One of his own books calls him the “Stateless Statesman” and he has been honored as a “globalist.” He is usually referred to by the liberal media as a “financier” or “philanthropist.” In fact, George Soros is a billionaire hedge fund operator whose financial manipulations can affect the fates of nations and their currencies. His hedge fund, Quantum Funds, is based off-shore, making the sources of his funds practically impossible to determine. Forbes magazine says Soros has a net worth of $22 billion, making him the seventh richest person in America.1 The only hedge-fund manager ranked in Forbes’s top ten, Soros lives in Katonah, New York. He has been using much of the money to support the Democratic Party and organizations associated with it. The exact figure is not known, but it is reported that he spent at least $27 million to defeat President George W. Bush in 2004. At the time, Washington Post columnist Harold Meyerson, a member of the Democratic Socialists of America, praised Soros for engineering the “privatization” of the Democratic Party through funding of the “527? political groups and bypassing what he called an incompetent Democratic Party apparatus. He is considered by some the virtual owner of the Democratic Party, having contributed lavishly to the party, its causes and candidates, including Obama. Soros had backed Obama for president in 2008, saying that he had “the charisma and the vision to radically reorient America in the world,” and personally contributed $50,000, the maximum allowed, to the Obama inauguration. The Soros “U.S. programs,” as they are called, had taken a new and more aggressive direction in response to Republican gains in Congress. “When the U.S. Programs began in 1996, we were in the middle of the Clinton Administration,” declared a “Status Report on Changes in the Open Society Institutes U.S. Programs.” It explained, “The election of a Republican majority in Congress in the 1994 midterm elections dramatized the ascendancy of an ideology that exalted the marketplace as the answer to everything, determined to shrink public responsibility for all except national defense and criminal justice. In launching a U.S. Program, George Soros sought to address the growing inequality fostered by this trend, and to promote public interest values and protect the public sphere.” 2 Soros made his first big money because of advice provided by Jim Rogers, his junior partner, who had recommended defense industry stocks and helped Soros profit from a defense boom. 3 Today, however, the Soros-funded Center for American Progress (CAP) argues for massive defense cuts 4 and was instrumental in the Obama policy change permitting open homosexuals in the Armed Forces of the United States. Our analysis shows that CAP is one of the top 15 organizations supported financially by the Soros-funded Open Society Institute (OSI). The leading recipient of Soros money is the ACLU, which is so extreme that it favors the legalization of all drugs, even heroin and crack cocaine, and opposes virtually all measures taken to curtail drug use. In another example of its extremist approach, the group has rejected funds from the Ford and Rockefeller Foundations, and participation in the Combined Federal Campaign, because acceptance of the money would require adopting measures to make sure it does not employ terrorists or support terrorist activity. Soros hired Aryeh Neier as president of his Open Society Institute (OSI) in 1993. Neier had worked for the ACLU for 15 years, including eight as national director. In his book, Taking Liberties: Four Decades in the Struggle for Rights, Neier talks about his role in creating the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), the same group that would eventually spawn the terrorist Weather Underground. Neier says that he hired Tom Hayden as one of the leaders but became disillusioned with Hayden and the pro-communist direction he took the organization. “I was anti-Soviet and anti-communist and was appalled by arguments that Soviet repression and the invasion of Hungary were defensive actions in response to Cold War aggression for which the United States bore prime responsibility,” he said.5 However, the book, published in 2003, makes no mention of one of Neier’s close associates at the ACLU, identified Communist Party USA member Frank J. Donner. The 1959 report of the House Committee on Un-American Activities, “Communist Legal Subversion: The Role of the Communist Lawyer,” features Donner as one of several lawyers identified as members of the Communist Party USA (CPUSA) before the committee.
