posted March 07, 2012 05:40 PM            

What then is Obama’s dream? We don’t have to speculate because the President tells us himself in his autobiography, Dreams from My Father. According to Obama, his dream is his father’s dream. Notice that his title is notDreams of My Father but rather Dreams from My Father. Obama isn’t writing about his father’s dreams; he is writing about the dreams he received from his father.

So who was Barack Obama Sr.? He was a Luo tribesman who grew up in Kenya and studied at Harvard. He was a polygamist who had, over the course of his lifetime, four wives and eight children. One of his sons, Mark Obama, has accused him of abuse and wife-beating. He was also a regular drunk driver who got into numerous accidents, killing a man in one and causing his own legs to be amputated due to injury in another. In 1982 he got drunk at a bar in Nairobi and drove into a tree, killing himself.

An odd choice, certainly, as an inspirational hero. But to his son, the elder Obama represented a great and noble cause, the cause of anticolonialism. Obama Sr. grew up during Africa’s struggle to be free of European rule, and he was one of the early generation of Africans chosen to study in America and then to shape his country’s future.

I know a great deal about anticolonialism, because I am a native of Mumbai, India. I am part of the first Indian generation to be born after my country’s independence from the British. Anticolonialism was the rallying cry of Third World politics for much of the second half of the 20th century. To most Americans, however, anticolonialism is an unfamiliar idea, so let me explain it.

Anticolonialism is the doctrine that rich countries of the West got rich by invading, occupying and looting poor countries of Asia, Africa and South America. As one of Obama’s acknowledged intellectual influences, Frantz Fanon, wrote in The Wretched of the Earth, “The well-being and progress of Europe have been built up with the sweat and the dead bodies of Negroes, Arabs, Indians and the yellow races.”

…

It may seem incredible to suggest that the anticolonial ideology of Barack Obama Sr. is espoused by his son, the President of the United States. That is what I am saying. From a very young age and through his formative years, Obama learned to see America as a force for global domination and destruction. He came to view America’s military as an instrument of neocolonial occupation. He adopted his father’s position that capitalism and free markets are code words for economic plunder. Obama grew to perceive the rich as an oppressive class, a kind of neocolonial power within America. In his worldview, profits are a measure of how effectively you have ripped off the rest of society, and America’s power in the world is a measure of how selfishly it consumes the globe’s resources and how ruthlessly it bullies and dominates the rest of the planet.

For Obama, the solutions are simple. He must work to wring the neocolonialism out of America and the West. And here is where our anticolonial understanding of Obama really takes off, because it provides a vital key to explaining not only his major policy actions but also the little details that no other theory can adequately account for.

Why support oil drilling off the coast of Brazil but not in America? Obama believes that the West uses a disproportionate share of the world’s energy resources, so he wants neocolonial America to have less and the former colonized countries to have more. More broadly, his proposal for carbon taxes has little to do with whether the planet is getting warmer or colder; it is simply a way to penalize, and therefore reduce, America’s carbon consumption. Both as a U.S. Senator and in his speech, as President, to the United Nations, Obama has proposed that the West massively subsidize energy production in the developing world.

Rejecting the socialist formula, Obama has shown no intention to nationalize the investment banks or the health sector. Rather, he seeks to decolonize these institutions, and this means bringing them under the government’s leash. That’s why Obama retains the right to refuse bailout paybacks–so that he can maintain his control. For Obama, health insurance companies on their own are oppressive racketeers, but once they submitted to federal oversight he was happy to do business with them. He even promised them expanded business as a result of his law forcing every American to buy health insurance.

If Obama shares his father’s anticolonial crusade, that would explain why he wants people who are already paying close to 50% of their income in overall taxes to pay even more. The anticolonialist believes that since the rich have prospered at the expense of others, their wealth doesn’t really belong to them; therefore whatever can be extracted from them is automatically just. Recall what Obama Sr. said in his 1965 paper: There is no tax rate too high, and even a 100% rate is justified under certain circumstances.

Obama supports the Ground Zero mosque because to him 9/11 is the event that unleashed the American bogey and pushed us into Iraq and Afghanistan. He views some of the Muslims who are fighting against America abroad as resisters of U.S. imperialism. Certainly that is the way the Lockerbie bomber Abdel Baset al-Megrahi portrayed himself at his trial. Obama’s perception of him as an anticolonial resister would explain why he gave tacit approval for this murderer of hundreds of Americans to be released from captivity.

Finally, nasa. No explanation other than anticolonialism makes sense of Obama’s curious mandate to convert a space agency into a Muslim and international outreach. We can see how well our theory works by recalling the moon landing of Apollo 11 in 1969. “One small step for man,” Neil Armstrong said. “One giant leap for mankind.”

But that’s not how the rest of the world saw it. I was 8 years old at the time and living in my native India. I remember my grandfather telling me about the great race between America and Russia to put a man on the moon. Clearly America had won, and this was one giant leap not for mankind but for the U.S. If Obama shares this view, it’s no wonder he wants to blunt nasa’s space program, to divert it from a symbol of American greatness into a more modest public relations program.

Clearly the anticolonial ideology of Barack Obama Sr. goes a long way to explain the actions and policies of his son in the Oval Office. And we can be doubly sure about his father’s influence because those who know Obama well testify to it. His “granny” Sarah Obama (not his real grandmother but one of his grandfather’s other wives) told Newsweek, “I look at him and I see all the same things–he has taken everything from his father. The son is realizing everything the father wanted. The dreams of the father are still alive in the son.”

In his own writings Obama stresses the centrality of his father not only to his beliefs and values but to his very identity. He calls his memoir “the record of a personal, interior journey–a boy’s search for his father and through that search a workable meaning for his life as a black American.” And again, “It was into my father’s image, the black man, son of Africa, that I’d packed all the attributes I sought in myself.” Even though his father was absent for virtually all his life, Obama writes, “My father’s voice had nevertheless remained untainted, inspiring, rebuking, granting or withholding approval. You do not work hard enough, Barry. You must help in your people’s struggle. Wake up, black man!”

The climax of Obama’s narrative is when he goes to Kenya and weeps at his father’s grave. It is riveting: “When my tears were finally spent,” he writes, “I felt a calmness wash over me. I felt the circle finally close. I realized that who I was, what I cared about, was no longer just a matter of intellect or obligation, no longer a construct of words. I saw that my life in America–the black life, the white life, the sense of abandonment I’d felt as a boy, the frustration and hope I’d witnessed in Chicago–all of it was connected with this small piece of earth an ocean away, connected by more than the accident of a name or the color of my skin. The pain that I felt was my father’s pain.”

In an eerie conclusion, Obama writes that “I sat at my father’s grave and spoke to him through Africa’s red soil.” In a sense, through the earth itself, he communes with his father and receives his father’s spirit. Obama takes on his father’s struggle, not by recovering his body but by embracing his cause. He decides that where Obama Sr. failed, he will succeed. Obama Sr.’s hatred of the colonial system becomes Obama Jr.’s hatred; his botched attempt to set the world right defines his son’s objective. Through a kind of sacramental rite at the family tomb, the father’s struggle becomes the son’s birthright.

Colonialism today is a dead issue. No one cares about it except the man in the White House. He is the last anticolonial. Emerging market economies such as China, India, Chile and Indonesia have solved the problem of backwardness; they are exploiting their labor advantage and growing much faster than the U.S. If America is going to remain on top, we have to compete in an increasingly tough environment.

But instead of readying us for the challenge, our President is trapped in his father’s time machine. Incredibly, the U.S. is being ruled according to the dreams of a Luo tribesman of the 1950s. This philandering, inebriated African socialist, who raged against the world for denying him the realization of his anticolonial ambitions, is now setting the nation’s agenda through the reincarnation of his dreams in his son. The son makes it happen, but he candidly admits he is only living out his father’s dream. The invisible father provides the inspiration, and the son dutifully gets the job done. America today is governed by a ghost.

posted March 08, 2012 12:28 AM            

O'Bomber is in the process of destroying the US economy and the US military...so it can be rebuilt on the Socialist model.

In other words, O'Bomber is making war on the United States from within the US government.

He's not going to get away with it.

posted March 08, 2012 11:29 AM            

Since America couldn't be tagged with actual colonialism..since we have no colonies and have offered territories and protectorates the option to go their own way or stay under the protection of a "greater America umbrella"; the communists had to coin a new word to cover the sins of America.

That word was "cultural colonialism". Yep, if residents of other nations prefer a "Big Mack" over an offering of "Yak on a stick"...then, America is guilty of cultural colonialism.

Your idol is nothing more than a screeching, howling, shrieking little commie...of the Marxist set who despises the United States and always has...since his mother, grandparents, Frank Marshall Davis and Marxist professors filled his empty little head with hate for his own country. Of course, that was their job as members of the International communist movement who thought they were going to stir up the so called trampled masses and take over any day now...for the last 80 years.

It's all there, right out in plain sight. His friends, his associates, the partnerships he formed with people like the reverrrrrend Wright, the communist catholic priest the so called "father Phleger, the domestic communist bombers Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dorne, his association with the so called "Democratic Socialists of America, the Communist Party USA and even the Revolutionary Communist Party.

Many of these people wound up and/or their associates wound up in O'Bomber's administration and not one of them could find their as$es with both hands and a map.

This is who O'Bomber really is. After all the rhetoric, after all the lying out of both sides of his mouth, after all the empty words and phrases like "hope and change" which exists in a vacuum of rhetorical diarrhea, O'Bomber is an empty suit and an empty intellect who would get shredded in any debate with either Sarah Palin or Newt, either of whom would tie his insane policies to his core beliefs that the US must first be destroyed in order to be rebuilt in the image of International Socialism.

The first time I realized "for certain" I was right about O'Bomber's anti-colonialism came when he had the bust of Winston Churchill..given to the US by the British government... packaged up and returned to Britain...days after he began infesting the White House.

If it's possible, O'Bomber despises Britain more than the US.

O'Bomber's benefactor, financial backer and political guru..(current}...is George Soros; the guy who says it's his mission in life to to destroy the power..financial and military..of the United States and reduce the influence of the United States in world affairs.

Along these lines, O'Bomber IS destroying the US economy, the US dollar is being devalued...debauched by printing trillions in paper notes with no hard assets to back the paper currency which will lead to massive inflation and loss of value for every American who has their savings or retirement funds tied to the value of the Federal Reserve Notes. We can have an argument later about whether Federal Notes are even money...authorized by the Constitution...they're NOT.

But for now, it's enough to point out O'Bomber's attack on the United States, his attacks on the people of the United States and his attacks on the US military as he cuts military force levels, cuts naval war ships, cuts military aircraft and has already cut the mission of NASA and funding for new pioneering missions. Each and every one of the things O'Bomber has been meddling in are areas is which America led the world...before O'Bomber. Now, he's busily attempting to triple the cost of military health insurance to the military injured and/or retired. And, he's attempting to reduce the US nuclear arsenal to 300...while leaving Russia with roughly 1500 and who knows how many China has.

The only area in which O'Bomber has managed to create lots of jobs are at the small arms manufacturers and ammunition manufacturers and retail gun shops and shooting ranges in America. Demand is strong, so strong for rifles, scopes, pistols, revolvers and for ammunition for these guns that factories can't keep up with the demand and many items are and remain on back order for months.

A very strong segment of those buying guns are women. They're buying 9mm autos, .38 Supers, .380 autos, .357 Magnums, .40 Winchester pistols and they're taking classes to learn how to shoot and get their concealed carry permits. They're also buying rifles from .22 caliber all the way up to .308 Winchester and everything in between...and the optical scopes for them. Bless them!

America is not Socialist Europe and it's not going to be.

posted March 08, 2012 12:02 PM            

while obama is far from an idol for me he is even further from "screeching" etc, a singularly thoughtful, calm persona is more like it

now if you want screeching, sarah palin is always handy to satisfy your needs.

you, who approve of the NDAA and it's nullification of habeas corpus and right to trial...have no foot to stand on as i see it. you go into caniption fits over the term "teabagging" and its INCORRECT identification with homosexuals, you moan and groan along with the religious right about religious freedom when it is suggested that employees of catholics should have the right to contraception(but you don't mind if that is also denying women MEDICAL treatment for hormonal conditions), and you appear to live in stark terror of the communists who are NOT on your doorstep.

i am sure there are some rational conservatives around. in fact i see them posting articles a lot lately, bemoaning the descent of their party into gagaland. you do your cause more disservice than service, sir. but please, do carry on.

just because obama's AFRICAN father, who lived through outright colonialism, believed in the rights of his people to self-determination, does not make obama himself a commie.

most of the people you mention are tacticians regardless of their politics, people who wanted to bring more power to the people or their segment of the people. your complete lack of understanding about why an old black man might be critical of the government, well, it describes you, not obama, who, being from both sides of the colour divide, understands both positions better than you ever will.

but the fact that i see his good points doesn't mean i idolize him. he's made plenty of mistakes...he is all too human, but i don't see that as disqualification for president, in fact i see it as a plus.

question: do you think the fact that kennedy worked as president without pay makes him a commie too?

posted March 08, 2012 12:09 PM            

At the OP, this article is completely biased and this writer has used Obama's words to distort the meaning of the messages he's expressed in his book. This anti-colonialism claim is old news and attributing that ideology to Obama is making an unfounded claim, this relates more to far left ideologies and less to President Obama's personal views.

The assumptions made by the writer of this article are meant to beguile not inform because they're unsubstantiated. Attacking Obama's father's culture seems ridiculous considering many cultures around the world do not conform to the societal or ideological systems and frameworks we've developed here in the US. Obama's views in his autobiography simply expressed dissatisfaction with the ineffectiveness of certain policies and systems. The author has skewed the content of Obama's autobiography in favor of his own personal biases.

posted March 08, 2012 01:13 PM            

George Soros is calling for a break-up of the banking oligopoly in the United States. His recent comments were made in reference to the big four U.S. banks that have come to dominate the banking sector. CitiGroup, Bank of America, JP Morgan and Wells Fargo now dominate the overwhelming majority of the U.S. bank market.

posted March 08, 2012 04:46 PM            

The NDAA has no provisions for military arrest and detention...indefinite or otherwise, of US Citizens or those in the country legally. In fact, Section 32...I believe it's Section 32 (a and (b SPECIFICALLY EXCLUDE US CITIZENS AND LEGAL ALIENS IN THE UNITED STATES.

I've showed this to you here before and it's the law, passed by Congress and signed by O'Bomber.

Leftists never met a wet dream fantasy they didn't try to latch on to for political advantage.

As for George Soros, he's on record as determined to undermine the United States. To reduce it's power and influence in the world.

George Soros...the next time he sets foot on American soil should be arrested, stripped of his Naturalized US Citizenship and booted out of America..never, ever to return here.

Let's not forget who this little bast@rd really is. In WWII when the Nazis were going house to house, arresting Jews and confiscating their property, George Soros was with them, with them physically...and pointing out to the Nazis who the Jews were.

How does an idiot like George Soros ever rise to an icon of the left. All his false naratives have been burst like the bubbles they were...and are. Yet, among leftists, Soros is Saint Soros. There has to be a mental defect in the minds of leftists who glorify, and magnify a man who is one of the worst examples of humanity every born on earth.

There are some who believe George Soros is a financial genius. But, it doesn't take genius to trade on insider information derived from sources within government who know what's going to happen in advance of the event or getting tipped off by friends in the business community as to how their earnings reports or outcomes of federal lawsuits are going to shake out. Buffett is another who's made billions from trading on insider trading informations.

Buffet didn't get caught and prosecuted but George Soros did get caught and convicted of insider trading and lost his appeals. He stands as a convicted felon.

This is the crux of the Soros creed.

Soros Supports Reducing Us Sovereignty

Soros Has Argued “The Sovereignty Of States Must Be Subordinated To International Law And International Institutions.” “Soros identifies a problem: ‘Our global open society lacks the institutions and mechanisms necessary for its preservation.’ The solution? ‘Some global system of political decision-making’ in which ‘the sovereignty of states must be subordinated to international law and international institutions’ when ‘collective interests’ are at stake.” (Matthew Rees, “Saving Capitalism From Soros,” The Ottawa Citizen, 12/9/98)

This is the rest or some of the rest of the Soros drivel he's spewed over the years. In these quotes...fully attributed...you'll find a man so twisted that it's difficult for any rational person to describe Soros as fully human.

This comes under the heading of...you should know who you're getting into bed with before you do so.

GEORGE SOROS BACKGROUNDER

Soros’ Latest Campaign
October 2004

On September 28, Soros Announced $3 Million Anti-Bush Campaign Featuring Speaking Tour, Newspaper Ads And Direct Mail. “Calling it ‘the most important election of my lifetime,’ billionaire George Soros, a Democratic philanthropist and financial supporter of Sen. John F. Kerry, announced Tuesday that he would spend as much as $3 million on a monthlong, multi-state speaking tour criticizing President Bush and his conduct in the Iraq war. … Soros plans to focus his efforts and money on states where the two presidential candidates are closest in the polls, visiting about a dozen key cities in five states. Steve Smith, a spokesman for Soros, said the bulk of the money would go to newspaper ads and a drive aimed at distributing about 2 million pamphlets to American households. ‘I would like to … reach the business community, particularly the Republicans and traditional conservatives, people who are quite distressed by the policies of this administration,’ Soros said.” (Richard Rainey, “Financing His Own Anti-Bush Campaign,” Los Angeles Times, 9/29/04)

Soros’ Campaign Includes Wall Street Journal Newspaper Ad And New Website. “His one-man crusade also includes an advertising campaign to begin Wednesday with a two-page spread in the Wall Street Journal, a Web site (georgesoros.com) devoted to unseating the president and plans to mail pamphlets to 2 million voters.” (Julia Malone, “Billionaire Soros Embarks On One-Man Campaign To Defeat Bush,” Cox News Service, 9/28/04)

Soros’ “Stump” Speech Attacks President Bush’s Approach To Fighting Terrorism, Suggesting That “The More Than 1,000 Americans Who Have Died Did So For A Cause That Has Made The Nation Less Safe.” “Soros' final election year drive is built around a ‘stump’ speech that rips into the Bush approach to fighting terrorism, charges that the United States has killed 15,000 Iraqis and suggests that the more than 1,000 Americans who have died did so for a cause that has made the nation less safe.” (Julia Malone, “Billionaire Soros Embarks On One-Man Campaign To Defeat Bush,” Cox News Service, 9/28/04)

Soros Said Iraq War “Violated International Law.” “[I]n invading Iraq as we did, without a second U.N. resolution, we violated international law.” (George Soros, Remarks At National Press Club, Washington, DC, 9/28/04)

Soros Said Prisoner Abuse By US Troops “Violated The Geneva Conventions.” “By mistreating and even torturing prisoners, we violated the Geneva Conventions.” (George Soros, Remarks At National Press Club, Washington, DC, 9/28/04)

Soros Was Unprepared To Answer If The 1,000 Americans Who Died In Iraq “Died For Nothing.”

QUESTION: “How much are you going to spend on this effort? Are you also going to give additional money to MoveOn that will be used for advertising? And are you saying that the 1,000 Americans who died in Iraq died for nothing?”

SOROS: “I intend to spend between $2 million and $3 million on this campaign. And if I make any other contributions, I will announce them. And it's a terrible question that you're proposing because it's a tremendous responsibility for the president. Because going into Iraq endangered our security instead of securing our safety. So we are more at risk now than we were before we went into Iraq. So it's a tremendous tragedy.” (George Soros, Remarks At National Press Club, Washington, DC, 9/28/04)

Strange Quotes

Soros: “I Fancied Myself As Some Kind Of God.” “A passage in his book The Alchemy of Finance, published in 1987, distinguishes Soros from all other financiers, ever. ‘I have always harboured an exaggerated view of my self-importance,’ he wrote. ‘To put it bluntly, I fancied myself as some kind of god or an economic reformer like Keynes, or, even better, like Einstein. My sense of reality was strong enough to make me realise that these expectations were excessive, and I kept them hidden as a guilty secret. This was a source of considerable unhappiness through much of my adult life. As I made my way in the world, reality came close enough to my fantasy to allow me to admit my secret, at least to myself. Needless to say, I feel much happier as a result.’” (Stephen Fay, “Profile: George Soros: God Of All He Surveys,” The Independent [London], 5/17/98)

Soros Admits To Delusions “Of Grandeur” And Said That His “Goal Is To Become The Conscience Of The World.” “He [Soros] admits to what Kaufman calls ‘messianic’ ideals: ‘I have had these illusions, or perhaps delusions, of grandeur and they have driven me.’ He has also said that his ‘goal is to become the conscience of the world.’” (Anthony Gottlieb, “Who Wants To Be A Billionaire?” The New York Times, 3/3/02)

Soros: “So That’s What I’m All About. I Am A Kind Of Nut Who Wants To Have An Impact.” (Michael T. Kaufman, Soros: The Life And Times Of A Messianic Billionaire, 2002, p. 293)

Soros Wrote That September 11th Terrorist Attacks “Could Not Have Been More Spectacular.” “Hijacking fully fueled airliners and using them as suicide bombs was an audacious idea, and its execution could not have been more spectacular.” (George Soros, “The Bubble Of American Supremacy,” The Atlantic Monthly, 12/03)

Soros Attacks The Bush Administration

Soros Said Pictures Of Prisoner Abuse At Abu Ghraib “Hit Us The Same Way As The [2001] Terrorist Attack Itself.” “Philanthropist George Soros, who has given more than $7 million to independent anti-Bush groups such as MoveOn.org and America Coming Together, told the conference the Abu Ghraib affair was ‘the moment of truth’ for the nation that ‘hit us the same way as the [2001] terrorist attack itself.’” (Peter Wallsten, “Distaste For Bush Spurs Liberals To Push For Kerry,” Los Angeles Times, 6/4/04)

Soros Said Bush’s Conduct Of War On Terror “Converted Us From Victims To Perpetrators.” “He said there was ‘a direct connection between those two events. The way President Bush conducted the war on terror converted us from victims to perpetrators.’ Soros labeled the Bush doctrine of preemptive military action against those who may pose a threat to the U.S. an ‘atrocious proposition.’” (Peter Wallsten, “Distaste For Bush Spurs Liberals To Push For Kerry,” Los Angeles Times, 6/4/04)

Soros Charged That War On Terrorism “Has Claimed More Innocent Victims Than The Original Attack Itself.” “Soros also charged that the war on terrorism ‘has claimed more innocent victims than the original attack itself.’ Republican National Committee Chairman Ed Gillespie quickly responded to Soros’ comments.” (Peter Wallsten, “Distaste For Bush Spurs Liberals To Push For Kerry,” Los Angeles Times, 6/4/04)

For Soros, Defeating Bush Is “The Central Focus” Of His Life And “A Matter Of Life And Death.” (Laura Blumenfeld, “Soros’s Deep Pockets Vs. Bush,” The Washington Post, 11/11/03)

Soros Said A “Supremacist Ideology” Guides Bush Administration, Which Reminds Him Nazis. “Soros believes that a ‘supremacist ideology’ guides this White House. He hears echoes in its rhetoric of his childhood in occupied Hungary. ‘When I hear Bush say, ‘You’re either with us or against us,’ it reminds me of the Germans.’ It conjures up memories, he said, of Nazi slogans on the walls, Der Feind Hort mit (‘The enemy is listening’). ‘My experiences under Nazi and Soviet rule have sensitized me,’ he said in a soft Hungarian accent.” (Laura Blumenfeld, “Soros’s Deep Pockets Vs. Bush,” The Washington Post, 11/11/03)

Soros Believes Republican Party Has Been “Captured By A Group Of Extremists” Who “Don’t Believe In The System Of Democracy As We Know It.” “I think that the Republican Party has been captured by a group of extremists who believe that they are in possession of the ultimate truth, and who don’t believe in the system of democracy as we know it.” (Buzzflash.com Interview With George Soros, Buzzflash.com Website, http://www.buzzflash.com/interviews/04/02/int04012.html, Accessed 2/25/04)

Soros Said “Extremist” Republican Party Has “Really Brought Into Question The Survival Of Open Society In The United States.” “In general, our system of democracy has been based on two parties competing for the center. Today, one of the two major parties has been pushed to an extremist position and that has shifted the entire discourse very far in their direction. This has really brought into question the survival of open society in the United States. Now the situation may not be as dire as it sounds, because it is in the nature of an open society that it is always endangered. In the end, it’s up to the electorate to protect our open society, and I am confident that that will happen. Since the large majority of people are not extremists, they will reject an extremist ideology.” (Buzzflash.com Interview With George Soros, Buzzflash.com Website, http://www.buzzflash.com/interviews/04/02/int04012.html, Accessed 2/25/04)

