s something we’ll come to understand by going over his business career in hedge funds.

SOROS CAREER/OPEN SOCIETY ESTABLISHMENT

Soros began his career in finance by the mid-1950s. He worked as a leather-goods salesman, then got his first gig at the Singer and Friedlander merchant bank. Failing in London but finding success in New York after arriving in 1963. Throughout the 50s and 60s, he perfected his understanding of being a trader and broker. In 1969 he started Soros Fund Management. The investment firm is the foundation for his booming financial success here on out. A few years later in 1973, George established The Quantum Fund (a group of Cayman Island hedge funds). Done in partnership with a fellow investor, Jim Rogers. Soros Fund Management sat in a key advisement position. Quantum Fund operated in the Netherlands Antilles to avoid U.S. SEC regulations (that came back to haunt him).

Soros Fund Management has averaged a 20% annual rate of return as of today. But to give a sense of scale: somebody who invested $1000 in 1969 would have $2 million by the mid-1990s. The Quantum Fund was worth $21.5 billion in August 1998 according to a New York Times piece back then. The subject itself was even though Quantum Fund lost $2 billion in Russia, assets were up 19.13% that year. George Soros made enormous gambles daily, based on economic and political current events.

Ol’ George thought the global economy was falling apart. That the world needed regulation protections to stop people like Soros. Nelson Mandela once called George and asked how to protect South Africa from people like him. That’s the two feuding sides within George Soros. He’s got the cold-hard capitalist side, believing being an economist is an immoral activity. His opposite side is the philanthropist who knows money is a responsibility and tries to do right by it.

That would become evident at the start of the 1980s. Soros was hitting unprecedented new heights in his level of wealth. The Quantum Fund jumped to $400 million by 1981. It led to George having some sort of midlife crisis at that time. His Quantum Fund made him hundreds of millions of dollars. But the downside was he had no awareness of the definition of success. George tried looking for clubs and associations to join up with, but nothing struck his fancy.

The Open Society started to form in 1981. George’s childhood friends got him in touch with Hungary’s political dissidents. People like István Rév and Miklós Haraszti. Besides them was Annette Laborey, a friend of George from Paris who was in charge of an underground group. Soros asked how much Annette needed to expand her operations. She said 10 thousand dollars. Soros told Annette to “think larger,” and as a result, George had started funding her network for quite a few years. Laborey eventually became the Open Society Foundations Vice-President, serving through until 2012.

George says the first Open Society Foundation office opened in 1984. He started up an office in Budapest to fight back against Communism. What was going to be his strategy? Make calculated small cracks in the political system, hoping for a max impact. In practical terms, this meant things like providing photocopiers to the Eastern Bloc. Give people the tools to circulate texts banned by the Communists. Political influencers like Haraszti realized they owed Soros for his help. According to the official biography, Soros opened up offices in Poland and Russia during this time frame. After the Berlin Wall came down, George spent the next few years expanding things further. What was his original political subversion group became something much more. He was going to make a foundation built on being a catalyst for Open Society. Soros was going to throw money at minorities to help raise them up in the world.

Soros established the Central European University in 1991 with campuses in Budapest and Warsaw. The intent was to give him an academic foothold in the region. He called it a “beacon for the value of critical thinking.” Meant as a “global center of learning to serve as a model for rebuilding public institutions of higher education.”

But to be honest it was a power move. George ain’t no saint either.

George had tried to get his conviction for insider trading overturned in June 2006. But the Cour de Cassation (France’s highest court) rejected it. The event of interest happened back in 1988 when Soros got into trouble. He bought and sold Société Générale shares after receiving privileged information about a corporate take over. The French appeals court had ruled in March 2005 that Soros must pay the fine of €2.2 million for buying 95,000 shares. The investigation itself took a long time. After fourteen years, the court initially found George guilty in December 2002. He swore to appeal. Soros confessed to someone telling him in late 1988 a Paris financier was planning to take over Société Générale. But George was adamant that such information wasn’t enough to be considered “insider.” That it didn’t influence his transactions, and it was part of a broader strategy of investment Soros had been trying out at the time.

They call Soros “the man who broke the Bank of England” for his involvement in the infamous Black Wednesday incident (September 16th, 1992).

The earlier part of the 1990s made clear what was to come as the British pound had been at odds with the Deutsche Mark. This left the country with high inflation and low-interest rates. This was all caused by Britain’s entry into the ERM (Exchange Rate Mechanism). They aimed to keep their currency above 2.7 marks to the pound, as they prepared to swap the pound for the Euro. Earlier in 1992, the Maastricht Treaty passed and gave birth to the European Union. Which meant the adoption of their singular currency with the Euro. Also, economic pressure on Germany’s reunification caused more reliance on the German mark. Black Wednesday happened after Britain upped interest rates to help the pound’s appeal. Yet, currency speculators like George Soros shorted the currency en masse thereafter. His business partner Stanley Druckenmiller says it was his own initial idea. But Soros took that ball and ran all the way he could with it. That was the day they “broke the pound.” What’s meant by that is the incident forced the British government to pull from the European ERM. It ended up being a good thing in the long run as it brought interest rates and inflation back in order.

Soros pocketed $1 billion from the ordeal.

The Open Society Foundation was first officially founded in April 1993. Soros got to work in the Europe area to clean up the Communist era. It wasn’t exactly an accountable entity back then. George went to different countries looking for people who shared his ambitions. When he found them, he gave those people money to set things up in that particular location for Open Society. Soros was flexible in how he let the people he recruited pursue the end goal. So these recruits he tasked built their charities up and got their own friends involved that way. These support networks evolved into academic think tanks that targeted influencing policy.

By 1994 Soros had already invested nearly $1 billion in Eastern Europe. One $250 million grant to help the humanities (train teachers and make textbooks) in Russia and a SECOND $250 million grant to establish Central European University. $200 million went to set up his network of foundations, $100 million to help encourage Russian scientists to stay in the country, and finally $50 million for aid to the new country of Bosnia, whose Muslims had been urged by Washington and Germany to proclaim independence in 1993, triggering the bloodiest part of the Yugoslav War.

In 1995 Soros did an interview with Charlie Rose that gave us a look inside where his mind was at the time. George had mixed opinions on the state of Eastern Europe. Felt they missed a valuable opportunity for open society to take root there. Nationalist ideologies were being adopted to indulge emerging business interests, said Soros. Believing NATO’s mission to be unclear, he recommended the organization redefine themselves. They missed a chance to shape Bosnia’s future, and George said it caused the current turmoil there. According to him, government organizations need to be in place for Open Society’s sake. Some kind of international security system to bring about a sense of order. Soros saw the United Nations in that regard as a failure. George thought modern instability was because the USA no longer policed the world. He’s got that globalist mentality. Involving himself in all four corners. To George, the current period was a crisis of values that lacked a sense of common direction.

This is where we begin to see George’s priorities and view on the world change.

Soros seemed worried about regression in Germany’s government and thought the E.U. needed to admit Poland and Hungary. Soros also admits trying to influence President H.W. Bush’s decisions during Communism’s fall. At the time of this interview, George was hasty on backing Bill Clinton in the next election cycle. He had disagreements with how he handled foreign policy issues. Decades later, Bill himself would admit to meeting Soros during this time.

Yet despite this new lease on life, Soros was still the finances man too. While there’s a full money management team, George’s ideas and beliefs are a driving force. He doesn’t believe success is between right and wrong, it’s about doing things right on a large scale. George exploits holes in the system, specializing in situations where normal rules shift. Things like war and turmoil. The Internet seemed as revolutionary as the printing press. Global markets served as Soros’s laboratory to experiment in.

There was an Asian Financial Crisis in August 1997. In Thailand, the baht entangled with the US dollar for the preceding decade. This was because business authorities had encouraged the country’s banks/corporations to borrow USD unhedged, and fuel domestic lending. By the mid 90s Thailand trade/capital accounts deteriorated, making paying back dollar debt difficult and the baht peg unsustainable. The Thai government didn’t understand how much of a decline occurred when they left the peg in July 1997. By October the baht depreciated 60%. What happened in Thailand caused a widespread chain reaction of Asian currency speculation. Places like: Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines. All feeling a depreciation whiplash. The contamination spread to South Korea and Russia too.

Sources involved with the Quantum Fund back then said Soros had a hand in this. He reportedly bet $1 billion against the baht, kickstarting the crisis as a result.

He denied that being the case. Instead, Soros laid the blame on Bank of Thailand:

“For instance, by selling the Thai baht short in January 1997, the Quantum Fund managed by my investment company sent a market signal that the baht may be overvalued. Had the authorities responded to the depletion of their reserves, the adjustment would have occurred sooner and been less painful. But the authorities allowed their reserves to run down; the break, when it came, was catastrophic.”

Soros bankrolled Mikheil Saakashvili during the November 2003 Rose Revolution. A dispute arising over parliamentary elections integrity led to non-violent protests in Georgia. The situation peaked on the 22nd and incumbent Soviet President Shevardnadze stepped down. Mikheil was pretty much indebted to Soros after that. George is also believed to be behind the November 2004 Orange Revolution in Kiev, Ukraine. The Presidential election between Viktor Yushchenko and Viktor Yanukovych heated up. Reports of vote rigging would snowball into corruption accusations and voter intimidation. Protests began after Yushchenko had a projected 11% lead from exit poll results, while official numbers gave Yanukovych a 3% lead. Thousands of protesters marched the streets until January 2005. Then, officials declared Yushchenko the winner after weeks of investigation and scrutiny.

These color revolutions have a common trait of extended longevity beyond the normal. Somehow, they’re sustained by a continuous outside source of fuel and funding. What matters here is Soros used his wealth to start a foundation that gave him political access in numerous places around the world.

To demonstrate the extent of that, next we’ll look at George’s involvement in and around the United States.

SOROS AND THE USA

So Soros had lost $2 billion when the Russian Economy collapsed. With the dot-com boom in 1999, Soros lost $700 million when he bet the stocks would have a downfall and they didn’t. George decided to change his mind and buy into the stocks. That’s when the NASDAQ crash in Spring 2000 happened. Soros lost $3 billion. That’s when he “retired” from active involvement in managing the Quantum Fund. He didn’t retire, of course. George does what he wants anyway. What ends up happening is Soros turned his management fund into a family office in 2011. This was done to circumvent the Dodd-Frank regulations Obama signed into law in 2010.

By 1996 and the start of the Clinton era is when George Soros became involved within the United States. The Open Society targeted drug laws, the criminal justice system, immigration policies, and end-of-life care. His “harm reduction” strategy was curtailing law enforcement’s war against drugs. They did a lot through the Open Society’s funding of the Drug Policy Alliance. Currently on a $50,000,000 grant for the next five years (it was a 10-year grant that started in 2012).

According to a DEA document (PDF):

“A few wealthy businessmen — not broad grassroots support — started and sustain the “medical” marijuana and drug legalization movements in the United States. Without their money and influence, the drug legalization movement would shrivel. According to National Families in Action, four individuals — George Soros, Peter Lewis, George Zimmer, and John Sperling — contributed $1,510,000 to the effort to pass a “medical” marijuana law in California in 1996, a sum representing nearly 60 percent of the total contributions.”

Soros saw the Twin Towers fall in 2001. He told someone in an interview the event “touched” him. At first, he backed the strikes against Taliban forces in Afghanistan. George thought America was heading the wrong way when the Patriot Act passed. This was on top of Bush’s invasion of Iraq. Soros had a go at trying to get Bush out of office in 2004. $23 million went to help John Kerry.

While I hated Glenn Beck growing up, I came across one of his old shows he did back on FOX News. The one with the chalkboard and the strange over-dramatic theatrics. My personal belief is Glenn Beck was hyperbolic when discussing Soros. Despite that, there were some decent insights and facts pointed out.

The most prominent of these was a pattern of George’s political strategy:

THE PATTERN

• 1.) Form a shadow government (using humanitarian aid as “cover” for subversive activities)
• 2.) Control the airwaves (fund existing radio/tv outlets or start new ones)
• 3.) Destabilize the state (weaken government, build anti-government)
• 4.) Provoke an election crisis
• 5.) take power (stage demonstrations)

We can apply this to the United States on a wider scale.

1.) Form a Shadow Government: Aryeh Neier was the first President of the Open Society Institute from 1993 to 2012. He had previously involved with the creation of Students for a Democratic Society back in the 1960s. A socialist organization dedicated to student rights activism. Their Weather Underground subgroup organized the infamous Days of Rage riots (October 8th to 11th, 1969).

Soros funded 1/3 of the shadow conventions in 2000. It was a hodge-podge group of activists, politicians, and celebrities running “shadow conventions” to mirror the actual ones going on during that election year. John McCain was there. As well as Jesse Jackson. They focused on campaign-finance reform, the growing gap between the rich and poor, and the war on drugs. Arianna Huffington was his megaphone. Years later she’d involve herself with on the Directors Board for Soros’s Center for Public Integrity.

Now, what do they stand for? According to their own site:

“We are one of the country’s oldest and largest nonpartisan, nonprofit investigative news organizations. Our mission: To serve democracy by revealing abuses of power, corruption and betrayal of public trust by powerful public and private institutions, using the tools of investigative journalism.”

It’s ironic. But we can take advantage of people’s perceptions of what’s considered left-wing and right-wing when it comes to media reporting. Much like how Soros uses that for economics. MOTHER JONES talked about these shadow conventions at the time. Aren’t they left-leaning?