Donner’s book The Age of Surveillance
For his part, Donner thanks Neier for helping prepare his 1980 book, The Age of Surveillance: The Aims and Methods of America’s Political Intelligence System. A blurb from Neier is featured on the book flap, which quotes him as saying, “Frank Donner knows more about the theory and practice of political surveillance than anyone else. This magisterial book is essential and fascinating reading for anyone who wants to know why the government spies on its citizens and how this spying has shaped American public life.” Donner refused to admit his CPUSA membership in an appearance before the committee and attacked those who testified truthfully before it. The CPUSA was viewed by the FBI and the CIA as a subversive force representing a foreign ideology and America’s destruction. The CPUSA announced objective was a “Soviet America.” That is why the CPUSA and its agents, many of them secret members such as “historian” Howard Zinn, Obama mentor Frank Marshall Davis, singer Paul Robeson and labor leader Harry Bridges, were under FBI surveillance and the subject of extensive files about their activities and associates. The CPUSA was so extreme during its heyday that it not only defended the mass murderer Stalin but the Hitler-Stalin Pact. The group also supplied Soviet espionage agents in the U.S. Government.
Frank J. Donner
This is significant in the case of Donner because, as the committee said in its report on the Communist lawyer, “A Communist owes his primary loyalty to an international revolutionary conspiracy, masterminded in Moscow toward complete enslavement of the earth’s people. By subordinating himself to this conspiracy, a lawyer becomes part and parcel of an operation designed to abolish our constitutional form of government and its guarantee of equal justice under law in favor of a slave-state existence.” The nature of the problem can be found in the so-called Venona papers. These were decoded telegrams between Soviet spies in the U.S. and their superiors in Moscow showing that about 350 Americans conspired with or spied for the Soviet Union. John Earl Haynes, who with Harvey Klehr has written two books on Moscow’s ties to the Communist Party USA (CPUSA), has said many of them were members of the CPUSA and that several Soviet spy rings were operating throughout the U.S. government. Members of the communist networks included Laughlin Currie, an adviser to FDR, and Harry Dexter White, assistant secretary of the Treasury. Donner, in turn, leads to some other interesting personalities, including Morton Halperin, another top aid to Soros, and Robert Borosage, founder and president of the Soros-funded Institute for America’s Future and co-director of its sister organization, the Campaign for America’s Future. Borosage was director of the Center for National Security Studies, an organization thanked in Donner’s book, when Halperin was listed as an “associate” with the group. Borosage also served as director of the Marxist Institute for Policy Studies.
Halperin, Borosage, Jerry J. Berman, and Christine M. Marwick wrote the1976 book, The Lawless State: The Crimes of the U.S. Intelligence Agencies. They attacked the CIA for its role in overthrowing the Marxist president of Chile, Salvador Allende, and the FBI for investigating the communist connections of Martin Luther King Jr. after being requested to do so by then-Attorney General Bobby Kennedy. At the time of the publication of this book, Halperin was director of the Project on National Security and Civil Liberties, a joint project of the Center for National Security Studies and the ACLU. Berman was director of the Center’s Project on Domestic Surveillance. Accused by Ernest W. Lefever of having “provided [CIA defector and paid Cuban agent Philip] Agee with classified information for his KGB-assisted book attacking the CIA,” 6 Halperin became “a senior advisor to the Open Society Foundations” and one who “provides strategic guidance on U.S. and international issues.” The official bio states that he “previously served as director of U.S. Advocacy for the Foundations”7 and as Open Society Policy Center Executive Director. 8 Halperin’s telephones were tapped when he served under Henry Kissinger in the Nixon Administration. He was suspected as a leaker of classified information. When he was nominated as Assistant Secretary of Defense for Democracy and Peacekeeping in 1993, testimony in opposition was provided by Francis J. McNamara. McNamara’s credentials included:
Headed the National Security Program of the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW).
Research analyst and consultant to the House Committee on Un-American Activities; subsequently director of research and then its staff director.
Executive secretary for the Subversive Activities Control Board (SACB).
Vice-chairman of the Security and Intelligence Foundation from 1987-90.
Senior fellow at the Center for Intelligence Studies in Arlington, Virginia.
McNamara said the following about Halperin:
For some 25 years, as an employee of the Department of Defense and the National Security Council as well as in various private sector posts, he has violated security regulations and/or consistently attacked and strongly opposed generally accepted security practices, in addition to demonstrating extremely poor judgment about what constitutes sensitive security information. Another reason for rejecting Halperin’s nomination is that he has revealed a sick, unhealthy animus and hostility toward the U.S. Intelligence Community and the individual agencies composing it, despite their vital relationship to the security of the Nation.