Soros Said That American And Israeli Policy Contribute To Anti-Semitism, Prompting Sharp Response From Jewish Leaders. “A reported comment by billionaire philanthropist George Soros asserting that the policies of America and Israel are to blame for the resurgence of anti-Semitism in Europe is sparking outrage everywhere from the White House to the American Jewish leadership and prompting concern about a wider backlash against Israel. … Mr. Soros’s comments came last week at a conference of Jewish philanthropists. According to a report that moved Sunday on the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, a venerable news wire service, Mr. Soros said, ‘There is a resurgence of anti-Semitism in Europe. The policies of the Bush administration and the Sharon administration contribute to that. If we change that direction, then anti-Semitism also will diminish,’ Mr. Soros said, according to the JTA report. … The chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, James Tisch, called the Soros remarks ‘an outrage.’ ‘It boggles the mind,’ Mr. Tisch said, invoking the precedent of the early Third Reich, when Jews were told that if they’d just be quiet anti-Semitism would abate. ‘Soros may be wealthy and he may be brilliant with the markets but he obviously hasn’t learned his history,’ Mr. Tisch said. … The national director of the Anti-Defamation League, Abraham Foxman, using some of the strongest language he has ever uttered to condemn remarks by an American public figure, called Mr. Soros’s remarks ‘obscene.’” (Ira Stoll, “Outrage Greets Soros Remarks,” The New York Sun, 11/11/03)

Soros Wrote That Since September 11, “The War On Terrorism Has Claimed More Innocent Civilians In Afghanistan And Iraq Than Have The Attacks On The World Trade Center.” (Ira Stoll, “Soros Says Israel Was Likely Motive For War,” The New York Sun, 12/4/03)

Soros Wrote That Nazis, Israel, Arab Terrorists And America After September 11 Are All Cases Of “Victims Turning Perpetrators.” “He also says that the Nazis, Israel, Arab terrorists, and America after September 11 are all cases of ‘victims turning perpetrators.’ The comments – in a new book, ‘The Bubble of American Supremacy,’ published by Public Affairs – represent sentiments that until now have mainly been on the fringes of the American policy debate. But Mr. Soros is a famous New York philanthropist who regularly hobnobs with Manhattan’s elite. He’s also a big player in Democratic politics, a backer of Howard Dean’s presidential campaign who has vowed to spend at least $15 million of his own money to defeat President Bush in the 2004 election. ‘Victims turning perpetrators is a well-known syndrome both in individuals and in groups,’ Mr. Soros writes. ‘Perhaps the most poignant and difficult case is Israel. Jews were the victims of the Holocaust, which can itself be ascribed, in part, to a process of victims turning perpetrators: Hitler rose to power by capitalizing on a wave of resentment caused by an onerous peace treaty and runaway inflation.’ Mr. Soros writes, ‘After the war, Jews resorted to terrorism against the British in Palestine in order to secure a homeland in Israel. Subsequently, after being attacked by Arab nations, Israel occupied additional territory and expelled many of the inhabitants. Eventually, the Arab victims also turned perpetrators, and Israel started suffering terrorist attacks.’ Mr. Soros writes that ‘Perpetrators are now in charge on both sides,’ noting that Prime Minister Sharon ‘has been held responsible for the massacre of Palestinians that took place in the Shatila and Sabra refugee camps in Lebanon in 1982.’ He writes that, ‘Under the Bush administration, the United States has also become a victim-turned-perpetrator, although the American public would be loath to recognize it.’” (Ira Stoll, “Soros Says Israel Was Likely Motive For War,” The New York Sun, 12/4/03)

The Wall Street Journal Reported That Soros “Views America As The Gravest Threat To World Freedom.” “More recently, since September 11, Mr. Soros has made it his goal to burst what he has called ‘the bubble of American supremacy.’ He has said that having helped to liberate Communist countries, he now views America as the gravest threat to world freedom.” (Editorial, “Who Is George Soros?” The Wall Street Journal, 11/10/03)

Soros: “America, Under Bush, Is A Danger To The World.” “‘America, under Bush, is a danger to the world,’ Soros said. Then he smiled: ‘And I’m willing to put my money where my mouth is.’” (Laura Blumenfeld, “Soros’s Deep Pockets Vs. Bush,” The Washington Post, 11/11/03)

In June 2003, Soros Called Bush Doctrine Orwellian And As Dangerous As Communism. “Above all, Soros warned, [the Administration] has introduced the ‘very dangerous’ Bush doctrine which claims the right to preemptive military action. ‘Taken to its logical conclusion, this means that there are now two kinds of sovereignty in the world: the sovereignty of the United States that overrides all international obligations and treaties, and the sovereignty of other countries which is subject to the Bush doctrine. This is reminiscent of George Orwell’s dictum in “Animal Farm” that all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.’ The current view in Washington that ‘there is only one model of democracy, that of the United States’ is ‘as false, and potentially as dangerous, as that of the Communists’ belief that there is only one way to organise society,’ Soros said.” (Bernard Besserglik, “Soros Cuts Open Society Aid To Russia, Targets US,” Agence France Presse, 6/9/03)

Soros: “The War On Terrorism Cannot Be Accepted As The Guiding Principle Of US Foreign Policy.” (George Soros, “Bush’s Inflated Sense Of Supremacy,” Financial Times, 3/13/03)

Soros Wrote The Bush Administration “Deliberately Fosters Fear Because It Helps To Keep The Nation Lined Up Behind The President.” “Terrorism is the ideal enemy. It is invisible and therefore never disappears. An enemy that poses a genuine and recognised threat can effectively hold a nation together. That is particularly useful when the prevailing ideology is based on the unabashed pursuit of self-interest. Mr Bush’s administration deliberately fosters fear because it helps to keep the nation lined up behind the president.” (George Soros, Op-Ed, “Bush’s Inflated Sense Of Supremacy,” Financial Times, 3/13/03)

Soros “Believes That Both At Home And Abroad, The American Government Has Put In Jeopardy The Values Of Openness And Democracy In A Search For ‘Invisible Enemies.’” “[Soros] believes that both at home and abroad, the American government has put in jeopardy the values of openness and democracy in a search for ‘invisible enemies.’” (Mark Gimein, “George Soros Is Mad As Hell,” Fortune, 10/27/03)

Soros Claimed Bush Administration Is Following A Policy Of “Dominating The World In The Guise Of Fighting Terrorism.” “[T]he bigger bubble that Soros sees is ideological. ‘The crisis now, the one that I’m predicting, the crisis of global capitalism, latest version, is a political and military crisis,’ an agitated Soros told me. ‘It has been brought about by the exploitation of Sept. 11 by the Bush administration to pursue its policy of dominating the world in the guise of fighting terrorism.’ In his writings, Soros discusses how bubbles or ‘self-reinforcing’ trends develop when a wrong idea – whether in finance or politics – survives a comparatively easy test, making an idea that’s unsustainable in the long term appear prescient in the short. That’s how Soros thinks of the Iraq war: A quick military victory reinforces the wrongheaded idea that thanks to an unbeatable military, the U.S. can achieve its international objectives by going to war. In a draft of the forthcoming The Bubble of American Supremacy, Soros puts it more strongly: ‘[W]e are becoming enmeshed in a vicious circle of escalating violence.’” (Mark Gimein, “George Soros Is Mad As Hell,” Fortune, 10/27/03)

In March 2003, Soros “Denounced The Bush Administration Friday For What He Called Its ‘Imperialist Vision.’” “George Soros, who made billions as a currency trader, denounced the Bush administration Friday for what he called its ‘imperialist vision.’ ‘President Bush is pushing the wrong buttons when he says, “Those who are not with us are against us,”‘ Mr. Soros said in a speech at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh. ‘This is an imperialist vision in which the U.S. leads and the rest of the world follows.’ The Bush administration has a ‘visceral aversion to international cooperation,’ which is why it is willing to confront Iraq militarily even though much of the world opposes such action, he said.’” (Greg Pierce, “Inside Politics,” The Washington Times, 3/3/03)

In September 2003, Soros Called For “Regime Change” In The United States. “Left-wing billionaire George Soros is urging Americans to oust George W. Bush in next year’s presidential election. That is the only way to put an end to ‘extremist’ policies by the United States, Mr. Soros told BBC radio. ‘It is only possible if you have a regime change in the United States – in other words if President Bush is voted out of power,’ Mr. Soros said on an interview program. ‘I am very hopeful that people will wake up and realize that they have been led down the garden path, that actually 11 September has been hijacked by a bunch of extremists to put into effect policies that they were advocating before, such as the invasion of Iraq,’ he said.” (Greg Pierce, “Inside Politics,” The Washington Times, 10/1/03)

In September 2003, Soros Said “Extremists” In The Bush Administration Believe That The United States “Should Impose Its Power, Impose Its Will And Its Interests On The World And It Should Do It Looking After Itself.” “Mr. Soros added that there was a ‘false ideology’ behind the policies of the Bush administration. ‘There is a group of – I would call them extremists – who have the following belief: that international relations are relations of power, not of law, that international law will always follow what power has achieved,’ he said. ‘And therefore [they believe] the United States being the most powerful nation on earth should impose its power, impose its will and its interests on the world and it should do it looking after itself. I think this is a very dangerous ideology. It is very dangerous because America is in fact very powerful.’” (“Soros Calls For ‘Regime Change’ In US,” BBC News Website, http://news.bbc.co.uk/, 9/30/03)

Soros Called Bush’s Foreign Policy “Both False And Dangerous.” “‘The fate of the world depends on the United States and President Bush is leading us in the wrong direction,’ he said in a statement issued Friday from his New York investment office. ‘The Bush doctrine is both false and dangerous. The rest of the world is having an allergic reaction to it, as we have seen in Iraq. We need to change direction.’” (Thomas Hargrove, “Financier Donates $10M To Defeat Bush,” The Record [Bergen, NJ], 8/10/03)

In September 2003, Soros Stated Bush’s “Extremist Ideology” Was “Very Dangerous For The World.” “[Soros] added that he felt US actions in the build-up to the war on Iraq was evidence of an extremist element in the Bush administration. ‘Probably President Chirac would not disagree with this philosophy but he is not so powerful – so I am not so worried about what France is doing,’ Mr. Soros said, referring to France’s opposition to the war. ‘But America being really the dominant power to be in the grips of such an extremist ideology is very dangerous for the world and that is my major concern.’” (“Soros Calls For ‘Regime Change’ In US,” BBC News Website, <http://news.bbc.co.uk/>, 9/30/03)

Soros: “To Claim We Are Invading Iraq For The Sake Of Establishing Democracy Is A Sham, And The Rest Of The World Sees It As Such.” “Given the country’s recent track record in countries like Afghanistan, ‘to claim we are invading Iraq for the sake of establishing democracy is a sham, and the rest of the world sees it as such,’ Soros said. He said Bush is really interested in Iraq as an antidote to this country’s myriad problems: the decreasing value of the dollar, the fading stock market, out-of-control gas prices and increased tensions between Israelis and Palestinians and with North Korea.” (Michael Ko, “Billionaire Blasts Administration Over Iraq Policy,” The Seattle Times, 3/14/03)

In March 2003, Soros Criticized “Bush Doctrine” As A Contradiction To American Values While Expressing Hawkish Views Toward Iraq. “I’m a bit of a hawk also on Iraq. And I’m very concerned about the fact that we’re going about it the wrong way. How is it that basically most of the world agrees that Saddam is a threat, that we have to deal with, yet, most of the world is opposed to our policies? There must be something wrong with the way we’re doing it. And that, I think, is the Bush doctrine, which basically arrogates to us the right of preemptive action. And that, I think, contradicts the United Nations. It contradicts our values, American values. … I would also be very happy to see Saddam gone, if that were possible. … There’s something wrong with the Bush doctrine, with the dominant fashion within the Bush administration that believes that international relations are relations of power, not law, that legality and legitimacy are just decorations.” (George Soros, CNN’s “Lou Dobbs Moneyline,” 3/12/03)

In March 2003, Soros Accused Bush Administration Of Waging Convenient War On Iraq Instead Of Following Proper Priorities. “[T]he inspections were making progress. They could make more progress. And the only reason we must go to war now is because the troops are lined up and ready to go. And that’s the way the First World War started. It is not a very good way to go about it. In other words, there are other issues in the world. There’s North Korea. There is the war on terrorism. The link between the war on Iraq and the war on terrorism has not been properly made. … I think that there are certain priorities and we got our priorities wrong by pushing too hard on this particular issue, when for instance, as I say, North Korea is a much more serious threat because they not only do they have nuclear weapons but they’re known proliferators.” (CNN’s “Lou Dobbs Moneyline,” 3/12/03)

In March 2003, Soros Accused President Bush Of Precipitating The North Korean “Crisis.” “I think that they are all involved, but the North Koreans want to talk to the United States. And we – this is a crisis that actually was precipitated by President Bush, who established the discontinuity with the Clinton administration’s agreed framework. We were actually containing North Korea, not perfectly, but we were containing it. And then – and North Korea – the president of South Korea, came here and asked President Bush to endorse his sunshine policy. And that policy was working. The North Koreans actually want to come in from the cold. They’re anxious. … [T]he only thing they have got is the threat.” (George Soros, CNN’s “Lou Dobbs Moneyline,” 3/12/03)

In July 2003, Soros Helped Finance Ad Accusing Bush Administration Of Using Intelligence “Exposed As Exaggerated Or Even False” To Justify Iraq War. “Soros helped finance an ad in The New York Times two Sundays ago accusing Bush of using intelligence ‘exposed as exaggerated or even false’ to justify the U.S.-led war in Iraq.” (Sharon Theimer, “Multibillionaire Soros Commits $10 Million To New Democratic-Leaning Group,” The Associated Press, 8/8/03)

Soros: “A Global Open Society Requires Affirmative Action On A Global Scale, While The Bush Approach Is Restricted To Punitive Action.” (George Soros, Remarks At The Seattle Town Hall, Seattle, WA, 3/13/03)

Fortune Magazine Describes Soros As “Fierce, Angry, Partisan Critic” Who Compares Bush’s Rhetoric To That Of Soviets, Calling Bush’s Speeches “Orwellian.” “At the age of 73, George Soros has found new purpose: He has recast himself as a fierce, angry, partisan critic of the Bush administration and American policy. In what amounts to a barnstorming tour that has taken him from town halls in Seattle to a school of international relations in Baltimore to the World Economic Forum in Athens, Soros has argued that the U.S. right now is in the midst of a crisis. … ‘I lived through both German and Soviet occupation … When I hear President Bush say that those who are not with us are against us, I hear alarm bells.’ He calls Bush’s speeches ‘Orwellian’ and compares the Bush vision of international democracy – ‘You can have freedom as long as you do what we tell you to do’ – to Soviet rhetoric about ‘people’s democracies.’” (Mark Gimein, “George Soros Is Mad As Hell,” Fortune, 10/27/03)

From Soros’ New Book, “The Bubble

Of American Supremacy”

Execution Of 9/11 Attacks “Could Not Have Been More Spectacular.” “Admittedly, the terrorist attack was a historic event in its own right. Hijacking fully loaded airplanes and using them as suicide bombs was an audacious idea, and the execution could not have been more spectacular.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. 2)

2004 Election “A Matter Of Life And Death.” “It may be surmised from the closing remarks of the last chapter that I have become rather rabid in my political views. This is a novel experience for me. I used to be rather balanced between the two main parties, seeing some good and some bad in each and leaning only slightly toward the Democrats. Even today, I remain rather even-handed by finding much to criticize in the leadership of the Democratic Party. Certainly I did not use to consider it a matter of life and death which party won the elections. I do now.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. 176)

Compares Bush Administration To Nazis. “My own sensitivity to the excesses of the Bush administration may be attributed in part to my background. I grew up as a Jew in Hungary during World War II. I lived though both German and Soviet occupation and learned how political systems can affect your very survival. When I hear President Bush say that ‘either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists,’ I hear alarm bells. … I am distressed that the public is not as alarmed as I am. This is not the America I chose as my home.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, pp. viii-ix)

Bush Administration Is Guided By “Supremacist Ideology.” “The supremacist ideology of the Bush administration is in contradiction with the principles of an open society because it claims possession of an ultimate truth. It postulates that because we are stronger than others, we must know better and we must have right on our side. That is where religious fundamentalism comes together with market fundamentalism to form the ideology of American supremacy.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. 10)

Under President Bush, America Is A Danger To The World. “The Bush dream of American supremacy is both unattainable and in contradiction with the principles that America has traditionally stood for. It endangers our values as well as our security. And it endangers the world because America is so powerful.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. vii)

America Should Have Treated 9/11 Attacks As Crime, Responded With Police Work. “War is a false and misleading metaphor in the context of combating terrorism. Treating the attacks of September 11 as crimes against humanity would have been more appropriate. Crimes require police work, not military action. To protect against terrorism, you need precautionary measures, awareness, and intelligence gathering – all of which ultimately depend on the support of the populations among which terrorists operate. Imagine for a moment that September 11 had been treated as a crime. We would have pursued Bin Laden in Afghanistan, but we would not have invaded Iraq. Nor would we have our military struggling to perform police work in full combat gear and getting killed in the process.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. 18)

posted March 08, 2012 04:49 PM            

Declaring War “Wrong Way To Deal With Terrorism.” “Declaring war on terrorism suited the purposes of the Bush administration better because it invoked our military might. But it is the wrong way to deal with terrorism. Military action requires an identifiable target, preferably a state. As a result, the war on terrorism has been directed primarily against states harboring terrorists. Yet terrorists are nonstate actors by definition, even if in many cases they are sponsored by a state. By turning the hunt for terrorists into a war, we are bound to create some innocent victims. The more innocent victims there are, the greater the resentment and the better the chances that some victims will turn perpetrators.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, pp. 18-19)

“Far From Reducing The Terrorist Threat, The War On Terrorism Has Actually Increased It.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, pp. 186-187)

Nazi Germany, Israel, Arab Terrorists And Post-9/11 America Are All Examples Of “Victims Turning Perpetrators,” And In Arab-Israeli Conflict, “Perpetrators Are Now In Charge On Both Sides.” “Victims turning perpetrators is a well-known syndrome both in individuals and in groups. … Perhaps the most poignant and difficult case is Israel. Jews were the victims of the holocaust, which can itself be ascribed, in part, to a process of victims turning perpetrators: Hitler rose to power by capitalizing on a wave of resentment cause by an onerous peace treaty and runaway inflation. He appealed to the German people’s sense of being victimized. Whether the Germans’ sense of victimization was imaginary or not, there can be no doubt that the Jews were victims in the literal sense. In the holocaust, many Jews went to their death helplessly and naively obeying orders, something I witnessed personally as a thirteen-year-old in Budapest. After the war, Jews resorted to terrorism against the British in Palestine in order to secure a homeland in Israel. Subsequently, after being attacked by Arab nations, Israel occupied additional territory and expelled many of the inhabitants. Eventually, the Arab victims also turned to perpetrators, and Israel started suffering terrorist attacks. Israel made the habit of retaliating vigorously, enlarging the circle of Arab victims. … The situation deteriorated until suicide bombings became commonplace. Perpetrators are now in charge on both sides. … Under the Bush administration, the United States has also become a victim-turned-perpetrator, although the American public would be loath to recognize it. On September 11, America was the victim of a heinous crime and the whole world expressed spontaneous and genuine sympathy. Since then, the war on terrorism has claimed more innocent lives in Afghanistan and Iraq than have the attacks on the World Trade Center. That comparison is rarely made at home: American lives are valued differently than the lives of foreigners, but the distinction is less obvious to people abroad.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, pp. 19-22)

Oil And Israel Were Likely Secret Reasons For War In Iraq. “The true motives for the Bush administration’s determination to overthrow Saddam Hussein remain shrouded in mystery. … One motive may have been the assertion of American supremacy – a demonstration that the United States sets the agenda. Iraq may have been chosen as a demonstration project for the simple reason that it was doable. … [T]here are more realistic geopolitical considerations that can be adduced in favor of toppling Saddam. Perhaps the single most important impediment to America’s control of its own destiny is its reliance on foreign oil. … By occupying Iraq and moving American military bases from Saudi Arabia to Iraq, the United States could establish a secure alternative to Saudi oil. … The other important consideration was Israel. A large number of religious fanatics in the United States believe that the rebirth of Israel presages the apocalypse and the second coming of the Messiah. Hence, in addition to the traditional pro-Israel lobby, Israel also has strong support from the evangelical right – and that is the core of the president’s constituency. … President Bush, however, felt obliged to pay attention to his constituency. Establishing a strong military presence in Iraq would help to transform the political complexion in the entire region. This would reassure Israel and weaken the Palestinian extremists sufficiently to allow some progress toward a settlement on terms acceptable to Israel and its U.S. supporters. … Oil and Israel likely loomed large in the administration’s policy deliberations, but these were not the reasons publicly offered by Bush and his advisers for the invasion of Iraq. … Only by skillfully weaving the themes of terrorism and weapons of mass destruction together and raising the specter of terrorists gaining access to weapons of mass destruction could the president justify going to war with Iraq. Whatever the case for invading Iraq, the American public has every reason to feel deceived.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, pp. 51-54)

President Bush Exploited 9/11 To Foster Fear, Keep Nation United Behind Him In Quest For “American Supremacy.” “[T]he Bush administration proceeded to exploit the terrorist attack for its own purposes. To silence criticism and keep the nation united behind the president, the administration deliberately fostered the fear that has gripped the country. It then used the war on terrorism to pursue its dream of American supremacy.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. 9)

“I Contend That The Bush Administration Has Deliberately Exploited September 11 In Order To Pursue Policies That The American Public Would Not Have Otherwise Tolerated.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. vii)

“[T]he Bush Administration Was Able To Carry The Nation Behind It By Playing Up The Terrorist Threat.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. xi)

War On Terrorism Cannot Be “Centerpiece Of Our National Strategy.” “The most powerful country on earth cannot afford to be consumed by fear. To make the war on terrorism the centerpiece of our national strategy is an abdication of our responsibility as the leading nation in the world. The United States is the only country that can take the lead in addressing problems that require collective action: preserving peace, assuring economic progress, protecting the environment, and so on. Fighting terrorism and controlling weapons of mass destruction also fall into this category.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. 30)

Bin Laden An “Evil Genius” And President Bush “Played Right Into The Hands Of The Terrorists.” “As a proponent of radical fallibility, I am reluctant to ascribe too much foresight to anyone; yet in retrospect I can discern the vague outlines of an imaginary master plan conceived by an evil genius called Bin Laden. From his perspective our civilization is degenerate. It is rich and powerful but devoid of true faith. It needs to be destroyed for the faith to prevail. The only way to destroy it is by exploiting its weakness: the fear of death. It will respond to a terrorist attack by lashing out against an unseen enemy. Since the perpetrators remain invisible, the instinctive reaction will claim innocent victims. The victims will be Muslim, and Islam will be radicalized, provoking a general confrontation between Islam and the West. Although the West enjoys material superiority, Islam will prevail because it has a major comparative advantage: It is not afraid of death. Events so far have lived up to this putative Bin Laden’s wildest expectations. The twin towers of the World Trade Center actually collapsed, making the attack more spectacular than could have been imagined. And President Bush responded by declaring war on terrorism. … The invasion of Iraq was an unexpected gift. American soldiers on Arabian soil are serving as a magnet, attracting al Qaeda–trained terrorists from all over the world. Sleeper cells are coming alive. Around three thousand people with al Qaeda connections are said to have disappeared from Saudi Arabia. Some of them must be active in Iraq. President Bush is right in saying that Iraq has become the central front in the war on terror. Wittingly or unwittingly, he has played right into the hands of the terrorists.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, pp. 182-183)

America Is “In The Hands Of A Group Of Extremists” Who Are Making Our Nation “Weaker, Not Stronger.” “The United States enjoys a dominant position in the world today that cannot be challenged by any other state or combination of states for the foreseeable future. It can lose its dominance only as a result of its own mistakes. At present the country is in the process of committing such mistakes because it is in the hands of a group of extremists whose strong sense of mission is matched only by their false sense of certitude. By abusing the position that the United States occupies in the world, the extremists have made our nation weaker, not stronger.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. viii)

