Even Xymphora gets it, on collaboration

[hava1]

XYMPHORA
http://xymphora.blogspot.com/2010/12/woodshed.html
WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 08, 2010

The woodshed
The crime of Wikileaks was lèse majesté, an insufficient deference to Power. The cables are instructive. The Americans could care less about the opinions of the leaders of various nonentities like Saudi Arabia or Great Britain. What is important is that American diplomats conduct a periodic check-up - like having your teeth cleaned - in order to ensure that everybody knows who the boss is. Thus, from time to time, world leaders are interviewed by American diplomats who say nothing and just write everything down. The various leaders struggle to say what they think the Americans would want them to say, and if they meet the test, they are allowed to stay in power. Just striving to meet the test teaches a lesson. Perhaps the biggest surprise from the cables is how hard everybody strives to meet the American test of fealty.

We're in the middle of a long social experiment to see what we will put up with. The plutocrats keep asking for more, and we just give it to them. There is absolutely no push-back whatsoever. In fact, all we do is ask for more punishment and deprivation. The results of this experiment have been so startling to the plutocrats that they have until recently not asked for everything, in fear that perhaps they would awaken a sleeping giant of rebellion. Nope. No giant. Just sleeping. The continuing non-reaction to the massive financial theft in Europe and the United States, where the thieves were not only not punished, but massively rewarded, was the final test. The only reason why we are not all slaves building pyramids to the glory of the plutocrats is that they, in their infinite generosity of spirit, haven't asked us yet. They will, and we'll start hauling rocks.

Did you note the petulance in Obama's press conference on giving in completely to Republican demands that he extend the tax cuts for the very richest (at a massive cost that will have to be borrowed from China, and which will raise the deficit and have to be paid off by old people living on cat food when the American right suddenly starts worrying about the deficit)? You know what he was saying? How dare you expect any backbone from me when you have no backbone yourselves!

On the other hand, note the class consciousness of the other side. Big corporations like Amazon, Visa, MasterCard, and PayPal enforced the will of the plutocracy without the slightest compunction ("It is fascinating to see the tentacles of the corrupt American elite."). This is also intended to be instructive. There is no chance in fighting them as they will stick together, even in cases where it appears that their class cohesiveness will cost them money. Were we smart enough, we might learn something from them.

And what of various institutions, some of which are supposed to be protecting us? The Swedish government and judicial system, Interpol, the British judicial system, all instantly gave up even the slightest pretense of attempting to follow their own rules, when those rules are all they are really about. Power wins out over everything. There is no hope. Give up even the slightest struggle and save yourselves from being destroyed (although you will have to be slaves).

Many people noted the hypocrisy of the announcement of the American hosting of World Press Freedom Day (the Washington Post, busy not doing the job that Wikileaks has had to do, helpfully explains the meaning of the word 'irony'). And what of the freedom of the internet itself, something of great interest to Hillary when she could use it as a weapon against China? Wikileaks attempted to use the logic of the freedom of the internet to turn the secret-keepers into knots and thus destroy their conspiracy. The powerful simply changed the rules to deal with Wikileaks. They want us to know that they can change the rules. They can always change the rules. Eventually, the internet will be completely reserved for plutocrats to exploit us to make money. We're demonstrated that we are not responsible enough to have freedom of speech. We've also demonstrated that we won't object when they take our freedoms.

The treatment of Julian Assange and Wikileaks is intended to be over-the-top, hypocritical, offensive, and outrageous ("wholly comparable to the kind of treatment doled out to dissidents in China or Burma"). He's supposed to end up executed in an American military prison. Wikileaks put a real scare into them, which explains the overreaction. They want us to be reminded of punishments in the Dark Ages. It is a lesson to anybody who might present any real challenge to power.
AT 12/

The blog that whips everyone for "collaborating" with ZOG, finally gets it. Everyone collaborates, some do it openly and others are hypocrites who feign courage or independence, but when push come shove..and long before any bullet was fired, they sell their law, indepedence and in the case of australia, their citizenship to the USA.

No surprise netanyahu came out looking good, he never thought its possible to do anything differently, but to serve the masters and with strict devotion. at last he feels validated, indeed there was no other choice...selling out is now a formal doctrine and he was the first to show the way !