That means we can totally trust them on this:

“A major force behind the Shadows is former conservative vamp Arianna Huffington, with a hefty assist from billionaire George Soros’ Open Society Institute, which has given $175,000 toward the projected $500,000 project.”

But McCain’s appearance at the Shadow Conventions would actually lead somewhere. In November 2002, he and Russ Feingold got the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act passed. This McCain-Feingold Act put a prohibition on soft money (funds perceived to influence elections but not subject to campaign finance law regulations) in federal elections for political parties, officeholders, and other candidates. There was barring on unions and corporations using funds to buy issue-based advertisements. This would later change in January 2010 with Citizens United v. the Federal Election Commission. It deemed Section 203 of the McCain-Feingold act as a violation of the first amendment.

But this 8-year time frame changed the political landscape. Issue-advocacy groups with 501(c)3 (plus 527 and 501(c)4) status were not included in the McCain-Feingold act. So, companies could donate to these 501(c)3 (or other aforementioned) groups instead, and let them speak on their behalf. Given the new artificial demand for them out of this McCain-Feingold law, there was a 501(c)3 (and other aforementioned groups) creation boom.

McCain-Feingold 2002 led to 501(c)3 (and other aforementioned groups) boom, and that’s what Soros is a pro at controlling.

2.) Control the Airwaves: Open Society Institute donated $1.8 million to NPR. The NPR ombudsman actually talked about it when this was happening in May 2011. This was a two-year grant from OSI for their Impact on Government project and used to hire 100 journalists. NPR hired two radio reporters for every state to put more of a spotlight on state government issues.

“OSI Foundations met NPR’s qualification criteria for funders,” said Dana Davis Rehm, NPR’s spokesperson. “They understood and accepted our terms — chief among them the prohibition of any effort to influence editorial decision making. Our acceptance of the grant was based on principles of independence and fairness, and we stand by it.”

Soros donated $3 million to John Podesta’s Center for American Progress Action Fund. Another source cites OSI gave Center for American Progress over $5.4 million from 2005 to 2010. Established in 2003 as a counterattack against the Republicans and their Heritage Foundation. Podesta called it a “think tank on steroids,” meant to be a powerhouse for progressives. Podesta and the Center for American Progress oversaw the 2008 Obama White House transition. CAP was behind many of the attack ads against McCain’s policies in the lead-up to the 2008 elections. Coordinating with media outlets and pumping their talking points down their throats.

The most important branch of this is the ThinkProgress “news” website. That labels itself as a forum for progressive ideas. In 2010, ThinkProgress accused the U.S. Chamber of Commerce of running Partisan Attack ads backed by foreign funding. This reminds me of leftist claims about Russia’s involvement in Trump winning 2016 election. The piece by ThinkProgress provided no evidence of this allegation. The Obama White House even confirmed that they knew of no specific evidence at that time.

3.) Destabilize the State: OSI funds the Tides Foundation. To be clear though, Soros did NOT establish the Tides Foundation. That honor goes to Drummond Pike, who did so in 1976. Tides is a middle-man charity. They receive donor money and then send it off to whatever political cause they desire. This comes in handy when it comes to radical groups. Allow me to better explain. Someone who wanted to fund radicals but not have their name attached? They could send their cash off to the Tides Foundation and let them donate it on their behalf. It’s a loophole that allows nonprofits to make for-profit groups and then fund them via Tides. By 2010, the Tides Center was overseeing over 140 projects.

Tides sends money onto places like the Apollo Alliance. Their stated goal was to “catalyze a clean energy revolution in America.” But this Apollo Alliance group managed to have an impact elsewhere. They helped craft the $86 billion “clean energy and green-collar jobs” section of Obama’s $787 billion stimulus package law in 2009. A climate memo (PDF) indicates George’s devotion to the issue. Soros was pledging $10,000,000 a year for 5 years to the Climate Policy Initiative starting back in 2009. People accuse Wikipedia of having a left-leaning bias. $2,000,000 from Tides in 2010 might’ve caused that change of perspective for the site. Call it a hunch.

Soros and Tides Foundation sometimes double-team on funding too. In 2012 the Daily Caller revealed records of Media Matters for America receiving $4,384,702 from Tides and $1,075,000 from OSI.

4.) Provoke an Election Crisis: OSI funded ACORN to shake confidence in the vote. The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now makes up that acronym. They’re focused on getting as many people signed up to vote as possible, along with other social issues like gun control and health care.

To get an idea of what the group was like, here’s a quote from one of their CEOs, Bertha Lewis. “Organize, get out into the street. You really have got to circle the wagons. This is not rhetoric or hyperbole. This is real.” ACORN closed after a scandal in September 2009. James O’ Keefe and Hannah Giles pretended to be a pimp and a prostitute, then asked ACORN staff how they can trick federal tax authorities. The incident led to a domino effect cascaded by questions about how ACORN used funds. The group closed in November 2010 after their government contracts and donors fled.

Soros donated $10,000 to the Secretary of State project (SOS). The group’s intent was coaching and electing their own Secretary of States around the U.S. Which, as a reminder, are the people who certify election results. Founded in 2006, but hasn’t been exactly active since 2010. Group members believed electing Democrats in certain states was key to election protection. Targeting battleground states with tight vote margins back from the 2004 Presidential elections. It was a by-product of the organization Soros founded in 2005, Democracy Alliance. It’s better to show rather than tell you about this organization.

With that in mind, here’s a map of their anti-Trump efforts courtesy of the New York Times.

The group is a bunch of donors that coordinate their contributions to go to whoever they endorse. A great example of this happened in 2016 after Trump’s election. It was then Soros and the Democracy Alliance gathered in DC to discuss how to block actions throughout President Trump’s term. Nancy Pelosi, Elizabeth Warren, and Keith Ellison were among some of the folks who showed up.

Soros further invested in the leftist platform of his Democracy Alliance to help support projects like America Votes. A 501(c)4 organization dedicated to coordinating progressive issues. In 2012, Tides Foundation dumped $1.8 million during the election season into this group.

5.) Take Power — Stage Demonstrations: Institute for Policy Studies is another group Soros allegedly involved himself in. The oldest of these Think Tanks, a 501(c)3 founded by Marcus Raskin and Richard Barnet. Their financial backers at the Samuel Rubin Foundation chose them to lead it. Sam was a Russian Bolshevik and his daughter Cora Weiss got involved with communists. Their original focus was shifting public attitudes and changing laws to their liking. Their war on Capitalism entails goals like putting the U.N. in control of American foreign policy. IPS allegedly wanted Obama to bypass Congress and issue Executive Orders. Which in itself people would see as an act of a tyrant rather than a President. Which is why we got things like the Tea Party for a few years.

They call this technique “top down, bottom up.” Top down means getting people riled up for widespread chaos. Bottom up is using that chaos to make people believe they need change.

The Washington Times reported Soros donated $33 million to groups working with Ferguson activists in 2015. That fuels the protest movement to extend itself for a longer duration of time than the story itself was.

You can see how these 5 different dynamics start feeding into each other.

It’s worth mentioning the Soros/Clinton tragedy that was her 2016 campaign. A book called The Shadow Party: How George Soros, Hillary Clinton, and Sixties Radicals Seized Control of the Democratic Party quoted Soros saying: “I do now have great access in [the Clinton] administration,” George told PBS in 1995. “There is no question about this. We actually work together as a team.”

There’s no need to further prove Bill/Hillary’s relationship with Soros. We can state their fondness for one another as fact.

George went to bat for Hillary’s election as far back as October 2013. That’s when he donated $25,000 to become co-chair on the “Ready for Hillary” National Finance Committee. “His support for Ready for Hillary is an extension of his long held belief in the power of grassroots organizing,” said Soros political director Michael Vachon.

Soros Fund Management spent $10,554,093 trying to get Hillary in office (via opensecrets.org).

*sad trombone*

It’s definitely more than that for the election’s total. He didn’t put all his cash into just Hillary. Besides, $10 million is like pocket change to ol’ George.

A Politico article from July 2016 takes a closer look at his 2016 Election funding.

“Soros has donated or committed more than $25 million to boost Hillary Clinton and other Democratic candidates and causes, according to Federal Election Commission records and interviews with his associates and Democratic fundraising operatives.”

So here again we have an opportunity to see Soros up close and how he operates. By looking at how exactly he distributed his money during 2012, 2014, and 2016 election cycles. What differences do you see between these instances? What stays the same throughout?

These are the sorts of questions worth asking, as you’ll see it’s a significant factor in how George Soros operates.

$7 million to a super PAC supporting Clinton called Priorities USA Action. One of the largest in the Democratic Party. It came around to help Obama get re-elected. They ran a controversial and misleading ad about Mitt Romney closing down a factory. The ad insinuates it was Romney’s fault a factory worker’s wife died of cancer afterward. But according to a factcheck.org investigation, evidence points to that being untrue.

$2 million to American Bridge 21st Century, an opposition research super PAC that has been targeting Trump and other Republican candidates. “Holding Republicans accountable” is their slogan. Enough said. According to Michael Vachon (political adviser for Soros), he told Politico more details: Soros committed $5 million to super PAC Immigrant Voters Win (dedicated to increasing turnout among Hispanics in swing states), another $5 million to “fighting conservative efforts to restrict voting,” (says Politico) called Voting Rights Trust (partly run by Clinton campaign lawyer). Finally, Vachon confirms $2 million to a voter mobilization group mentioned earlier, America Votes.

Why bring this up? It’s a prime example of how George interacts with systems of government. It plays back into the shaping realities thing that Soros is into doing. George spent twice as much cash changing political landscapes compared to Hillary’s campaign. It reveals the true motivations on why Soros cares about migration. It’s all about getting them in voting booths.

This was a big deal at the time. As Wikileaks documents show, Hillary and Soros were close.

Greg Speed to Huma Abedin. September 16th, 2014, 11:42 AM:

“Hi Huma (and Lona): It was wonderful to see you last week. Thanks so much again for making the time in a very, very busy week.

Attached is an invitation for Secretary Clinton to join us at an evening reception at the home of George Soros in December. We would be thrilled to have her serve as honored guest and speaker at this gathering of our top supporters honoring America Votes’ work over the past 10 years and looking forward to the next decade.

Thanks so much in advance for your and the Secretary’s consideration of this request. We are now holding dates at Mr. Soros’ home in the middle of the month (Dec. 15–17) and hope we can find a mutually agreeable date during that window if possible or an alternative. Please let us know if we can provide any further information, address any questions, etc.

Thanks very much again and look forward to talking again soon.

Best, GS Greg Speed

President America Votes”

Huma Abedin to Robert Mook. October 7th, 2014, at 11:11 AM:

“She is having dinner with George Soros tonight. Do you know much about America Votes? As Greg Speed explained to me, they are the coordinated campaign for various outside groups. Soros is a big supporter of the group and hes going to ask her tonight if she will come to a fundraiser for them at his house in December. Thoughts?”

Robert Mook to Huma Abedin. October 7th, 2014, at 11:21 AM:

“I would only do this for political reasons (ie to make Soros happy) It’s very unclear to me how much AV will matter next cycle. And I haven’t seen then adding any value this cycle. I also worry a little it will cause donor confusion vis a vis Priorities.”

This is the only Wikileaks bit I’m going to go over in this piece. The chances of more examples somewhere in these messages are high, though. That particular exchange is an exception because of the media attention it received.

The Women’s March on DC was a heavily Soros backed initiative, according to the Media Research Center. They made a list of every group that Soros donated to and calculated how much was donated between 2000–2014. Places at the top like ACLU got $37 million, and Planned Parenthood got $20 million. Further down there’s NAACP with $3.5 million. But it’s an interesting list overall as it shows the extent of George’s influence in American activism.

Right now? We’ve got Antifa running around the country and causing a ruckus. This Steven Crowder video showing people what their movement is really like behind the scenes gives us a good idea of all that. People question if Soros is funding their efforts. They’re trying to make an election crisis to widen the political divide in the United States.

Shout out to /pol/NewsInfinity for finding all this out. The guy that was running it got into some sort of rivalry with another Twitter named /pol/report. That particular account claimed to have information on Open Society funding Anti-fa groups. We won’t know what it was for sure since they vanished from Twitter before making any of their findings public. What resulted was /pol/NewsInfinity uncovered some things already in the public record. They posted a few situations pointing out a sort of connection between Soros and anti-fa.

Unfortunately, their first example had some holes. Open Society gave a one-year grant to Washington Community Action Network for $50,000. All the way back in 2010. The Craigslist advertisement that Washington CAN puts up for anti-Trump organizers? Put up online in 2016. Soros could’ve funded Washington CAN. The fact money was exchanged at all is enough to consider it a possibility. But in this instance, the amount of time between point A and point B is too long to consider it feasible.

The RefuseFascism.org angle is more promising. On their crowdraise page, they disclose being an Alliance for Global Justice project. So boom right there you’ve got a lead. From that, all that’s needed is to look up their 990 tax forms (PDF) for 2016. You’ll see they list the Soros-linked Tides Foundation as a contributor.

So the answer of “Does Soros fund Anti-fa?” is more of a yes than no.