American Government Has “Fallen Into The Hands Of Extremists Who Are Guided By A Crude Form Of Social Darwinism.” “The government of the most powerful country on earth has fallen into the hands of extremists who are guided by a crude form of social Darwinism: Life is a struggle for survival, and we must rely mainly on the use of force to survive.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. xi)

Bush Doctrine Is “Orwellian Doublespeak” – Which Soros Is Sensitive To Because Of His Upbringing Under Nazi And Communist Rule In Hungary. “The Bush doctrine, first enunciated in the president’s speech at West Point in June 2002 and then incorporated in the national security strategy in September 2002, is built on two pillars: First, the United States will do everything in its power to maintain its unquestioned military supremacy and, second, the United States arrogates the right to preemptive action. Taken together, these two pillars support two classes of sovereignty: the sovereignty of the United States, which takes precedence over international treaties and obligations, and the sovereignty of all other states, which is subject to the Bush doctrine. This is reminiscent of George Orwell’s Animal Farm: All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others. To be sure, the Bush doctrine is not stated so starkly; it is buried in Orwellian doublespeak. The doublespeak is needed because of the contradiction between the Bush administration’s concept of freedom and democracy and the actual principles of freedom and democracy. Talk of spreading democracy looms large in the national security strategy. When President Bush says, as he does frequently, that “freedom” will prevail, in fact he means that America will prevail. I am rather sensitive to Orwellian doublespeak because I grew up in Hungary first under Nazi and later Communist rule.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. 11)

President Bush Has “Simplistic View” Of Right And Wrong Contrary To “The Principles Of Open Society.” “President Bush equates freedom with American values. He has a simplistic view of what is right and what is wrong: We are right and they are wrong. This is in contradiction with the principles of open society, which recognize that we may be wrong.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, pp. 12-13)

Aftermath Of Iraq War A “Dismal Failure.” “As brilliant as the military part of the plan was, the aftermath has been a dismal failure.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. 60)

Compares Iraq To Vietnam. “We find ourselves in a quagmire that is in some ways reminiscent of Vietnam. Having invaded Iraq, we cannot extricate ourselves. Domestic pressure for withdrawing is likely to build, just as it did in the Vietnam War, but withdrawing would inflict irreparable damage to our standing in the world. In this respect, Iraq is worse than Vietnam because of our dependence on Middle Eastern oil.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. 62)

America’s Position Has Declined Since Bush Became President. “All in all, at no other time has America’s position declined as dramatically in as short a period as it has since George W. Bush became president. The swing in our international position matches the swing in our budget deficit. Whatever the flaws in the ideology that has guided the Bush administration, the practical results have been nothing short of disastrous.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. 74)

“President Bush Is Leading The United States And The World In A Very Dangerous Direction.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. 10)

“The Forthcoming Elections Provide An Excellent Opportunity To Deflate The Bubble Of American Supremacy.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. 74)

***Note*** All we have to do to reverse what Soros sees as "deflating the American bubble of Supremacy is elect the American Traitor John F Kerry***

World Needs To Reconcile Principle Of Sovereignty With Protecting Common Interests Through Multilateral System Guided By “International Public Opinion.” “The prevailing world order has a great unsolved problem: how to protect the common interest in a world consisting of sovereign states that habitually put their own interests ahead of the common interest. … It would be utopian to try and devise a solution that would do away with sovereign states and replace them with international institutions. Yet a way must be found to reconcile the common interest with the principle of sovereignty. The most promising democratic way is to establish a multilateral system in which all states submit to the same rules and participate in the same arrangements. We could then rely on international public opinion to determine and protect the common interest to a greater extent than today. The task of leading such an effort must fall to the United States, in view of its dominant position.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, pp. 81-82)

Bush Administration Has “Visceral Aversion To All Multilateral Agreements.” “[The Bush Administration] has a visceral aversion to all multilateral arrangements. It believes that international relations are purely relations of power, not law, and since America is the most powerful nation, multilateral treaties and institutions impose undue limitations on the exercise of American power. The only form of cooperation the Bush administration can live with is one in which the United States decides and others follow. This attitude has led to the Bush doctrine.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. 82)

While Soros Supported Intervention In Kosovo Without UN Authorization, He Holds That “Unilateral Action That Goes Against International Public Opinion Cannot Be Justified.” “I believe we were justified in intervening in Kosovo without UN authorization, and we would have done better if we have relied on NATO and not the United Nations in Bosnia. But unilateral action that goes against international public opinion cannot be justified, and it can endanger our national security by turning the world against us. This is what the Bush administration has accomplished by its rabid unilateralism.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. 118)

Proposes Cutting Defense In Favor Of Increased Foreign Aid, Domestic Spending. “An alternative U.S. foreign policy would differ from the present one in much more than being multilateral rather than unilateral. It would involve a radical reordering of our priorities. Instead of devoting the bulk of the budget to military expenditures to implement the Bush doctrine, we would engage in preventive actions of a constructive nature. This would require incomparably smaller budgetary expenditures, leaving room for greater domestic spending within a balanced budget. After all, it would be unacceptable to increase foreign aid without a comparable improvement in social benefits at home.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, pp. 123-124)

Supports New Arms Control Agreement. “At present we spend almost as much on defense as do all the other countries in the world combined. We are way ahead of them in technology. Naturally they try to catch up with us the best they can, so we keep on pushing ahead on technology in order to maintain our superiority. This is an arms race between unequals that could be slowed down by international agreement. … We are in a position to dictate the terms that would satisfy us. We are prevented from doing so only by our own attitude: Nothing would satisfy us, because under the influence of extremists, we are opposed to the process.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, pp. 174-175)

Believes That A Boom-Bust Process, Or Bubble, Is Occurring With Regard To “The Bush Administration’s Pursuit Of American Supremacy.” “I believe something akin to a boom-bust process, or bubble, is occurring now in connection with the Bush administration’s pursuit of American supremacy. … In my view, the Bush administration’s quest of American supremacy qualifies as a bubble.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, pp. 177-179)

Iraqi Insurgents’ Guerilla Tactics “Forced The Invaders To Behave Like Occupying Powers … Inflicting Insults And Injuries That Turned The Population Against Them.” “Saddam Hussein appears to have planned on waging a guerilla war. He may have had that in mind as early as October 2002, when he released all the prisoners from Iraqi jails. The guerilla tactics forced the invaders to behave like occupying powers, suspicious of the civilian population and inflicting insults and injuries that turned the population against them.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. 61)

9/11 Provided President Bush With “Enemy He Was Looking For.” “Once September 11 provided President Bush with the enemy he was looking for he became a man with an ordained mission. It suited his personality. Being a reformed substance abuser and a born-again Christian, he had personal acquaintance with the devil. The devil took the form of suicide bombers who tried to destroy him personally in the White House; this gave him an intensely felt sense of personal engagement.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. 34)

War On Terrorism Cannot Be Won, Will Bring About “Permanent State Of War.” “The war on terrorism as pursued by the Bush administration cannot be won, because it is based on false pretenses. The war on terrorism is more likely to bring about a permanent state of war. Terrorists are invisible; therefore, they will never disappear. They will continue to provide a convenient pretext for the pursuit of American supremacy by military means. That pursuit, in turn, will continue to generate resistance, setting up a vicious cycle of escalating violence. In this respect, there is a parallel between the war on terrorism and the war on drugs: the remedy is inappropriate to the disease. In the case of drugs, we are confronted by a public health problem, not a problem of crime. The public health problem cannot be properly addressed if we treat drug addicts as criminals. In the case of terrorists we are dealing with a crime. We need detective work, good intelligence, and cooperation from the public, not military action. In both cases, waging war is a false metaphor that can be used to justify repressive measures.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. 26)

“There Can Be No Doubt That We Invaded Iraq On False Pretenses.” “The quagmire in Iraq ought to serve as the moment of truth. Whatever the justification for removing Saddam Hussein, there can be no doubt that we invaded Iraq on false pretenses. Wittingly or unwittingly, President Bush deceived the American public and Congress and rode roughshod over the opinions of our allies. The gap between the administration’s expectations and the actual state of affairs could not be wider. The fallacy in waging war on terrorism has been demonstrated on the ground in Iraq.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, pp. 185-186)

Soros Bankrolls Drug Legalization Efforts

“Soros Has Said He Has Given $15 Million To Pro-Marijuana Efforts Over The Years.” (Ed Vogel, “Health Board Opposes Question,” Las Vegas Review-Journal, 10/5/02)

Soros “Contributed More Than $15 Million To Initiatives And Propositions Pushing For Drug Legalization” (Robert Weiner and Amy Rieth, “Canada, Maryland Going To Pot,” The Washington Times, 7/2/03)

Soros Has Bankrolled At Least Nineteen Drug Legalization Ballot Initiatives. “University of Phoenix founder John Sperling and investors George Soros and Peter Lewis have contributed the bulk of the money to finance Proposition 203. The three have funded 19 initiatives in other states with a high rate of success.” (Elvia Diaz, “Wealthy Trio Back Marijuana Initiative,” The [Phoenix] Arizona Republic, 10/17/02)

In 1996, Former Carter Administration Secretary Of Health, Education And Welfare, Joseph Califano, Called Soros “The Daddy Warbucks Of Drug Legalization.” “And the award for best supporting role goes to billionaire George Soros, the Daddy Warbucks of drug legalization.” (Joseph A. Califano Jr., Op-Ed, “Devious Efforts To Legalize Drugs,” The Washington Post, 12/4/96)

In 1997, Soros Compared Joseph Califano To Slobodan Milosevic Accusing Him Of “Totalitarian Mind-Set.” “Hysteria has replaced debate in the public discourse. It was left to the voters of California and Arizona to introduce a note of sanity into our drug policy. [Joseph] Califano asserts that they were bamboozled but, in doing so, he reveals a totalitarian mind-set. When he claims that the voters of Arizona and California did not know what they were voting for when they supported the two initiatives, he reminds me of the way Serbia’s President Slobodan Milosevic reacted to recent election results in that country.” (George Soros, Op-Ed, “A Look At … The Drug War Debate,” The Washington Post, 2/2/97)

In 1997, Soros Called United States Drug Policy “Insane.” “‘[U.S.] drug policy is insane,’ [Soros] says. ‘And no politician can stand up and say what I’m saying, because it’s the third rail – Instant electrocution.’” (William Shawcross, “Turning Dollars Into Change,” Time, 9/1/97)

Soros Compared The War On Drugs To The Vietnam War, Calling A Drug-Free America “A Utopian Dream.” “I believe that a drug-free America is a utopian dream. Some form of drug addiction or substance abuse is endemic in most societies. Insisting on the total eradication of drug use can only lead to failure and disappointment. The war on drugs cannot be won; but, like the Vietnam War, it has polarized our society.” (George Soros, Op-Ed, “A Look At … The Drug War Debate,” The Washington Post, 2/2/97)

Soros: “I Firmly Believe That The War On Drugs Is Doing More Harm To Our Society Than Drug Abuse Itself.” (George Soros, Op-Ed, “A Look At … The Drug War Debate,” The Washington Post, 2/2/97)

In 2002, Soros Funded Ballot Initiative That Would “Require Arizona State Police To Hand Out Free Marijuana To The Ill.” “In their quest to loosen drug laws, three wealthy men have shelled out most of the $1.1 million spent so far to promote a November ballot initiative that would require Arizona state police to hand out free marijuana to the ill. University of Phoenix founder John Sperling and investors George Soros and Peter Lewis have contributed the bulk of the money to finance Proposition 203.” (Elvia Diaz, “Wealthy Trio Back Marijuana Initiative,” The [Phoenix] Arizona Republic, 10/17/02)

In August 1997, Soros Donated $1 Million To Finance Needle Exchange. “Soros did his lightning-rod act again last month, giving $1 million to the Tides Foundation in San Francisco to finance needle exchanges for addicts.” (William Shawcross, “Turning Dollars Into Change,” Time, 9/1/97)

Favors Making “Heroin And Certain Other Illicit Drugs Available On Prescription To Registered Drug Addicts.” “If public opinion were ready for it, I would advocate ‘hollowing out’ the black market for drugs by making heroin and certain other illicit drugs available on prescription to registered drug addicts while discouraging non-addicts with social opprobrium, the dissemination of reasonable and persuasive information on the harms caused by drugs, and, to the extent necessary, by legal sanctions.” (George Soros, Op-Ed, “A Look At … The Drug War Debate,” The Washington Post, 2/2/97)

Last Year, Soros Supported A Successful Initiative For The District Of Colombia That Would “Guarantee Drug Treatment” For Nonviolent Defendants In Place Of Prison Terms. “Last year the Drug Policy Alliance, working with funding from philanthropist George Soros, placed an initiative on the D.C. ballot, informally named Treatment Instead of Jails. Measure 62 was designed to guarantee drug treatment for nonviolent defendants charged with possession of PCP or cocaine. As long as a person was seeking treatment, such crimes would no longer carry a prison term. … Nevertheless, the measure was approved by 78 percent of the local vote on Nov. 5. The D.C. Council voted to set aside the measure, and a D.C. Superior Court judge later ruled that the measure could not be implemented because it was legally flawed.” (Tom Schoenberg, “Drug Court Facing Test of Wills,” Legal Times, 10/6/03)

In 2000, It Was Reported Soros’ Lindesmith Center Bankrolled Canadian Court Appeal To Allow Medical Marijuana. “In August, 2000, it was revealed the U.S.-based Lindesmith Center, heavily funded by Mr. Soros, paid for a Canadian’s successful appeal against marijuana charges on the basis he needed the drug to overcome pain.” (Michael Higgins, “Critic Of Capitalism’s Excess On Trial For Insider Trading,” [Canada] National Post, 11/8/02)

In 2002, It Was Revealed State That “Grass-Roots Campaigns” To “Legalize Marijuana” Were Funded By Soros And His Associates. “Two billionaires and a multimillionaire are bankrolling campaigns to legalize marijuana in three states and Washington, D.C. Purported grass-roots campaigns in Nevada, Ohio, Arizona and the District of Columbia are being run by political advocacy firms in New York and Washington, D.C., with money from financier George Soros and University of Phoenix founder John Sperling, billionaires both, and multimillionaire Peter Lewis, retired CEO of Progressive Insurance. Opponents say their posse of soccer moms, anti-drug groups and police officials cannot raise the money to counter the proponents’ professional media campaign. … In Ohio, Soros, Sperling and Lewis each donated $271,276, state records show. … The money went to Progressive Campaigns Inc. of Santa Monica, Calif., a professional political campaign and petition management group. Zimmerman says getting signatures in populous states is far too difficult to do with volunteers. ‘It takes dozens of people working full-time to get the signatures.’ Of $1.6 million raised by the initiative group Nevadans for Responsible Law Enforcement, just $184,000 came from 4,000 small donors, the group’s Web site shows. In Arizona, Soros donated $406,467, and Sperling, who lives in Phoenix, donated $590,383. The organizations do not apologize for their big-money backers.” (Donna Leinwand, “Superrich Trio Put Cash Into Marijuana Initiatives,” USA Today, 11/5/02)

Long Time Supporter Of Drug Legalization. “In 1996, the California ballot initiative passed, making the state the first to remove criminal penalties for qualifying patients who grow, possess and use medical marijuana. But such initiatives are funded by people like George Soros, who has contributed more than $15 million to initiatives and propositions pushing for drug legalization.” (Robert Weiner and Amy Rieth, “Canada, Maryland Going To Pot,” The Washington Times, 7/2/03)

Criticized U.N. Drug Control Measures. “The Open Society Institute, a private foundation started by financier George Soros, said the U.N.’s strict drug control treaties are undermining efforts to prevent the spread of AIDS because they discourage countries from introducing effective public health measures.” (William J. Kole, “Critics At U.N. Narcotics Conference Say ‘No’ To American Anti-Drug Campaign,” The Associated Press, 4/15/03)

Soros “Equates The American Government’s Abuse Of Power In The Drug War With The Fascist Regimes In Hungary And Nazi Germany.” (Alex Beam, “The Money Behind Question 8,” The Boston Globe, 11/2/00)

For Soros, The Drug War “Is Something That Has Resonance With What He Was Exposed To Under Totalitarian Government.” “Nadelmann, director of the Soros-funded Lindesmith Center on Drug Policy in New York, says the theme is consistent for the Hungarian-born philanthropist. ‘Soros is the single most significant philanthropist in the world,’ he said. ‘For him, the drug war – and this issue of asset forfeiture – is something that has resonance with what he was exposed to under totalitarian government.’” (Judy Fahys, “Initiative B Funded By ‘Outsider,’” Salt Lake Tribune, 10/16/00)

Soros Opposes Tougher Laws

Against Drug Trafficking Near Schools

Soros-Funded Drug Policy Alliance Opposes Tougher Penalties For Drug Trafficking Within 1,000 Feet Of Schools, Colleges, Public Libraries, Drug Treatment Or Daycare Facilities. “At a time when many states are reconsidering harsh mandatory-minimum sentences, the U.S. House Judiciary Committee is scheduled to vote on Wisconsin Congressman Sensenbrenner’s cruel sentencing bill, the Safe Access to Drug Treatment and Child Protection Act (HR 4547), next week. If enacted, HR 4547 would impose new federal mandatory-minimum sentences, swelling federal prisons with more low-level, nonviolent drug offenders while increasing your tax burden. As a Wisconsin resident, we need your help: Please call Congressman James Sensenbrenner and co-sponsor Congressman Mark Green today. URGE THEM TO CANCEL THE VOTE ON HR 4547. … HR 4547 would reduce judicial discretion while increasing racial disparities in the criminal justice system. The bill would increase to five years the federal mandatory-minimum-sentence for the sale of a controlled substance within 1,000 feet of a school, college, public library, drug treatment facility (or any place where drug treatment, including classes, is provided), or private or public daycare facilities. (Since almost anywhere in a major city is within 1,000 feet of one of these facilities, the effect will be to sentence non-violent drug offenders from inner cities to long, mandatory prison terms.) The bill would also impose a mandatory-minimum sentence of ten years on any person 21-years old or older who sells drugs (including marijuana) to any person younger than 18, even if they are friends or family. If the person has a previous felony drug offense, the sentence would be automatic life imprisonment. Finally, the bill would tighten the federal ‘safety valve,’ making it harder for judges to use their constitutional discretion to show leniency to deserving first-time, low-level drug offenders.” (Drug Policy Alliance Website, “Wisconsin Residents: Stop Mandatory-Minimum Sentence Bill In Congress,” www.drugpolicy.org, 9/20/04)

ü Soros Funds Drug Policy Alliance, Sits On Group’s Board Of Directors. (Drug Policy Alliance Website, www.drugpolicy.org, Accessed 9/27/04; Patty Henetz, “Prosecutors, Police Reluctantly Comply With Asset Seizure Law,” The Associated Press, 7/17/04)

Soros Supports Assisted Suicide Laws

“Mr. Soros Provided $15 Million For The Death In America Project, Which Supports Euthanasia.” (Toni Marshall, “Enigmatic Billionaire,” The Washington Times, 11/9/97)

“Billionaire George Soros Has Contributed $250,000 To Retain Oregon’s Assisted Suicide Law …” (Corky Siemaszko, “Dave’s Top Cop Leads Houston Ballot,” [New York] Daily News, 11/4/97)

ü In 1995, “Soros Voiced Disapproval Of His Father’s Reluctance To Die.” “In an interview with the New Yorker in 1995, Mr. Soros voiced disapproval of his father’s reluctance to die, even though he was gravely ill. ‘My father unfortunately wanted to live … and I was kind of disappointed in him. … I wrote him off,’ he said.” (Toni Marshall, “Enigmatic Billionaire,” The Washington Times, 11/9/97)

Soros Supports Voting Rights For Felons

Financed Efforts To Obtain Voting Rights For Felons. (Rebecca Carr, “Superdonors’ Super Power,” The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, 2/11/01)

Soros Funds RU-486 Manufacturer

Soros Financed Manufacturer Of Abortion Pill, RU-486. “[F]or-profit Danco and its nonprofit partner, the Population Council Inc., a New York-based organization that promotes family planning world-wide, have received grants and loans to develop mifepristone [RU-486] from some prominent investors, including foundations set up by Warren Buffett, George Soros and the late David Packard.” (Rachel Zimmerman, “Choice Allies: Awaiting Green Light, Abortion-Pill Venture Keeps To The Shadows,” The Wall Street Journal, 9/5/00)

Soros Funded Delivery Of RU-486 Through Advocacy Group Abortion Rights Mobilization (ARM). “The American company licensed to market RU-486 says it has found manufacturers willing to produce the French ‘abortion pill’ and is working with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for final approval. … Largely unnoticed by the public, some women are already using RU-486 in a special research program. Women early in their pregnancies can get the drug today at more than a dozen sites across the country, including the Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center in Baltimore. In the past 18 months, more than 3,000 women in the United States have taken RU-486 under this program, sponsored by an advocacy group known as the Abortion Rights Mobilization (ARM). The group’s efforts, funded by nonprofit organizations including the John Merck Family Foundation and the George Soros Foundation, have provided the drug to 15 centers from Seattle to Bellevue, Neb., to Cherry Hill, N.J.” (Marc Kaufman, “Abortion Pill Inches Closer to Production,” The Washington Post, 3/23/99)

Contributed $1 Million To Planned Parenthood For “Outreach, Education And Training” Relating To RU-486. (Marc Kaufman, “Abortion Pill Deliveries Begin Soon,” The Washington Post, 11/16/00)

Soros Funds Abortion Providers

Soros Pledged $600,000 To National Abortion Federation To “Alleviate The Shortage Of Abortion Providers.” (Capital Research Center Website, www.capitalresearch.org, Accessed 11/19/03)

Soros Supports Reducing Us Sovereignty

Soros Has Argued “The Sovereignty Of States Must Be Subordinated To International Law And International Institutions.” “Soros identifies a problem: ‘Our global open society lacks the institutions and mechanisms necessary for its preservation.’ The solution? ‘Some global system of political decision-making’ in which ‘the sovereignty of states must be subordinated to international law and international institutions’ when ‘collective interests’ are at stake.” (Matthew Rees, “Saving Capitalism From Soros,” The Ottawa Citizen, 12/9/98)

“In The Crisis Of Global Capitalism (1998) And Open Society (2000), [Soros] Argued That A Vision Of ‘Open Society Idealism’ Must Supersede Traditional State Sovereignty If Globalization Is To Benefit All.” (Carlin Romano, “George Soros Offers A Plan To Help Poor Via Globalization,” The Philadelphia Inquirer, 3/24/02)

Soros Supports Gun Control

Soros Has Given Millions To Support Gun Control Efforts. “After many years of being outspent and outmuscled by the National Rifle Association, the gun control movement has begun the most ambitious campaign in its history to raise money, recruit foot soldiers and build public support for stronger gun laws in preparation for this fall’s national elections. … At the same time, wealthy proponents of gun control seem more willing to contribute to the cause. Several major philanthropists, including George Soros, have given millions of dollars over the last two years to groups that are providing intellectual and strategic support to the organizations and politicians who advocate more regulation of guns.” (James Dao, “Gun Control Groups Use N.R.A. Tactics For Fall Elections,” The New York Times, 7/24/00)