[AlicetheKurious]

Netanyahu: America is Easy to Push Around

March 22, 2010: U.S. holds firm against Israel settlement policy

November 1, 2010: US drops demand for Israeli settlement freeze

"In the night between Thursday and Friday, when the secretary of state wanted to lead the vote on a ceasefire at the Security Council, we did not want her to vote in favor, [Israeli Prime Minister] Olmert said."

"I said 'get me President Bush on the phone'. They said he was in the middle of giving a speech in Philadelphia. I said I didn't care. 'I need to talk to him now'. He got off the podium and spoke to me."

"I told him the United States could not vote in favor. It cannot vote in favor of such a resolution. He immediately called the secretary of state and told her not to vote in favor." ...

"She was left shamed...a resolution that she prepared and arranged, and in the end she did not vote in favor." Link

[JackRiddler]

.

I don't look past and greatly dislike Xymphora's "ZOG" rhetoric, but he's been aggregating literally dozens of reports on important stories coming out through the cables as well as anyone else. So that's been useful so far and prompted me to visit more often than I have in the years since he went almost all "ZOG."

On the subject of "Wikileaks as Zionist plot" he shows he may be a fanatic with regard to "ZOG," but he's not an idiot:

"Wikileaks: Where are the Israel documents?":

"I've heard people voicing suspicions about this. Have the Israel cables been suppressed, they ask.
The answer, apparently, is no. There's little or nothing from Israel in the 250,000 or so documents – and the explanation, I'm told by someone who ought to know, is very simple.
Israel, in the eyes of the US diplomats, is not a normal country like any other and so it's not dealt with in the normal way. Sensitive documents from Israel go through different channels – to the White House rather than the State Department – and are therefore not among the batch leaked to Julian Assange."

.

Actually, if you look at the results so far, with still only a tiny fraction of cables released, Iran is now more powerful than ever and is the big winner of the leaks. Perhaps Assange did a deal with President Ahmedinejad, which Ahmedinejad is trying to hide by claiming it is all a Zionist plot! By the way, isn't it time to permanently throw all the lousy poseur entrepreneurs - Tarpley, Madsen, Alex Jones, etc. - under the bus? Their mercantile stupidity is holding us back.

.

Sunday, December 05, 2010

The conspiracy poseurs

Hey, you can be so, so, so smart, and assume there is no goodness in the world, and absolutely everything is run by the Rothschilds. I can't stop you. By the way, how is that ultra-scepticism working out for you? Is it making the world a better place? Well, at least you can die knowing you were never a chump. Or, you could try to do something positive for a change.

In the following he unwittingly shows the hazards of arguing by filling in the unknowns to please one's own priori conclusion. The relative lack of Israel-related documents in the cables leak so far leads some "ZOG" believers to say Wikileaks is a "ZOG" plot, while this "ZOG" believer takes the exact same lack of evidence to come to an opposite conclusion about Wikileaks while still using it in support of "ZOG" as the master thesis:

It is really not worth continuing to argue against the silly notion that Wikileaks is some kind of Zionist operation - a belief held by those who believe in controlled demolition but not in climate change! - but you should note the evidence of ZOG in the tone and content of the cables. American diplomats can slag Berlusconi, Putin, and even members of the British Royal Family, but even the slightest hint of criticism of the Jews, even in secret cables read only by other diplomats, would be the end of a career. The reason why Israel fares relatively well in the leaks is the bias in the original documents caused by ZOG.

At any rate, this is a lot more believable than "Mind-controlled Assange channels 250,000 cables to prompt nuking of Iran and distract from Israeli control of the universe." Israel is the world hot-button issue thanks to its special relationship with US empire as its prime (in the UN, sole) sponsor, the domestic smear campaigns against its critics by ADL and Co., and the neoconned perception that it is always under a life-or-death siege. It will be treated differently and through more sensitive channels.

.

[hava1]

JackR, I agree with you, surprisingly, on all counts. I also check that blog periodically, and ignoring his obssessions, the blog is informative.

