George Soros: International Man of Misery

The term “euphemism” refers to the substitution of a vague or milder term for one that may be considered harsh, offensive or blunt.
Example: George Soros is a “philanthropist”.
If by “philanthropist” we mean one who creates chaos, destruction and financial ruin for his own personal gain, it’s a perfect fit. Calling Soros a philanthropist is rather like referring to the Nazi block wardens as Neighborhood Watch.

Soros certainly gives lots of money away. But a philanthropist acts to improve the human condition. Soros acts solely to improve the Soros condition. Despite the lofty sounding rhetoric about an Open Society, Soros’ objective is to wreck the United States. Actually Soros never really defines his Open Society. The concept arose in the 1930s with the notion of a moral code based on “universal principles”. After tweaking the concept to suit his own purposes, Soros adopted his own version of an Open Society which would be one in which the US has no power.

Soros was born in Hungary in 1930 to non practicing Jewish parents. His father, a lawyer was able to hide their identities and young George was recruited by the Judenrat to hand out flyers deceptively directing Jews to turn themselves in for deportation to the death camps. Soros later said he found the work exhilarating. Later passing himself as an official’s godson, he accompanied his benefactor confiscating valuables from innocent Jews. (David Horowitz and Richard Poe, The Shadow Party. 2006).

Soros would later tell Steve Kroft on 60 Minutes that he had no remorse about what he had done.

In fact, Soros doesn’t have remorse for much, if anything. In The Shadow Party (David Horowitz and Richard Poe, 2006), Soros is quoted as saying that conscience clouds an investor’s judgment.

Soros amassed his fortune by speculating in the currency markets. He got a lot of attention for tanking the British pound in 1992. More than once, Soros has used his status as an investor to manipulate markets. According to Horowitz and Poe, the great patriot Soros likely sold short after 9/11 when the rest of the nation was being urged to take whatever they could afford and buy some shares of their favorite stocks. Lots of patriotic Americans did exactly that.

To further jeopardize our national security, Soros told CNN that the market would react negatively if the US were to invade Afghanistan knowing his words would cause a global market reaction. Soros has stuck his nose in governments all over the world claiming a philanthropic motive. Yet like day into night, once he’s done, the local economy is in a shambles and Soros is richer.

The Clinton administration allowed Soros to run wild in the dying Soviet Union. The results were entirely predictable. Working in tandem with Strobe Talbott, “Russian Policy Czar” they set about playing games with government funds. Soros reveled in having so much access to the Clintons and fancied himself part of the “Clinton Team”.

According to journalist Anne Williamson, Soros appeared before the House Banking Committee in September, 1999 attempting to explain to stunned congressmen exactly how so many US taxpayer dollars had evaporated in Russia. The Clintons managed to shut that scandal down quickly thanks to their expertise in scandal control.

Soros was actually convicted of insider trading in France. His opinion moves markets. He is one of the most powerful people in the world entirely due to his ability to get other people to part with their money. His tentacles are everywhere. He uses numerous foundations and associations to keep money flowing and spread around. It’s no secret that George Soros is fond of deceit and subterfuge. He is a radical in the mold of Saul Alinsky. For all of the nonsensical blathering he does about how he can make the world a better place, he has no real plan to do any such thing. Soros loses interest in a project after the demo phase is over. According to Horowitz and Poe, Soros candidly admits he finds destruction easier than creation.

Thus it makes perfect sense that Soros is the de facto head of the Democratic Party in America now that it is a foaming-at-the-mouth rabid left wing Democratic Party. As Horowitz and Poe put it: “Soros and his Shadow Party did not invent the politics of demagoguery and racial division. They are merely practicing and expanding the politics familiar on the Democratic Left.”

In 2004 Soros made it his personal mission to defeat George W Bush. Not only did Bush not share his moral relativism and radical ideology, Soros was outraged about Afghanistan and Iraq. Soros opposed Bush’s War on Terror and provides funding to pro terror groups. Worse still from Soros’ point of view, after enjoying easy access to the Clintons, Bush was not equally impressed and failed to seek out his wise counsel on foreign policy.