Soros’ Open Society Institute Was The First Private Group To Finance Lawsuit Against Gun Manufacturers. “Some of the nation’s leading private foundations and philanthropists such as billionaire George Soros are pouring millions of dollars into research and support in the battle to control gun violence. The infusion of private money has raised the wrath of the National Rifle Association, which in a publication this month named Soros and another private foundation as part of a ‘vast conspiracy’ to bankrupt gun manufacturers with lawsuits. But anti-gun advocates say the private money has helped ‘level the playing field’ between gun manufacturers and shooting victims and their families, according to Elisa Barnes, a plaintiffs’ attorney in a successful Brooklyn, N.Y., lawsuit against gunmakers. Soros’s Open Society Institute became the first private group to directly help finance a lawsuit against a weapons manufacturer when it contributed $300,000 to plaintiffs in the Brooklyn case. Barnes said Soros’s contribution ‘made all the difference in the world’ in winning the February verdict, which held nine gunmakers liable for practices that allowed criminals to obtain guns. … Soros is among the major philanthropic givers who have recently decided to take on the gun lobby, Mahon said, because they believe gun violence is a ‘massive public health problem’ and that the government is ‘paralyzed’ by the NRA. ‘It’s really something whose time has come,’ said Stephen P. Teret, a gun safety litigation expert whose Center for Gun Policy and Research at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore is supported by foundation grants. … Since January, Mahon’s center has helped organize the Funders Collaborative for Gun Violence Prevention, a consortium that has raised $11 million in seed money. ‘The strategy is to show leadership from the philanthropies and say this is an important issue for our country,’ said Mahon. The campaign is making inroads. Buoyed by successful lawsuits against the tobacco industry, five cities launched a similar strategy last year against gun manufacturers, trying to force the industry to pay the costs of gun violence. … Soros, whose wealth was built on foreign currency exchange dealings, established the Center on Crime, Communities and Culture in 1996 to fund crime prevention programs. It has dispensed $13 million, with its most notable contribution the money put into the Brooklyn lawsuit. ‘The courts are the place where David and Goliath can go at it and David can win,’ said Mahon. ‘That’s why the gun industry is so spooked by this suit.’ … The difference a foundation can make in such costly litigation became clear in the landmark Brooklyn case. Plaintiffs’ attorney Barnes said the major foundations she initially approached for funding regarded the case as ‘too risky’ politically. These foundations, which included some of the biggest in the country, were willing to finance research into gun violence ‘but never litigation,’ she said. She then turned to Soros’s Center on Crime. It was the only one ‘iconoclastic’ enough to align itself with a lawsuit that cost $1.5 million, even with lawyers working pro bono and ‘cutting every corner,’ she said. A spokesman for Soros’s group said the decision to get involved was an easy one. ‘Given the fact [that] youth gun violence is a priority area for us, it was a no-brainer,’ said Andrew J. Martin.” (David B. Ottaway, “Legal Assault On Firms Is Armed By Foundations,” The Washington Post, 5/19/99)

Soros Helped Fund The Million Mom March In 2000. “Bent on breaking the congressional deadlock over gun legislation, a newly aroused lobbying force converges today on the nation’s capital and dozens of other cities nationwide: fed-up moms. Their numbers may not live up to the name organizers gave the event – the Million Mom March – but 150,000 or more demonstrators are expected to gather this Mother’s Day for the largest gun control rally in U.S. history. … Organizers of the march had raised about $1.8 million through last week, including $1 million from an anonymous New York donor and $500,000 from the Funders Collaborative for Gun Violence Prevention, set up by billionaire George Soros, philanthropist Irene Diamond and an anonymous donor, said Andrew McGuire, executive director of the San Francisco-based Bell Campaign, a victim-led gun control group helping with the march. The budget for all of the rallies around the country is $2.3 million.” (Richard Simon and Nick Anderson, “Million Mom March Expected To Draw 150,000 Nationwide,” Los Angeles Times, 5/14/00)

Soros Opposes The Death Penalty

Soros Urged Opposes The Death Penalty, Pushed For Moratorium. “Just weeks ago, 40 prominent death-penalty opponents, including Nobel peace laureate Elie Wiesel and billionaire philanthropist George Soros, urged a moratorium on federal executions.” (Andrew Gumbel, “Death Penalty Opponents Target U.S.,” Hamilton [Ontario] Spectator, 12/19/02)

Soros Opposes Welfare Reform

Soros Called The 1996 Welfare Reform Bill A “Mean-Spirited Attack On Immigrants” And Contributed $50 Million To Aid Those Affected By The Legislation. “George Soros, a billionaire immigrant philanthropist, pledged Monday to donate $50 million to aid legal immigrants affected by welfare reform, which he says is unjust and unwise. His pledge, unprecedented in size and target, is intended to fund charities and organizations across the country that advocate for immigrants or help them become citizens through English-language and civics classes. ‘The Statue of Liberty embraces those ‘yearning to breathe free,’ but the current mean-spirited attack on immigrants threatens to choke them,” said Soros, who left Hungary for England in 1947, then the USA in 1956. The money will be doled out through Soros’ newest charitable foundation, the Emma Lazarus Fund, named for the 19th-century writer of mostly forgotten sentimental poetry. Her best known work is a sonnet inscribed on the Statue of Liberty, welcoming ‘your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.’ Soros said he is ‘appalled’ by the just-signed welfare reform law, which reverses longstanding U.S. policy of treating legal immigrants the same as citizens in handing out welfare benefits. Now, current and future immigrants can be barred from major welfare programs or see their benefits reduced. The states will have some flexibility in implementing the law. ‘This is the first time legal immigrants are being discriminated against,’ said Soros, a naturalized citizen. ‘It won’t save money because immigrants will naturalize (and thus regain eligibility for welfare). It’s a gimmick.’” (Maria Puente, “Philanthropist Pledges $50M For Immigrants,” USA Today, 10/1/96)

Soros Opposes “Three-Strikes” Laws

Soros Recently Gave $150,000 To Proposition Campaign Seeking To “Tone Down” California’s “Three Strikes” Law. “The effort to pass a ballot measure that would tone down California’s tough ‘three-strikes’ sentencing law has received three $150,000 donations from some of the nation’s largest backers of Democrat-oriented political groups. International financier George Soros, insurance magnate Peter Lewis and private university founder John Sperling each gave $150,000 to help pass Proposition 66, according to campaign finance records. The contributions were received Friday. In a written release, the ‘The Yes on 66 -- Fix Three Strikes’ campaign said the $450,000 came via the Drug Policy Alliance Network, a national drug-law reform organization. The proposition’s backers argue that the three-strikes law unjustly ensnares small-time drug users with lifetime sentences. They want the stiff sentencing guidelines to apply only to people convicted of ‘serious or violent’ felonies such as rape and murder -- what they call the ‘original intent’ of voters who passed the law a decade ago. Lewis, chairman of the board of the suburban Cleveland-based insurer Progressive Corp., and Soros have donated millions this election cycle to Democratic-leaning causes. Sperling is founder of the University of Phoenix. Proponents said their donations would finance ‘a vigorous media campaign,’ starting next month.” (“Soros, Lewis, Sperling Give To Proposition 66 Fund,” The Associated Press, 9/13/04)

Soros On Anti-Semitism And Israeli, American Policy

Soros Compared The Bush Administration To Nazis. “Soros believes that a ‘supremacist ideology’ guides this White House. He hears echoes in its rhetoric of his childhood in occupied Hungary. ‘When I hear Bush say, ‘You’re either with us or against us,’ it reminds me of the Germans.’ It conjures up memories, he said, of Nazi slogans on the walls, Der Feind Hort mit (‘The enemy is listening’). ‘My experiences under Nazi and Soviet rule have sensitized me,’ he said in a soft Hungarian accent.” (Laura Blumenfeld, “Soros’s Deep Pockets Vs. Bush,” The Washington Post, 11/11/03)

Soros Said That American And Israeli Policy Contribute To Anti-Semitism, Prompting Sharp Response From Jewish Leaders. “A reported comment by billionaire philanthropist George Soros asserting that the policies of America and Israel are to blame for the resurgence of anti-Semitism in Europe is sparking outrage everywhere from the White House to the American Jewish leadership and prompting concern about a wider backlash against Israel. … Mr. Soros’s comments came last week at a conference of Jewish philanthropists. According to a report that moved Sunday on the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, a venerable news wire service, Mr. Soros said, ‘There is a resurgence of anti-Semitism in Europe. The policies of the Bush administration and the Sharon administration contribute to that. If we change that direction, then anti-Semitism also will diminish,’ Mr. Soros said, according to the JTA report. … The chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, James Tisch, called the Soros remarks ‘an outrage.’ ‘It boggles the mind,’ Mr. Tisch said, invoking the precedent of the early Third Reich, when Jews were told that if they’d just be quiet anti-Semitism would abate. ‘Soros may be wealthy and he may be brilliant with the markets but he obviously hasn’t learned his history,’ Mr. Tisch said. … The national director of the Anti-Defamation League, Abraham Foxman, using some of the strongest language he has ever uttered to condemn remarks by an American public figure, called Mr. Soros’s remarks ‘obscene.’” (Ira Stoll, “Outrage Greets Soros Remarks,” The New York Sun, 11/11/03)

Soros Wrote That Israel “Likely” Was A Big But Secret Reason For America’s War In Iraq. “Billionaire money manager George Soros says that Israel ‘likely’ was a big but secret reason for America’s war in Iraq. … The comments – in a new book, ‘The Bubble of American Supremacy,’ published by Public Affairs – represent sentiments that until now have mainly been on the fringes of the American policy debate. But Mr. Soros is a famous New York philanthropist who regularly hobnobs with Manhattan’s elite. He’s also a big player in Democratic politics, a backer of Howard Dean’s presidential campaign who has vowed to spend at least $15 million of his own money to defeat President Bush in the 2004 election. … ‘The true motives for the Bush administration’s determination to overthrow Saddam Hussein remain shrouded in mystery,’ Mr. Soros writes. ‘Oil and Israel likely loomed large in the administration’s policy deliberations, but these were not the reasons publicly offered by Bush and his advisers for the invasion of Iraq. A person could not even raise these issues without being called unpatriotic.’ In his chapter ‘The Iraqi Quagmire,’ a section on ‘the motives’ describes Israel as an ‘important consideration.’ ‘A large number of religious fanatics in the United States believe that the rebirth of Israel presages the apocalypse and the second coming of the Messiah,’ he writes.” (Ira Stoll, “Soros Says Israel Was Likely Motive For War,” The New York Sun, 12/4/03)

Soros Wrote That Nazis, Israel, Arab Terrorists And America After September 11 Are All Cases Of “Victims Turning Perpetrators.” “He also says that the Nazis, Israel, Arab terrorists, and America after September 11 are all cases of ‘victims turning perpetrators.’ The comments – in a new book, ‘The Bubble of American Supremacy,’ published by Public Affairs – represent sentiments that until now have mainly been on the fringes of the American policy debate. But Mr. Soros is a famous New York philanthropist who regularly hobnobs with Manhattan’s elite. He’s also a big player in Democratic politics, a backer of Howard Dean’s presidential campaign who has vowed to spend at least $15 million of his own money to defeat President Bush in the 2004 election. ‘Victims turning perpetrators is a well-known syndrome both in individuals and in groups,’ Mr. Soros writes. ‘Perhaps the most poignant and difficult case is Israel. Jews were the victims of the Holocaust, which can itself be ascribed, in part, to a process of victims turning perpetrators: Hitler rose to power by capitalizing on a wave of resentment caused by an onerous peace treaty and runaway inflation.’ Mr. Soros writes, ‘After the war, Jews resorted to terrorism against the British in Palestine in order to secure a homeland in Israel. Subsequently, after being attacked by Arab nations, Israel occupied additional territory and expelled many of the inhabitants. Eventually, the Arab victims also turned perpetrators, and Israel started suffering terrorist attacks.’ Mr. Soros writes that ‘Perpetrators are now in charge on both sides,’ noting that Prime Minister Sharon ‘has been held responsible for the massacre of Palestinians that took place in the Shatila and Sabra refugee camps in Lebanon in 1982.’ He writes that, ‘Under the Bush administration, the United States has also become a victim-turned-perpetrator, although the American public would be loath to recognize it.’” (Ira Stoll, “Soros Says Israel Was Likely Motive For War,” The New York Sun, 12/4/03)

Soros’ Business Dealings

In December 2002, Soros Was Convicted Of Insider Trading In France And Fined $2.3 Million. “After a 14-year investigation, a French court today convicted the American financier George Soros of insider trading and fined him 2.2 million euros ($2.3 million), the amount prosecutors said he had profited from the trading. Mr. Soros, who was not present in the courtroom, called the verdict unfounded and said he would appeal.” (John Tagliabue, “Soros Is Found Guilty In France On Charges Of Insider Trading,” The New York Times, 12/21/02)

Soros Has Been Accused Of “Destabilizing World Currencies And Wrecking The Economies Of Nations.” “George Soros is one of the most successful investors of all time. Even now, though he manages little or no money besides his own, he can move markets with a ten-minute appearance on cable television. Detractors have accused him of destabilizing world currencies and wrecking the economies of entire nations. He is appealing a French conviction for insider trading.” (Mark Gimein, “George Soros Is Mad As Hell,” Fortune, 10/27/03)

Soros Has Been Known As the “Man Who Broke The Bank Of England.” “George Soros got the first part right. As a detached and mysterious currency speculator, he made billions by moving markets in a manner that made him a whipping boy for besieged bankers and ministers. In one famous week in 1992, he made $1 billion betting against the British pound, earning him the grudging title of the Man Who Broke the Bank of England.” (William Shawcross, “Turning Dollars Into Change,” Time, 9/1/97)

Soros Is “Widely Blamed In Thailand For Triggering The Collapse Of The Economy In 1997.” “Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, meanwhile, reiterated his ban on foreign NGOs travelling to Thailand for the duration of the meeting. The Prime Minister stressed that he had clearly announced that Thailand had the names of all NGOs known to organize protests during international meetings, stating that they would not be welcome in Thailand during the Summit period. The Prime Minister also personally picked out US financier George Soros – widely blamed in Thailand for triggering the collapse of the economy in 1997 – as an alleged backer of NGOs.” (“All Involved Stand Ready To Host APEC Meeting,” Thai Press Reports, 10/14/03)

Soros’ Writings

In His 1998 Book “The Crisis Of Global Capitalism,” Soros Predicted The “Disintegration Of The Global Capitalist System.” (Robert J. Dowling, “Will The Real Soros Please Stand Up,” Business Week, 12/21/98)

Newsweek Columnist Robert Samuelson Writes That Soros “Delivers Drivel” In Atlantic Monthly Essay, Asserting “If Soros Weren’t The Author, This Gibberish Wouldn’t Have Made It Into Print.” “Americans recall how basketball great Michael Jordan did in baseball. He bombed. There’s an insight here. Call it the Jordan principle: genius doesn’t travel well. Applying the Jordan principle to George Soros – the fabulously successful investor who is among the world’s wealthiest men – we find that getting rich doesn’t make you an economic philosopher. In Soros’s case, just the opposite: as a seer, he’s a crackpot. … I know this because I’ve recently read his essay ‘The Capitalist Threat’ in the February Atlantic Monthly. It argues that ‘the spread of market values into all areas of life’ is now the main threat to ‘open and democratic society.’ Powerful stuff. Also rubbish. Soros’s essay is rambling and incoherent. … The truth is that if Soros weren’t the author, this gibberish wouldn’t have made it into print. … Soros might have advanced this ongoing debate with specific ideas over where government is – and isn’t – needed. Instead, he delivers drivel. Yes, this is the same Soros who helped finance California’s pro-marijuana campaign and whose charities reach around the world. Others will judge his politics and philanthropy. But as an economic prophet Soros is no more entitled to be taken seriously than Jordan is to play major-league baseball. Unless he makes sense, we shouldn’t listen.” (Robert J. Samuelson, “Crackpot Prophet,” Newsweek, 3/17/97)

Soros Contributions To Liberal Soft Money Groups

Soros Is Largest Donor To Democrat 527 Groups, Contributing A Total Of $18.5 Million. “By mid-August, Mr. Soros had given more than $15 million to advocacy groups like America Coming Together. At that time, he said in an interview on Monday, he fully expected Mr. Kerry to win the election. But recently, Mr. Soros saw what he called the outrageous and slanderous Swift boat commercials against Mr. Kerry and how they had damaged his standing in the polls. Since then, the Hungarian-born Mr. Soros said, he has become so worried that Mr. Bush will win the election that he increased his giving, to $18.2 million, and has scrapped a trip in October to Russia to work against the president's re-election. … Mr. Soros, whose $7.2 billion fortune makes him the 24th richest person in the United States, has become the biggest donor to the 527 advocacy groups, a category named for the section of the tax code that covers them. He pledged $10 million to America Coming Together for a registration and get-out-the-vote drive, but gave a total of $14.5 million. His other contributions to Democratic 527’s are $2.5 million to MoveOn.org Voter Fund; $325,000 to Young Voter Alliance; $325,000 to 21st Century Democrats; $300,000 to the Real Economy Group; and $250,000 to Democracy for America.” (Katharine Q. Seelye, “Anti-Bush Billionaire Plans To Give More,” The New York Times, 9/29/04)

Soros: “I Have Ulterior Motives, But They Are Clear: I Want A Hearing For My Views.” “‘Why should a rich guy give money without ulterior motives?’ he says. In fact, he adds, ‘I have ulterior motives, but they are clear: I want a hearing for my views. ... I want a referendum on the Bush doctrine’ in foreign affairs.” (Rick Hampson, “George Soros Putting His Fortune Behind A New Cause: Ousting Bush,” USA Today, 6/1/04)

Since 1999, Soros has contributed $205,750 To National Democrat Party Committees, Including $7,750 To DNC, $83,000 To DSCC And $115,000 To DCCC. (Center For Responsive Politics Website, www.opensecrets.org, Accessed 12/10/03)

Soros: “I’ve Come To The Conclusion … That One Can Do A Lot More About The Issues I Care About By Changing The Government Than By Pushing The Issues.” “‘I’ve come to the conclusion,’ Soros told Fortune, ‘that one can do a lot more about the issues I care about by changing the government than by pushing the issues.’ In short, he has become the world’s angriest billionaire.” (Mark Gimein, “George Soros Is Mad As Hell,” Fortune, 10/27/03)

Soros Initially Pledged $15.5 Million In Soft Money To Liberal Activist Groups, Including $10 Million To America Coming Together, $3 Million To The Center For American Progress And $2.5 Million To MoveOn.org. “Soros, who has financed efforts to promote open societies in more than 50 countries around the world, is bringing the fight home, he said. On Monday, he and a partner committed up to $5 million to MoveOn.org, a liberal activist group, bringing to $15.5 million the total of his personal contributions to oust Bush. … Standing on the back deck, the evening sun angling into their eyes, Soros took aside Steve Rosenthal, CEO of the liberal activist group America Coming Together (ACT), and Ellen Malcolm, its president. They were proposing to mobilize voters in 17 battleground states. Soros told them he would give ACT $10 million. … Soros also promised up to $3 million to Podesta’s new think tank, the Center for American Progress.” (Laura Blumenfeld, “Soros’s Deep Pockets Vs. Bush,” The Washington Post, 11/11/03)

Soros Will Reportedly Spend $100 Million To Defeat Bush. “George Soros, the richest of the liberal philanthropists, has publicly declared that his good work on behalf of building ‘open societies’ worldwide is at risk because of George Bush’s assaults on an open society at home. So Soros will spend about $100 million trying to oust Bush.” (Robert Kuttner, “Growing Power Of Small Money,” The Boston Globe, 11/12/03)

Would Spend Entire $7 Billion Fortune To Defeat Bush “If Someone Guaranteed” Outcome. “Asked whether he would trade his $7 billion fortune to unseat Bush, Soros opened his mouth. Then he closed it. The proposal hung in the air: Would he become poor to beat Bush? He said, ‘If someone guaranteed it.’” (Laura Blumenfeld, “Soros’s Deep Pockets Vs. Bush,” The Washington Post, 11/11/03)

Soros Is Largest Contributor In American Political History. (Byron York, “Democrats Throw The Spirit Of Reform Out The Window,” The Hill, 11/5/03)

Soros Said Defeating Bush Is “The Central Focus” Of His Life And 2004 Election Is A Matter Of Life And Death.” “George Soros, one of the world's richest men, has given away nearly $5 billion to promote democracy in the former Soviet bloc, Africa and Asia. Now he has a new project: defeating President Bush. ‘It is the central focus of my life,’ Soros said, his blue eyes settled on an unseen target. The 2004 presidential race, he said in an interview, is ‘a matter of life and death.’ (Laura Blumenfeld, “Soros’s Deep Pockets Vs. Bush,” The Washington Post, 11/11/03)

NM Governor Bill Richardson Stated That The New Soft Money 527s “Have Become The Replacement For The National Democratic Party.” “‘These groups are crucial’ to the anti-Bush effort, says Governor Bill Richardson (D-New Mexico), who has a group of his own called Moving America Forward. ‘Now that campaign finance reform is law,’ he says, ‘organizations like these have become the replacement for the national Democratic Party.’” (Jeffrey H. Birnbaum, “The New Soft Money,” Fortune, 10/27/2003)

SOROS & AMERICA COMING TOGETHER (ACT)

Soros “Pledged $10 Million To America Coming Together For A Registration And Get-Out-The-Vote Drive, But Gave A Total Of $14.5 Million.” “Mr. Soros, whose $7.2 billion fortune makes him the 24th richest person in the United States, has become the biggest donor to the 527 advocacy groups, a category named for the section of the tax code that covers them. He pledged $10 million to America Coming Together for a registration and get-out-the-vote drive, but gave a total of $14.5 million.” (Katharine Q. Seelye, “Anti-Bush Billionaire Plans To Give More,” The New York Times, 9/29/04)

Soros’ Commitment To America Coming Together Makes Him A “Key Player In The Huge ‘Soft Money’ Push That The Democrats … Hope Will Be One Of The Keys To Matching Bush’s Formidable Fundraising Apparatus In The 2004 Election.” (Mark Gimein, “George Soros Is Mad As Hell,” Fortune, 10/27/03)

America Coming Together’s $75 Million Fundraising Goal Is “Unprecedented.” “Labor, environmental and women’s organizations, with strong backing from international financier George Soros, have joined forces behind a new political group that plans to spend an unprecedented $75 million to mobilize voters to defeat President Bush in 2004.” (Thomas B. Edsall, “Liberals Form Fund To Defeat President,” The Washington Post, 8/8/03)

America Coming Together Running “‘Massive Voter Contact’ Program To Defeat Bush.” “Activists recently formed America Coming Together, with a pledge to raise $75 million for a ‘massive voter contact’ program to defeat Bush. George Soros will give $10 million for the effort, but names of other donors may not be disclosed.” (Julia Malone, “Activists Race To Fill ‘Soft Money’ Gap,” The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, 9/21/03)

America Coming Together Will Mount “The Largest Field Operation This Country Has Ever Seen.” “Rosenthal, ACT’s chief executive, calls it ‘the largest field operation this country has ever seen.’ Drawing on the lessons from labor’s political efforts, it aims in large part at expanding the likely base for progressive Democratic candidates.” (David Moberg, “Decisions, Decisions,” In These Times, 9/15/03)

ü America Coming Together Intends To “Hire Hundreds Of Organizers, State Political Directors And Others As The 2004 Election Approaches” And Concentrate Its Activities In 17 “Battleground” States. “Steve Rosenthal, whose mobilization of union members from 1996 through 2002 has been widely praised, will be ACT’s chief executive officer. He said that ACT will hire hundreds of organizers, state political directors and others as the 2004 election approaches. ACT plans to concentrate its activities in 17 states, all of which are likely to be presidential battlegrounds: Iowa, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, New Mexico, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Washington, Wisconsin, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, Ohio and West Virginia.” (Thomas B. Edsall, “Liberals Form Fund To Defeat President,” The Washington Post, 8/8/03)

SOROS & THE CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS

Soros Contributed $3 Million To John Podesta’s New Think Tank, The Center For American Progress. “Soros also promised up to $3 million to Podesta’s new think tank, the Center for American Progress. Soros will continue to recruit wealthy donors for his campaign. Having put a lot of money into the war of ideas around the world, he has learned that ‘money buys talent; you can advocate more effectively.’” (Laura Blumenfeld, “Soros’s Deep Pockets Vs. Bush,” The Washington Post, 11/11/03)

The Center For American Progress Has A 501(c) 3 Think Tank Component And A 501(c) 4 “Rapid Response And Communications Operation That Will Dabble More Heavily In Campaign Politics” – Both Of Which Can Collect Unlimited Contributions With No Disclosure. “The organizational structure is split into two components: a 501(c)3 think tank and a 501(c)4 rapid response and communications operation that will dabble more heavily in campaign politics. Both divisions are referred to by their designation within Internal Revenue Service tax code. Fundraising for the 501(c)3 is already in full swing while the 501(c)4 money-gathering has just begun, according to Laura Nichols, former communications director for Rep. Richard Gephardt (D-Mo.) and now senior vice president of CAP. Both entities can accept unlimited donations and do not have to reveal their donors.” (Chris Cillizza, “Clark To Keynote Forum For Podesta Group,” Roll Call, 9/30/03)