I thought that this WIki event can effect him to mature, realizing that "ZOG" is within...and is a metaphore and almost "religious illusion", and collaboration is human, and take the rest from there...he is definitely not an idiot, that can be deduced from the level of his writing and knowledge. He was always well aware of the nuances within the "anti jewish" forcdes, to diffentiate himself from hard core racists, nazis and the likes.
But, the tone is still way too antisemitic for my sensibilities, and probably since I am Jewish. I wouldnt want to meet his crowdin a dark alley.

I think he was aware of his excess in the way he treated the Soros media affair in canada. He fell into the hands of the ZOG gang, who also didnt want soros meddling with their FOX-like takeover of world media. Anyway, hate is never a good compass, and always serves the devil.


--

[Montag]

What was the Soros media affair in Canada, I didn't hear about that?

p.s. I used the Google, came up with these links.

Canada’s Sun Media Apologizes to George Soros After Lawsuit Threat
http://www.mediaite.com/print/canadas-s ... it-threat/

Moral hollowness at Work
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=8ef_1283676421&c=1

That is a sordid article, I wonder if that was part of Glenn Beck's source material. Too bad he didn't sue him as well.

It says Soros is a strident critic of capitalism, lol. So far as I know in the 90s he was a pure neoliberal who has mellowed somewhat... I'd imagine he's some sort of third wayer right now. Though, he went to the Fabian socialist London School of Economics, I don't think he any longer holds those type of views (I'm not sure how left the LSE is these days).

[hava1]

Montag, check out XYM's blogposts on this affair.

One thing is to criticize Soros, i am no fan as well, another is to play to the hands of Glen beck types by becoming hysterical, just because soros is jewish.

If you could check this board, I posted before that incident about Soros and Jstreet, predicting precisely what happened, namely, that between the leftist idiots (like Xymphora) and the right wing mafia, he will lose his political effort to mount some oppistion/alternative to AIPAC - re Israel-palestine. the thing is, that all mega billionaires are usually pretty disgusting, but one has to make choices who to support in a specific situation. Since soros is Jewish, he falls into the hands of both racists and the right wing Jews. So, if one is a Jewish mega millionnaire he would fare better being totally right wing.

if people hate fox media, they should realize that the only alternative is a soros type media, (not necessarily jewish, but another mega millionaire will own it). Xymphora played the role of the useful idiot, alerting thet soros wants to buy canda media and turn it to fox-news, and immediately thereafter , came the vicious slander against Soros about being a nazi collaborator, from Jewish right wing sources. that's when xymphora realized perhaps it was unnecessary to attack soros prematurely. but then, it was too late to retract..

--
bottom line, for me at least, that this really doesnt matter much, because on the matter of Israel, neither Soros nor aipac give a damn about the interests of the jewish residents of the region who they "represent". Its a game, and they cash the political/financial dividends by pimping the "issue" in the USA and worldwide.

[Montag]

Call me a reflexive leftist Hava, but I've seen the attack on Soros as the right-wing making an example out of him. They don't want left-liberal billionaires to start financing things. The right-wing here finances all various and sundry, and their talking points seem to pierce like bullets through the MSM... Whereas progressive ideas or talking points rarely seem to be treated in the same way. I'm reading what they are doing as sending a message to anyone who might follow Soro's example that this is what they are going to do to them.

[hava1]

Montag, I totally agree with you. but at the same time, those who are supposed to back the "liberal billionnaire" against those right wing bllioniares, will attack him as well, for being Jewish - so is there really a good prospect for Soros to succeed ? that's what I said. Xymphora's first post on Soros' intention to enter Canada media business was something like "oh, the jew fangs are eating our press", "ZOG" and what not...later he realized that- 1 the jews already have the media. 2/ soros is precisely the person who can stop the FOXization of that media. 3. that his post was echoed in a vicious attack by "the sun", calling Soros a nazi collaborator. 12 points to fox ! did he have to write knee jerk post ? no, but perhaps it is true what the right wing bilionniares say "they hate us anyway so why bother"....

Same funny "mirror" effect, now happening in Israel. A left leaning billionniare is on the top10 list of BDS. The liberal leaning foundation that he supports, (NIF), is behind the groups that call to ban his products ). So you could say it proves the left had integity and they dont discriminate in favor of their donors, but really, is that the case ? I dont think so. I've seen it on small scale everywhere. the left now is in a self destructive frenzy, and the aggression is turned inwards.