These days Soros is everywhere you look. Just recently there’s been a few prominent examples. In one corner we’ve got the United States. New reports indicate the NFL Player’s Association has donated to the same sorts of activist groups as Soros, like the Center for Community Change Action, the union group Jobs with Justice, and AFL-CIO’s Working America community affiliate. Over in the other corner, we have Europe. Specifically, Catalonia. After the recent clashes between Spanish police and Catalonia’s own authorities, and the violent protest riots that happened on Referendum day, reports surfaced revealing Soros helped fund some of Catalonia’s independence advocate organizations. $27049 to (Catalonia’s Public Diplomatic Council), and $24973 to the CIDOB — Barcelona international documentation and information center.

U.S. government had a century and a half before Soros was even born to develop their institutions. Harder for Soros to infiltrate. In Europe, it’s different because George was around and in a place of power as the European Union was born. Next, we’ll go over how this works with the Open Society and what all this means.

SOROS AND EUROPE

By 2010 people had begun seeing the Open Society is more boisterous. It only took two decades for Soros to make an effective and extensive network of influence. This in-depth article “Open Society vs. Eastern Europe” is an enlightening read.

It’s all something that erases the heritage and legacy of individual counties. Practicing the philosophy that a world of identical people with a shared artificial culture is easier to rule. The previously mentioned piece tells of a gay pride parade held that year in Belgrade, Serbia. The pro-European government promoted it as a sign the country was “ready” for the EU and was now a “tolerant” place. In reality, riot police had to guard a few hundred LGBT activists (imported from Western Europe) against the opposing group of protesters. Ten times as large.

Any respect towards traditions is something that George sees as blocking his path. What is that path? Soros thinks of European countries as temporary agreements. Ol’ George believes being loyal to one’s country is crazy talk. This Open Society dream of his is a utopian globalist paradise. What’s at stake with the European migrant crisis is a country’s sense of history and culture. Soros would prefer to tear down religion and shape the education system away from valuing it.

Things make more sense if you shift your thinking on what Soros and the Open Society Foundation are. What they define as philanthropy work is actually more of a sort of political activism. The former focuses on helping people, while the latter focuses on persuading politicians.

How I’m going to approach talking about Europe is starting and ending with Hungary.

As mentioned previously, Soros had an interest in the Education field. So much, in fact, he established the Central European University in 1991 over in Budapest Hungary. CEU is an American-like university, with a charter arrangement from the state of New York Board of Regents. It functions like any other college in their program offerings and departments. Business, Economics, Gender Studies, and so forth. The difference with CEU is it serves as a breeding ground for the Open Society ideology. Until the 2000s the University focused on issues with the open society and Europe. But by the next decade, they broadened the scope of that discussion to a global scale.

The Media Research Center did a report on George’s education donations as well. They put out a list of 19 different schools gifted at least $1 million from Soros. Places like Columbia University, Georgetown, Harvard, Maryland, and California. But the top among these was his own. The Open Society Foundation gave $250 million to the Central European University between 1991 and 2011. A hotbed of far left ideology. George uses the institution as a speaking platform for himself, even using the lectures he gave there as an excuse for a book. A seminar called “Promoting Integration of Migrants and Minorities Through Media” had the Center for Independent Journalism co-hosting. That group received $50,000 from Soros.

Keep in mind some CEU graduates and alumni go on to political careers. People like: Darko Angelov(Macedonian Diplomat/Ambassador to Hungary), Dušan Pavlović (Serbian political economist/politician) Lívia Járóka (Hungarian Romani politician/Member of the European Parliament), and Giorgi Margvelashvili (President of Georgia).

This type of institution fosters a sense of obligation for these people to act on George’s behalf. You’ll see later on an example of this. Of Soros supporting a politician’s education as a point of consideration. It’s almost guaranteed given the curriculum of CEU’s classrooms. Agendas consisting of the Open Society philosophies, shaping and brainwashing minds. With teaching staff *who as well* come from places of political power across Europe. That type of authority can command a student’s admiration with little difficulty.

On April 4th, 2017, Hungary passed a higher education law that had a significant impact on CEU. This new regulation mandates universities to open in the country they registered in. Otherwise, they must close down unless their origin country makes an agreement with the government.

Later that month, a New York Times article gives us the perspective of Hungary’s Prime Minister:

“Mr. Orban has accused Mr. Soros of “preparing liberal activists” for political life in the Balkans and Central Europe, adding, “The Soros empire set out to promote the cause of migrants and mass migration.”

An earlier article from the end of March elaborated on Orban’s thinking here:

“There is competition among universities and it is inexplicable why we should put our own universities at a disadvantage […] while securing an unfair advantage for the foreign university,” Orban told state radio.”

This all adds up to the Soros methodologies explored earlier. Viktor Orban knows what he’s talking about. This is because he got a Soros scholarship to study at Oxford back in ‘89.

This education indoctrination is not limited to CEU. Not by a long shot. It’s the “get ’em while they’re young” technique. Soros is into that sort of thing as is the Open Society. In an article, they propose early childhood intervention for children. Which kind of children? You’d assume they mean those with possible developmental delays or disabilities. OSF expands the definition to families lacking resources or skills to raise children. They try to paint intervention as more of a middle-man rather than an institution in itself. They want to mold your kids “proper” during their formative years. To that end, the Open Society Foundations launched their Step by Step Program back in 1994. Designed to reform childhood education in 15 different European and Asian countries. By October 1998, they evolved into the International Step by Step Association. So now it’s a network of people and NGOs to take their plan to a deeper level. And what do you think they teach in these classrooms?

Let me quote them on it:

“Since its establishment ISSA has developed a number of pedagogical tools and guides designed for teachers and other early childhood stakeholders emphasizing inclusion, diversity, and the values required in open, democratic societies.”

Another example is “open-source” textbooks in Poland, editable by teachers and students. It’s from the education system that Soros attacks the traditional family unit. Accusing them of prejudice. Labeling it as sexist, racist, homophobic. OSI wants to redefine education as an equal partnership between teachers and students. They desire to shift it away from being about the acquirement of knowledge.

Soros first got an edge in Europe when the Romani situation happened. He used that as an opportunity for OSI to start beating the “racism” drum. The Romani are Indian nomads that live off other people’s property. A group that makes the gypsy lifestyle choice. Soros made it into a race issue that came into play in education, economic, and political systems. From that single viewpoint alone, George’s people can enact various institutional measures. With education, for example, they can demand teachers undergo anti-bias training. OSI could order Romani history and culture integration into school textbooks. On the political end, you’ve got efforts started to legally mandate affirmative action. Plus an avalanche of legislative proposals to fight perceived discrimination in housing. Tax incentives and special access to low-interest credit result from the economic angle.

It’s efforts like this, at changing society and the government, that is at play here. Not only in Europe, but George’s efforts worldwide. This section’s main point is analyzing how George Soros pulls Europe’s political strings. To do that, we have to keep in mind the Open Society Foundation’s role. As the group acts on behalf of what Mr. Soros demands of them. It’s a lot to take in. But I guarantee by the end of this part you’ll better follow these chess pieces moved around. It’s a $14 billion dollar game George is playing. That number is how much Open Society spent in the past 35 years, according to their site.

In September 2016 George Soros wrote “Why I’m Investing $500 Million in Migrants” on the Wall Street Journal. He’s blunt in his delivery when writing. George says forced migration is already a thing no matter what. Soros places blame on world governments not having the adequate policies to deal with it.

“Migrants are often forced into lives of idle despair, while host countries fail to reap the proven benefit that greater integration could bring.”

George frames the argument that makes it sound like his solutions are the only way forward. He calls for infrastructure reform in European countries to accommodate this supposed inevitability. George says Obama requested US companies in a call to action to help deal with forced migration.

“All of the investments we make will be owned by my nonprofit organization. They are intended to be successful — because I want to show how private capital can play a constructive role helping migrants — and any profits will go to fund programs at the Open Society Foundations, including programs that benefit migrants and refugees.”

These companies all met up together at the UN to discuss their plans. Soros explained they’d be working with the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and the International Rescue Committee every step of the way.

It’s worth mentioning the United Nations explored Replacement Migration back in 2001. They consider it a possible “solution” to declining and aging populations. Their published paper states the U.N. projects population decline in Europe and Japan. The United Nations sees that as a challenge for their organization. One that demands they reassess their programs and policies to study the extent of the impact.

That right there shows the political entanglement of this situation. But we’re just getting started, Brittany.

To explain the evidence of this next part, I need to go over where all these Open Society documents came from. Last year, August 2016, 2500 Open Society insider documents became public. George’s foundation got hacked. The site in question where these leak files were all hosted was http://soros.dcleaks.com. After I started looking into Soros a few month back, the site shut down. The story of this hack was quickly buried by the mainstream media for the most part. Since it was election season, everyone’s attention spans were shorter than usual.

According to Zero Hedge, DCLeaks published a statement alongside this massive release:

“George Soros is a Hungarian-American business magnate, investor, philanthropist, political activist and author who is of Hungarian-Jewish ancestry and holds dual citizenship. He drives more than 50 global and regional programs and foundations. Soros is named as the architect and sponsor of almost every revolution and coup around the world for the last 25 years. Thanks to him and his puppets USA is thought to be a vampire, not a lighthouse of freedom and democracy. His slaves spill blood of millions and millions people just to make him even more rich. Soros is an oligarch sponsoring Democratic party, Hillary Clinton, hundreds of politicians all over the world. This website is designed to let everyone take a look at restricted documents of George Soros’ Open Society Foundation and related organisations. It represents workplans, strategies, priorities and other activities of Soros. These documents shed light on one of the most influential network operating worldwide.”

I have a copy of all the files, so no worries. You can access them here.

As far back as 2012 (PDF), we see their reports suggest that OSI influences the drafted laws. In such a way that it’s heavily favored toward giving NGOs loose restrictions.

These documents get down to specific instances. One talks of proposed European Court of Human Rights reform, initiated by the UK. OSI didn’t like the idea so they made an intense effort to counter. The group coordinated with different ministries in European capitals to dispute the move. It *does* have an impact. The report says OSI neutered the UK’s proposals in regards to admissibility criterion. Further on, this document connects OSI, NGOs, and the European Commission. The Open Society meets up at the Fundamental Rights Platform every year. This is where 180 NGOs get together and collaborate on Fundamental Rights issues. It’s important to note the EU organized this Fundamental Rights Platform themselves. Here they have a communication channel with OSI to exchange information. But that doesn’t mean OSI has total authority over the European Union. A later point in this particular leak details OSI reacting to their nervousness. They were worried about funding reforms impacting money flow from the Commission to NGOs. Their remedy involved pressuring Parliament for an amendment. OSI used NGOs in Brussels and OSF grantees to push it to attention. They discreetly distributed a strategy for possible amendments to their “friendly” MEPs.

The reality of this is OSI seems to wield more power than actual European countries at times. Enough to shift the direction at decision points. A later part of this same report shows this is the case. It says the European Commission challenged Italy’s authorities responses on rights violations. The reason pointed to as the cause was OSI fed the Commission info to use.

It was around this time that OSI was putting the “Fund to Counter Xenophobia in Western Europe (Xen Fund)” in place. An explanation page on the Open Society website describes what exactly this fund was:

“The Open Society Fund to Counter Xenophobia, a grant-making program of the Open Society Foundations, will tackle both the causes and manifestations of xenophobia in order to see acts and practices of discrimination reduced, to guarantee non-discriminatory policies and to (re)gain a social and cultural consensus in which xenophobic views and practices are considered unacceptable.”

Xen Fund has a contact database of over 100 allies per country at their disposal. Activists, academics, donors, journalists, elected officials, NGOs, you name it. This document makes specific mention of Hope not Hate being a successful part of the system and a HUGE help to OSI.

Let’s look at a PDF report from the next month. OSI recognized EU’s involvement in Burma during the transition phase before 2015’s elections. OSI seized that opportunity to connect with EU policymakers. Elsewhere, OS-Brussels reacted very loud during the adoption of anti-discrimination laws in Ukraine. This was because they adopted the draft without asking civil society folks about it. They didn’t get the chance to give it a thumbs up. This sort of process was happening in other places like Moldova. Their parliament finally passed anti-discrimination laws after three years of OSI advocacy work. But the Open Society had other intentions for backing this. The most important being the law was key for Moldovan citizens to have visa-free travel in the EU. The OSI document talks about this in particular at a later bullet point. The passing of this law didn’t happen smoothly. Local politicians only followed through at the last minute. They stalled as long as they could until the final setup deadline. According to this report, this law is a hook for the EU to litigate related situations as they see fit. Giving them a further reason to generally keep tabs on what goes on in the country. The main point to understand here is how the international community views OSI. A part of this document details their reporting on Central Asian border concerns. It gives the impression internationally people hold Open Society Foundation in high regard. OSI hosted a seminar, making recommendations on fixing the issue to various officials. NATO and EU representatives listened to their human rights and infrastructure viewpoints.

Let’s get down to (PDF) brass tacks here. All Open Society Institute of Europe staff are open society policy experts. They’ve got their own talking heads ready to go at a moment’s notice in Brussels. The group’s think tanks spit out in-depth analysis papers to justify changes demanded. They know their targets when it comes to EU decision makers. OSI adds pressure by using the press and change the conversation the public has. That makes the grounds for debate happen on OSI’s terms. External Action Service diplomats push the group’s goals through. They have political actors of their own that are in direct contact with policy-makers. Imposing OSI’s agenda onto the EU government’s to-do list.

The particular paper makes special mention of Soros.

“The personal commitment of George Soros is an exceptionally effective and valuable tool; OSEPI follows up after he has opened doors, pressed high-level contacts and made the case in his own words, to help his initiative to result in action.”