The Center For American Progress “Appear To Be Another Part Of Soros’ [Anti-Bush] Campaign.” ““Fighting back could well be the theme of the Center for American Progress. Supporters of the project seem to sincerely believe that they are up against a pervasive conservative bias in the nation’s media that can only be answered by an aggressive public-relations counter-offensive, which they call ‘pushback.’ And although it bills itself as a traditional think tank – scholarship and all – for now, at least, the Center appears to be all about pushback. … But perhaps the biggest buzz coming from the new Center for American Progress has nothing to do with a party, a conference, or a movie premiere. Recently the Center began sending out a daily e-mail commentary on events known as ‘Progress Report.’ An exhaustive collection of news bits wrapped in stridently anti-Bush rhetoric, the report, which Podesta calls ‘one of our flagship products,’ resembles nothing so much as a collection of the most aggressive, most energetic opposition research in politics. … But by any common-sense standard, Podesta’s group is as partisan as they come. … The Center’s funding also suggests its deeply political orientation. One of the organization’s top donors is the financier George Soros, who this year has devoted his enormous financial resources to defeating George W. Bush in 2004. So far, Soros has contributed $10 million to the new anti-Bush group America Coming Together, which will coordinate voter turnout efforts in key states. [Ed.: See Mr. York’s article “By George” in our last issue.] The Center appears to be another part of Soros’s campaign. … Don’t say that too loudly at a Center for American Progress event. Yes, organizers say they are searching for new ideas. They’re just not searching too hard. ‘We respect the need for debate,’ Podesta said at the Center’s coming-out party. ‘But our goal is to win.’” (Byron York, “The War Room, Cont.: This Time, The Democrats Are Calling It A ‘Think Tank,’” National Review, 11/24/03)

Podesta Called The Center For American Progress A “Think Tank On Steroids.” “[Podesta] is also the leader and architect of a new liberal think tank in Washington known as the Center for American Progress. … Podesta laid out his plan for what he likes to call a ‘think tank on steroids.’ Emulating those conservative institutions, he said, a message-oriented war room will send out a daily briefing to refute the positions and arguments of the right. An aggressive media department will book liberal thinkers on cable TV. There will be an ‘edgy’ Web site and a policy shop to formulate strong positions on foreign and domestic issues. In addition, Podesta explained how he would recruit hundreds of fellows and scholars – some in residence and others spread around the country – to research and promote new progressive policy ideas. … American Progress is slated to operate with a $10 million budget next year, raised from big donors like the financier George Soros.” (Matt Bai, “Notion Building,” The New York Times Magazine, 10/12/03)

SOROS & MOVEON.ORG

Soros And A Partner Contributed $5 Million To MoveOn.org’s $15 Million Anti-Bush Ad Campaign. “MoveOn is now poised to be one of the Democrats’ most effective fundraising vehicles during this year’s presidential campaign. It has already raised millions to support candidates and fund ads such as the one criticizing Bush’s $87 billion commitment to rebuilding Iraq. In November, billionaire philanthropist George Soros and his business partner, Peter Lewis, pledged a $5 million matching grant – a dollar for every two raised by MoveOn members – to create a $15 million advertising campaign to defeat President Bush.” (Beth Fouhy, “MoveOn.org Becomes Anti-Bush Online Powerhouse,” The Associated Press, 1/10/04)

SOROS & DEMOCRAT PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES

Soros And Kerry Are Neighbors In Sun Valley, Idaho, Have Had Dinner With Each Others’ Families And Once Spent “A Whole Afternoon Over Christmas In 2001 Talking About Foreign Policy.” “[Soros] said that in this election year he had had minimal contact with Mr. Kerry, largely because campaign finance laws bar coordination between candidates and 527's, and he is such a large donor to the 527's that such contact would be not be correct. The two men are neighbors in Sun Valley, Idaho. ‘We used to have dinners as a foursome,’ Mr. Soros said, ‘and I got to know him quite well. We spent a whole afternoon over Christmas in 2001 talking about foreign policy.’” (Katharine Q. Seelye, “Anti-Bush Billionaire Plans To Give More,” The New York Times, 9/29/04)

Kerry And Soros Spoke By Phone While Both Were Vacationing In Sun Valley, Idaho. “It’s unclear whether a man who helped free millions from communism would be a political liability to John Kerry. But, though Soros and Kerry were both vacationing in Sun Valley, Idaho, in March, they spoke only on the phone. They did not meet, Soros says, ‘because of how it would be interpreted.’” (Rick Hampson, “George Soros Putting His Fortune Behind A New Cause: Ousting Bush,” USA Today, 6/1/04)

In January, Soros Said He Was “Keen On Dean,” But Also Considered Kerry And Clark Well Qualified To Be President. “‘There is no doubt about Howard Dean’s abilities and qualities for being president,’ Mr. Soros said after giving a speech at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace sharply critical of the administration’s foreign policy. ‘Other candidates are also qualified. I’m also a great advocate of Clark and Kerry.’ All three, he said, had views very similar to his own. ‘I’m not picking one particular candidate,’ he added, ‘but I am keen on Dean.’” (Michael Janofsky, “A Wealthy Foe Of Bush Supports Three Democrats,” The New York Times, 1/13/04)

In September, Soros Hosted A $1,000-A-Person Fundraiser For Dean At His Westchester County Home. (Marc Humbert, “Dean Takes Presidential Campaign To Banks Of Hudson River,” The Associated Press, 9/20/03)

This Cycle, Soros Has Contributed To The Presidential Campaigns Of Dean, Graham And Kerry. (Center For Responsive Politics Website, www.opensecrets.org, Accessed 10/20/03)

Soros Contributions To Campaign

Finance Reform Advocacy Groups

Democracy 21’s Fred Wertheimer Said Soros Helped Start “A Soft-Money Arms Race.” “[Soros] also has alienated his former partners in campaign-finance reform. ‘George Soros started out as part of the solution, and he’s ended up as part of the problem,’ says Fred Wertheimer of Democracy 21, an advocacy group for campaign reform to which Soros once contributed. He says that whatever Soros’ intentions, he has helped start ‘a soft-money arms race.’” (Rick Hampson, “George Soros Putting His Fortune Behind A New Cause: Ousting Bush,” USA Today, 6/1/04)

Soros Has Reportedly Contributed A Total Of $18 Million To Campaign Finance Reform Advocacy Groups Over The Last Seven Years. “Soros has backed altering campaign finance, an aide said, donating close to $18 million over the past seven years.” (Laura Blumenfeld, “Soros’s Deep Pockets Vs. Bush,” The Washington Post, 11/11/03)

Soros Has Reportedly Contributed The Following Amounts To These Reform Groups:

ü Common Cause: $625,000 (Byron York, “Democrats Throw The Spirit Of Reform Out The Window,” The Hill, 11/5/03)

ü Brennan Center For Justice: $2.5 Million (Byron York, “Democrats Throw The Spirit Of Reform Out The Window,” The Hill, 11/5/03)

ü Public Campaign: $4.1 Million (Open Society Institute Website, www.soros.org, Accessed 11/18/03; Michelle Cottle, “Where Are The Good Guys When We Need Them?” Washington Monthly, 9/97)

ü Democracy 21: $310,000 (Open Society Institute Website, www.soros.org, Accessed 4/6/04)

ü Alliance For Better Campaigns: $650,000 (Byron York, “Democrats Throw The Spirit Of Reform Out The Window,” The Hill, 11/5/03)

ü Center For Public Integrity: $1.7 Million (Byron York, “Democrats Throw The Spirit Of Reform Out The Window,” The Hill, 11/5/03)

ü Center For Responsive Politics: $75,000 (Byron York, “Democrats Throw The Spirit Of Reform Out The Window,” The Hill, 11/5/03)

SOROS CONTRIBUTED TO SEVERAL CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM GROUPS

Soros’ Open Society Institute Has Reportedly Contributed To Reform Groups Such As Common Cause, Public Campaign, Democracy 21, Alliance For Better Campaigns And Several Others. “One might assume that advocates of reform would not want to take part in the world of 527 soft money. But look at Soros. The website of his foundation, the Open Society Institute, lists lots of grants to reform groups in the last few years. There is $625,000 to Common Cause, $2.5 million to the Brennan Center for Justice, $1.2 million to Public Campaign, $125,000 to Democracy 21, $1.7 million to the Center for Public Integrity, $75,000 to the Center for Responsive Politics and $650,000 to the Alliance for Better Campaigns. Their common goal, in the words of Public Campaign’s mission statement, is ‘to dramatically reduce the role of big special interest money in American politics.’ But now, liberal advocacy and 527 groups like America Coming Together are accepting huge checks from Soros. And he has a very special interest: to get Bush.” (Byron York, “Democrats Throw The Spirit Of Reform Out The Window,” The Hill, 11/5/03)

SOROS & DEMOCRACY 21

Democracy 21’s Fred Wertheimer: “We’re Determined To See The New Law Work Properly And Are Determined To Fight Any Efforts To Blatantly Circumvent The Law And Inject Soft Money Into Federal Campaigns.” “[C]ampaign finance groups pledged to fight alongside Republicans to make sure that 527 groups do not have a major influence on federal elections. ‘We’re determined to see the new law work properly and are determined to fight any efforts to blatantly circumvent the law and inject soft money into federal campaigns,’ said Fred Wertheimer, president of Democracy 21. ‘We’re going to fight this every step of the way throughout the year.’” (Alexander Bolton, “Senate To Enter 527 Battle,” The Hill, 2/18/04)

Wertheimer Criticized Soros For His Huge Contributions. “‘If this new organization coordinates its activities with the Democratic party or Democratic presidential candidates, they will be violating the new law,’ said Fred Wertheimer, president of Democracy 21, another group that has in the past received Soros money. ‘And if George Soros is contributing $10-million to an organization for the purpose of defeating George Bush, he will be violating the spirit of the law,’ said Mr. Wertheimer. Democracy 21 has filed complaints against ‘shadow’ Democratic and Republic party groups, and Mr. Wertheimer said he will not hesitate to take on Mr. Soros if necessary. ‘We know that some people are going to try to cheat and evade the law, some will try to do what was done before in new ways, and others will try legitimately to adapt to the new playing field,’ he said. ‘It’s something that has to be watched carefully. As much effort is going to have to be put in to enforcing the law as there was put into passing it.’” (Luiza Chwialkowska, “Soros Chastised By Liberal Advocates Of Campaign Finance Reform,” The New York Sun, 8/13/03)

Wertheimer Said He Was “Sorry That Mr. Soros Has Decided To Put So Much Money Into A Political Effort … We Will Be Watchdogging Him Closely.” “Fred Wertheimer, president of Democracy 21, which promotes changes in campaign finance, has benefited from Soros’s grants over the years. Soros has backed altering campaign finance, an aide said, donating close to $18 million over the past seven years. ‘There’s some irony, given the supporting role he played in helping to end the soft money system,’ Wertheimer said. ‘I’m sorry that Mr. Soros has decided to put so much money into a political effort to defeat a candidate. We will be watchdogging him closely.’” (Laura Blumenfeld, “Soros’s Deep Pockets Vs. Bush,” The Washington Post, 11/11/03)

Wertheimer Expressed Regret That Soros Was Making “Such A Huge Contribution For A Specific Effort To Defeat Mr. Bush.” “The Soros donation to ACT has disappointed Fred Wertheimer, president of Democracy 21, one of the top backers of the campaign finance law. ‘I’m sorry that Mr. Soros chose to make such a huge contribution for a specific effort to defeat Mr. Bush, given the very valuable role he played in supporting efforts to enact the soft-money ban,’ Wertheimer said. He added that his group would be carefully monitoring ACT to ensure that the group complies with laws forbidding coordination with the Democratic Party or a presidential candidate.” (Julia Malone, “Billionaires Open Wallets To Defeat Bush,” The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, 11/16/03)

Wertheimer: “We Are Concerned About George Soros’ Large Contributions To Affect The 2004 Campaign, As We Are Also Concerned About President Bush’s Decision To Swamp The Country With $200 Million In Spending For His Uncontested Presidential Primary Race …” (Will Lester, “Gillespie Challenges Foes In AP Interview,” The Associated Press, 11/17/03)

SOROS FUNDING DEMOCRACY 21

According To The Open Society Institute’s Website, Soros’ Foundation Contributed $310,000 To Democracy 21 Since 1999. (Open Society Institute Website, www.soros.org, Accessed 4/6/04)

Wertheimer Said Soros’ Foundation Gave About $250,000 To His Group. “Fred Wertheimer of Democracy 21 said Soros’ foundation has given about $250,000 to his group, but he was quick to point out that he has called for investigations of Democrats such as former President Clinton and the DNC as well as Republicans.” (Will Lester, “Gillespie Challenges Foes In AP Interview,” The Associated Press, 11/17/03)

These are some of the musing and rants of one of the most demented men on earth.

Yet, leftists still treat this idiot as an icon and follow his every word as though it's Holy Writ.

Perhaps the psychiatrist Rossister is right. Leftism is a mental disease.

posted March 08, 2012 04:59 PM            

Declaring War “Wrong Way To Deal With Terrorism.” “Declaring war on terrorism suited the purposes of the Bush administration better because it invoked our military might. But it is the wrong way to deal with terrorism. Military action requires an identifiable target, preferably a state. As a result, the war on terrorism has been directed primarily against states harboring terrorists. Yet terrorists are nonstate actors by definition, even if in many cases they are sponsored by a state. By turning the hunt for terrorists into a war, we are bound to create some innocent victims. The more innocent victims there are, the greater the resentment and the better the chances that some victims will turn perpetrators.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, pp. 18-19)

“Far From Reducing The Terrorist Threat, The War On Terrorism Has Actually Increased It.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, pp. 186-187)

Nazi Germany, Israel, Arab Terrorists And Post-9/11 America Are All Examples Of “Victims Turning Perpetrators,” And In Arab-Israeli Conflict, “Perpetrators Are Now In Charge On Both Sides.” “Victims turning perpetrators is a well-known syndrome both in individuals and in groups. … Perhaps the most poignant and difficult case is Israel. Jews were the victims of the holocaust, which can itself be ascribed, in part, to a process of victims turning perpetrators: Hitler rose to power by capitalizing on a wave of resentment cause by an onerous peace treaty and runaway inflation. He appealed to the German people’s sense of being victimized. Whether the Germans’ sense of victimization was imaginary or not, there can be no doubt that the Jews were victims in the literal sense. In the holocaust, many Jews went to their death helplessly and naively obeying orders, something I witnessed personally as a thirteen-year-old in Budapest. After the war, Jews resorted to terrorism against the British in Palestine in order to secure a homeland in Israel. Subsequently, after being attacked by Arab nations, Israel occupied additional territory and expelled many of the inhabitants. Eventually, the Arab victims also turned to perpetrators, and Israel started suffering terrorist attacks. Israel made the habit of retaliating vigorously, enlarging the circle of Arab victims. … The situation deteriorated until suicide bombings became commonplace. Perpetrators are now in charge on both sides. … Under the Bush administration, the United States has also become a victim-turned-perpetrator, although the American public would be loath to recognize it. On September 11, America was the victim of a heinous crime and the whole world expressed spontaneous and genuine sympathy. Since then, the war on terrorism has claimed more innocent lives in Afghanistan and Iraq than have the attacks on the World Trade Center. That comparison is rarely made at home: American lives are valued differently than the lives of foreigners, but the distinction is less obvious to people abroad.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, pp. 19-22)

Oil And Israel Were Likely Secret Reasons For War In Iraq. “The true motives for the Bush administration’s determination to overthrow Saddam Hussein remain shrouded in mystery. … One motive may have been the assertion of American supremacy – a demonstration that the United States sets the agenda. Iraq may have been chosen as a demonstration project for the simple reason that it was doable. … [T]here are more realistic geopolitical considerations that can be adduced in favor of toppling Saddam. Perhaps the single most important impediment to America’s control of its own destiny is its reliance on foreign oil. … By occupying Iraq and moving American military bases from Saudi Arabia to Iraq, the United States could establish a secure alternative to Saudi oil. … The other important consideration was Israel. A large number of religious fanatics in the United States believe that the rebirth of Israel presages the apocalypse and the second coming of the Messiah. Hence, in addition to the traditional pro-Israel lobby, Israel also has strong support from the evangelical right – and that is the core of the president’s constituency. … President Bush, however, felt obliged to pay attention to his constituency. Establishing a strong military presence in Iraq would help to transform the political complexion in the entire region. This would reassure Israel and weaken the Palestinian extremists sufficiently to allow some progress toward a settlement on terms acceptable to Israel and its U.S. supporters. … Oil and Israel likely loomed large in the administration’s policy deliberations, but these were not the reasons publicly offered by Bush and his advisers for the invasion of Iraq. … Only by skillfully weaving the themes of terrorism and weapons of mass destruction together and raising the specter of terrorists gaining access to weapons of mass destruction could the president justify going to war with Iraq. Whatever the case for invading Iraq, the American public has every reason to feel deceived.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, pp. 51-54)

President Bush Exploited 9/11 To Foster Fear, Keep Nation United Behind Him In Quest For “American Supremacy.” “[T]he Bush administration proceeded to exploit the terrorist attack for its own purposes. To silence criticism and keep the nation united behind the president, the administration deliberately fostered the fear that has gripped the country. It then used the war on terrorism to pursue its dream of American supremacy.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. 9)

“I Contend That The Bush Administration Has Deliberately Exploited September 11 In Order To Pursue Policies That The American Public Would Not Have Otherwise Tolerated.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. vii)

“[T]he Bush Administration Was Able To Carry The Nation Behind It By Playing Up The Terrorist Threat.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. xi)

War On Terrorism Cannot Be “Centerpiece Of Our National Strategy.” “The most powerful country on earth cannot afford to be consumed by fear. To make the war on terrorism the centerpiece of our national strategy is an abdication of our responsibility as the leading nation in the world. The United States is the only country that can take the lead in addressing problems that require collective action: preserving peace, assuring economic progress, protecting the environment, and so on. Fighting terrorism and controlling weapons of mass destruction also fall into this category.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. 30)

Bin Laden An “Evil Genius” And President Bush “Played Right Into The Hands Of The Terrorists.” “As a proponent of radical fallibility, I am reluctant to ascribe too much foresight to anyone; yet in retrospect I can discern the vague outlines of an imaginary master plan conceived by an evil genius called Bin Laden. From his perspective our civilization is degenerate. It is rich and powerful but devoid of true faith. It needs to be destroyed for the faith to prevail. The only way to destroy it is by exploiting its weakness: the fear of death. It will respond to a terrorist attack by lashing out against an unseen enemy. Since the perpetrators remain invisible, the instinctive reaction will claim innocent victims. The victims will be Muslim, and Islam will be radicalized, provoking a general confrontation between Islam and the West. Although the West enjoys material superiority, Islam will prevail because it has a major comparative advantage: It is not afraid of death. Events so far have lived up to this putative Bin Laden’s wildest expectations. The twin towers of the World Trade Center actually collapsed, making the attack more spectacular than could have been imagined. And President Bush responded by declaring war on terrorism. … The invasion of Iraq was an unexpected gift. American soldiers on Arabian soil are serving as a magnet, attracting al Qaeda–trained terrorists from all over the world. Sleeper cells are coming alive. Around three thousand people with al Qaeda connections are said to have disappeared from Saudi Arabia. Some of them must be active in Iraq. President Bush is right in saying that Iraq has become the central front in the war on terror. Wittingly or unwittingly, he has played right into the hands of the terrorists.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, pp. 182-183)

America Is “In The Hands Of A Group Of Extremists” Who Are Making Our Nation “Weaker, Not Stronger.” “The United States enjoys a dominant position in the world today that cannot be challenged by any other state or combination of states for the foreseeable future. It can lose its dominance only as a result of its own mistakes. At present the country is in the process of committing such mistakes because it is in the hands of a group of extremists whose strong sense of mission is matched only by their false sense of certitude. By abusing the position that the United States occupies in the world, the extremists have made our nation weaker, not stronger.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. viii)

American Government Has “Fallen Into The Hands Of Extremists Who Are Guided By A Crude Form Of Social Darwinism.” “The government of the most powerful country on earth has fallen into the hands of extremists who are guided by a crude form of social Darwinism: Life is a struggle for survival, and we must rely mainly on the use of force to survive.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. xi)

Bush Doctrine Is “Orwellian Doublespeak” – Which Soros Is Sensitive To Because Of His Upbringing Under Nazi And Communist Rule In Hungary. “The Bush doctrine, first enunciated in the president’s speech at West Point in June 2002 and then incorporated in the national security strategy in September 2002, is built on two pillars: First, the United States will do everything in its power to maintain its unquestioned military supremacy and, second, the United States arrogates the right to preemptive action. Taken together, these two pillars support two classes of sovereignty: the sovereignty of the United States, which takes precedence over international treaties and obligations, and the sovereignty of all other states, which is subject to the Bush doctrine. This is reminiscent of George Orwell’s Animal Farm: All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others. To be sure, the Bush doctrine is not stated so starkly; it is buried in Orwellian doublespeak. The doublespeak is needed because of the contradiction between the Bush administration’s concept of freedom and democracy and the actual principles of freedom and democracy. Talk of spreading democracy looms large in the national security strategy. When President Bush says, as he does frequently, that “freedom” will prevail, in fact he means that America will prevail. I am rather sensitive to Orwellian doublespeak because I grew up in Hungary first under Nazi and later Communist rule.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. 11)

President Bush Has “Simplistic View” Of Right And Wrong Contrary To “The Principles Of Open Society.” “President Bush equates freedom with American values. He has a simplistic view of what is right and what is wrong: We are right and they are wrong. This is in contradiction with the principles of open society, which recognize that we may be wrong.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, pp. 12-13)

Aftermath Of Iraq War A “Dismal Failure.” “As brilliant as the military part of the plan was, the aftermath has been a dismal failure.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. 60)

Compares Iraq To Vietnam. “We find ourselves in a quagmire that is in some ways reminiscent of Vietnam. Having invaded Iraq, we cannot extricate ourselves. Domestic pressure for withdrawing is likely to build, just as it did in the Vietnam War, but withdrawing would inflict irreparable damage to our standing in the world. In this respect, Iraq is worse than Vietnam because of our dependence on Middle Eastern oil.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. 62)

America’s Position Has Declined Since Bush Became President. “All in all, at no other time has America’s position declined as dramatically in as short a period as it has since George W. Bush became president. The swing in our international position matches the swing in our budget deficit. Whatever the flaws in the ideology that has guided the Bush administration, the practical results have been nothing short of disastrous.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. 74)

“President Bush Is Leading The United States And The World In A Very Dangerous Direction.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. 10)

“The Forthcoming Elections Provide An Excellent Opportunity To Deflate The Bubble Of American Supremacy.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. 74)

***Note*** All we have to do to reverse what Soros sees as "deflating the American bubble of Supremacy is elect the American Traitor John F Kerry***

World Needs To Reconcile Principle Of Sovereignty With Protecting Common Interests Through Multilateral System Guided By “International Public Opinion.” “The prevailing world order has a great unsolved problem: how to protect the common interest in a world consisting of sovereign states that habitually put their own interests ahead of the common interest. … It would be utopian to try and devise a solution that would do away with sovereign states and replace them with international institutions. Yet a way must be found to reconcile the common interest with the principle of sovereignty. The most promising democratic way is to establish a multilateral system in which all states submit to the same rules and participate in the same arrangements. We could then rely on international public opinion to determine and protect the common interest to a greater extent than today. The task of leading such an effort must fall to the United States, in view of its dominant position.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, pp. 81-82)

Bush Administration Has “Visceral Aversion To All Multilateral Agreements.” “[The Bush Administration] has a visceral aversion to all multilateral arrangements. It believes that international relations are purely relations of power, not law, and since America is the most powerful nation, multilateral treaties and institutions impose undue limitations on the exercise of American power. The only form of cooperation the Bush administration can live with is one in which the United States decides and others follow. This attitude has led to the Bush doctrine.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. 82)

While Soros Supported Intervention In Kosovo Without UN Authorization, He Holds That “Unilateral Action That Goes Against International Public Opinion Cannot Be Justified.” “I believe we were justified in intervening in Kosovo without UN authorization, and we would have done better if we have relied on NATO and not the United Nations in Bosnia. But unilateral action that goes against international public opinion cannot be justified, and it can endanger our national security by turning the world against us. This is what the Bush administration has accomplished by its rabid unilateralism.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. 118)