The left has an innate mechanism, these days, to purge itself to death. And so why bother ? that's just a thought.

[AlicetheKurious]

Soros is no "left-wing" alternative. Maybe you-all don't know or don't care that his organizations, like the National Endowment for Democracy, Freedom House and other lofty-sounding but sinister organizations, specialize in exploiting public discontent in target countries, subverting and mobilizing it through the use of massive funding and professional P.R. companies like Saatchi & Saatchi to serve a global capital and zionist agenda. The so-called "Cedar Revolution" in Lebanon is but one highly instructive example. The so-called "Rose Revolution" that cynically manipulated the Georgian people into replacing one dictatorship with a more Israel-friendly one, is another.

...Late last fall, Saakashvili led thousands of "spontaneous" demonstrators, bused in from around Tbilisi, brandishing flowers as they invaded the president's palace. This was during the freezing Georgian winter when any roses not black and brittle had to be flown or trucked in, courtesy of the same bankroll that funded the fleet of rented buses for demonstrators: that of George Soros, the Hungarian-born billionaire and egotist. A former member of the Georgian Parliament said that in the three months before the "Rose Revolution," "from August through October, Soros spent $42 million ramping-up for the overthrow of Shevardnadze."

Soros has publicly committed himself to funding the "democratic" presidency of Mikhail Saakashvili, just as he has publicly committed himself and his money to the destruction of the presidency of George W. Bush, whom he has compared to Yasser Arafat and Hitler. Soros and the United Nations are paying the wages of all of Saakashvili's top government officials--ministers, deputies, the road police, and others--on the grounds that this will keep them from stealing. As if bribery and corruption were simply a problem of immediate financial need, not greed.

Shevardnadze's attempt to rig the November 2003 parliamentary elections was a handy catalyst for the coup, but it was already in the works. The previous summer Soros had flown Saakashvili and his followers to a seminar he sponsored in Belgrade on how to stage your own "Velvet Revolution." And perhaps Soros would deserve some credit--except for the undeniable fact that, ever since his anointing in a crooked election in January, Saakashvili has sounded more like a raging nationalist and authoritarian thug than a democrat strewing rose petals.

"It is democracy in a china shop," the New York Times reported on March 28. "A growing number of critics, though, say that the new president is exploiting his popularity to cut legal corners, violate human rights and silence opposition views." "Saakashvili's all-powerful party is getting into the habit of ignoring the law, or changing it, when it does not suit their purpose," reported Agence France-Presse.

Saakashvili, now 36, was an only child with an absent father. He was raised by a divorced, domineering, and ambitious mother, and his tough-talking Dutch-born wife, Sandra Roelof, appears to follow in that tradition. (Saakashvili married her in lower Manhattan in 1993 while he was attending Columbia for a year on a U.S. taxpayer-funded scholarship.) In February, Roelof gave an interview to a Dutch magazine for a breathless Vanity Fair-like profile headlined "Sandra Roelof's Fairy Tale: From a Zeeuws Girl to First Lady of Georgia." Roelof seems to have taken to Georgian politics:

Georgia has produced strong leaders. Stalin, Beria, Gamsakhurdia. Even Shevardnadze, before he got addicted to power. They looked beyond Georgia. My husband does the same; he fits in the tradition. This country needs a strong hand. It is incredibly important that respect for authority returns. That laws are less frequently broken, that people simply pay their bills for once. There is hardly a sense of responsibility here. . . . I think my husband is the right person to frighten people. That is not to say it is immediately fascism or something. Should he develop extremist traits he will be alerted to that. All eyes are looking at us now.

What a roll call! Stalin's birthplace in Gori, Georgia, close to the Saakashvilis' home in Tbilisi, is still maintained as a public museum, though the crimes of the man against his own people, particularly native Georgians, are beyond repeating, and Sandra Roelof's citation appears demented. One would think Stalin's house would have been burned down long ago, the ashes scattered to the cold Caucasus winds--and I'm not speaking just metaphorically. If Saakashvili wants to really make some democratic bones, he might drive to Gori and light the ceremonial match.