The Open Society Foundation has a hyperfocus on protecting their own reputation. Reason being is their popularity is the only way this EU system of influence is able to work. OSI’s constant coordination with foundations and NGO groups lays the pressure on. The Foundation expects EU politicians to show obedience to OSI’s values. If they don’t they suffer social shaming and other consequences like ostracization.

A Netherlands anti-fa article outlines the reality of NGOs. Back in April 2013, they wrote “NGOs: Instruments of Imperialism.” In general, the article goes against the usual expectations of political stances. The author claims a small group of people control world order. According to them, this group maintains their elevation by using social institutions. These “non-governmental organizations” (NGOs) fulfill their need to maintain ideological control. The author says worldwide institutions get backed by billions of dollars in subsidies. That places like Amnesty International and National Endowment for Democracy get collective benefits. This blog lays down the evident double standard. While NGOs go after dictatorships and defend human rights? They also have their own capitalist interests. Then this piece starts pulling back and looking at the big picture. They say NGOs have high political pull, influencing the direction of activist groups. That their people with ambition and ideas exchange it for a cushy NGO job that pays well.

This is all vindicated back in that Open Society strategy document. “The EU’s routes of influence are highly developed and opened to our input,” it says.

So what we have here in OSI is a powerful middle-man keeping a close eye on the EU. The Foundation rolls back NGO laws they don’t think are beneficial to them. While at the same time calling for the most favorable working conditions possible. Also, OSI wants direct cash funding for NGOs and civil society. They want safeguards against the rules for stopping the financing of terror organizations. Special exemptions to guarantee there’d be no blowback on civil society groups. But OSI doesn’t see themselves as NGOs. They position themselves as something with better access and larger capacity than them. Playing a long game of constant pressuring so they can shape the EU in their image over the course of years.

Let them tell you more about it themselves. OSI writes:

“We build public alliances through our leading role in the Human Rights and Democracy Network. Behind closed doors, we will use our high-level access to EU policy-makers to convene diplomats in the European External Action Service and national capitals to build longer-term strategies for rights, justice and governance objectives (building on the success of our Global Europe 2020 project).”

OSI priorities are fundamental rights and rule of law in the EU political mechanism. They try to ensure all member states uphold that, especially on immigration. OSI advocates for thorough and migrant friendly safeguard protocols. The group’s Justice Initiative programs aim toward influencing policy-makers. To that end, the EU encouraged member states to stop irregular migrant detentions. What drives OSI forward is their belief that open society is under attack in Europe. But they say that’s also an opportunity for them to widen their range of political engagement. A chance to recruit more political actors to their cause. The think tanks on one end analyze how the Open Society should advance their agenda. On the opposite side, they’re focusing on public communication refinement.

Over here on page 8 is where Soros and OSI are willing to play dirty. OSI saw 2014’s EU Parliament elections as a battleground for European liberal politics. They worried the angry public would engage in protest voting. Which in turn would lead to more “xenophobic” candidates winning their elections. The Foundation outlined plans to try and avert that doomsday scenario. Objectives involved reducing the vote for anti-EU candidates by working with local groups. Of course, OSI made countering racist claims one of their goals. But they took that aim and went to a higher mark. They wanted candidates to pledge they’d not wander into racist dialogue when campaigning.

The next one deserves quoting. “Develop new ideas, concepts, and memes” to connect with the public. As they were trying to push an influence on this election. “Run a two-level strategy to reduce the number of opponents of the open society who get elected,” it says.

So OSI leads the Human Rights and Democracy Network which coordinates NGOs. They’re making alliances with EU officials. Like the EU Special Representative for Human Rights, and Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights. Moreover engaging with officials in the European External Action Service and European Commission.

Next, we’re going to look at a (PDF) full of special projects. These are grants dedicated to OSI influencing the 2014 EU elections.

“The European Parliamentary elections in May 2014 present a crucial opportunity for citizens and civil society actors to help influence and shape the agenda of the European Union in the EU’s legislative period 2015–2019. OSIFE identified three main aims: 1) to support projects that amplify the voice and demands of constituencies that are far from the centers of power, 2) to fight all types of hate speech, and 3) to mobilize voters to take part in this rare political moment of transnational democracy.”

21 pages of organizations with projects in particular countries. All sharing the same goals as OSI. (shout out to Hope not Hate, who shows up on the last page with their $93,740.00 project). But one, in particular, stood out to me because it involved a media outlet.

EUObserver discloses their grant from the Open Society Foundation, yet they aren’t exactly clear as to what it was for:

— — $130,992 for 128 articles between February and May 2014: The EUObserver publication became a springboard for one of the Open Society’s projects. This initial grant entailed making news reports to “foster debate.” Creating a media campaign focused on open society values being at stake in the 2014 EU elections. They used loaded topics like “the rise of hate speech by Europe’s far right.” Coupled with reports depicting mainstream politicians guilty of “intolerant rhetoric.” EUObserver hired journalists with the cash. Then they’d send off to election campaign events and do interviews. These “high-level op-eds” they made got done in 16 different countries. EUObserver’s “go local” narrative shifted the discussion focus to things happening cross-borders.

But that wasn’t enough.

— — $29,353 for 32 MORE articles in June 2014: This was an extra month of extension on top of the previous grant. It let the project use “journalistic accounts” of the election and make forecasts. There was an underlying narrative at work in this arrangement. A specific focus on asking why Member states voted in a particular way. Then their experts analyzed if “anti-immigrant parties” were a coherent EU Parliament group.

— — $75,000 from January 2015 to August 2016: Not specified if OSI and EUObserver went through on this grant proposal. The purpose of it was for EUObserver to do long-term national EU-level coverage. The grant wanted “network of independent journalists in EU capitals” to get the local vibe. Get a sense of how the public feels about top government decisions. Escape from the routine of having every reporter in Brussels for policy-making stories. This network was going to coordinate with each other on stories to “crossed borders.” The effort intended to “help the public hold EU leaders to account.”

Remember what Glenn Beck said about controlling the airwaves? There it is. Right there. Did any of it work? Even back then? Hell no.

HopeNotHate even kept track (PDF) of far-right populists election votes that year. The Open Society is hyper-vigilant about that sort of thing. They definitely love their lists, though (American Soros groups taking a hint?).

Open Society took the elections that year pretty hard. A paper of theirs in 2014 (PDF) focused on the implications of “xenophobic” populist parties in European Parliament. This author at OSI worried that these populist neanderthal invaders would manipulate Parliament. The paper projects they’d fragment the mainstream right over time with “xenophobic” pressure. They’d express specified worries about the directions of issues like migration. The paper says people would introduce “extremist rhetoric.” Justifying it on the grounds of defending national identity and protection of culture. OSI paints it like a bad thing. According to the paper, there was a total of 114 “xenophobic populist” MEPs out of the 751. To their credit, the paper actually mentions why they think the populists did well. They conclude it wasn’t based on economic situations. Their easy answer is mainstream parties bandwagon off the protests against EU/migration. But later they realize people are losing trust in European democracy’s representative power. That the institutions in place don’t represent the public anymore.

Together that feeds the erosion of cultural identity and the loss of traditionalism.

This paper states the Lisbon Treaty grants further powers to populist MEPs. More opportunities to block EU legislation and with matters of funding and resolution. They’re in more of a position to put political pressure on governments as a result. The report states populist MEPs use Parliament as a source of personal funds and as a soapbox. Their “xenophobic and anti-elite” speeches get uploaded to YouTube. While parliament opponents might not bother listening, the populist’s message reaches the public. The paper states this widespread discourse is eroding what civil society stands for. In response, the two biggest mainstream groups joined forces to take charge. The European People’s Party and the Socialists & Democrats entered a “grand coalition political agreement” with the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE).

So was the Open Society. They were trying to make heads or tails of what was what too.

THERE’S A WHOLE “RELIABLE ALLIES IN THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT (2014–2019)” PDF THAT GOES INTO MEGA DETAIL. 177 pages. Made by a group called the Kumquat Consult. Which happens to have BOTH the Open Society AND several governing bodies of the E.U. as clients.

It lists email addresses, physical mailing addresses, telephone numbers, and TWITTER ACCOUNTS. They do background checks and explore a member’s career history before taking office. Plus, their particular political interests and other group involvements they might have elsewhere. Where applicable this catalog describes members with negative traits. They take note when someone’s personal beliefs or belonging might make it hard to work with them. It’s one thing to explore a Parliament member’s general political leanings. That’s innocuous. But it crosses lines with meticulous details that insinuate targeted manipulation. Open Society was trying to re-consolidate their relationships with Parliament.

The best way to show this is going over people from both sides. First from the perspective of actions taken by Open Society onto EU officials. The other perspective being vice versa.

Dr. Costanza Hermanin’s specializations relate back to Defend Europe’s issues in particular. Her Open Society European Policy Institute work (PDF) focuses on Equality, Migration, and Italy. So we get all the main issues at hand with Defend Europe in one place. But that’s not all our friend Costanza does. She’s a special adviser to Italy’s under-secretary for Justice, has a nice cozy spot in the Huffington Post to write articles whenever they wish, and has a working relationship with nearly all the NGOs involved in migrant rescues in the Mediterranean. Her plans include shipping migrants off from Italy to the rest of Europe. OSEPI state outright they wanted to influence the next Italian EU president’s agenda. Costanza herself had a series of discussions with NGO groups and EU officials. Done with the intention of influencing these sorts of political guidelines (PDF).

Our dear Costanza is only one person of many in this sort of position of leverage and influence.

On the other side (PDF).

Federica Mogherini (Italy, Party of European Socialists) is the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Policy. Also worth noting she first joined the Italian Communist Party as a young woman. She laid out a vision to reshape the External Action Service in her appointment hearing. It consists of giving EU member states a common direction in the next five years. Institutions coordinating themselves and their work to better efficiency.

What does the External Action Service do?

EEAS is in charge of EU diplomatic missions, intelligence, and crisis management structures. They assist the High Representative in conducting Common Foreign and Security Policy. Which is the EU foreign policy in matters of defense diplomacy, security, and actions. They support his/her capacities as President of the Foreign Affairs Council and Vice-President of the European Commission. EEAS does not propose or put in place policy on their own behalf. Instead, they prepare acts adopted by the High Representative, the European Commission or the Council.

According to the briefing, Federica has a keen interest in civil society and NGOs. She sees their expertise as valuable.

One facet of the External Action Service plays a key role in the Defend Europe situation. Keep in mind. The Open Society wanted to go all the way with “enforcement of debating procedure.” Their outlined plan involves controlling what’s focused on in public discourse. OSF hoped long-term to push new anti-hate speech laws utilizing cross-party political “intergroups.”

The East Stratcom Task Force was created in June 2015 with three main objectives in mind: make communication effective and promote EU policies, strength the media environment, and lastly, word for word “improve EU capacity to forecast, address and respond to disinformation activities by external actors.” They further explain the Task Force’s focus is creating “a positive EU narrative” and analyze disinformation trends by “myth-busting” what they call disinformation narratives.

This effort intends to stop the Russians (who had kicked Soros out the same year this Task Force formed). The EU believed they were engaging in disinformation campaigns. What the Task Force does is sort out “fake news” from what they think is real. In December 2016 this East Stratcom Task Force decided on two separate occasions that “NGOs are smuggling migrants into Europe ‘on an industrial scale’ as evidenced by video footage” was fake news. On the 13th (PDF) and again on the 20th (PDF).

They throw in this disclaimer in their reports:

“****DISCLAIMER: The Disinformation Review is a compilation of reports received from members of the EEAS East Stratcom mythbusting network, which comprises of over 400 experts, journalists, officials, NGOs and Think Tanks in over 30 countries.”

Another (PDF) document lists Twitter accounts OSI thought were “Key Pro-Russian Opinion Formers.” Which goes back to the whole keeping a tight grip on public perception aspect.

It’s as simple as narrowing things down to a single thread. Then following along to see how Soros’s narrative manipulation plays itself out.

For this, we’re going to look at something called The Rome Charter. It’s sponsored and supported by Soros’s Open Society Foundation (because of course). What the Charter is about is best described in this English version PDF they’ve got. They wanted international journalist associations to be more fact-based when reporting migration issues. The Rome Charter tries to be a code of conduct on the subject of immigration. This was adopted by the National Council of the Journalists’ Professional Association and the Italian National Press Federation.

To clarify: they made the original version of this document (PDF) back in March and April 2011. It goes over things like: covering migration for current affairs news, interviewing asylum-seekers/refugees/trafficking victims/migrants, reporting on the political and public debate, reporting on data/statistics and on opinion polls, local information sources and the role of foreign journalists, and the need to focus on specific minority groups.

There’s a whole page called the “Diversity Checklist.” They added it so journalists can be more culturally sensitive as to what they are reporting about. The English “guidebook” has this glossary of definitions to use for migrants. The original Italian document itself is also very particular about terminology usage. There’s an important distinction between terminologies. Economic migrants leave their country to seek employment elsewhere. Refugees flee their country out of necessity to escape chaos and destructive wars. Two situations with key variations. The Charter has a very subtle shaping with what’s considered appropriate and what is not. It’s these sorts of slight nuances that make a huge difference in journalism. To see that aspect manipulated is actually very troubling.

But then the SUGGESTED SOURCES this Charter suggests journalists use? There’s a common thread with some of their suggestions.