Proposes Cutting Defense In Favor Of Increased Foreign Aid, Domestic Spending. “An alternative U.S. foreign policy would differ from the present one in much more than being multilateral rather than unilateral. It would involve a radical reordering of our priorities. Instead of devoting the bulk of the budget to military expenditures to implement the Bush doctrine, we would engage in preventive actions of a constructive nature. This would require incomparably smaller budgetary expenditures, leaving room for greater domestic spending within a balanced budget. After all, it would be unacceptable to increase foreign aid without a comparable improvement in social benefits at home.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, pp. 123-124)

Supports New Arms Control Agreement. “At present we spend almost as much on defense as do all the other countries in the world combined. We are way ahead of them in technology. Naturally they try to catch up with us the best they can, so we keep on pushing ahead on technology in order to maintain our superiority. This is an arms race between unequals that could be slowed down by international agreement. … We are in a position to dictate the terms that would satisfy us. We are prevented from doing so only by our own attitude: Nothing would satisfy us, because under the influence of extremists, we are opposed to the process.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, pp. 174-175)

Believes That A Boom-Bust Process, Or Bubble, Is Occurring With Regard To “The Bush Administration’s Pursuit Of American Supremacy.” “I believe something akin to a boom-bust process, or bubble, is occurring now in connection with the Bush administration’s pursuit of American supremacy. … In my view, the Bush administration’s quest of American supremacy qualifies as a bubble.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, pp. 177-179)

Iraqi Insurgents’ Guerilla Tactics “Forced The Invaders To Behave Like Occupying Powers … Inflicting Insults And Injuries That Turned The Population Against Them.” “Saddam Hussein appears to have planned on waging a guerilla war. He may have had that in mind as early as October 2002, when he released all the prisoners from Iraqi jails. The guerilla tactics forced the invaders to behave like occupying powers, suspicious of the civilian population and inflicting insults and injuries that turned the population against them.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. 61)

9/11 Provided President Bush With “Enemy He Was Looking For.” “Once September 11 provided President Bush with the enemy he was looking for he became a man with an ordained mission. It suited his personality. Being a reformed substance abuser and a born-again Christian, he had personal acquaintance with the devil. The devil took the form of suicide bombers who tried to destroy him personally in the White House; this gave him an intensely felt sense of personal engagement.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. 34)

War On Terrorism Cannot Be Won, Will Bring About “Permanent State Of War.” “The war on terrorism as pursued by the Bush administration cannot be won, because it is based on false pretenses. The war on terrorism is more likely to bring about a permanent state of war. Terrorists are invisible; therefore, they will never disappear. They will continue to provide a convenient pretext for the pursuit of American supremacy by military means. That pursuit, in turn, will continue to generate resistance, setting up a vicious cycle of escalating violence. In this respect, there is a parallel between the war on terrorism and the war on drugs: the remedy is inappropriate to the disease. In the case of drugs, we are confronted by a public health problem, not a problem of crime. The public health problem cannot be properly addressed if we treat drug addicts as criminals. In the case of terrorists we are dealing with a crime. We need detective work, good intelligence, and cooperation from the public, not military action. In both cases, waging war is a false metaphor that can be used to justify repressive measures.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. 26)

“There Can Be No Doubt That We Invaded Iraq On False Pretenses.” “The quagmire in Iraq ought to serve as the moment of truth. Whatever the justification for removing Saddam Hussein, there can be no doubt that we invaded Iraq on false pretenses. Wittingly or unwittingly, President Bush deceived the American public and Congress and rode roughshod over the opinions of our allies. The gap between the administration’s expectations and the actual state of affairs could not be wider. The fallacy in waging war on terrorism has been demonstrated on the ground in Iraq.” (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, pp. 185-186)

Soros Bankrolls Drug Legalization Efforts

“Soros Has Said He Has Given $15 Million To Pro-Marijuana Efforts Over The Years.” (Ed Vogel, “Health Board Opposes Question,” Las Vegas Review-Journal, 10/5/02)

Soros “Contributed More Than $15 Million To Initiatives And Propositions Pushing For Drug Legalization” (Robert Weiner and Amy Rieth, “Canada, Maryland Going To Pot,” The Washington Times, 7/2/03)

Soros Has Bankrolled At Least Nineteen Drug Legalization Ballot Initiatives. “University of Phoenix founder John Sperling and investors George Soros and Peter Lewis have contributed the bulk of the money to finance Proposition 203. The three have funded 19 initiatives in other states with a high rate of success.” (Elvia Diaz, “Wealthy Trio Back Marijuana Initiative,” The [Phoenix] Arizona Republic, 10/17/02)

In 1996, Former Carter Administration Secretary Of Health, Education And Welfare, Joseph Califano, Called Soros “The Daddy Warbucks Of Drug Legalization.” “And the award for best supporting role goes to billionaire George Soros, the Daddy Warbucks of drug legalization.” (Joseph A. Califano Jr., Op-Ed, “Devious Efforts To Legalize Drugs,” The Washington Post, 12/4/96)

In 1997, Soros Compared Joseph Califano To Slobodan Milosevic Accusing Him Of “Totalitarian Mind-Set.” “Hysteria has replaced debate in the public discourse. It was left to the voters of California and Arizona to introduce a note of sanity into our drug policy. [Joseph] Califano asserts that they were bamboozled but, in doing so, he reveals a totalitarian mind-set. When he claims that the voters of Arizona and California did not know what they were voting for when they supported the two initiatives, he reminds me of the way Serbia’s President Slobodan Milosevic reacted to recent election results in that country.” (George Soros, Op-Ed, “A Look At … The Drug War Debate,” The Washington Post, 2/2/97)

In 1997, Soros Called United States Drug Policy “Insane.” “‘[U.S.] drug policy is insane,’ [Soros] says. ‘And no politician can stand up and say what I’m saying, because it’s the third rail – Instant electrocution.’” (William Shawcross, “Turning Dollars Into Change,” Time, 9/1/97)

Soros Compared The War On Drugs To The Vietnam War, Calling A Drug-Free America “A Utopian Dream.” “I believe that a drug-free America is a utopian dream. Some form of drug addiction or substance abuse is endemic in most societies. Insisting on the total eradication of drug use can only lead to failure and disappointment. The war on drugs cannot be won; but, like the Vietnam War, it has polarized our society.” (George Soros, Op-Ed, “A Look At … The Drug War Debate,” The Washington Post, 2/2/97)

Soros: “I Firmly Believe That The War On Drugs Is Doing More Harm To Our Society Than Drug Abuse Itself.” (George Soros, Op-Ed, “A Look At … The Drug War Debate,” The Washington Post, 2/2/97)

In 2002, Soros Funded Ballot Initiative That Would “Require Arizona State Police To Hand Out Free Marijuana To The Ill.” “In their quest to loosen drug laws, three wealthy men have shelled out most of the $1.1 million spent so far to promote a November ballot initiative that would require Arizona state police to hand out free marijuana to the ill. University of Phoenix founder John Sperling and investors George Soros and Peter Lewis have contributed the bulk of the money to finance Proposition 203.” (Elvia Diaz, “Wealthy Trio Back Marijuana Initiative,” The [Phoenix] Arizona Republic, 10/17/02)

In August 1997, Soros Donated $1 Million To Finance Needle Exchange. “Soros did his lightning-rod act again last month, giving $1 million to the Tides Foundation in San Francisco to finance needle exchanges for addicts.” (William Shawcross, “Turning Dollars Into Change,” Time, 9/1/97)

Favors Making “Heroin And Certain Other Illicit Drugs Available On Prescription To Registered Drug Addicts.” “If public opinion were ready for it, I would advocate ‘hollowing out’ the black market for drugs by making heroin and certain other illicit drugs available on prescription to registered drug addicts while discouraging non-addicts with social opprobrium, the dissemination of reasonable and persuasive information on the harms caused by drugs, and, to the extent necessary, by legal sanctions.” (George Soros, Op-Ed, “A Look At … The Drug War Debate,” The Washington Post, 2/2/97)

Last Year, Soros Supported A Successful Initiative For The District Of Colombia That Would “Guarantee Drug Treatment” For Nonviolent Defendants In Place Of Prison Terms. “Last year the Drug Policy Alliance, working with funding from philanthropist George Soros, placed an initiative on the D.C. ballot, informally named Treatment Instead of Jails. Measure 62 was designed to guarantee drug treatment for nonviolent defendants charged with possession of PCP or cocaine. As long as a person was seeking treatment, such crimes would no longer carry a prison term. … Nevertheless, the measure was approved by 78 percent of the local vote on Nov. 5. The D.C. Council voted to set aside the measure, and a D.C. Superior Court judge later ruled that the measure could not be implemented because it was legally flawed.” (Tom Schoenberg, “Drug Court Facing Test of Wills,” Legal Times, 10/6/03)

In 2000, It Was Reported Soros’ Lindesmith Center Bankrolled Canadian Court Appeal To Allow Medical Marijuana. “In August, 2000, it was revealed the U.S.-based Lindesmith Center, heavily funded by Mr. Soros, paid for a Canadian’s successful appeal against marijuana charges on the basis he needed the drug to overcome pain.” (Michael Higgins, “Critic Of Capitalism’s Excess On Trial For Insider Trading,” [Canada] National Post, 11/8/02)

In 2002, It Was Revealed State That “Grass-Roots Campaigns” To “Legalize Marijuana” Were Funded By Soros And His Associates. “Two billionaires and a multimillionaire are bankrolling campaigns to legalize marijuana in three states and Washington, D.C. Purported grass-roots campaigns in Nevada, Ohio, Arizona and the District of Columbia are being run by political advocacy firms in New York and Washington, D.C., with money from financier George Soros and University of Phoenix founder John Sperling, billionaires both, and multimillionaire Peter Lewis, retired CEO of Progressive Insurance. Opponents say their posse of soccer moms, anti-drug groups and police officials cannot raise the money to counter the proponents’ professional media campaign. … In Ohio, Soros, Sperling and Lewis each donated $271,276, state records show. … The money went to Progressive Campaigns Inc. of Santa Monica, Calif., a professional political campaign and petition management group. Zimmerman says getting signatures in populous states is far too difficult to do with volunteers. ‘It takes dozens of people working full-time to get the signatures.’ Of $1.6 million raised by the initiative group Nevadans for Responsible Law Enforcement, just $184,000 came from 4,000 small donors, the group’s Web site shows. In Arizona, Soros donated $406,467, and Sperling, who lives in Phoenix, donated $590,383. The organizations do not apologize for their big-money backers.” (Donna Leinwand, “Superrich Trio Put Cash Into Marijuana Initiatives,” USA Today, 11/5/02)

Long Time Supporter Of Drug Legalization. “In 1996, the California ballot initiative passed, making the state the first to remove criminal penalties for qualifying patients who grow, possess and use medical marijuana. But such initiatives are funded by people like George Soros, who has contributed more than $15 million to initiatives and propositions pushing for drug legalization.” (Robert Weiner and Amy Rieth, “Canada, Maryland Going To Pot,” The Washington Times, 7/2/03)

Criticized U.N. Drug Control Measures. “The Open Society Institute, a private foundation started by financier George Soros, said the U.N.’s strict drug control treaties are undermining efforts to prevent the spread of AIDS because they discourage countries from introducing effective public health measures.” (William J. Kole, “Critics At U.N. Narcotics Conference Say ‘No’ To American Anti-Drug Campaign,” The Associated Press, 4/15/03)

Soros “Equates The American Government’s Abuse Of Power In The Drug War With The Fascist Regimes In Hungary And Nazi Germany.” (Alex Beam, “The Money Behind Question 8,” The Boston Globe, 11/2/00)

For Soros, The Drug War “Is Something That Has Resonance With What He Was Exposed To Under Totalitarian Government.” “Nadelmann, director of the Soros-funded Lindesmith Center on Drug Policy in New York, says the theme is consistent for the Hungarian-born philanthropist. ‘Soros is the single most significant philanthropist in the world,’ he said. ‘For him, the drug war – and this issue of asset forfeiture – is something that has resonance with what he was exposed to under totalitarian government.’” (Judy Fahys, “Initiative B Funded By ‘Outsider,’” Salt Lake Tribune, 10/16/00)

Soros Opposes Tougher Laws

Against Drug Trafficking Near Schools

Soros-Funded Drug Policy Alliance Opposes Tougher Penalties For Drug Trafficking Within 1,000 Feet Of Schools, Colleges, Public Libraries, Drug Treatment Or Daycare Facilities. “At a time when many states are reconsidering harsh mandatory-minimum sentences, the U.S. House Judiciary Committee is scheduled to vote on Wisconsin Congressman Sensenbrenner’s cruel sentencing bill, the Safe Access to Drug Treatment and Child Protection Act (HR 4547), next week. If enacted, HR 4547 would impose new federal mandatory-minimum sentences, swelling federal prisons with more low-level, nonviolent drug offenders while increasing your tax burden. As a Wisconsin resident, we need your help: Please call Congressman James Sensenbrenner and co-sponsor Congressman Mark Green today. URGE THEM TO CANCEL THE VOTE ON HR 4547. … HR 4547 would reduce judicial discretion while increasing racial disparities in the criminal justice system. The bill would increase to five years the federal mandatory-minimum-sentence for the sale of a controlled substance within 1,000 feet of a school, college, public library, drug treatment facility (or any place where drug treatment, including classes, is provided), or private or public daycare facilities. (Since almost anywhere in a major city is within 1,000 feet of one of these facilities, the effect will be to sentence non-violent drug offenders from inner cities to long, mandatory prison terms.) The bill would also impose a mandatory-minimum sentence of ten years on any person 21-years old or older who sells drugs (including marijuana) to any person younger than 18, even if they are friends or family. If the person has a previous felony drug offense, the sentence would be automatic life imprisonment. Finally, the bill would tighten the federal ‘safety valve,’ making it harder for judges to use their constitutional discretion to show leniency to deserving first-time, low-level drug offenders.” (Drug Policy Alliance Website, “Wisconsin Residents: Stop Mandatory-Minimum Sentence Bill In Congress,” www.drugpolicy.org, 9/20/04)

ü Soros Funds Drug Policy Alliance, Sits On Group’s Board Of Directors. (Drug Policy Alliance Website, www.drugpolicy.org, Accessed 9/27/04; Patty Henetz, “Prosecutors, Police Reluctantly Comply With Asset Seizure Law,” The Associated Press, 7/17/04)

Soros Supports Assisted Suicide Laws

“Mr. Soros Provided $15 Million For The Death In America Project, Which Supports Euthanasia.” (Toni Marshall, “Enigmatic Billionaire,” The Washington Times, 11/9/97)

“Billionaire George Soros Has Contributed $250,000 To Retain Oregon’s Assisted Suicide Law …” (Corky Siemaszko, “Dave’s Top Cop Leads Houston Ballot,” [New York] Daily News, 11/4/97)

In 1995, “Soros Voiced Disapproval Of His Father’s Reluctance To Die.” “In an interview with the New Yorker in 1995, Mr. Soros voiced disapproval of his father’s reluctance to die, even though he was gravely ill. ‘My father unfortunately wanted to live … and I was kind of disappointed in him. … I wrote him off,’ he said.” (Toni Marshall, “Enigmatic Billionaire,” The Washington Times, 11/9/97)

Soros Supports Voting Rights For Felons

Financed Efforts To Obtain Voting Rights For Felons. (Rebecca Carr, “Superdonors’ Super Power,” The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, 2/11/01)

Soros Funds RU-486 Manufacturer

Soros Financed Manufacturer Of Abortion Pill, RU-486. “[F]or-profit Danco and its nonprofit partner, the Population Council Inc., a New York-based organization that promotes family planning world-wide, have received grants and loans to develop mifepristone [RU-486] from some prominent investors, including foundations set up by Warren Buffett, George Soros and the late David Packard.” (Rachel Zimmerman, “Choice Allies: Awaiting Green Light, Abortion-Pill Venture Keeps To The Shadows,” The Wall Street Journal, 9/5/00)

Soros Funded Delivery Of RU-486 Through Advocacy Group Abortion Rights Mobilization (ARM). “The American company licensed to market RU-486 says it has found manufacturers willing to produce the French ‘abortion pill’ and is working with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for final approval. … Largely unnoticed by the public, some women are already using RU-486 in a special research program. Women early in their pregnancies can get the drug today at more than a dozen sites across the country, including the Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center in Baltimore. In the past 18 months, more than 3,000 women in the United States have taken RU-486 under this program, sponsored by an advocacy group known as the Abortion Rights Mobilization (ARM). The group’s efforts, funded by nonprofit organizations including the John Merck Family Foundation and the George Soros Foundation, have provided the drug to 15 centers from Seattle to Bellevue, Neb., to Cherry Hill, N.J.” (Marc Kaufman, “Abortion Pill Inches Closer to Production,” The Washington Post, 3/23/99)

Contributed $1 Million To Planned Parenthood For “Outreach, Education And Training” Relating To RU-486. (Marc Kaufman, “Abortion Pill Deliveries Begin Soon,” The Washington Post, 11/16/00)

Soros Funds Abortion Providers

Soros Pledged $600,000 To National Abortion Federation To “Alleviate The Shortage Of Abortion Providers.” (Capital Research Center Website, www.capitalresearch.org, Accessed 11/19/03)

Soros Supports Reducing Us Sovereignty

Soros Has Argued “The Sovereignty Of States Must Be Subordinated To International Law And International Institutions.” “Soros identifies a problem: ‘Our global open society lacks the institutions and mechanisms necessary for its preservation.’ The solution? ‘Some global system of political decision-making’ in which ‘the sovereignty of states must be subordinated to international law and international institutions’ when ‘collective interests’ are at stake.” (Matthew Rees, “Saving Capitalism From Soros,” The Ottawa Citizen, 12/9/98)

“In The Crisis Of Global Capitalism (1998) And Open Society (2000), [Soros] Argued That A Vision Of ‘Open Society Idealism’ Must Supersede Traditional State Sovereignty If Globalization Is To Benefit All.” (Carlin Romano, “George Soros Offers A Plan To Help Poor Via Globalization,” The Philadelphia Inquirer, 3/24/02)

Soros Supports Gun Control

Soros Has Given Millions To Support Gun Control Efforts. “After many years of being outspent and outmuscled by the National Rifle Association, the gun control movement has begun the most ambitious campaign in its history to raise money, recruit foot soldiers and build public support for stronger gun laws in preparation for this fall’s national elections. … At the same time, wealthy proponents of gun control seem more willing to contribute to the cause. Several major philanthropists, including George Soros, have given millions of dollars over the last two years to groups that are providing intellectual and strategic support to the organizations and politicians who advocate more regulation of guns.” (James Dao, “Gun Control Groups Use N.R.A. Tactics For Fall Elections,” The New York Times, 7/24/00)

Soros’ Open Society Institute Was The First Private Group To Finance Lawsuit Against Gun Manufacturers. “Some of the nation’s leading private foundations and philanthropists such as billionaire George Soros are pouring millions of dollars into research and support in the battle to control gun violence. The infusion of private money has raised the wrath of the National Rifle Association, which in a publication this month named Soros and another private foundation as part of a ‘vast conspiracy’ to bankrupt gun manufacturers with lawsuits. But anti-gun advocates say the private money has helped ‘level the playing field’ between gun manufacturers and shooting victims and their families, according to Elisa Barnes, a plaintiffs’ attorney in a successful Brooklyn, N.Y., lawsuit against gunmakers. Soros’s Open Society Institute became the first private group to directly help finance a lawsuit against a weapons manufacturer when it contributed $300,000 to plaintiffs in the Brooklyn case. Barnes said Soros’s contribution ‘made all the difference in the world’ in winning the February verdict, which held nine gunmakers liable for practices that allowed criminals to obtain guns. … Soros is among the major philanthropic givers who have recently decided to take on the gun lobby, Mahon said, because they believe gun violence is a ‘massive public health problem’ and that the government is ‘paralyzed’ by the NRA. ‘It’s really something whose time has come,’ said Stephen P. Teret, a gun safety litigation expert whose Center for Gun Policy and Research at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore is supported by foundation grants. … Since January, Mahon’s center has helped organize the Funders Collaborative for Gun Violence Prevention, a consortium that has raised $11 million in seed money. ‘The strategy is to show leadership from the philanthropies and say this is an important issue for our country,’ said Mahon. The campaign is making inroads. Buoyed by successful lawsuits against the tobacco industry, five cities launched a similar strategy last year against gun manufacturers, trying to force the industry to pay the costs of gun violence. … Soros, whose wealth was built on foreign currency exchange dealings, established the Center on Crime, Communities and Culture in 1996 to fund crime prevention programs. It has dispensed $13 million, with its most notable contribution the money put into the Brooklyn lawsuit. ‘The courts are the place where David and Goliath can go at it and David can win,’ said Mahon. ‘That’s why the gun industry is so spooked by this suit.’ … The difference a foundation can make in such costly litigation became clear in the landmark Brooklyn case. Plaintiffs’ attorney Barnes said the major foundations she initially approached for funding regarded the case as ‘too risky’ politically. These foundations, which included some of the biggest in the country, were willing to finance research into gun violence ‘but never litigation,’ she said. She then turned to Soros’s Center on Crime. It was the only one ‘iconoclastic’ enough to align itself with a lawsuit that cost $1.5 million, even with lawyers working pro bono and ‘cutting every corner,’ she said. A spokesman for Soros’s group said the decision to get involved was an easy one. ‘Given the fact [that] youth gun violence is a priority area for us, it was a no-brainer,’ said Andrew J. Martin.” (David B. Ottaway, “Legal Assault On Firms Is Armed By Foundations,” The Washington Post, 5/19/99)

Soros Helped Fund The Million Mom March In 2000. “Bent on breaking the congressional deadlock over gun legislation, a newly aroused lobbying force converges today on the nation’s capital and dozens of other cities nationwide: fed-up moms. Their numbers may not live up to the name organizers gave the event – the Million Mom March – but 150,000 or more demonstrators are expected to gather this Mother’s Day for the largest gun control rally in U.S. history. … Organizers of the march had raised about $1.8 million through last week, including $1 million from an anonymous New York donor and $500,000 from the Funders Collaborative for Gun Violence Prevention, set up by billionaire George Soros, philanthropist Irene Diamond and an anonymous donor, said Andrew McGuire, executive director of the San Francisco-based Bell Campaign, a victim-led gun control group helping with the march. The budget for all of the rallies around the country is $2.3 million.” (Richard Simon and Nick Anderson, “Million Mom March Expected To Draw 150,000 Nationwide,” Los Angeles Times, 5/14/00)

Soros Opposes The Death Penalty

Soros Urged Opposes The Death Penalty, Pushed For Moratorium. “Just weeks ago, 40 prominent death-penalty opponents, including Nobel peace laureate Elie Wiesel and billionaire philanthropist George Soros, urged a moratorium on federal executions.” (Andrew Gumbel, “Death Penalty Opponents Target U.S.,” Hamilton [Ontario] Spectator, 12/19/02)

Soros Opposes Welfare Reform

Soros Called The 1996 Welfare Reform Bill A “Mean-Spirited Attack On Immigrants” And Contributed $50 Million To Aid Those Affected By The Legislation. “George Soros, a billionaire immigrant philanthropist, pledged Monday to donate $50 million to aid legal immigrants affected by welfare reform, which he says is unjust and unwise. His pledge, unprecedented in size and target, is intended to fund charities and organizations across the country that advocate for immigrants or help them become citizens through English-language and civics classes. ‘The Statue of Liberty embraces those ‘yearning to breathe free,’ but the current mean-spirited attack on immigrants threatens to choke them,” said Soros, who left Hungary for England in 1947, then the USA in 1956. The money will be doled out through Soros’ newest charitable foundation, the Emma Lazarus Fund, named for the 19th-century writer of mostly forgotten sentimental poetry. Her best known work is a sonnet inscribed on the Statue of Liberty, welcoming ‘your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.’ Soros said he is ‘appalled’ by the just-signed welfare reform law, which reverses longstanding U.S. policy of treating legal immigrants the same as citizens in handing out welfare benefits. Now, current and future immigrants can be barred from major welfare programs or see their benefits reduced. The states will have some flexibility in implementing the law. ‘This is the first time legal immigrants are being discriminated against,’ said Soros, a naturalized citizen. ‘It won’t save money because immigrants will naturalize (and thus regain eligibility for welfare). It’s a gimmick.’” (Maria Puente, “Philanthropist Pledges $50M For Immigrants,” USA Today, 10/1/96)