The second man to whom Sandra Roelof compares her husband is Lavrenty Beria, Stalin's secret police czar and the Georgian-born father of the Soviet Gulag. Beria, a notorious pedophile, was responsible for the deaths of millions of Soviet citizens. He was executed on Khrushchev's order after Stalin's death in 1953.

Next on Roelof's list is Zviad Gamsakhurdia, the first elected president of Georgia, a rabid nationalist completely intolerant of any opposition. He was deposed in a coup in the early '90s and later shot himself in the head (or was murdered). Two weeks ago Saakashvili announced that 2004 would be "the year of Gamsakhurdia," whatever that is intended to mean.

The last of Roelof's major players is Shevardnadze, the mentoring father figure Saakashvili never had, who brought him into parliament, appointed him to his cabinet, and guided him along until Saakashvili turned and stabbed him. Despite the relentless encomiums from the last three U.S. administrations, Shevardnadze was brutal and corrupt. (Saakashvili, who lives around the corner from Shevardnadze in Tbilisi, has never had him arrested.)

The British Helsinki Human Rights Group recently compared Saakashvili's regime to that of Shevardnadze, noting that "Saakashvili has unleashed a wave of arrests against real and imagined opponents, and, like Shevardnadze when he first came to power, his new regime has targeted any media outlet which steps out of line." The report said, "Since Saakashvili won the grotesque presidential election in January 2004, when he was awarded an even higher percentage of the vote than Shevardnadze granted himself in 1992, waves of arrests and media closures have hit Georgia."

The report quotes Saakashvili engaging in neo-Stalinist bluster. "I want to tell the criminal bosses and their defenders that they will get it in the teeth," adding that "anyone who disturbs the sleep of an ordinary citizen will be ruthlessly punished and exterminated." They added what almost goes without saying: "This is hardly the language of a civil society, yet none of the Soros-funded Open Society or anti-death penalty NGOs have piped up to express concern."

It was no surprise to the British Helsinki Human Rights Group when Saakashvili, upon taking office, replaced the Georgian national flag with the flag of his own National Movement party. As a result of Saakashvili's electioneering and his dominance of the Georgian media, particularly the powerful Soros-funded TV station Rustavi 2, which acts as Saakashvili's own bichon frisé, his party swept the recent legislative elections by a wide margin. This has left Georgia--and George Soros--with a one-leader, one-party government, a far cry from a noble experiment in democracy. ... Link

Billionaire currency speculator Soros is no "Leftist", any more than he is a "champion of democracy" -- he is a zionist operative who funds and organizes the overthrow of regimes that are hostile to Israel or merely obstacles to the Israeli agenda and has them replaced with those who are willing to do exactly what Israel wants. His zionism is not the open bull-in-a-china-shop zionism of Ariel Sharon and Benjamin Netanyahu, it is the far more insidious, ersatz "dovishness" of Shimon Peres and Rahm Emmanuel. "By way of deception shalt thou do war", as the Mossad's motto says. Where it counts, when America's imperialist interests diverge from those of Israel, Soros can be counted on to support the latter. When democratic principles do not fit into the zionist agenda, they are abandoned forthwith. That is what Soros is and that is what Soros does.

[hava1]

Atk,i am not pro soros (i wrote it here in the "is jstreet cia" ? thread.) I was refering to political decisions that need to be alligned with political goals of the people who make them.

As for your analysis of Soros, yet again, making "israel" the only issue by which to choose whether to support someone in a specific situation (say, media and fox) is not somthing I can relate to as sane (and I think the same goes for the flip side.

[AlicetheKurious]

making "israel" the only issue by which to choose whether to support someone in a specific situation (say, media and fox) is not somthing I can relate to as sane (and I think the same goes for the flip side.

Based on that criteria for defining insanity, 100% of the US' truly effective policy-makers, legislators, media pundits, journalists and "think-tank" strategists are insane. Not 50%, not 80%, not 99%, but 100%. Are. All. Insane.

Perhaps. But perhaps what's really insane is pretending that this is irrelevant and insufficient to explain why they act as they do.