In the 1976 book, The Lawless State: The Crimes of the U.S. Intelligence Agencies, Halperin and his co-authors wrote:
Communist party affiliation is hardly evidence that someone is a subversive foreign agent. Many members of the Communist party are and were patriotic citizens.
This comment was made in a chapter of the book on the matter of the FBI’s investigation and wiretaps of civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. It is preceded by the report that Stanley Levison, “a close friend and confidant of King,” was a member of the Communist Party USA. Information about Levison’s work in the CPUSA was uncovered by Operation SOLO, described as “a long-running FBI program to infiltrate the Communist Party of the United States and gather intelligence about its relationship to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, China, and other communist nations.” The FBI says it officially began in 1958 and ended in 1977, although Morris and Jack Childs, two of the principal agents in the operation, had been involved with the Bureau for several years prior. At the behest of Levison, according to John Barron’s book on SOLO, King hired Hunter Pitts “Jack” O’Dell. Barron reported:
Unbeknown to Jack or Morris, Levison in the I950s met King and subsequently attached himself to the young civil rights leader as a personal confidant and advisor. At the behest of Levison, King later employed Jack O’Dell in the Southern Christian Leadership Council. Morris identified Jack O’Dell as Hunter Pitts O’Dell, a secret member of the party’s governing body, the National Committee. In November I959 Jackson revealed to Jack that O’Dell was working full time for King and that Levison worked closely with O’Dell. On May 6, 1960, Jack reported: ‘Hunter Pitts [Jack] O’Dell is working full time in connection with the King mass meeting to be held in Harlem on May I7, I960. Working closely with O’Dell are Stanley and Roy Levison [Bennett]. The CP considers [the] King meeting of the most importance and feels that it is definitely to the Party’s advantage to assign outstanding Party members to work with the [Martin] Luther King group. CP policy at the moment is to concentrate upon Martin Luther King.’
Defending the IPS
In 1980, Aryeh Neier went to the defense of the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS), an organization with close ties to anti-American regimes that worked feverishly to undermine President Reagan’s anti-communist foreign policy. He wrote two articles for The Nation magazine (“The I.P.S. and Its Enemies” in the December 6, 1980 issue, and “An Open Letter To The Times Magazine” in the May 30, 1981 issue) disputing critical attention being focused on the IPS by the New York Times Magazine and conservative authors and writers. The IPS was the subject of an article, “Think Tank of the Left,” by Joshua Muravchik that appeared in the April 26, 1981, New York Times Magazine. It noted that the IPS was formed in 1963 by Richard J. Barnet and Marcus Raskin, who both served in the Kennedy Administration. On defense and foreign policy issues, Muravchik pointed out, some of those associated with IPS had voiced support for Communist regimes such as Cuba and North Vietnam and revolutionary movements in Africa, Central America and the Middle East. In addition, Muravchick noted, the IPS facilitated CIA defector Philip Agee’s travels in Europe, sponsored the controversial figure, Orlando Letelier, a Chilean Marxist with close ties to Cuba, and played a key role in the effort to restrict the operations of American intelligence agencies. On domestic issues, Muravchik said that in 1978, at the request of 56 members of Congress, the IPS prepared a study of the federal budget that proposed a number of Socialist economic measures and a cut in the military budget by nearly 50 per cent. (Fifty-two members requested a similar study in 1982.) The Muravchik article noted that the IPS was seeking to strengthen its ties with Congress, the Democratic Party and organized labor. Neier objected to the claim that IPS itself had a stand on political issues and took particular exception to charges that the organization engaged in subversive activity or “covert action.” In fact, the evidence against the IPS was strong and convincing and has accumulated over time. Most troubling has been IPS manipulation and use of religious figures. Catholic Priest J. Bryan Hehir taught a course at the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) “Washington School” called “Matthew, MARX, Luke and John.” Once the communists seized power in Nicaragua, the IPS held events to rally support for the regime. The 1987 book Covert Cadre documented the communist intelligence connections of the IPS and even featured photos of Soviet intelligence agents at IPS events. The IPS conducted international conferences with Soviet KGB-affiliated research organizations such as the Institute of the USA and Canada and the USSR-USA Friendship Society. There was official concern over the use of these conferences by Soviet intelligence. Saul Alinsky, whose disciples trained “community organizer” Barack Obama, also spoke at the IPS. Soviet spy Alger Hiss, the United Nations founder and a U.S. State Department official, spoke at the IPS on March 23, 1984. IPS regards him as innocent and launched a series of “Alger Hiss lectures” in 2002, after receiving a bequest from the estate of Alger and Isabel Johnson Hiss.