Soros Opposes “Three-Strikes” Laws

Soros Recently Gave $150,000 To Proposition Campaign Seeking To “Tone Down” California’s “Three Strikes” Law. “The effort to pass a ballot measure that would tone down California’s tough ‘three-strikes’ sentencing law has received three $150,000 donations from some of the nation’s largest backers of Democrat-oriented political groups. International financier George Soros, insurance magnate Peter Lewis and private university founder John Sperling each gave $150,000 to help pass Proposition 66, according to campaign finance records. The contributions were received Friday. In a written release, the ‘The Yes on 66 -- Fix Three Strikes’ campaign said the $450,000 came via the Drug Policy Alliance Network, a national drug-law reform organization. The proposition’s backers argue that the three-strikes law unjustly ensnares small-time drug users with lifetime sentences. They want the stiff sentencing guidelines to apply only to people convicted of ‘serious or violent’ felonies such as rape and murder -- what they call the ‘original intent’ of voters who passed the law a decade ago. Lewis, chairman of the board of the suburban Cleveland-based insurer Progressive Corp., and Soros have donated millions this election cycle to Democratic-leaning causes. Sperling is founder of the University of Phoenix. Proponents said their donations would finance ‘a vigorous media campaign,’ starting next month.” (“Soros, Lewis, Sperling Give To Proposition 66 Fund,” The Associated Press, 9/13/04)

Soros On Anti-Semitism And Israeli, American Policy

Soros Compared The Bush Administration To Nazis. “Soros believes that a ‘supremacist ideology’ guides this White House. He hears echoes in its rhetoric of his childhood in occupied Hungary. ‘When I hear Bush say, ‘You’re either with us or against us,’ it reminds me of the Germans.’ It conjures up memories, he said, of Nazi slogans on the walls, Der Feind Hort mit (‘The enemy is listening’). ‘My experiences under Nazi and Soviet rule have sensitized me,’ he said in a soft Hungarian accent.” (Laura Blumenfeld, “Soros’s Deep Pockets Vs. Bush,” The Washington Post, 11/11/03)

Soros Said That American And Israeli Policy Contribute To Anti-Semitism, Prompting Sharp Response From Jewish Leaders. “A reported comment by billionaire philanthropist George Soros asserting that the policies of America and Israel are to blame for the resurgence of anti-Semitism in Europe is sparking outrage everywhere from the White House to the American Jewish leadership and prompting concern about a wider backlash against Israel. … Mr. Soros’s comments came last week at a conference of Jewish philanthropists. According to a report that moved Sunday on the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, a venerable news wire service, Mr. Soros said, ‘There is a resurgence of anti-Semitism in Europe. The policies of the Bush administration and the Sharon administration contribute to that. If we change that direction, then anti-Semitism also will diminish,’ Mr. Soros said, according to the JTA report. … The chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, James Tisch, called the Soros remarks ‘an outrage.’ ‘It boggles the mind,’ Mr. Tisch said, invoking the precedent of the early Third Reich, when Jews were told that if they’d just be quiet anti-Semitism would abate. ‘Soros may be wealthy and he may be brilliant with the markets but he obviously hasn’t learned his history,’ Mr. Tisch said. … The national director of the Anti-Defamation League, Abraham Foxman, using some of the strongest language he has ever uttered to condemn remarks by an American public figure, called Mr. Soros’s remarks ‘obscene.’” (Ira Stoll, “Outrage Greets Soros Remarks,” The New York Sun, 11/11/03)

Soros Wrote That Israel “Likely” Was A Big But Secret Reason For America’s War In Iraq. “Billionaire money manager George Soros says that Israel ‘likely’ was a big but secret reason for America’s war in Iraq. … The comments – in a new book, ‘The Bubble of American Supremacy,’ published by Public Affairs – represent sentiments that until now have mainly been on the fringes of the American policy debate. But Mr. Soros is a famous New York philanthropist who regularly hobnobs with Manhattan’s elite. He’s also a big player in Democratic politics, a backer of Howard Dean’s presidential campaign who has vowed to spend at least $15 million of his own money to defeat President Bush in the 2004 election. … ‘The true motives for the Bush administration’s determination to overthrow Saddam Hussein remain shrouded in mystery,’ Mr. Soros writes. ‘Oil and Israel likely loomed large in the administration’s policy deliberations, but these were not the reasons publicly offered by Bush and his advisers for the invasion of Iraq. A person could not even raise these issues without being called unpatriotic.’ In his chapter ‘The Iraqi Quagmire,’ a section on ‘the motives’ describes Israel as an ‘important consideration.’ ‘A large number of religious fanatics in the United States believe that the rebirth of Israel presages the apocalypse and the second coming of the Messiah,’ he writes.” (Ira Stoll, “Soros Says Israel Was Likely Motive For War,” The New York Sun, 12/4/03)

Soros Wrote That Nazis, Israel, Arab Terrorists And America After September 11 Are All Cases Of “Victims Turning Perpetrators.” “He also says that the Nazis, Israel, Arab terrorists, and America after September 11 are all cases of ‘victims turning perpetrators.’ The comments – in a new book, ‘The Bubble of American Supremacy,’ published by Public Affairs – represent sentiments that until now have mainly been on the fringes of the American policy debate. But Mr. Soros is a famous New York philanthropist who regularly hobnobs with Manhattan’s elite. He’s also a big player in Democratic politics, a backer of Howard Dean’s presidential campaign who has vowed to spend at least $15 million of his own money to defeat President Bush in the 2004 election. ‘Victims turning perpetrators is a well-known syndrome both in individuals and in groups,’ Mr. Soros writes. ‘Perhaps the most poignant and difficult case is Israel. Jews were the victims of the Holocaust, which can itself be ascribed, in part, to a process of victims turning perpetrators: Hitler rose to power by capitalizing on a wave of resentment caused by an onerous peace treaty and runaway inflation.’ Mr. Soros writes, ‘After the war, Jews resorted to terrorism against the British in Palestine in order to secure a homeland in Israel. Subsequently, after being attacked by Arab nations, Israel occupied additional territory and expelled many of the inhabitants. Eventually, the Arab victims also turned perpetrators, and Israel started suffering terrorist attacks.’ Mr. Soros writes that ‘Perpetrators are now in charge on both sides,’ noting that Prime Minister Sharon ‘has been held responsible for the massacre of Palestinians that took place in the Shatila and Sabra refugee camps in Lebanon in 1982.’ He writes that, ‘Under the Bush administration, the United States has also become a victim-turned-perpetrator, although the American public would be loath to recognize it.’” (Ira Stoll, “Soros Says Israel Was Likely Motive For War,” The New York Sun, 12/4/03)

Soros’ Business Dealings

In December 2002, Soros Was Convicted Of Insider Trading In France And Fined $2.3 Million. “After a 14-year investigation, a French court today convicted the American financier George Soros of insider trading and fined him 2.2 million euros ($2.3 million), the amount prosecutors said he had profited from the trading. Mr. Soros, who was not present in the courtroom, called the verdict unfounded and said he would appeal.” (John Tagliabue, “Soros Is Found Guilty In France On Charges Of Insider Trading,” The New York Times, 12/21/02)

Soros Has Been Accused Of “Destabilizing World Currencies And Wrecking The Economies Of Nations.” “George Soros is one of the most successful investors of all time. Even now, though he manages little or no money besides his own, he can move markets with a ten-minute appearance on cable television. Detractors have accused him of destabilizing world currencies and wrecking the economies of entire nations. He is appealing a French conviction for insider trading.” (Mark Gimein, “George Soros Is Mad As Hell,” Fortune, 10/27/03)

Soros Has Been Known As the “Man Who Broke The Bank Of England.” “George Soros got the first part right. As a detached and mysterious currency speculator, he made billions by moving markets in a manner that made him a whipping boy for besieged bankers and ministers. In one famous week in 1992, he made $1 billion betting against the British pound, earning him the grudging title of the Man Who Broke the Bank of England.” (William Shawcross, “Turning Dollars Into Change,” Time, 9/1/97)

Soros Is “Widely Blamed In Thailand For Triggering The Collapse Of The Economy In 1997.” “Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, meanwhile, reiterated his ban on foreign NGOs travelling to Thailand for the duration of the meeting. The Prime Minister stressed that he had clearly announced that Thailand had the names of all NGOs known to organize protests during international meetings, stating that they would not be welcome in Thailand during the Summit period. The Prime Minister also personally picked out US financier George Soros – widely blamed in Thailand for triggering the collapse of the economy in 1997 – as an alleged backer of NGOs.” (“All Involved Stand Ready To Host APEC Meeting,” Thai Press Reports, 10/14/03)

Soros’ Writings

In His 1998 Book “The Crisis Of Global Capitalism,” Soros Predicted The “Disintegration Of The Global Capitalist System.” (Robert J. Dowling, “Will The Real Soros Please Stand Up,” Business Week, 12/21/98)

Newsweek Columnist Robert Samuelson Writes That Soros “Delivers Drivel” In Atlantic Monthly Essay, Asserting “If Soros Weren’t The Author, This Gibberish Wouldn’t Have Made It Into Print.” “Americans recall how basketball great Michael Jordan did in baseball. He bombed. There’s an insight here. Call it the Jordan principle: genius doesn’t travel well. Applying the Jordan principle to George Soros – the fabulously successful investor who is among the world’s wealthiest men – we find that getting rich doesn’t make you an economic philosopher. In Soros’s case, just the opposite: as a seer, he’s a crackpot. … I know this because I’ve recently read his essay ‘The Capitalist Threat’ in the February Atlantic Monthly. It argues that ‘the spread of market values into all areas of life’ is now the main threat to ‘open and democratic society.’ Powerful stuff. Also rubbish. Soros’s essay is rambling and incoherent. … The truth is that if Soros weren’t the author, this gibberish wouldn’t have made it into print. … Soros might have advanced this ongoing debate with specific ideas over where government is – and isn’t – needed. Instead, he delivers drivel. Yes, this is the same Soros who helped finance California’s pro-marijuana campaign and whose charities reach around the world. Others will judge his politics and philanthropy. But as an economic prophet Soros is no more entitled to be taken seriously than Jordan is to play major-league baseball. Unless he makes sense, we shouldn’t listen.” (Robert J. Samuelson, “Crackpot Prophet,” Newsweek, 3/17/97)

Soros Contributions To Liberal Soft Money Groups

Soros Is Largest Donor To Democrat 527 Groups, Contributing A Total Of $18.5 Million. “By mid-August, Mr. Soros had given more than $15 million to advocacy groups like America Coming Together. At that time, he said in an interview on Monday, he fully expected Mr. Kerry to win the election. But recently, Mr. Soros saw what he called the outrageous and slanderous Swift boat commercials against Mr. Kerry and how they had damaged his standing in the polls. Since then, the Hungarian-born Mr. Soros said, he has become so worried that Mr. Bush will win the election that he increased his giving, to $18.2 million, and has scrapped a trip in October to Russia to work against the president's re-election. … Mr. Soros, whose $7.2 billion fortune makes him the 24th richest person in the United States, has become the biggest donor to the 527 advocacy groups, a category named for the section of the tax code that covers them. He pledged $10 million to America Coming Together for a registration and get-out-the-vote drive, but gave a total of $14.5 million. His other contributions to Democratic 527’s are $2.5 million to MoveOn.org Voter Fund; $325,000 to Young Voter Alliance; $325,000 to 21st Century Democrats; $300,000 to the Real Economy Group; and $250,000 to Democracy for America.” (Katharine Q. Seelye, “Anti-Bush Billionaire Plans To Give More,” The New York Times, 9/29/04)

Soros: “I Have Ulterior Motives, But They Are Clear: I Want A Hearing For My Views.” “‘Why should a rich guy give money without ulterior motives?’ he says. In fact, he adds, ‘I have ulterior motives, but they are clear: I want a hearing for my views. ... I want a referendum on the Bush doctrine’ in foreign affairs.” (Rick Hampson, “George Soros Putting His Fortune Behind A New Cause: Ousting Bush,” USA Today, 6/1/04)

Since 1999, Soros has contributed $205,750 To National Democrat Party Committees, Including $7,750 To DNC, $83,000 To DSCC And $115,000 To DCCC. (Center For Responsive Politics Website, www.opensecrets.org, Accessed 12/10/03)

Soros: “I’ve Come To The Conclusion … That One Can Do A Lot More About The Issues I Care About By Changing The Government Than By Pushing The Issues.” “‘I’ve come to the conclusion,’ Soros told Fortune, ‘that one can do a lot more about the issues I care about by changing the government than by pushing the issues.’ In short, he has become the world’s angriest billionaire.” (Mark Gimein, “George Soros Is Mad As Hell,” Fortune, 10/27/03)

Soros Initially Pledged $15.5 Million In Soft Money To Liberal Activist Groups, Including $10 Million To America Coming Together, $3 Million To The Center For American Progress And $2.5 Million To MoveOn.org. “Soros, who has financed efforts to promote open societies in more than 50 countries around the world, is bringing the fight home, he said. On Monday, he and a partner committed up to $5 million to MoveOn.org, a liberal activist group, bringing to $15.5 million the total of his personal contributions to oust Bush. … Standing on the back deck, the evening sun angling into their eyes, Soros took aside Steve Rosenthal, CEO of the liberal activist group America Coming Together (ACT), and Ellen Malcolm, its president. They were proposing to mobilize voters in 17 battleground states. Soros told them he would give ACT $10 million. … Soros also promised up to $3 million to Podesta’s new think tank, the Center for American Progress.” (Laura Blumenfeld, “Soros’s Deep Pockets Vs. Bush,” The Washington Post, 11/11/03)

Soros Will Reportedly Spend $100 Million To Defeat Bush. “George Soros, the richest of the liberal philanthropists, has publicly declared that his good work on behalf of building ‘open societies’ worldwide is at risk because of George Bush’s assaults on an open society at home. So Soros will spend about $100 million trying to oust Bush.” (Robert Kuttner, “Growing Power Of Small Money,” The Boston Globe, 11/12/03)

Would Spend Entire $7 Billion Fortune To Defeat Bush “If Someone Guaranteed” Outcome. “Asked whether he would trade his $7 billion fortune to unseat Bush, Soros opened his mouth. Then he closed it. The proposal hung in the air: Would he become poor to beat Bush? He said, ‘If someone guaranteed it.’” (Laura Blumenfeld, “Soros’s Deep Pockets Vs. Bush,” The Washington Post, 11/11/03)

Soros Is Largest Contributor In American Political History. (Byron York, “Democrats Throw The Spirit Of Reform Out The Window,” The Hill, 11/5/03)

Soros Said Defeating Bush Is “The Central Focus” Of His Life And 2004 Election Is A Matter Of Life And Death.” “George Soros, one of the world's richest men, has given away nearly $5 billion to promote democracy in the former Soviet bloc, Africa and Asia. Now he has a new project: defeating President Bush. ‘It is the central focus of my life,’ Soros said, his blue eyes settled on an unseen target. The 2004 presidential race, he said in an interview, is ‘a matter of life and death.’ (Laura Blumenfeld, “Soros’s Deep Pockets Vs. Bush,” The Washington Post, 11/11/03)

NM Governor Bill Richardson Stated That The New Soft Money 527s “Have Become The Replacement For The National Democratic Party.” “‘These groups are crucial’ to the anti-Bush effort, says Governor Bill Richardson (D-New Mexico), who has a group of his own called Moving America Forward. ‘Now that campaign finance reform is law,’ he says, ‘organizations like these have become the replacement for the national Democratic Party.’” (Jeffrey H. Birnbaum, “The New Soft Money,” Fortune, 10/27/2003)

SOROS & AMERICA COMING TOGETHER (ACT)

Soros “Pledged $10 Million To America Coming Together For A Registration And Get-Out-The-Vote Drive, But Gave A Total Of $14.5 Million.” “Mr. Soros, whose $7.2 billion fortune makes him the 24th richest person in the United States, has become the biggest donor to the 527 advocacy groups, a category named for the section of the tax code that covers them. He pledged $10 million to America Coming Together for a registration and get-out-the-vote drive, but gave a total of $14.5 million.” (Katharine Q. Seelye, “Anti-Bush Billionaire Plans To Give More,” The New York Times, 9/29/04)

Soros’ Commitment To America Coming Together Makes Him A “Key Player In The Huge ‘Soft Money’ Push That The Democrats … Hope Will Be One Of The Keys To Matching Bush’s Formidable Fundraising Apparatus In The 2004 Election.” (Mark Gimein, “George Soros Is Mad As Hell,” Fortune, 10/27/03)

America Coming Together’s $75 Million Fundraising Goal Is “Unprecedented.” “Labor, environmental and women’s organizations, with strong backing from international financier George Soros, have joined forces behind a new political group that plans to spend an unprecedented $75 million to mobilize voters to defeat President Bush in 2004.” (Thomas B. Edsall, “Liberals Form Fund To Defeat President,” The Washington Post, 8/8/03)

America Coming Together Running “‘Massive Voter Contact’ Program To Defeat Bush.” “Activists recently formed America Coming Together, with a pledge to raise $75 million for a ‘massive voter contact’ program to defeat Bush. George Soros will give $10 million for the effort, but names of other donors may not be disclosed.” (Julia Malone, “Activists Race To Fill ‘Soft Money’ Gap,” The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, 9/21/03)

America Coming Together Will Mount “The Largest Field Operation This Country Has Ever Seen.” “Rosenthal, ACT’s chief executive, calls it ‘the largest field operation this country has ever seen.’ Drawing on the lessons from labor’s political efforts, it aims in large part at expanding the likely base for progressive Democratic candidates.” (David Moberg, “Decisions, Decisions,” In These Times, 9/15/03)

ü America Coming Together Intends To “Hire Hundreds Of Organizers, State Political Directors And Others As The 2004 Election Approaches” And Concentrate Its Activities In 17 “Battleground” States. “Steve Rosenthal, whose mobilization of union members from 1996 through 2002 has been widely praised, will be ACT’s chief executive officer. He said that ACT will hire hundreds of organizers, state political directors and others as the 2004 election approaches. ACT plans to concentrate its activities in 17 states, all of which are likely to be presidential battlegrounds: Iowa, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, New Mexico, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Washington, Wisconsin, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, Ohio and West Virginia.” (Thomas B. Edsall, “Liberals Form Fund To Defeat President,” The Washington Post, 8/8/03)

SOROS & THE CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS

Soros Contributed $3 Million To John Podesta’s New Think Tank, The Center For American Progress. “Soros also promised up to $3 million to Podesta’s new think tank, the Center for American Progress. Soros will continue to recruit wealthy donors for his campaign. Having put a lot of money into the war of ideas around the world, he has learned that ‘money buys talent; you can advocate more effectively.’” (Laura Blumenfeld, “Soros’s Deep Pockets Vs. Bush,” The Washington Post, 11/11/03)

The Center For American Progress Has A 501(c) 3 Think Tank Component And A 501(c) 4 “Rapid Response And Communications Operation That Will Dabble More Heavily In Campaign Politics” – Both Of Which Can Collect Unlimited Contributions With No Disclosure. “The organizational structure is split into two components: a 501(c)3 think tank and a 501(c)4 rapid response and communications operation that will dabble more heavily in campaign politics. Both divisions are referred to by their designation within Internal Revenue Service tax code. Fundraising for the 501(c)3 is already in full swing while the 501(c)4 money-gathering has just begun, according to Laura Nichols, former communications director for Rep. Richard Gephardt (D-Mo.) and now senior vice president of CAP. Both entities can accept unlimited donations and do not have to reveal their donors.” (Chris Cillizza, “Clark To Keynote Forum For Podesta Group,” Roll Call, 9/30/03)

The Center For American Progress “Appear To Be Another Part Of Soros’ [Anti-Bush] Campaign.” ““Fighting back could well be the theme of the Center for American Progress. Supporters of the project seem to sincerely believe that they are up against a pervasive conservative bias in the nation’s media that can only be answered by an aggressive public-relations counter-offensive, which they call ‘pushback.’ And although it bills itself as a traditional think tank – scholarship and all – for now, at least, the Center appears to be all about pushback. … But perhaps the biggest buzz coming from the new Center for American Progress has nothing to do with a party, a conference, or a movie premiere. Recently the Center began sending out a daily e-mail commentary on events known as ‘Progress Report.’ An exhaustive collection of news bits wrapped in stridently anti-Bush rhetoric, the report, which Podesta calls ‘one of our flagship products,’ resembles nothing so much as a collection of the most aggressive, most energetic opposition research in politics. … But by any common-sense standard, Podesta’s group is as partisan as they come. … The Center’s funding also suggests its deeply political orientation. One of the organization’s top donors is the financier George Soros, who this year has devoted his enormous financial resources to defeating George W. Bush in 2004. So far, Soros has contributed $10 million to the new anti-Bush group America Coming Together, which will coordinate voter turnout efforts in key states. [Ed.: See Mr. York’s article “By George” in our last issue.] The Center appears to be another part of Soros’s campaign. … Don’t say that too loudly at a Center for American Progress event. Yes, organizers say they are searching for new ideas. They’re just not searching too hard. ‘We respect the need for debate,’ Podesta said at the Center’s coming-out party. ‘But our goal is to win.’” (Byron York, “The War Room, Cont.: This Time, The Democrats Are Calling It A ‘Think Tank,’” National Review, 11/24/03)

Podesta Called The Center For American Progress A “Think Tank On Steroids.” “[Podesta] is also the leader and architect of a new liberal think tank in Washington known as the Center for American Progress. … Podesta laid out his plan for what he likes to call a ‘think tank on steroids.’ Emulating those conservative institutions, he said, a message-oriented war room will send out a daily briefing to refute the positions and arguments of the right. An aggressive media department will book liberal thinkers on cable TV. There will be an ‘edgy’ Web site and a policy shop to formulate strong positions on foreign and domestic issues. In addition, Podesta explained how he would recruit hundreds of fellows and scholars – some in residence and others spread around the country – to research and promote new progressive policy ideas. … American Progress is slated to operate with a $10 million budget next year, raised from big donors like the financier George Soros.” (Matt Bai, “Notion Building,” The New York Times Magazine, 10/12/03)

SOROS & MOVEON.ORG

Soros And A Partner Contributed $5 Million To MoveOn.org’s $15 Million Anti-Bush Ad Campaign. “MoveOn is now poised to be one of the Democrats’ most effective fundraising vehicles during this year’s presidential campaign. It has already raised millions to support candidates and fund ads such as the one criticizing Bush’s $87 billion commitment to rebuilding Iraq. In November, billionaire philanthropist George Soros and his business partner, Peter Lewis, pledged a $5 million matching grant – a dollar for every two raised by MoveOn members – to create a $15 million advertising campaign to defeat President Bush.” (Beth Fouhy, “MoveOn.org Becomes Anti-Bush Online Powerhouse,” The Associated Press, 1/10/04)

SOROS & DEMOCRAT PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES

Soros And Kerry Are Neighbors In Sun Valley, Idaho, Have Had Dinner With Each Others’ Families And Once Spent “A Whole Afternoon Over Christmas In 2001 Talking About Foreign Policy.” “[Soros] said that in this election year he had had minimal contact with Mr. Kerry, largely because campaign finance laws bar coordination between candidates and 527's, and he is such a large donor to the 527's that such contact would be not be correct. The two men are neighbors in Sun Valley, Idaho. ‘We used to have dinners as a foursome,’ Mr. Soros said, ‘and I got to know him quite well. We spent a whole afternoon over Christmas in 2001 talking about foreign policy.’” (Katharine Q. Seelye, “Anti-Bush Billionaire Plans To Give More,” The New York Times, 9/29/04)

Kerry And Soros Spoke By Phone While Both Were Vacationing In Sun Valley, Idaho. “It’s unclear whether a man who helped free millions from communism would be a political liability to John Kerry. But, though Soros and Kerry were both vacationing in Sun Valley, Idaho, in March, they spoke only on the phone. They did not meet, Soros says, ‘because of how it would be interpreted.’” (Rick Hampson, “George Soros Putting His Fortune Behind A New Cause: Ousting Bush,” USA Today, 6/1/04)