“What we propose here is a list of sources broken down by sectors where journalists and information providers can find up-to-date information and information migrants, asylum seekers, refugees and minorities,” it says at the top of section 4.

Well, the biggest suggestion that stood out to me first was Amnesty International. Their head honcho director at the time, Steve Hawkins, got a big two-year grant from the Open Society Foundation back in June 2014. These are the folks that this Charter wants journalists to rely on to be unbiased.

asgi.it is the “Association for legal studies on immigration, essential for the updating of laws, decrees, judgments, circulars and implementing regulations,” according to the Roma Charter. But if you check on their website? You’ll see Open Society Foundations is a backer of them, right there at the bottom of the page.

Cospe is an NGO working on Italian and global initiatives for diversity/rights and equal opportunities for migrants and provides information on racism in Italy and Europe. Says the Rome Charter recommendation sheet. But what does the leaked list of European Elections 2014 projects for the Open Society Initiative say? Oh, it says that same COSPE organization was getting a $46,090 grant for addressing “the issue of insufficient political participation of EU citizens residing in Italy and aims to stimulate their active engagement in the political and public life by mobilizing them to register and vote in the 2014 European Parliament election.”

It’s a conflict of interest.

Allow me to reiterate on this. The Charter wants journalists to use *these* organizations when talking about immigration. It’s their best suggestion, hoping reporters buy into this appeal to authority cop-out.

21luglio is a non-profit site dedicated to stopping intolerance and discrimination, says the Rome Charter description. “Open Society Justice Initiatives” is on 21luglio’s partner page list. On top of THAT, you can see the Open Society Foundations logo pretty big on the page if you scroll down. Elsewhere, this Charter cites the blog fortresseurope.org as reputable for migration coverage. They name journalist Gabriele Del Grande as the one behind the site. Elsewhere, on Open Society Foundations own site, you can see a feature article they did back in October 2014 with that sameGabriele Del Grande. Right at the bottom of the page. “The Open Society Foundations have previously supported director Gabriele Del Grande and his blog Fortress Europe.” A Buon Diritto is a Soros backed operation according to their 2014 grant listings (PDF). So the Rome Charter’s suggestion of it as a trustworthy source is laughable.

It’s worthwhile to paint a picture of what Soros’s interests are in recent years. With that in mind, the best place to look is social media. The @GeorgeSoros Twitter account consists of OSF articles and other related writings. Many by George himself, but some from others that share his interests. All organized here, for further reading.

The 2012/2013 era shows us Soros’s interests in the European Union back then. He viewed it as an avoidable crisis that he can fix. He claimed government officials had an ethnic profiling status quo working against minorities. George warned the public that xenophobia loomed on the horizon. He started off (and ended) 2014 pretty big on Ukraine. Soros tried to use the EU as an example of open society “done right” for Ukraine to learn from. By summer his attention shifted to EU’s migration policies. He wanted to change the conversation people were having about that subject (“think of the children!”). Highlighting things like 200,000 kids in Greece weren’t citizens because they have migrant parents. In an interview he did in November, George went for the “at least the EU is better than Russia” strategy. Soros was in his 80s at this point. But he was ready to kick his Open Society world domination plan into overdrive. In 2015 Soros was holding up Croatia as an example for the rest of the EU to follow when it came to migration response. This was when he started applying the teachings of Karl Popper to his work here. Soros said country’s governments should connect to their people using “emotional intelligence.” Their perception of reality as a basis, rather than all possible facts. George promoted social cohesion as being necessary to appease the public. Remember how in 2014 Soros wanted to make migrant children citizens? That’s relevant here. As “social cohesion” means demanding cooperation between migrant and long-standing European families. They must get along and play nice. No matter what. An article on the OSF website tries to hammer that notion in further. They report on a multicultural neighborhood getting along “just fine” despite “populist rhetoric.” Soros said being “Islamophobic” went against European values. That it went against their “legacy” to turn away those in need of safety. The narrative being refugees were supposedly a part of Europe itself. He thought the EU needed to get their reception centers in better shape. George suggested they adopt a common asylum policy. In the first few months of 2016, Soros was all about Slovenia. He continued his technique of using individual countries for the rest of the EU to follow. George mentioned Canada’s private sponsorship program to create a financial appeal for refugees. George took Brexit harder than most. He thought UK’s exit from the EU meant the Union’s decline was now inevitable. This stalled his efforts urging the EU deal with the refugee situation collectively. Instead of on an individual country by country basis. By 2017 it all comes together. Soros thinks his Open Society is under attack. In George’s eyes, the migrant situation intertwines with the fate of the entire EU. Even financially.

So let’s take a look at current events and let me show you what this situation looks like, with this NEW lens you have.

In late September 2017, Hungary’s right-wing Fidesz party in Hungary promised to come forward with Soros’s plans to fill the E.U. with cheap migrant labor. They even request PM Viktor Orban to probe the E.U. on it after their ruling on imposing forced migration.

For this to make sense, we need to walk backward with this timeline of events. On September 6th, 2017 the European Court of Justice ruled that Hungary and Slovakia MUST accept the EU decision to relocate refugees from Greece and Italy, and accept them into their borders.

Ska Keller (Greens, DE) said:

“Now that the ECJ has dismissed the actions of Hungary and Slovakia against the redistribution of refugees, there is no excuse. Finally, those member states which have so far boycotted redistribution must also deliver. Solidarity in the EU is not a one-way street. Government leaders such as Viktor Orbán cannot demand more money for border protection, while blocking the reception of refugees from Greece and Italy.”

Civil Liberties Committee Chair Claude Moraes (S&D, UK) said:

“Member States cannot dodge their responsibilities; today’s verdict has shown this. The Parliament has consistently called on Member States to quickly uphold their commitments, since the adoption of the relocation mechanism in 2015. Yet two years later, only 28 000 people out of the 160 000 have been relocated.”

This had been brewing for a few years. Back in September 2015, Hungary was experiencing a surge in immigration. PM Viktor Orban had said he didn’t want the country taking in too many Muslim migrants. There was a lot of tension at the time. Viktor warned people fleeing places like Syria that they shouldn’t come to Hungary. Police blocked groups of refugees outside a Budapest train station for a few days. It was at this same time this was all going on was when Viktor Orban was having Hungary build a border fence. This border fence would come into play a few weeks later according to a Guardian article. “Hungary’s treatment of refugees is shocking and unacceptable, says UN.” There was a clash with refugees on Hungary’s southern border. Border guards used pepper spray, tear gas, and water cannons on refugees trying to cross.

It ticked off the U.N. for sure.

Now the Open Society Foundation also kept a close eye on all that, releasing their own report at the end of that month downplaying the migration crisis angle as much as possible. “THERE IS NO MIGRATION CRISIS IN HUNGARY” was their first big bullet point. The title of the article though? “What You Need to Know About the Refugee Crisis in Hungary.” So it’s a conflicting message, right from the get-go. Open Society accused officials and media of xenophobia, mentions the 175 km long border fence and takes a jab at Hungary’s protective measures they’d taken against the migrant situation. They go on to try and justify replacement migration as necessary to fill in the gaps in fertility rates.

During the 2016 U.S. elections, Bill Clinton actually commented about it while on the campaign trail for Hillary. “Poland and Hungary, two countries that would not be free but for the United States and the long Cold War, have now decided this democracy is too much trouble,” Bill said on May 17th, 2016 at a campaign stop in New Jersey. “They want Putin-like leadership: Just give me an authoritarian dictatorship and keep the foreigners out.”

A few days later we’d see a response from Orban that tied the situation back to Soros. These comments came from Orban while he was speaking on Hungarian radio.

“[B]eyond the American campaign, the remarks made about Hungary and Poland… have a political dimension,” Mr. Orban said, accusing Mr. Clinton of repeating Soros-inspired campaign lines: “These are not accidental slips of the tongue. And [the number of] these slips or remarks have been multiplying since we are living in the era of the migrant crisis. And we all know that behind the leaders of the Democratic Party, we have to see George Soros.”

“And George Soros published his six points supporting the Muslim migration to Europe, in which he announced that at least one million Muslims should be allowed [into Europe] each year, that they must be provided a safe path and that Europe should be happy to get such a chance and shouldn’t be defending against it. He also said that it will cost a lot of money, which he’d loan.”

Back to today — Orban had told the EU that Hungary would decline their decision. In an official response letter, Viktor spent several paragraphs politely telling the EU to blow it out their ass. Voters agree with Orban’s stance, and the Fidesz party is high in the public opinion. They concluded by saying EU officials will carry out this plan because they all “eat from Soros’ hand”.

Soros and Beyond

Soros connects to European and Global politics without even being a politician himself. He has an acute awareness of the comings and goings of Parliament and their stances on issues. He says he did it in the beginning with the intent of serving the public good. That focus began honing on the merit of a particular project to give money to, and what mattered to Open Society.

It all goes back to the banks. The model of economics at play here is all about controlling the money supply. It goes back to an ancient model by the Phoenicians and brought over to Europe by Venetian bankers. In fact, it may be worthwhile for us to take a step back for a second and go over what happened hundreds of years ago. What happened back then helps clarify things going on today a bit.

The Venetians influenced England via banking. They shaped the direction of England in a way that made Henry III bankrupt during the 1250s, which caused a massive civil war to happen. Further, it made the Hundred Years’ War (1337–1453) come to fruition. England’s King Edward III sent an envoy to Venice’s Doge Gradenigo, telling him that war with France was going to happen. Gradenigo accepted the proposition of an alliance in which Venetians on England’s land would be treated with the same rights as Englishmen, but without having to get their hands dirty with fighting. So England was fighting France on behalf of the Venetians.

The Venetians made myths to make themselves seem more influential. There was King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table on the government side. While Robin Hood was the people’s hero. You could call it an early form of “Top down. Bottom up,” in regards to how the Venetians focused on these two different aspects of society.

England was a wreck after the Hundred Years’ War. This set the stage for the Wars of the Roses(1455–1487) which had House of York against the House of Lancaster. Groups formed from disputes between the seven sons of pro-Venetian Edward III. England was at its knees as a result and ended up recovering thanks to Earl Henry Tudor, who became King Henry VII. He helped start England down the road of modernization/renaissance. Getting with the times and playing catch up with Italy and France. The pro-Venetian barons wiped themselves out by their own civil wars. This gave Henry VII the opportunity to set up a central government. Something with military power to help police the oligarchy. To meet such ends, Henry VII carved a path that circumvented the barons. The key was direct communication with the traders and producers. England ushered in an era stability due to based on Henry VII’s methods of rule.

They’d get their chance at revenge when Henry VIII took the throne.

Henry VIII ruled England from 1509–1547. He came to power as the War of the League of Cambraibegan breaking out. France, Spain, and the Holy Roman Empire, all teamed up joining up with Pope Julius II della Rovere. Their mutual enemy was Venice’s dominant oligarchy, and they wanted to take it down. England’s Henry VIII was an outlier. Being both a pro-Venetian in 1509/1510 yet also buddies with Pope Julius.

This next part of the story is one of the most well known in modern times. In 1527 Henry VIII wanted to get a divorce from Catherine of Aragon. A Venetian-controlled University egged him on. It serves as an early example of how the Soros open society system operates. The Venetians encouraged Henry’s legal legitimacy to follow through on this. Gasparo Contarini of the Venetians sent emissaries to the English court. Among those was his Uncle, Francesco Zorzi. He and Thomas Cromwell were able to play to Henry VIII’s weaknesses of lust. In doing so they got him to break off with the Roman Papacy and found the Anglican Church.

The Venetians made religious wars but they looked out for themselves when influencing events on either side of the feud. This war had lasting effects. Venetians realized they couldn’t control the world from a small home territory. Their solution to that was picking everything up and moving somewhere else. So their philosophies, fortunes, and politics went to the Netherlands, England, and France. You can see how the past influenced the present in this respect. The Venetians faded into the background and let other countries duke it out on their behalf.

The gold standard collapsed in the early 1970s, and the US made a deal with Saudi Arabia to have oil prices standardized in terms of USD. Some of the effects of this include persistent trade deficits and providing US financial markets liquidity through petrodollar recycling. The petrodollar made the USD the world’s dominant currency, being involved heavily in foreign exchange deals. The US has to be careful, as the arrangement puts it in a perpetual state of account deficits necessary for reserve requirements.

This was all possible thanks to President Nixon ending the gold standard on August 15th, 1971 in response to Vietnam War debt. The dollar went into a sudden decline because of inflation. A deal was made by Kissinger with Saudi Arabia in 1973, who in turn persuaded OPEC to join in on this. OPEC control 40% of the world’s oil supply. The organization has five founding members (Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Venezuela, Iraq, and Iran), plus ten other members today (U.A.E., Angola, Algeria, Libya, Ecuador, Gabon, Nigeria, Indonesia, Qatar and Equatorial Guinea).