Soviet spy Alger Hiss (at right) at the IPS.
The IPS promoted “Liberation Theology” at Georgetown University. Senator Ted Kennedy worked closely with the IPS. This photo (below) is from the Institute for Policy Studies Annual Report, 1979-1980. Another IPS associate, David Cortright, became the Director of Policy Studies at the Kroc Institute at the University of Notre Dame, an independent, national Catholic university. He was also listed as a sponsor and participant in the first national conference of the U.S. Peace Council, a CPUSA-controlled Soviet front. Notice, too, that Isabel Letelier spoke on behalf of the IPS. Aryeh Neier, Morton Halperin, and others around Soros object to our intelligence agencies having the ability to use wiretaps, surveillance, and informants and undercover agents against certain political groups. They succeeded in crippling the CIA and FBI in the war against communists, fellow-travelers, terrorists and their sympathizers. These are the people and organizations that Soros now supports and which are acting to dismantle America’s defenses against the global Islamic threat. Ironically, as noted by Paul Kengor in his book, Dupes, ACLU founder Roger Baldwin began his career working with the communists “but later he cooperated with the FBI in identifying Americans working for the KGB.” Although some limited investigative powers have been restored in the wake of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States, America is still vulnerable, as evidenced by the failure of the FBI to solve the post-9/11 anthrax attacks. It is also a reality that the U.S. Congress has nothing comparable to the House Committee on Un-American Activities, the House Internal Security Committee, or its Senate counterparts. All of them were abolished by liberals in Congress. On the executive level, the Attorney General’s list of subversive organizations is no longer in existence and the Subversive Activities Control Board was abolished. It is curious but telling that George Soros would choose to surround himself with people who either associated with members of the CPUSA or turned a blind eye to the threat they represent. Even Soros’s book publisher, Peter Osnos of Public Affairs Books, has a questionable history. He began his career as an assistant to I.F. Stone, the pro-communist “journalist” named as a Soviet agent of influence who was the uncle of Weather Underground communist terrorist Kathy Boudin
Economic Warfare Against the West
Soros engaged in a complex financial transaction that resulted in the Bank of England losing billions of dollars defending the British pound before having to devalue it. This assault on the British currency has not been analyzed to the extent necessary. One author, George Taylor, wrote a book, Germany Tries Again,9 offering the theory that Soros benefitted from inside information from the German government, and that Germany is attempting to re-establish a position of dominance in Europe. The author notes that both Germany and Soros favored the break-up of Yugoslavia and support for the Muslims in Bosnia. Other analysts suggest the so-called “rich Europeans” who invest with Soros and conceal their identities are based elsewhere and have greater influence over him. Other analysts raise the possibility that Soros is supported by either China or Russia. In any case, the idea that his wealth has resulted from his own deep understanding and analysis of global financial markets has to be challenged. The secret nature of his trading and currency manipulations lends itself to speculation about whether or not he is in cahoots with other special interests, including those hostile to the U.S. Significantly, Soros recently failed in his effort to have the European Court of Human Rights lift his conviction in an insider trading case in France. In a major U.S. court case filed by the law offices of David H. Relkin, Soros was charged with “money laundering, bankruptcy fraud, and bid rigging” and of having a “pattern of money laundering activities.” A Soros representative was quoted by the Reuters news agency as saying that the lawsuit was completely without merit. 10 The suit reviews some of what is known publicly about the history of Soros’s investments: “In August of 1990, according to Reuters News Agency, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency agents claimed that Banco de Columbia and other banks were conduits for Latin American drug money. In or about August 1994, according to Reuters, Soros acquired a nine percent interest in Banco de Columbia.”
Soros has categorically denied receiving money from drug cartels or any form of criminal activity. The fact remains, however, that at least some of his financial operations have been based offshore, in banking and financial centers that are reported to be considered conducive to money-laundering.