In January, Soros Said He Was “Keen On Dean,” But Also Considered Kerry And Clark Well Qualified To Be President. “‘There is no doubt about Howard Dean’s abilities and qualities for being president,’ Mr. Soros said after giving a speech at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace sharply critical of the administration’s foreign policy. ‘Other candidates are also qualified. I’m also a great advocate of Clark and Kerry.’ All three, he said, had views very similar to his own. ‘I’m not picking one particular candidate,’ he added, ‘but I am keen on Dean.’” (Michael Janofsky, “A Wealthy Foe Of Bush Supports Three Democrats,” The New York Times, 1/13/04)

In September, Soros Hosted A $1,000-A-Person Fundraiser For Dean At His Westchester County Home. (Marc Humbert, “Dean Takes Presidential Campaign To Banks Of Hudson River,” The Associated Press, 9/20/03)

This Cycle, Soros Has Contributed To The Presidential Campaigns Of Dean, Graham And Kerry. (Center For Responsive Politics Website, www.opensecrets.org, Accessed 10/20/03)

Soros Contributions To Campaign

Finance Reform Advocacy Groups

Democracy 21’s Fred Wertheimer Said Soros Helped Start “A Soft-Money Arms Race.” “[Soros] also has alienated his former partners in campaign-finance reform. ‘George Soros started out as part of the solution, and he’s ended up as part of the problem,’ says Fred Wertheimer of Democracy 21, an advocacy group for campaign reform to which Soros once contributed. He says that whatever Soros’ intentions, he has helped start ‘a soft-money arms race.’” (Rick Hampson, “George Soros Putting His Fortune Behind A New Cause: Ousting Bush,” USA Today, 6/1/04)

Soros Has Reportedly Contributed A Total Of $18 Million To Campaign Finance Reform Advocacy Groups Over The Last Seven Years. “Soros has backed altering campaign finance, an aide said, donating close to $18 million over the past seven years.” (Laura Blumenfeld, “Soros’s Deep Pockets Vs. Bush,” The Washington Post, 11/11/03)

Soros Has Reportedly Contributed The Following Amounts To These Reform Groups:

ü Common Cause: $625,000 (Byron York, “Democrats Throw The Spirit Of Reform Out The Window,” The Hill, 11/5/03)

ü Brennan Center For Justice: $2.5 Million (Byron York, “Democrats Throw The Spirit Of Reform Out The Window,” The Hill, 11/5/03)

ü Public Campaign: $4.1 Million (Open Society Institute Website, www.soros.org, Accessed 11/18/03; Michelle Cottle, “Where Are The Good Guys When We Need Them?” Washington Monthly, 9/97)

ü Democracy 21: $310,000 (Open Society Institute Website, www.soros.org, Accessed 4/6/04)

ü Alliance For Better Campaigns: $650,000 (Byron York, “Democrats Throw The Spirit Of Reform Out The Window,” The Hill, 11/5/03)

ü Center For Public Integrity: $1.7 Million (Byron York, “Democrats Throw The Spirit Of Reform Out The Window,” The Hill, 11/5/03)

ü Center For Responsive Politics: $75,000 (Byron York, “Democrats Throw The Spirit Of Reform Out The Window,” The Hill, 11/5/03)

SOROS CONTRIBUTED TO SEVERAL CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM GROUPS

Soros’ Open Society Institute Has Reportedly Contributed To Reform Groups Such As Common Cause, Public Campaign, Democracy 21, Alliance For Better Campaigns And Several Others. “One might assume that advocates of reform would not want to take part in the world of 527 soft money. But look at Soros. The website of his foundation, the Open Society Institute, lists lots of grants to reform groups in the last few years. There is $625,000 to Common Cause, $2.5 million to the Brennan Center for Justice, $1.2 million to Public Campaign, $125,000 to Democracy 21, $1.7 million to the Center for Public Integrity, $75,000 to the Center for Responsive Politics and $650,000 to the Alliance for Better Campaigns. Their common goal, in the words of Public Campaign’s mission statement, is ‘to dramatically reduce the role of big special interest money in American politics.’ But now, liberal advocacy and 527 groups like America Coming Together are accepting huge checks from Soros. And he has a very special interest: to get Bush.” (Byron York, “Democrats Throw The Spirit Of Reform Out The Window,” The Hill, 11/5/03)

SOROS & DEMOCRACY 21

Democracy 21’s Fred Wertheimer: “We’re Determined To See The New Law Work Properly And Are Determined To Fight Any Efforts To Blatantly Circumvent The Law And Inject Soft Money Into Federal Campaigns.” “[C]ampaign finance groups pledged to fight alongside Republicans to make sure that 527 groups do not have a major influence on federal elections. ‘We’re determined to see the new law work properly and are determined to fight any efforts to blatantly circumvent the law and inject soft money into federal campaigns,’ said Fred Wertheimer, president of Democracy 21. ‘We’re going to fight this every step of the way throughout the year.’” (Alexander Bolton, “Senate To Enter 527 Battle,” The Hill, 2/18/04)

Wertheimer Criticized Soros For His Huge Contributions. “‘If this new organization coordinates its activities with the Democratic party or Democratic presidential candidates, they will be violating the new law,’ said Fred Wertheimer, president of Democracy 21, another group that has in the past received Soros money. ‘And if George Soros is contributing $10-million to an organization for the purpose of defeating George Bush, he will be violating the spirit of the law,’ said Mr. Wertheimer. Democracy 21 has filed complaints against ‘shadow’ Democratic and Republic party groups, and Mr. Wertheimer said he will not hesitate to take on Mr. Soros if necessary. ‘We know that some people are going to try to cheat and evade the law, some will try to do what was done before in new ways, and others will try legitimately to adapt to the new playing field,’ he said. ‘It’s something that has to be watched carefully. As much effort is going to have to be put in to enforcing the law as there was put into passing it.’” (Luiza Chwialkowska, “Soros Chastised By Liberal Advocates Of Campaign Finance Reform,” The New York Sun, 8/13/03)

Wertheimer Said He Was “Sorry That Mr. Soros Has Decided To Put So Much Money Into A Political Effort … We Will Be Watchdogging Him Closely.” “Fred Wertheimer, president of Democracy 21, which promotes changes in campaign finance, has benefited from Soros’s grants over the years. Soros has backed altering campaign finance, an aide said, donating close to $18 million over the past seven years. ‘There’s some irony, given the supporting role he played in helping to end the soft money system,’ Wertheimer said. ‘I’m sorry that Mr. Soros has decided to put so much money into a political effort to defeat a candidate. We will be watchdogging him closely.’” (Laura Blumenfeld, “Soros’s Deep Pockets Vs. Bush,” The Washington Post, 11/11/03)

Wertheimer Expressed Regret That Soros Was Making “Such A Huge Contribution For A Specific Effort To Defeat Mr. Bush.” “The Soros donation to ACT has disappointed Fred Wertheimer, president of Democracy 21, one of the top backers of the campaign finance law. ‘I’m sorry that Mr. Soros chose to make such a huge contribution for a specific effort to defeat Mr. Bush, given the very valuable role he played in supporting efforts to enact the soft-money ban,’ Wertheimer said. He added that his group would be carefully monitoring ACT to ensure that the group complies with laws forbidding coordination with the Democratic Party or a presidential candidate.” (Julia Malone, “Billionaires Open Wallets To Defeat Bush,” The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, 11/16/03)

Wertheimer: “We Are Concerned About George Soros’ Large Contributions To Affect The 2004 Campaign, As We Are Also Concerned About President Bush’s Decision To Swamp The Country With $200 Million In Spending For His Uncontested Presidential Primary Race …” (Will Lester, “Gillespie Challenges Foes In AP Interview,” The Associated Press, 11/17/03)

SOROS FUNDING DEMOCRACY 21

According To The Open Society Institute’s Website, Soros’ Foundation Contributed $310,000 To Democracy 21 Since 1999. (Open Society Institute Website, www.soros.org, Accessed 4/6/04)

Wertheimer Said Soros’ Foundation Gave About $250,000 To His Group. “Fred Wertheimer of Democracy 21 said Soros’ foundation has given about $250,000 to his group, but he was quick to point out that he has called for investigations of Democrats such as former President Clinton and the DNC as well as Republicans.” (Will Lester, “Gillespie Challenges Foes In AP Interview,” The Associated Press, 11/17/03)
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/SOROS,%20GEORGE%20BACKGROUNDER1.htm

These are some of the musing and rants of one of the most demented men on earth.

Yet, leftists still treat this idiot as an icon and follow his every word as though it's Holy Writ.

Perhaps the psychiatrist Rossister is right. Leftism is a mental disease.

posted March 08, 2012 05:43 PM            

gotcha. sickness is everywhere. thanks for the info - i will go through it at leisure, HOWEVER i doubt we have anything more to talk about after your performance on the teabagging issue. not because i care whether or NOT anderson cooper is a closet queen; not because i care who thought up the "teabagger" nick for those folk or what the "origin" is (since it was not used that way by anyone i have heard/read); but because your blatant distaste for something you know obviously very little about disqualifies you from anything that can reasonably be called a conversation. i can find conservatives to TALK to elsewhere.

you think leftism is a disease? perhaps it is. i am not a leftist so your opinion of leftists don't botha me suh.

nor your repeated assertion that you don't like the feds interfering in our lives, but you think the war on drugs is somehow not just that, and on the taxpayer's dime. the feds shouldn't worry about safe abortions but they should worry about how much sex single women are having...and on it goes.

posted March 09, 2012 11:30 AM            

Sure, I dinged your little leftist icon idiot Soros but let's not get George Soros confused with Republicans who spend money on election campaigns.

I don't know of any Republican RICH who are attempting to turn the sovereignty of the United States over to a foreign power or group of foreign powers...like say...the United Nations.

I don't know any Republicans who are working directly against the best interests of the United States or the people of the United States.

George Soros IS doing that and admits he IS doing that.

George Soros and his money are directly behind every communist and Socialist group attempting to overthrow the US.

In some cases, it's out in the open. In other cases, where the associates are so radical, so militant, so vocal in their hate for America, Soros funds them through the leftist money laundering operation called the "Tides Foundation" where money can be fed in by extremists like Soros and the funding hidden because the checks go out to the extremist America haters under the name of the "Tides Foundation" and not under the name of Soros...or any other of the America hating leftists.

Now katatonic, if this guy...George Soros doesn't make you want to throw up, then there's probably no one who ever lived who would.

One last thing katatonic...and others.

The list of what George Soros has said and done is fully documented and the sources used were given full attribution.

posted March 09, 2012 02:48 PM            

The Jewish Council asked the little kids to hand out the deportation notices. I was told to go to the Jewish Council. And there I was given these small slips of paper ... It said report to the rabbi seminary at 9 am ... And I was given this list of names. I took this piece of paper to my father. He instantly recognized it. This was a list of Hungarian Jewish lawyers. He said, "You deliver the slips of paper and tell the people that if they report they will be deported."[17]

in other words he was handing out warnings to jews...heinous.

never having lived in a regime like the third reich, jwhop, perhaps you don't know how hard it was to openly rebel against it?

posted March 09, 2012 03:03 PM            

So you want to rename George Soros, Saint Soros.

No soap!

posted March 09, 2012 03:59 PM            

he was neither saint nor devil. there is a handsome retraction from the canadian paper that first pointed this finger at him, shall i fetch it for you? but of course ann coulter ran as far as she could with it.

a lot of people did things they weren't particularly proud of during nazi times. i spent three weeks on guernsey, which is about half and half descendants and remnants of collaborators and resistors...do i approve of such things? no, but like i said, what he did sounds somewhat like double-agenting, saving those who listened to him from what was planned for them.

there is another story of how he accompanied his "godfather" a non jew official, to inventory possessions left behind by a rich jew in exchange for his freedom to leave. though he went along, he did not assist in the job; though i reckon most rich people would be happy to leave some possessions behind as they hightailed it...

there's a certain baron von thyssen who was part of the nazi party at first, but reached the position of not being able to go along with it anymore. this man was not jewish, and had a lot to lose, but he emigrated rather than continue. is he to be called a collaborator, too, because at first he didn't realize what was going on or coming up?

i just sat on a jury jwhop. hearsay is not evidence, and that is all anyone has brought against soros on this count. i haven't read his book but i haven't either seen anyone QUOTE him as saying he pointed out jews' houses...as if the nazis didn't know where they were...only that he accompanied someone who was disposing of possessions being left behind.

posted March 09, 2012 06:30 PM            

No guilt, no emotion, no sympathy, no nothing...oh, and if George Soros hadn't helped the Nazis...he says someone else would have. Nice, very nice!

A Christian man helps Soros avoid being rounded up and sent to the Nazi death camps...by claiming Soros was his adopted son.

To imagine leftists idolize this Nazi collaborator is one of the most disgusting things I can think of.

In any comparison of moral and spiritual superiority..this Christian man...who put his own life in danger by lying to the Nazis wins hands down over George Soros.

Transcript from 60 Minutes...December 20, 1998 between Steve Kroft and George Soros.

This is the relevant portion of the transcript (from the 20 December 1998 broadcast of 60 Minutes):

Quote:
KROFT: (Voiceover) To understand the complexities and contradictions in his personality, you have to go back to the very beginning: to Budapest, where George Soros was born 68 years ago to parents who were wealthy, well-educated and Jewish.

When the Nazis occupied Budapest in 1944, George Soros' father was a successful lawyer. He lived on an island in the Danube and liked to commute to work in a rowboat. But knowing there were problems ahead for the Jews, he decided to split his family up. He bought them forged papers and he bribed a government official to take 14-year-old George Soros in and swear that he was his Christian godson. But survival carried a heavy price tag. While hundreds of thousands of Hungarian Jews were being shipped off to the death camps, George Soros accompanied his phony godfather on his appointed rounds, confiscating property from the Jews.

(Vintage footage of Jews walking in line; man dragging little boy in line)

KROFT: (Voiceover) These are pictures from 1944 of what happened to George Soros' friends and neighbors.

(Vintage footage of women and men with bags over their shoulders walking; crowd by a train)

KROFT: (Voiceover) You're a Hungarian Jew...

Mr. SOROS: (Voiceover) Mm-hmm.

KROFT: (Voiceover) ...who escaped the Holocaust...

(Vintage footage of women walking by train)

Mr. SOROS: (Voiceover) Mm-hmm.

(Vintage footage of people getting on train)

KROFT: (Voiceover) ... by -- by posing as a Christian.

Mr. SOROS: (Voiceover) Right.

(Vintage footage of women helping each other get on train; train door closing with people in boxcar)

KROFT: (Voiceover) And you watched lots of people get shipped off to the death camps.

Mr. SOROS: Right. I was 14 years old. And I would say that that's when my character was made.

KROFT: In what way?

Mr. SOROS: That one should think ahead. One should understand and -- and anticipate events and when -- when one is threatened. It was a tremendous threat of evil. I mean, it was a -- 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.

Mr. SOROS: Yes. Yes.

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

Mr. 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?

Mr. SOROS: Not -- not at all. 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?

Mr. SOROS: No.

KROFT: For example that, 'I'm Jewish and here I am, watching these people go. I could just as easily be there. I should be there.' None of that?

Mr. SOROS: Well, of course I c -- I could be on the other side or I could be the one from whom the thing is being taken away. But there was no sense that I shouldn't be there, because that was -- well, actually, in a funny way, it's just like in markets -- that if I weren't there -- of course, I wasn't doing it, but somebody else would -- would -- would be taking it away anyhow. And it was the -- whether I was there or not, I was only a spectator, the property was being taken away. So the -- I had no role in taking away that property. So I had no sense of guilt.

posted March 10, 2012 02:27 PM            

this "christian man" was the one doing the inventorying and disposing. soros was along for the ride, and cover, not actually partaking of the evil deed. yes, his "godfather" was taking a risk, but his position made it much less desperate a risk than soros' just for being jewish in hungary at that time.

again you show no sense of the position many people were in during that time. like romney, born a multimillionaire, you assume you know what it is like to be down and out. but you have no intention of ever finding out, even for a day, what that might be like.

without defending soros i can say with complete conviction that many many people felt they had no choice but to collaborate. soros father put him in that position.

posted March 10, 2012 02:31 PM            

Sun Media, this newspaper and Ezra Levant retract the statements made in the column and unreservedly apologize to Mr. Soros for the distress and harm this column may have caused to him.
http://mediamatters.org/research/201009200038

even this paper, in its original assertion, pointed out that soros collaborated, like thousands of others, to save his own skin (and on the instructions of his father).

posted March 11, 2012 02:38 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by amelia28:
Read this article: http://polipundit.com/?p=26104

What then is Obama’s dream? We don’t have to speculate because the President tells us himself in his autobiography, Dreams from My Father. According to Obama, his dream is his father’s dream. Notice that his title is notDreams of My Father but rather Dreams from My Father. Obama isn’t writing about his father’s dreams; he is writing about the dreams he received from his father.

So who was Barack Obama Sr.? He was a Luo tribesman who grew up in Kenya and studied at Harvard. He was a polygamist who had, over the course of his lifetime, four wives and eight children. One of his sons, Mark Obama, has accused him of abuse and wife-beating. He was also a regular drunk driver who got into numerous accidents, killing a man in one and causing his own legs to be amputated due to injury in another. In 1982 he got drunk at a bar in Nairobi and drove into a tree, killing himself.

An odd choice, certainly, as an inspirational hero. But to his son, the elder Obama represented a great and noble cause, the cause of anticolonialism. Obama Sr. grew up during Africa’s struggle to be free of European rule, and he was one of the early generation of Africans chosen to study in America and then to shape his country’s future.

I know a great deal about anticolonialism, because I am a native of Mumbai, India. I am part of the first Indian generation to be born after my country’s independence from the British. Anticolonialism was the rallying cry of Third World politics for much of the second half of the 20th century. To most Americans, however, anticolonialism is an unfamiliar idea, so let me explain it.

Anticolonialism is the doctrine that rich countries of the West got rich by invading, occupying and looting poor countries of Asia, Africa and South America. As one of Obama’s acknowledged intellectual influences, Frantz Fanon, wrote in The Wretched of the Earth, “The well-being and progress of Europe have been built up with the sweat and the dead bodies of Negroes, Arabs, Indians and the yellow races.”

…

It may seem incredible to suggest that the anticolonial ideology of Barack Obama Sr. is espoused by his son, the President of the United States. That is what I am saying. From a very young age and through his formative years, Obama learned to see America as a force for global domination and destruction. He came to view America’s military as an instrument of neocolonial occupation. He adopted his father’s position that capitalism and free markets are code words for economic plunder. Obama grew to perceive the rich as an oppressive class, a kind of neocolonial power within America. In his worldview, profits are a measure of how effectively you have ripped off the rest of society, and America’s power in the world is a measure of how selfishly it consumes the globe’s resources and how ruthlessly it bullies and dominates the rest of the planet.

For Obama, the solutions are simple. He must work to wring the neocolonialism out of America and the West. And here is where our anticolonial understanding of Obama really takes off, because it provides a vital key to explaining not only his major policy actions but also the little details that no other theory can adequately account for.

Why support oil drilling off the coast of Brazil but not in America? Obama believes that the West uses a disproportionate share of the world’s energy resources, so he wants neocolonial America to have less and the former colonized countries to have more. More broadly, his proposal for carbon taxes has little to do with whether the planet is getting warmer or colder; it is simply a way to penalize, and therefore reduce, America’s carbon consumption. Both as a U.S. Senator and in his speech, as President, to the United Nations, Obama has proposed that the West massively subsidize energy production in the developing world.

Rejecting the socialist formula, Obama has shown no intention to nationalize the investment banks or the health sector. Rather, he seeks to decolonize these institutions, and this means bringing them under the government’s leash. That’s why Obama retains the right to refuse bailout paybacks–so that he can maintain his control. For Obama, health insurance companies on their own are oppressive racketeers, but once they submitted to federal oversight he was happy to do business with them. He even promised them expanded business as a result of his law forcing every American to buy health insurance.

If Obama shares his father’s anticolonial crusade, that would explain why he wants people who are already paying close to 50% of their income in overall taxes to pay even more. The anticolonialist believes that since the rich have prospered at the expense of others, their wealth doesn’t really belong to them; therefore whatever can be extracted from them is automatically just. Recall what Obama Sr. said in his 1965 paper: There is no tax rate too high, and even a 100% rate is justified under certain circumstances.

Obama supports the Ground Zero mosque because to him 9/11 is the event that unleashed the American bogey and pushed us into Iraq and Afghanistan. He views some of the Muslims who are fighting against America abroad as resisters of U.S. imperialism. Certainly that is the way the Lockerbie bomber Abdel Baset al-Megrahi portrayed himself at his trial. Obama’s perception of him as an anticolonial resister would explain why he gave tacit approval for this murderer of hundreds of Americans to be released from captivity.

Finally, nasa. No explanation other than anticolonialism makes sense of Obama’s curious mandate to convert a space agency into a Muslim and international outreach. We can see how well our theory works by recalling the moon landing of Apollo 11 in 1969. “One small step for man,” Neil Armstrong said. “One giant leap for mankind.”

But that’s not how the rest of the world saw it. I was 8 years old at the time and living in my native India. I remember my grandfather telling me about the great race between America and Russia to put a man on the moon. Clearly America had won, and this was one giant leap not for mankind but for the U.S. If Obama shares this view, it’s no wonder he wants to blunt nasa’s space program, to divert it from a symbol of American greatness into a more modest public relations program.

Clearly the anticolonial ideology of Barack Obama Sr. goes a long way to explain the actions and policies of his son in the Oval Office. And we can be doubly sure about his father’s influence because those who know Obama well testify to it. His “granny” Sarah Obama (not his real grandmother but one of his grandfather’s other wives) told Newsweek, “I look at him and I see all the same things–he has taken everything from his father. The son is realizing everything the father wanted. The dreams of the father are still alive in the son.”

In his own writings Obama stresses the centrality of his father not only to his beliefs and values but to his very identity. He calls his memoir “the record of a personal, interior journey–a boy’s search for his father and through that search a workable meaning for his life as a black American.” And again, “It was into my father’s image, the black man, son of Africa, that I’d packed all the attributes I sought in myself.” Even though his father was absent for virtually all his life, Obama writes, “My father’s voice had nevertheless remained untainted, inspiring, rebuking, granting or withholding approval. You do not work hard enough, Barry. You must help in your people’s struggle. Wake up, black man!”

The climax of Obama’s narrative is when he goes to Kenya and weeps at his father’s grave. It is riveting: “When my tears were finally spent,” he writes, “I felt a calmness wash over me. I felt the circle finally close. I realized that who I was, what I cared about, was no longer just a matter of intellect or obligation, no longer a construct of words. I saw that my life in America–the black life, the white life, the sense of abandonment I’d felt as a boy, the frustration and hope I’d witnessed in Chicago–all of it was connected with this small piece of earth an ocean away, connected by more than the accident of a name or the color of my skin. The pain that I felt was my father’s pain.”

In an eerie conclusion, Obama writes that “I sat at my father’s grave and spoke to him through Africa’s red soil.” In a sense, through the earth itself, he communes with his father and receives his father’s spirit. Obama takes on his father’s struggle, not by recovering his body but by embracing his cause. He decides that where Obama Sr. failed, he will succeed. Obama Sr.’s hatred of the colonial system becomes Obama Jr.’s hatred; his botched attempt to set the world right defines his son’s objective. Through a kind of sacramental rite at the family tomb, the father’s struggle becomes the son’s birthright.

Colonialism today is a dead issue. No one cares about it except the man in the White House. He is the last anticolonial. Emerging market economies such as China, India, Chile and Indonesia have solved the problem of backwardness; they are exploiting their labor advantage and growing much faster than the U.S. If America is going to remain on top, we have to compete in an increasingly tough environment.

But instead of readying us for the challenge, our President is trapped in his father’s time machine. Incredibly, the U.S. is being ruled according to the dreams of a Luo tribesman of the 1950s. This philandering, inebriated African socialist, who raged against the world for denying him the realization of his anticolonial ambitions, is now setting the nation’s agenda through the reincarnation of his dreams in his son. The son makes it happen, but he candidly admits he is only living out his father’s dream. The invisible father provides the inspiration, and the son dutifully gets the job done. America today is governed by a ghost.

Or if you prefer watch this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6QOscKvUjU&feature=youtu.be

---

Keep up the good work Gurl

------------------
Passion, Lust, Desire. Check out my journal