This set the stage for political relations throughout the 1980s and 1990s, onward to today. December 1973 had the Shah of Iran raising oil prices by a factor of 3. This meant high gas prices in the US with the Middle East gets a ton of US dollars. They deposited it into banks and bought gold. But the banks had to lend that cash out. If someone made a massive withdraw all at once, the system could be destabilized. To remedy this, at the end of 1974 the Basel Committee was made between 10 major countries. From their first Concordat in 1975 onward, it was meant to prevent system failure if OPEC took out a ton of funds from one institution. The US had to keep printing more dollars to keep up with the oil trade. that raised prices of other goods and services. OPEC raised prices in response to reduced purchasing power. In 1979 there was a second oil crisis, along with the rise of Ayatollah Khomeini. Iran oil production plunges, the world turns to Rotterdam market in response. Oil market prices skyrocket to $40, and gold skyrockets along that as its connected to oil now. All in all, putting the petrodollar at risk. In September 1980, Iraq invaded Iran with US financing and support. That war lasted for ten years. June 1990 had Saddam Hussien request OPEC to raise prices for Iraq’s sake. OPEC didn’t feel like doing that. So in August 1990 Iraq invaded Kuwait and started the Gulf War. In February 1991 the Gulf War ended. Iraq left Kuwait, and the US did not pursue. Later in January 1999, the Euro is introduced. This raises oil prices. By October 2000 Iraq began converting oil transactions to Euros. In March 2003 the US invaded Iraq, with the results being them switching the currency back to $.

September 11th and the .com bust made Allen Greenspan lower Federal Reserve interest rates to 1%. This allowed Wall Street banks to borrow more money easier. The buyout boom that followed had Private Equity firms buying companies with vast amounts of debt, inflating asset prices. There was a lot of cheap credit thanks to that and other surpluses. From here, banks started placing more emphasis on leverage. This means letting people borrow money to increase the outcome of a deal. Lower interest rates led to a “search for yield” by investors because they wanted the same returns on loans they had prior. This led to increased tolerance of high-yield debt and leveraged loans where the borrowing conditions made mass default the foregone conclusion.

To put it simply. Wall Street took out massive amounts of credit, growing and growing with the more deals they make. Investors see this and want in on this system. Wall Street connected investors with homeowners via their mortgages. A family buying a house use a down-payment. Often, especially in the US, this is thought of as being arranged by brokers who connect that family to a lender and give them a mortgage. A purportedly simple system where everyone ends up happy. But then it’s taken a step further. For a start, even “brokered” mortgages are actually “originated” (this is the financial-legal term used) by banks, which create a debt account (hence creating the funds for the loan out of thin air, not using any funds held to provide that credit) and they set it off against another account containing the payments received from the mortgagee. They often sell on this debt quickly to clandestine parties (often overseas-registered) without telling the mortgagee, even though the contract remains between the bank and the mortgagee. The originating bank uses their securitization department to sell the mortgages to a special purchase vehicle. They then issue debt secured on the pool of mortgages. That group of securitized mortgages is known as Mortgage Backed Securities (MBS) or Collateralized Mortgage Obligations (CMO). Collateralized Debt Obligations (CDO) are a securitization of loans to corporations. A group of pooled assets.

Blythe Masters (former JPMorgan executive) is credited as the creator of the credit default swap. A major part of the 2008 financial crisis, a credit default swap is a financial swap agreement that means the seller of the CDS will pay the buyer in the event of a loan default. In return, this buyer makes a series of payments to the CDS seller.

The AAA tranches of MBS were bought by institutions (pension funds, money market funds, insurances funds). The riskiest trance, the Equity Piece, was usually retained by the originating bank. Higher risk equals a higher rate of return. But at the end of the day, everyone can repay their bills and make money. But these investment groups want to milk the cow for all the cash they can. To get more people into houses, they started using subprime mortgages. They knew that people who default their mortgages mean the banks get the house. The originating banks were paid only for selling the mortgage, whereas the SPV and its investors ended up with the risky mortgage. These SPV investors couldn’t see what these mortgages were, relying on Credit Rating Agencies. They put subprime mortgages through the same scheme as everyone else, profiting off of them in this system. These, in turn, were paid by the originating bank so they were incentivized to approve risky mortgages. They gave credit to these people to buy homes, and there was no conceivable way they were going to manage to pay it back.

You can think of it as a grid of debts sold on (clandestinely) by the banks who held the mortgage contracts to the Special Purpose Vehicles. Whereas the SPVs had previously taken vertical slices (so they knew there were constant proportions of good and bad debt in the slice that each of them got and thus anticipated the risk accordingly), in the run-up to the crisis, they instead started being offered, and taking, horizontal slices, so that bad debt (subprime) became an asset class in its own right. As expected, the subprime homeowners defaulted on their mortgages and the banks foreclosed on them. One of the root causes of this was the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act. Washington forced Freddie Mac/Fannie Mae and the banks to extend mortgage credit to unsuitable borrowers so they could drive up home ownership. Over time, more and more fall to the same fate, stacking foreclosures up. The remaining homeowners questioned paying huge cash amounts for a house diminishing in value. In the US, mortgages are nonrecourse. Homeowners can just walk away from a house and not be pursued for the outstanding debt owed afterward. Elsewhere around the globe, the bank can still come after people for the money in these situations. Even after the house is sold to pay back the mortgage. So they give up their houses too, leaving Investment Banker with worthless houses.

Some people got rich by betting against the housing market with credit default swaps.

Everything crashes. Soros saw that. The people in The Big Short saw that. Industry analysts like Peter Schiff did too. You didn’t, though. None of the average folks saw banking become the behemoth industry dominating the markets.

Right when the US financial crisis was ramping up, Soros bought 2 million shares in Halliburton. It was announced in February 2007, dated to have happened at some point before the end of December 2006. The timing is curious in retrospect, as crude oil prices seemed to have begun rising around that exact same time. Generally speaking, there was a variety of factors behind this price surge, but that doesn’t rule Soros manipulation out of the equation either. Halliburton deals in oil and engineering, and they proved their foothold within Iraq in the years prior. The Pentagon awarded them a contract to restore Iraq’s oil wells back in 2003. But Halliburton is known for their fair share of controversy. One of these came out in the weeks following the announcement of Soros buying shares. It revealed the company deals with the business of laundering illegal goods and money. To places like Iran, Iraq, and Libya. So it shouldn’t have come as any surprise that Iran was suddenly asking for oil customers to pay in money other than US dollars.

First-hand accounts say that Soros predicted the American economy’s recession before it hit. George met with financiers at a Summer 2007 luncheon. There he broadcasted this prediction to the group. They’d later make changes to investment strategies and bet against the housing market.

This is kind of a left-turn out of nowhere. But there was this investment fund manager who worked for George Soros. Howard Rubin. At the beginning of November, it came out that he “ran human trafficking enterprise in which he raped, electrocuted and imprisoned women in NYC sex dungeon’,” so says the lawsuit.

I feel obliged to explain the details of this at least a little bit. I mean you don’t hear stories like that every day.

“Howard ‘Howie’ Rubin, 62, is accused of sexually assaulting three women, two of whom are former Playboy bunnies, at an $8million penthouse in Manhattan in 2016 which contains a secret ‘dungeon’ of sex toys, masks and BDSM ‘apparatus’.

The women claim Rubin and his associates lured them to New York on JetBlue flights after contacting them on Instagram.

Once in Manhattan, they say he drugged them then violently beat them while they were gagged and bound in the sex dungeon, hitting woman so hard that she passed out as he demanded she call him ‘daddy’.

Two of them say he warned them: ‘I’m going to rape you like I rape my daughter,’ before attacking them and one says he punched her breast so hard her implant ‘flipped’.”

But this Daily Mail article unintentionally gives one hell of a clue for the financial crisis discussion we’re here to talk about. Howard Rubin was a trader on Wall Street who people say is responsible for Merrill Lynch’s $377 million loss in 1987. He’s alleged to have bought billions of dollars in mortgage bonds without the consent of his bosses. When the market had a bit of a crash, he couldn’t sell those bonds off. But since this is Wall Street we’re talking about? Rubin’s career wasn’t over there. Bear Sterns appointed him as the Senior Manager Director, where he was in charge of Collateralized Mortgage Obligations from ’87 to 1999.

He came out of retirement in 2008 to run a Mortgage-Backed Securities Fund for George Soros.

George took on the United States during the January 2008 World Economic Forum at Davos. As the US was experiencing a market slump, Soros made himself look better in the face of attempts of reassurance by Condoleezza Rice. During a US Senate Commerce Committee Oversight Hearing meeting in June of that year, Soros cited the rising cost of oil as something that happened on top of the credit crisis. He said oil discovery and development of reserves came at a higher cost. With that, the depletion rate was accelerating. There was a reflexive trend of oil supplies falling as prices go up. Finally, George said speculation augmented by market trends reinforced oil demand.

George Soros knew Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were in crisis. It became clear they were working in a rigged system. Before the Global Financial Crisis, the US Treasury issued them debt called Agency Debt. This was understood to be US Government backed. When the GFC was unfolding, they were nationalized. This meant their losses had been socialized. The next month Soros was raising his stakein Lehman brothers for that reason. He knew there’d be a bailout. Sure enough, by Fall 2008 that’s exactly what happened. It’s worth clarifying Soros later wrote the problem wasn’t only the oil reserves. They were a contributing factor to the problem of the financial system in itself. The housing bubble wasn’t the entire incident. It was a “detonator” for a credit and leverage super-bubble developing since the 1980s.

In November 2008, hedge fund managers had to face the Washington House Committee on Oversight and Reform. The government was looking into if hedge funds needed more regulations in place. But these testimonies solidify positions people like Soros had in the financial crisis. George told the committee hedge funds were a key part of the financial market bubble burst. Under George Bush’s TARP program, the US government purchased dodgy assets and equity. That means hedge funds were given Treasury money. In this sense, he amplified the effects of the economic crisis in the United States. This was George’s opportunity to present his change in economic thinking to the world. Using the Karl Popper ways of thought he practiced.

By 2009 we had a new President. Soros felt generous and donated $50,000 to his inauguration.

There were connections between Soros and the Obama White House. Eric P. Schwartz of the US Connect Fund had influence by funding from the Open Society Foundation. He met with leftist groups to help develop a range of pro-U.N. related policies. Even so, George wasn’t afraid to tell the world he didn’t think the 2009 stimulus plan would be enough. His public efforts were an attempt to guide the US government to a particular solution. It’s why he came out strong against the “Bad Bank” option the Obama administration put on the table. Soros framed this collapse as something greater than the Great Depression.

With Soros and the US heavily involved in the middle east, all we needed was a wild card. Gaddafi. Longtime ruler of Libya, in 2006 Gaddafi saw the pieces on the chessboard and wanted Libya’s oil reserves to get a piece of that wealth. The oil reserves in Libya are the largest in Africa. To further that end, he was elected chairman of the African Union in February 2009. It was here Gaddafi proposed gold dinar be used for African oil transactions, undermining the petrodollar.

In March of 2009, Soros laid out his public proposal for fixing the economy. The solution didn’t end at a stimulus package. He suggested a mortgage system overhaul and recapitalization of the banking system. Plus, a nod to oil with a step involving changing energy policy. Soros suggested developing countries get permission to borrow from large countries’ quotas of IMF international reserve assets. He recommended places like Eastern Europe get such support. That was because George wanted to get more interdependent leverage within the region. Making it more susceptible to further influence and reform.

Something to that effect would come to fruition by April. Soros praised world leaders for a “proactive” G20 summit that took place, addressing the world economy. Hosted by Gordon Brown, the meeting gave George the move he was after. That move was a $1.1 trillion dollar deal to combat the crisis. $500 Billion went to IMF resources, and $250 billion went to the Special Drawing Rights. The exact thing Soros had advocated for.

After that, Soros took one hell of a U-Turn. In the days following the G-20 summit, he labeled the US banks as insolvent. In an interview, George said the importance of the IMF’s $750 billion was the drawing rights. This creates new money for other countries to stimulate their own economy in a way the US already had the ability to. George had made up his mind at this point. By May 2009 he was telling reporters that Asia would come out on top from all this and surpass the United States as the catalyst for world growth. He noted that Germany needed to step forward and make the Euro more efficient.

All Soros had to do was make himself seem like they know it all. To that end, George spoke out againstcredit default swaps. He claimed countries like Poland and Hungary suffered worse for being Eurozone outsiders. Countries that had retained their own currencies in Central Europe had seen the rise of mortgages denominated in Euros or Swiss Francs, so the rate of default was higher than in the Eurozone once the exchange rate went south and the cost of living rose, a double whammy for the average citizen.

A quote by Soros from July 2009:

“Even George Soros, the billionaire hedge fund operator, says money managers would find ways to manipulate cap-and-trade markets. “The system can be gamed,” Soros, 79, remarked at a London School of Economics seminar in July. “That’s why financial types like me like it — because there are financial opportunities”…”

He made money from the US financial crisis. but he wanted more.

Soros wrote “No alternative to a new world architecture” for The Japan Times. Released on November 8th, 2009, George lays out the world’s choices for the future. According to him, we can either have international capitalism or state capitalism. He encouraged the US to embrace IMF Special Drawing Rights. This means no currency would have more of an advantage over any other. This move would allow China freedom from the US dollar exchange-rate peg. He blamed the Obama administration for reviving banks with hidden subsidies. This gives them a stronger market position and less likely to overhaul themselves. Soros threw the President under the bus. It becomes clear that George aimed for China to replace the United States in the world economy.

He highlighted the need to reform the currency system. In 2011, he’d get that wish. Soros called for a new Bretton Woods conference. A repeat of the 1944 meet-up that created the World Bank and International Monetary Fund.