John Kerry’s loss in 2004 was gasoline on the fire. “This is the Sorosization of the Democratic Party”, say Rachel Ehrenfelt and Shawn MacComber ( October 28, 2004). “As we will see, this idea of “scruples” being for the other guy has been central to Soros’ philosophy in business, philanthropy, and foreign policy”.

Although Soros had a mutually beneficial relationship with the Clintons, he knew enough to hedge his bets in 2008 and back more than one candidate. The type of revolution Soros wants requires a charismatic figure that can create a mass movement. Soros himself actually dislikes publicity. Good oratory skills and personal charisma are what he needs. Soros himself prefers to stay below the radar and work his subterfuge behind the scenes. After all, “Soros’ main concern is that somebody be elected who is indebted enough to him to pick up the phone when he calls” (Ehrenfeld and MacComber).

Just the other day, I attended a speech by Peggy Noonan. The topic was presidents. She told funny stories and shared her insights into Presidents Bush, Reagan, Clinton and Obama. Noonan talked about Clinton’s personal charisma, “it was impossible not to look at him”. And his speeches were well delivered but remarkably lacking in substance. Is anyone seeing a pattern here? Noonan sees Obama as more like Clinton than anyone else, not only in his policies, but his presentation.

Is it possible then that Bill Clinton was supposed to fulfill the role of George Soros’ cult leading Messiah but simply failed at it?

Soros can’t wreak his havoc alone. He needs his cult leader.

It’s important to understand that George Soros doesn’t want to “change” America. He wants to destroy it. America in its current state is anathema to Soros. The current Oval Office Occupant is not particularly fond of America either. His association with America hating radicals should be enough for most people but let’s not overlook the fact that his very first sit down interview after becoming president was to al Arabyia News Channel. Obama took the opportunity to share his views with the Muslim world that America has behaved very badly and we can be expected to change our ways so our relationship with Muslims will be like it was “twenty or thirty years ago”. This is a bit perplexing unless Obama either knows less about history than we thought or he longs for the days when Islamofascists led by Khomeini were holding 52 American hostages. I daresay the Muslim world was cheered to learn that our new president plans to take us back to the happy halcyon days of the Carter Administration. Soros is actually working toward a plan to completely overhaul the US Constitution.

When Soros gets hold of power in any government, he makes money. It is difficult to find examples of Soros invasions that leave the target country better off. But that is not Soros’ concern. Obama’s monstrous “Stimulus Bill” (euphemisms again) fits neatly into Soros’ paradigm. You can read Soros’ economy recovery plan on the Huffington Post (February 12, 2009).

For all the posturing Soros does about creating his Marxist Utopia there is no actual plan to create a new social order, an open one or otherwise. Soros, for all of his rambling hasn’t thought it through that far and he is not going to. His interest begins and ends with his potential to exploit whomever he can to grab money and power. He actually makes garden variety dopey liberals rather endearing by comparison. At least some of them believe in their unrealistic vision of socialism.

Keeping in mind that Soros will always act in ways that provide maximum benefit to Soros what are his plans for Obama? It’s clear he found the cult leader he needed. Obama is performing correctly with his daily catastrophizing and power grabbing. But what would benefit Soros more: a successful Obama presidency or a failed one? Success would give Soros four to eight years to work in the Shadows to destroy America and grab what spoils he can. But a failed presidency could offer even more. Obama and his Ministry of Propaganda have managed to create fear and panic in the population. His policies, if implemented cannot but lead to economic trouble and eventual shortages and rationing. Nobody knows more about how to destroy a currency than Soros. We have assumed that the peculiar short selling patterns and over hyped economic “collapse” were staged to get Obama elected. If an inept, inexperienced and radical president has his way, which Obama surely will, the net result is pretty predictable. Is that kind of social and economic chaos designed to open up a power vacuum that a guy like Soros just can’t resist?