On Edit: It is also insane to insist that Israel, with its long history of "false flag" operations; with its Mossad, whose motto is "By Way of Deception Shalt Thou Do War"; and with Israel being "the leading authority in the field" of Game Theory according to the controversial 2005 Nobel laureate, would use only operatives that openly declare whom they work for.

In all politics, but especially in anything to do with Israel, it is the height of sanity to ignore the patter and watch the hands.

[hava1]

wait, i am going to pick up the check from the mossad...oh shit, no raise this month. I must post some more. I should call my handler to increase the brainwashing.

I should avoid those discussions, as it tends to be circular.

Suffice it to say that I think the issue of Israel is important, but I think you are falling in the "battered wife syndrome", and I dont see so many policy makers as you ennumerate, focused on Israel. and if they are, its precisely in the other direction (total, unqualified, rigid support).

Someone said, and I think I quoted it already, that the Israelis and the Palestinians collaborate perfectly in making the "conflict" hot on the plate. It makes sense, or else you get Bosnia (and who cares, about all those wartorn miserabe places), and its good business, and all parties make a buck. But let's pretend nobody is reading this, perhaps its possible to dicuss issues (like media and fox) from some other, fresh, angles.

or not....

Whatever...

[Montag]

I don't think the NED needed Soros to become bad.

Trojan Horse: The National Endowment for Democracy
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/ ... se_RS.html

I've not heard Soros linked to Freedom House or NED. I've heard him linked to Human Rights Watch, the Tides Foundation, J Street, Media Matters, I think even Alternet, he spreads the money around quite a bit, so I'm sure he's funded a lot that I'm not at all aware of.

I've always been against big money in politics, but I'm starting to think the left needs money too. B/c the right owns the country, and they have no shame and they will stoop to any level... Usually billionaires don't get that way by opening lemonade stands.

[AlicetheKurious]

I don't think the NED needed Soros to become bad.

Trojan Horse: The National Endowment for Democracy
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/ ... se_RS.html

I've not heard Soros linked to Freedom House or NED.

I'm sorry, you're right, that was sloppy of me. The truth is, I got confused by the dozens of NGOs with different names but behind the labels they are virtually interchangeable and work like the fingers of one hand. In so many targeted countries you find these swarms of mysteriously-funded NGOs with names like "Open Society" and "Freedom" and "Democracy" etc., seemingly independent but financially and otherwise interconnected and all working in concert. The NED and Freedom House, despite supposedly being NGOs, are generally understood to be government organizations, while Soros is considered to be private. Although both Freedom House and NED receive the bulk of their funding from the US government, NED and Soros are both financial backers of Freedom House, according to Engdahl. Prominent neocons and other right-wing zionists mingle with CIA, Republicans and Democrats on the boards of all these NGOs, often on several at once.

What of the NGOs Soros established and finances? Who are the other leaders of these groups? Clark informs us that at Human Rights Watch, for example, there is Morton Abramowitz, U.S. assistant secretary of state for intelligence and research from 1985-1989` and now a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations; Warren Zimmerman former ambassador “whose spell in Yugoslavia coincided with the break up of that country”; and Paul Goble, director of communications “at the CIA-created Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (which Soros also funds).”

According to Clark, Soros’ International Crisis Group “boasts such ‘independent’ luminaries as the former national security advisers Zbigniew Brzezinki and Richard Allen, as well as General Wesley Clark, once NATO supreme allied commander for Europe. The group’s vice-chairman is the former congressman Stephen Solarz, once described as ‘the Israel lobby’s chief legislative tactician on Capitol Hill’ and a signatory, along with the likes of Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz, to a notorious letter to President Clinton in 1998 calling for a ‘comprehensive political and military strategy for brining down Saddam and his regime’.”

So much for Soros’ opposition to Bush’s Iraq policies.

There’s more! Who are Soros’s business partners at the Carlyle Group---one of the world’s largest private equity funds, which makes most of this profit from defense contracts? They include the former secretary of state James Baker and Frank Carlucci, former defense secretary, George Bush, Sr, and “until recently, the estranged relatives of Osama BinLaden.” Soros has invested more than $100 million in Carlyle, Clark tells us.

He also points out that “Soros may not, as sometimes suggested, be a fully paid-up CIA agent. But that his corporations and NGOS are closely wrapped up in U.S. expansionism cannot seriously be doubted.”