The U.S. Housing Market Collapse
Soros’s conviction in France for insider trading adds to the concern about his assault on the British pound and what role, if any, he played in the U.S. financial collapse. It stems from a meeting he had with John A. Paulson, a Wall Street trader who made billions of dollars on the decline in housing prices. Joshua M. Brown writes, “One of my favorite anecdotes from the book The Greatest Trade Ever was when John Paulson heads up to George Soros’ offices for a light lunch and a heavy discussion of how Paulson’s real estate/ mortgage crash trade was conceived and constructed.” 11 Gregory Zuckerman of the Wall Street Journal had disclosed the meeting, noting, “Word of his [Paulson's] success got around in the world of hedge funds — investment partnerships for institutions and rich individuals. George Soros invited Mr. Paulson to lunch, asking for details of how he laid his bets, with instruments that didn’t exist a few years ago. Mr. Soros is famous for another big score, a 1992 bet against the British pound that earned $1 billion for his Quantum hedge fund. He declined to comment.” 12 This refusal to comment undermines the idea of the “open society” that he claims to favor. The collapse of the financial system in mid-September 2008 greatly damaged the electoral chances of the Republican ticket of John McCain and Sarah Palin, who were ahead in the polls at the time, and paved the way for Obama’s victory. Zubi Diamond is the author of the powerful book, Wizards of Wall Street, which carries the subtitle of “The scam that elected Barack Obama.” He accuses the hedge fund short sellers, including Soros, of being behind the U.S. financial crisis that enabled Obama to win the presidency. Diamond says the Managed Funds Association (MFA), the lobbying arm of the hedge fund short sellers, is crafty and deceitful. “When they tell you that short selling contributes liquidity to the market, that is a lie,” he says. “Short selling destroys capital and takes away liquidity from the market. When they tell you that they are taking steps to remove manipulation from the stock market, that is a lie. They are taking steps to introduce manipulation to the stock market, and prime the stock market for manipulation and looting. When they tell you that the uptick rule is outdated, because of decimalization, that is a lie. They lie to deceive, to bring forth a big payday from short selling, hence the looting of America and America’s wealthiest corporations and their shareholders, sanctioned by their Washington D.C. lapdogs.” “The most influential members of Managed Funds Association, the hedge fund short sellers, have an anti-capitalism agenda, an anti-industrialized nation agenda, and a far left liberal, Marxist radical agenda,” Diamond says.” Hedge Fund short sellers are not capitalist. They are anti-capitalist and they are not investors; they are anti-investors.” He says they “loot” companies and countries. Soros Fund Management is a member of the “founder’s council” of the MFA, one of the most powerful lobbies and special interests in Washington, D.C. The MFA, which describes itself as “the global voice for the hedge fund industry,” fights proposals to impose more regulation on hedge-fund managers. The MFA includes managers affiliated with the 50 largest hedge funds who manage a “significant portion” of the estimated $1.1 trillion invested in hedge funds. However, the Congress refuses to investigate Soros and his hedge fund. In fact, Soros is treated so well by Congress that he actually placed his June 3, 2008 testimony to the U.S. Senate Commerce Committee into his book, The Crash of 2008 and What It Means. Soros is not the only hedge fund operator, of course. Barron’s featured an interview with Adam Fisher, the 38-year-old founder of Commonwealth Opportunity Capital, which was carried under the headline, “How to Make Money in a World of Risk.” The point was that there is money to be made while the world–and eventually America–goes up in flames. The hedge funds operate beyond the law and governments. One hedge fund manager tried to justify his activities by saying:
Truth can be very uncomfortable but worse than truth are those who try and evade the truth for long periods of times to achieve their ends. For example I praise John Paulson but his genius was to expose the 20 years of absurd subsidization of the housing market (Fannie/ Freddie, mortgage interest deductions, deductibility of property tax on income taxes that only benefits the poor, a local government industrial complex that encourages residential development and ever rising prices and a mortgage delivery system that was corrupt). There was no incentive for anyone to point these issues out because frankly everyone was in on it. The media too loved this as real estate brokers fueled ad pages as did mortgage brokers. Ending this charade was painful but didn’t it make sense for a country to allocate such an absurd amount of resources to an asset that really serves no value at all. Wouldn’t those resources be better diverted to healthcare, education, infrastructure rather than bigger and bigger houses? I lived in China and they tax the hell out of property and divert the money to infrastructure which makes all their people more productive. Yes they have some absurd problems too, but wasn’t the bubble in housing an extreme that needed to end? The fact that Paulson benefited from the issue in many ways is beside the point. Incentives in any ecosystem matter probably more than anything and whether you don’t like that he was rewarded for being a part of the end of this ridiculous real estate complex that’s simply part of being a species that requires incentives to find the right path.