Britain realized they were going to win World War II after the Soviets and America got involved. That freed up some time for them to focus on the new world order and financial control. By 1942, FDR talked of his Allies as “the United Nations.” In 1944 they started plans for a pair of institutions: the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. The finalized motion happened at the Bretton Woods Conference. Another name for it was the United Nations Monetary and Financial Conference. Between July 1st and 22nd 1944, delegates from 44 nations met up in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire. The purpose was to establish new rules for the international monetary system. World War II was finally at an end, and the global shake-up demanded a call to restore order. America’s economic desperation during the Great Depression taught a lot of hard lessons. The various policies put into place came at the cost of international instability. These gathered leaders from around the globe agreed on economic coordination.

Thus by the end of 1946, both the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund were operational. They controlled the money supply and gave emergency loans to countries after the war. The intention was to provide the means for restoring peace and normalcy. An American helming the World Bank, and a European in charge of the IMF. The World Bank handles loans for capital projects (“Uncle Sam-compatible infrastructure”), while the IMF handles the “humanitarian” side. IMF demands third world countries restructure their economies before giving them loans. What this boils down is them gutting their welfare programs. They give these loans in their local currency while demanding repayment in USD. By payback time, exchange rate shifts make it impossible at the country’s central bank. This is due to the export of mineral wealth that tends to take place in the interim. But it isn’t just Third World that the IMF helps out. Back in the 1970s (1976), Britain had to go to them when the Labour Party turned the country insolvent.

It goes something like this: There’s the Fed, ECB, and Bank of England on the fourth rung. The third rung being IMF and World Bank. The second highest is the Bank for International Settlements. Then there’s reportedly 8000 men on the top. The 1% of the 1%. The EU (all the way up to Juncker), follows the orders of bankers in London and New York. The EU diplomats have diplomatic immunity, great benefits, and tax-exempt salary. They weren’t angry about Brexit. But the bankers at the ECB in Frankfurt and their bosses at the BIS were. These legions of EU-federalists don’t even know they are shielding the BIS. Brexit has shaken the European Union worldview. One that American and British elites shared since the 1940s.

George believed the world needed to change the currency system again because people don’t trust the U.S. dollar the same way they did at the end of WWII. He demanded new international rules be put in place to deal with how financial institutions were handled, what capital controls are supposed to do, and a reorganization of the International Monetary Fund to change the order of importance and methods of operation.

Soros returned to Bretton Woods in April 2011, bringing 200 of the smartest economists and world leaders with him. They hosted a conference titled “CRISIS and RENEWAL: International Political Economy at the Crossroads” from 8th to the 11th. Their reason for the meeting was they believed the current monetary policy and economic thinking around the world weren’t working. This was a result of the subprime mortgage crisis that started back in July 2007. The US dollar became the world’s reserve currency at the 1944 conference. At this April 2011 conference, the United States was on the chopping block. The country was in 14 trillion dollars of debt at this point. They wanted to replace the system with something that didn’t depend so much on America.

The main theme was that developing nations needed to be brought into the same global fold. A Reuters article on the event has a decent quote from former British PM Gordon Brown:

“So, you come to 2010, and for the first time virtually for nearly 200 years America and Europe — that’s the United States of America and the 27 members of the European Union, for the first time are being outproduced, outmanufactured and outexported, and also, interestingly, outinvested by the rest of the world,” former British Prime Minister Gordon Brown told the conference.

More than two-thirds of these speakers were tied to Soros. There were a few journalists on the list too. A managing editor for the Financial Times and editors from The Times, Reuters, Wall Street Journal, and The New Yorker. Nineteen of these speakers were Project Syndicate contributors (Soros website where people post op-eds and commentaries). The group hosting the event itself was George’s own he founded the week before releasing that Japan Times Article. They were called the Institute for New Economic Thinking (INET for short). The last conference the group had before this one was at Central European University, which Soros has dumped over $250 million into.

INET’s Executive Director Rob Johnson is one speaker. He was a managing director at Soros Fund Management and serves on the Economic Policy Institute’s Board of Directors (Soros funded). There’s also Joseph E. Stiglitz. A close friend of the Soros family. He was senior vice president and chief economist for the World Bank. He’s also on INET’s Board and writes for Project Syndicate. Speaker Jeffery Sachs is a director at The Earth Institute and got $50 million from Soros for the U.N. Millennium project. Last speaker worth mentioning is Paul Volcker. He’s a former Fed chairman and also former chairman of Obama’s Economic Advisory Board.

All these people held the same world views as Soros. To be blunt, this was George wanting to rearrange the whole global economic system and financial order. Capitalism was now the big enemy, not Communism. He wanted to reform the International Monetary Fund and the United Nations in a way that boosted China and other countries while taking away power from the United States.

But the US needed to give that power up willingly.

“Reorganizing the world order will need to extend beyond the financial system and involve the United Nations, especially membership of the Security Council,” George wrote back in 2009. “That process needs to be initiated by the U.S., but China and other developing countries ought to participate as equals.”

That’s exactly the type of powerful banker sorts that showed up to speak: Erik Berglöf (Chief Economist and Special Adviser, European Bank for Reconstruction & Development), Claudio Borio(Bank for International Settlements), Charles Dallara (Institute of International Finance), Andy Haldane (Executive Director, Financial Stability, Bank of England), Orville Schell (Director, Center on US-China Relations), Louis Kuijs (Senior Economist, World Bank (Beijing)), Zhu Min (Special Advisor, International Monetary Fund), James Boughton (Historian, IMF), Adair Turner (Chairman, Financial Services Authority), Andrés Velasco (Chile’s Former Minister of Finance), Andrew Sheng (Chief Adviser, China Banking Regulatory Commission), and Jomo Kwame Sundaram (Assistant Secretary-General for Economic Development, United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA)).

This Bretton Woods Conference meant Soros could move forward with his political maneuvering.

Gaddafi was killed by NATO forces in October 2011. A civil war (Obama/Clinton armed the rebels) had broken out, and the rebels seeking to remove Gaddafi from power. Much of Clinton’s intelligence came from Sidney Blumenthal, who reportedly had his own personal interests in Libya. Blumenthal worked with Tyler Drumheller. Together they pined for their Osprey company in Libya to profit off of military and medical contracts. An April 2011 memo showed France was concerned about Gaddafi’s $7 billion in gold and silver to prop up their African currency. This was seen as the motivation behind bombing the country. They succeeded. Gaddafi was taken out in October 2011. By the same people (NATO) that Gaddafi argued with about their oil fields in April of that year. But not without a cost. On top of that, there’s the Syrian Civil War. One of the root causes of that were two rival pipelines that were proposed for construction. Assad turned down Qatar and Turkey’s plans but accepted Iran’s. As they had Russia’s blessing. Both of these pipelines heavily involve the Mediterranean, making it a center point of political and economic interest. But for the past 5 or so years, the country has been torn apart by war. This power vacuum in the area led to the refugee crisis, with migrants fleeing the instability in hopes of a better life in Europe.

To start grasping the connection here, we need to look at the Merkel plan. This links Soros backing groups that advocate migrant resettlement, to the bank system.

The European Stability Initiative designed the Merkel plan.

In 2008, ESI’s own site credits their chairman Gerald Knaus as an Open Society fellow. A recent talk event at the European Council on Foreign Relations in March 2017 lists Gerald Knaus as “Chairman, European Stability Initiative and Open Society Fellow, ECFR Council Member.” But it appears the relationship between Knaus and Open Society is over a decade old. A 2004 ESI site article shows the two were exchanging ideas about Eastern Europe as far back as then. But to eliminate any doubt that there’s a strong relationship between Knaus and Soros? It says right here on ESI’s site that Open Society Foundation is a current supporter of theirs. The word-for-word text of the Merkel plan is here. Feel free to read that at your leisure. What actually matters though is the way the Merkel plan was carried out.

It was set into motion as far back as September 2015. Merkel suspended the Dublin Regulation, letting all the Syrian asylum-seekers stay in Germany. Merkel’s partners abroad and elsewhere openly stood against her for the move. Her popularity in the public eye plummeted. She explained her plan on the Anne Will political talk show. Germany was going to work with Turkey.

Ankara would stop the smuggling operations in exchange for Germany’s investment to help to improve the living conditions for migrants in Turkey as work was done to resettle Syrians in an “orderly and legal” fashion. The Merkel plan wanted Turkey to take back all irregular migrants that entered Greek territory after March 20th. In return, the EU would reward Ankara financial support for those refugees. and give visa-free travel around the EU for Turkey’s citizens. Finally, the EU member states would resettle these Syrian refugees from Turkey.

“Germany should agree to grant asylum to 500,000 Syrian refugees registered in Turkey over the coming 12 months,” says the Plan’s text.

Knaus did not account for the reality of international cooperation. An avalanche of “48 Hour Reports” from the Soros DCLeaks dump paints a detailed timeline of events.

Greece had their own difficulties. Brussels demanded Athens create hotspot registration centers to speed things along. The EU threw $200 million euro at them in funding to make hiring the officers and guards happen. But there were already 50,000 refugees over there and it took several months to set this system up. Progress was slow and the asylum agency didn’t have enough resources to speed up movement.

Yet the biggest setback came 15th/16th of July 2016. There was a coup attempt in Ankara, Turkey. Those sorts of things are one big shake-up for a country no matter which way you slice it. Recently the Turkish court gave 40 life sentences to the various plotters who tried to kill Erdoğan. This coup caused a snag in Greece as the Turkish officers stationed there got called back to Ankara. It was an abrupt notice meant to get things sorted out. People were hasty to trust Turkey even before the plan. Now on top of that, their partnership hit some turbulence (that coup was a big deal to them) as well as the months rolled on by.

This deal put the EU in a compromising position. It set up a situation where the Turks could blackmail them for continual funding.

Gerald Knaus participated in a September 2016 article reflecting on the status of the Merkel plan. He blames the European Commission for slowing the process down. When it came to the Greece asylum system, Gerald expected everyone in the EU to lend a helping hand. That did not happen. Reason being? Things cost money. What incentive was there for member-states to chip in? Even so, the EU was going to persist in their migration strategy here and focus on Africa instead of Europe.

On the 13th of September 2017, Juncker brought up the topic of migration in his State of the Union address:

“In spite of the debate and controversy around this topic, we have managed to make solid progress (…) We now need to redouble our efforts. Before the end of the month, the Commission will present a new set of proposals with an emphasis on returns, solidarity with Africa and opening legal pathways.”

The announcement revealed a new resettlement scheme for 50,000 refugees. Juncker explained they were all trying to figure out options for legal migration. He made it clear one of those was making a more effective EU return policy.

High Representative/ Vice-President Federica Mogherini said:

“Over the last two years, we finally built an EU policy on migration, which is starting to deliver. It is about managing one of the most complex, structural phenomena of our times, not a temporary emergency. Our cooperation with our partners in Africa, but also with the UN, has started to bear fruits by ensuring a better protection of migrants, making traffickers and smugglers’ business less profitable, and offering alternatives and legal avenues. We will keep working on the same track: We’ll only succeed by working in a united and consistent manner.”

So we got our talking puppets. Then, they’d drop the most important bit of information of all.

“The Commission has set aside €500 million to support Member States’ resettlement efforts.”

That’s how a humanitarian issue becomes a monetary one in the case of European migration. Assuming this is about the 50,000 new refugees mentioned in this piece? That makes their price per person 10000 euro. This link demonstrates how Soros involves himself with the European monetary system. He’s able to have an impact on how many migrants come in. That has a butterfly effect. The immigration factors how much fiat currency they make. Plus, it determines the growth of this Eurozone cottage industry they’re building. A contrived system geared toward asylum seekers and irregular migrants.

The German economy wants an artificially low euro plus low-interest rates. That way, they can permit out-competing of other European industry by German conglomerates. They, in turn, can cheaply access this massive supply of capital and evade humongous wage bills by using this poor eurozone labor pool. This spurred on the European Union law known as the “Six-Pack” put in force by December 2011. It’s a series of six economic regulations aimed at keeping the member states’ public deficits in check.

It’s to stop people like Soros who want to make the vast and cheap as possible of a Eurozone as they desire. The key to absolute power is controlling the money supply. Governments lead themselves to believe they MUST borrow money from the central banks. Their impression is the debt system depends on people’s continuous capacity to produce. To keep cranking out money. If they stop having kids and the birth rate slows down, economic order falls apart.

“That sounds like replacement migration.” You’d be right.

The bankers of the world want a working-age and consumer-geared population. Individuals who aren’t too stupid to work, but not smart enough to ask questions about how things are run. It’s the reason why we’re put into a system of debt. We have our savings funds depleted, land ownership and inheritance destroyed via taxes and zero interest rates. Being self-sufficient means the banks lose their purpose. It’s all about creating a human ecosystem that demolishes personal spirit. A mankind zombified through stimulation and incentivization. Control over intellectual property is also important to them. It keeps the flow of innovation in the hands of the folks who are “on the same page” as everyone else. This is part of the reason why Gab.ai is facing the pushback that it is.

That’s not an accident. Controlling the population is not only done in a political sense but an economic one too.

Germans have started asking questions about the ECB because they foot the bill. Basically, this German political system (Merkel and old Stasi helpers from GDR) are representatives of the Anglo-American elite. German identitarianism and the Alternative für Deutschland are a political threat because they are the first players since 1949 to openly claim their intent to reassert German sovereignty.