This brings us back to the question; “why has Soros lambasted Bush?” The answer lies in understanding that, more than ever, within the Wall Street power elite there may be differences in tactics but seldom are there significant differences in the end goal---opening the way for the maximization of corporate profits everywhere around the world. Today, there is basically a oneness of purpose in promoting U.S. imperial dominance, and in the process, attempting to solve a deepening global economic crisis by controlling diminishing petroleum and energy resources.

How does this play out where Soros is concerned? As Clark points out, “Soros is angry not at Bush’s aims---of expanding Pax Americana and making the world safe for global capitalists like himself—but with the crass and blundering way Bush is going about it. By making U.S. ambitions so clear, the Bush gang has committed the cardinal sin of giving the game away. For years, Soros and his NGOs have gone about their work extending the boundaries of the ‘free world’ so skillfully that hardly anyone noticed. Now a Texan redneck and a gang of overzealous neo-cons have blown it”

Soros’ way is to use a few billion dollars, some NGOs and a “nod and wink from the U.S. State department” to bring down foreign governments that are “bad for business” to seize a nation’s assets, and even get thanked for your ‘benevolence,’” according to Clark. This method has worked for Soros and his cohorts.

Take the collapse of the Soviet Union, for example. Clark points out that “Soros’ role was crucial: “From 1979, he distributed $3 million a year to dissidents including Poland’s solidarity movement, Charter 77 in Czechoslovakia and Andrei Sakharov in the Soviet Union. In 1984, he founded his first Open Society Institute in Hungary and pumped millions of dollars into opposition movements and independent media. Ostensibly aimed at building up a ‘civil society”, these initiatives were designed to weaken the existing political structures and pave the way for eastern Europe’s eventual exploitation by global capital. Soros now claims with characteristic immodesty, that he was responsible for the “Americanization” of eastern Europe.”

More recently, there is the case of Yugoslavia. As Clark puts it:

“The Yugoslavs remained stubbornly resistant and repeatedly returned Slobodan Milosevic’s reformed Socialist Party to government. Soros was equal to the challenge. From 1991, his Open Society Institute channeled more than $100 million to the coffers of the anti-Milosevic opposition, funding political parties, publishing houses and “independent” media such as Radio B92, the plucky little student radio station of western mythology, which was in reality bankrolled b one of the world’s richest men on behalf of the world’s most powerful nation. With Slobo finally toppled in 2000 in a coup d’etat financed, planned and executed in Washington all that was left was to cart the ex Yugoslav leader to the Hague tribunal, co-financed by Soros along with other custodians of human rights, Time Warner Corporation and Disney. He faced charges of crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide, based in the main on the largely anecdotal evidence of (you guessed it) Human Rights Watch.”

Clark points out that “since the fall of Milosevic, Serbia, under the auspices of Soros- backed “reformers”, has become less, not more, free. The recently lifted state of emergency saw more than 4,000 people arrested, many of them without charge, political parties threatened with bans, and critical newspapers closed down” This has been so blatant that it was condemned by the UN Commission on Human Rights and the British Helsinki Group

“Soros has made money in every country he has helped to prise ‘open’. In Kosovo, for example, he has invested $50 million in an attempt to gain control of the Trepca mine complex, where there are vast reserves of gold, silver, lead and other minerals estimated to be worth in the region of $5 billion. He thus copied a pattern he has deployed to great effect over the whole of eastern Europe of advocating ‘shocking therapy’ and ‘economic reform’, then swooping in with his associate to buy valuable state assets at knock-down prices,” according to Clark.*

In Hungary, Soros is the benefactor of the Free Democrats party “which has pursued the classic Soros agenda of privatization and economic liberalization---leading to a widening gap between rich and poor,” says Clark.

“The Soros strategy for extending Pax Americana differs from the Bush model, particularly in its subtlety. But it is just as ambitious and just as deadly,” Clark concludes.

Of course, in the case of Yugoslavia, ultimately the Soros approach was not enough so the overwhelming might of the U.S. military was brought into play. Link

Nevertheless, there's no excuse for my carelessness. Freedom House and NED are not Soros organizations. Sorry again.