Centrist/third parties in the European Union don’t represent owners or workers. They latch on to NGOs and the aggressive pan-European agendas to make up for their lack of domestic ideology. The Open Society’s allies include folks like those in Ireland: Irish members from Sinn Féin (Marxist terrorists) and the supposedly center-right Fine Gael but not from the center-left Fianna Fáil. Elsewhere there are groups like the European People’s Party (EPP), a conservative-lite bloc that the Tories left a few years ago after being sickened with the amount of EU-federalism involved. The EU’s liberal party equivalent is the ALDE. Aggressive corporatists. Moreso than the national parties that make them up. Socialists make up the S&D, otherwise referred to as the “world’s biggest union boss junket.”

The European Parliament itself is a façade. Designed to allow the European Commission to hide its power level. The bankers of the mid 20th century wanted the same thing. So they ensured the Bank for International Settlements was free of politicians. The similarity is a desire for immunity from prosecution, no worries of oversight. The European Council got tacked on later. Patriotic heads of state felt like they were being tossed to the side in the EU decision-making process.

The Open Society is a massive and complex group using many fronts of manipulation at once. Soros managed to throw the Caucasus and Ukraine into turmoil using the Saakashvili, Aliyev, and Poroshenko mafias to stage revolutions. The neocon takeover of the U.K.s Labour party is another aspect, being fought off by “Corbynistas.”

Money is the greatest driver of these people. We’ve been barking up the wrong tree by assuming it’s an ideological battle they want. Of course, there are the Satanists hiding out that want to see Western culture crumble. The truth is the people in charge of the world are idiots. These bankers that don’t understand how to do anything else than what they’re doing now. It’s not about mixing races. When it comes to immigration they see these people as currency moving around. The import of migrants into Europe props up the Euro.

Bankers in New York and London (Soros and W. Averell Harriman who drafted the Marshall Plan) wanted this sort of outcome for many decades. If you want to trace the ideological roots of this? It goes back to the 1870s. John Ruskin inspired that generation of students to make the world more socialist. Some of them founded the Fabians (today known as Blairites/neocons), or became Labour Party entryists. A second segment went into direct warmongering. If not that, they used Austrian psychology to manipulate public perception and stoke the flames of war. A third chunk founded extractive-industry companies in Africa and the Middle East. These different branches all tie back to the families that own the world’s central banks. They want to flood the Western world with migrants for their own financial gains.

Ideology IS money to them. It’s all about that Euro. Let me show you something the EU put out themselves (PDF), to demonstrate this. Look at this diagram. “Prospective euro members” get this special shade of panic yellow.

Juncker’s recent State of the Union address involved indirect pressure on Sweden. They want them to drop the krona and convert to the euro. It’d trigger a massive extra issue of fiat euros, due to their massive migrant population. The Swedish Central Bank fudges the numbers on purpose to keep Brussels at bay. A perpetual “don’t know” on if Sweden meets eurozone accession’s convergence criteria. The cause of attacks on the Visegrád Four alliance countries is the refusal to give up their own currencies. That’s a burn for the BIS ON TOP OF their refusal to take migrant quotas.

President Jean-Claude Juncker’s relevant remarks in his State of the Union Address:

“If we want the euro to unite rather than divide our continent, then it should be more than the currency of a select group of countries. The euro is meant to be the single currency of the European Union as a whole. All but two of our Member States are required and entitled to join the euro once they fulfill all conditions.

Member States that want to join the euro must be able to do so. This is why I am proposing to create a Euro-accession Instrument, offering technical and even financial assistance.

If we want banks to operate under the same rules and under the same supervision across our continent, then we should encourage all Member States to join the Banking Union. Completing the Banking Union is a matter of urgency. We need to reduce the remaining risks in the banking systems of some of our Member States. Banking Union can only function if risk-reduction and risk-sharing go hand in hand. As everyone well knows, this can only be achieved if the conditions, as proposed by the Commission in November 2015, are met. To get access to a common deposit insurance scheme you first need to do your homework.”

This comes after Juncker’s remarks that they must hurry Balkan member states into the Schengen borderless area. He is getting his marching orders straight from the BIS.

If you need proof that the Open Society and Soros are wrapped up in all of this? Here’s a PDF detailing their projects and relationships with the World Bank, globally. If that doesn’t wet your whistle, here’s another OSF document PDF detailing a meeting with the World Bank President and for the setting up of said map. Still not satisfied? It also details Open Society’s focus on Education and their efforts to identify key countries they want to target, in a tag-team effort in cooperation alongside the World Bank.

Let me hit this point home. Grand slam. This last PDF document here removes any last doubt about Soros’s place in this grand scheme of grand schemes.

“Strengthening Coordination with Global CSO [Civil Society Organizations] Community to Advocate for Stronger World Bank Social and Environmental Standards Proposal for the Open Society Foundations By the Bank Information Center [OSF funded group]

This proposal aims to enhance coordination among Southern and Northern CSOs in order to have a more effective campaign to strengthen social and environmental safeguards at the World Bank. To achieve this, we plan to conduct the following activities:

1) Reach out to key CSO allies to coordinate strategy and provide guidance on what efforts each party can contribute to and when they can timely send advocacy messages to decision makers at the World Bank and U.S. government. We are hoping to better coordinate our work with several key constituent CSOs, which may include: Asian Indigenous Peoples’ Pact, Bretton Woods Project, CIVICUS, Center for International Environmental Law, Eurodad, Friends of the Earth, Forest Peoples Programme, Global Unions, Greenpeace, Habitat International Coalition, Human Rights Watch, Inclusive Development International, Indian Law Resource Center, International Accountability Project, International Federation of Human Rights, International Rivers, International Trade Union Confederation, Land Rights Network, Oxfam, Publish What You Pay, Save the Children, Sierra Club, Urgewald, World Resources Institute, and World Wildlife Fund.

2) Organize joint strategy workshops in Asia, Latin America, and/or Europe to prepare CSO partners for official World Bank consultations, plan joint submissions, and arrange advocacy trips to Washington DC to engage decision-makers.”

Maybe you’re one of those “i gotta see to believe” types. If that’s the case, we should mention Alex Soros. George’s son. Alexander connects the World Bank and International Monetary Fund together on his instagram. But that’s just the tip of the iceberg. His profile provides ample documentation for this sort of high-level international affairs stuff ol’ George is involved in.

Alex Soros

Even to the untrained eye, there’s a good chance you’ll spot something interesting over on the Alex Soros Instagram page. He knows Bono from U2. Which is inevitable based on their shared interests in philanthropic endeavors. George Clooney and his wife Amal are chums of Alex’s, as their foundation focuses on refugee-related issues. Even that bit about Nelson Mandela calling up Soros and asking for advice on how to protect his country from people like Soros? Probably true, based on the fact that as a child Alex met Mr. Mandela according to an old photograph. Elsewhere you’ll find a smug Richard Branson and a grinning Alex sitting side-by-side at some sort of human rights activist group dinner. With this sort of mixed variety crowd of high-profile figures, by the time you see snapshots of Alex and Alec Baldwin talking climate change at the Ford Foundation or elsewhere, it seems par for the course.

Let’s go deeper. Start asking yourself: “how in the world does Alex Soros have seemingly easy access to people like Edward Snowden on demand?”

(Apparently, Alex likes the guy’s “chutzpah.”)

And the answer to that sort of question is entangled within the web that is the Open Society and George Soros. Thankfully we already went over all that. And luckily for us, Alex is open to sharing things. Stuff that he assumed the public would never be able to make heads or tails of, probably. He likely just thought posting it made him look cool and important.

As explained earlier on here, the Open Society Foundation is the key central network hub that allows George Soros to shape global politics as he desires. In Europe’s case, the European Union is his best hope at getting the open society and borderless countries future he dreams of. In Alex’s own words, the Open Society European Policy Institute works “tirelessly to help hold the European Union together at this critical juncture in its history, where it is at threat of becoming history!” He boasts that the OSF has hundreds of members worldwide. The diversity of which is so vast, the orientation for new members has four separate language options (English/Spanish/Russian/Turkish). The whole diversity shtick for Europe comes into play as well, as we see when Alex talks about things like the Council of Europe establishing a “Roma Institute for Arts and Cultures” to combat negative prejudices. Alex has one eye on keeping these diversity projects straight, and another eye on the “streets” of European nationalism. I’m not kidding. Every so often, Alex shares maps and stuff like that.

Basically, Alex runs around to the different Open Society Foundations offices in places like Londonand DC and oversees operations. Unlike George, Alex has still got some youth left in him to be up to the task. Whereas George himself is mostly confined to making speeches about how his organizations will live on, even after he finally keels over. The Open Society Foundation is the type of place that has their board meeting dinners right by where the Berlin Wall was, in an effort of symbolism.

We get a peek at some inside stuff like OSF’s state propaganda seminar, including guest speakers like David Brock from Media Matters and a spin doctor that worked for Vladimir Putin. Alex is pretty hands-on in the day to day, including things like having breakfast with new OSF fellowship members. Recipients like Adam Foss work towards larger goals like prosecutor reform, aiming to change that role’s powers and responsibilities. In this case, it was geared ending mass incarceration.

Like an obedient son, Alex globetrots wherever he’s needed. One day he can pop on down over to Brazil, where Alex oversees OSF’s efforts to try and get housing/jobs for drug users that the government typically sees as criminals. He’s like a central link that coordinates the different branches. such as Kyrgystan’s Soros Foundation. While Kyrgyzstan may seem like an obscure small Asian country, it’s actually where George Soros and OSF have the American University of Central Asia set up. Which is basically a counterpart operating in a similar capacity to the Central European University in Hungary.

That’s the heart of what they do at the Open Society. Alex seriously flies out to South Africa so he can have discussions about LGBT rights and marginalized groups. And he manages to keep himself hyped up about it. All the time. If you think I was kidding about the whole symbolism thing, no he does it in South Africa too. Apparently, it’s more meaningful if the Open Society hangs out in an old prisonwhere Nelson Mandela and Gandhi hung out at some point in history. But don’t let that fool you. These ventures give Alex the chance to get face to face with political leaders and have some hands-on time getting to know them. So the flipside is networking.

Alex makes special mention of the OSF’s support of Bryan Steveson’s Equal Justice Initiative. EJI is dedicated to, according to him, fighting “the legacy of slavery and racial injustice” that holds back America from its open society potential.

Let’s follow the yellow brick road and hop around a few Open Society connected groups gives for the Soros clan. Starting with the Gordan Parks Foundation. They support “artistic and educational activities that advance what Gordon described as ‘the common search for a better life and a better world.’” That support includes scholarships for “artistic” students and assistance to researchers. There’s a yearly dinner and auction put on by the important sounding Meserve-Kundhardt family, and Alex is a co-chair. That Bryan Stevenson guy (who is also apparently an Open Society Foundations board member) has a key role in this event. An event in which consists of giving Alex’s friends (like director Ed Zwick and Congressman John Lewis) awards. And ringing the NASDAQ, because why the hell not.

George’s heightened interests in education outreach certainly present itself with his son too.

Another one of the educational efforts put on by Alex is this Ideas Box gimmick. In April 2015 one of the first of these pops up in Jordan. Today they’re dotted throughout the world in economic and politically disadvantaged locations. Anywhere from the Middle East to Detroit is fair game. Officially set up by Libraries Without Borders, it’s in practice very much an Alex Soros backed effort. “This is an important effort to provide hope and access to knowledge in the developing world,” he writes. Working with the United Nations on the ground in places like Jordan to implement his IdeasBox strategy, the project helps the kiddos in refugee camps hear (Soros approved) stories and learn new (SOROS APPROVED) things. Both in electronic format, and hardcover physical books.

As a side note, #LibrariesWithoutBorders founder Patrick Weil is a buddy of Alex’s that can block French legislation he doesn’t like. It’s also through #LibrariesWithoutBorders we discover Alex’s work took him to the Greek islands around the same time the Merkel deal was going to shit.

At the end of the day, Alex managed to capture people’s attention with this IdeasBox concept. With the one, he set up in Doha, Qatar? Michelle Obama showed up to check it out. Did I mention Alex and Barack Obama are pals? They’re pals. Maybe not as close as Alex and Chuck Schumer are (I found the description in this pic just adorable), or Alex and Bill de Blasio, but *almost*.

Almost Joe-Biden-Friendship-Bracelet tier.

The philanthropy comes spiraling back and colliding with cold-hard politics. As I highlighted in the United States section, George Soros dumped a lot of dough into political action committees. His son Alex is one of the leading forces behind a PAC called Bend the Arc.

Here’s an April 2015 Politico blurb from when they started up:

“Bend the Arc PAC will back progressive candidates by making direct contributions to their campaign committees. It will focus on issues such as income inequality, marriage equality, social justice and immigration reform.”

“There’s an opportunity to launch something that actually speaks to what the American Jewish community cares the most about and to show the narrative of what the real American Jewish experience is,” Alex Soros said in an interview.

Alex Soros is enough of an open book about Bend the Arc that we learn he’s a founding chair, and that: Representative Keith Ellison of Minnesota, Al Franken, and Elizabeth Warren are involved with it. People like Bryan Stevenson (Open Society, Gordon Parks Foundation) from earlier pop up again in related festivities.

What I can say for sure is Bend the Arc got super mad at Trump that one time a picture he tweeted included something in a similar shape to the Star of David.

Alex Soros wanted Hillary to win. Really badly. Within weeks after being announced at the DNC, he had breakfast with Tim Kaine and one of his mates set up a Clinton fundraiser event. Clearly-oh-clearly that should have worked!