This, then, is the mind-set of the hedge fund short seller. They believe they should set U.S. Government policies – not through open lobbying and pressure on Congress but through financial manipulations. They bet on the decline or collapse of a stock or currency through complex financial instruments handled mostly through secret off-shore accounts in order to damage or destroy a particular sector of the economy. However, before audiences such as those at the libertarian Cato Institute, they insist that they “provide liquidity and transparency to our capital markets” and that their operations “expose corporate fraud and mismanagement.” Since Congress demonstrates no will to take on the power of these financial manipulators, at least at this point in time, it is incumbent to analyze where their activities are leading us – and the world. Soros, the most powerful hedge fund short seller, is open about this part of his program. He wants to diminish the role of the U.S. in the world, including the value of the dollar. He proposes what he calls “an annual issue of Special Drawing Rights (SDR) that rich countries would donate for international assistance.” The SDR idea is a variation of a global tax to finance more foreign aid. SDRs, created by the International Monetary Fund, have been defined as a form of international reserve currency intended to “supplement the existing official reserves of member countries” in transactions with the IMF. What Soros proposes would greatly alter and expand their use. As someone who has developed a reputation for practicing financial and economic warfare against the nations of the world, he seems determined to drain more wealth away from the United States. The Obama Administration’s unofficial point man in U.N. deliberations has been economist Joseph Stiglitz, a close friend of Soros who coordinated a “Commission of Experts” that reported to then-U.N. General Assembly President Miguel D’Escoto, the notorious Communist Catholic Priest who received the Lenin Peace Prize from the old Soviet Union. Stiglitz produced his own document which called for “the issuance of additional SDRs,” “additional sources of funding” for global institutions, a new global reserve currency, and a new global credit facility. In terms of new funding sources, the document called for “innovative sources of financing such as emission rights trading and financial transactions taxes…” The concept of “emissions trading” enables corporations to avoid limits on greenhouse gas emissions if they pay taxes to government. It was part of the “cap and trade” legislation that the liberals were pushing on Capitol Hill. Chapter Five of this document, “International Financial Innovations,” goes into detail, declaring that “For some time, the difficulty in meeting the UN official assistance target of 0.7 percent of Gross National Income of developed industrial countries as official development assistance, as well as the need for adequate funding for the provision of global and regional public goods (peace building, fighting global health pandemics, combating climate change and sustaining the global environment more generally) has generated proposals on how to guarantee a more reliable and stable source of financing for these objectives.” The document notes that an international airline ticket tax is now in effect, as a result of the actions of the “Leading Group on Solidarity Levies” that now involves close to 60 countries and major international organizations. This money is going to fight global diseases. The term “Solidarity Levies” is U.N.-speak for global taxes. The Stiglitz document explains, “Some of the initiatives that have been proposed encompass ‘solidarity levies’ or, more generally, taxation for global objectives. Some countries have already decreed solidarity levies on airline tickets but there is a larger set of proposals. There have also been suggestions to auction global natural resources-such as ocean fishing rights and pollution emission permits-for global environmental programs.”
Stiglitz at “Occupy Wall Street” protest
It goes on to say, “The suggestion of taxes that could be earmarked for global objectives has a long history. To avert their being perceived as encroachments on participating countries’ fiscal sovereignty, it has been agreed that these taxes should be nationally imposed, but internationally coordinated.” So the nations of the world, including the U.S., will collect the taxes but then turn them over to institutions such as the U.N. The world body will function, in effect, like a global IRS. This is the Soros plan. Stiglitz, it should be noted, showed up at the “Occupy Wall Street” protests in New York in October 2011 to show his support. But there is a difference between the “good” Wall Street and the “bad” Wall Street that Stiglitz, being on the Soros payroll, doesn’t want to point out. Zubi Diamond, author of Wizards of Wall Street & Washington Lap Dogs; The Scam That Elected Barack Obama, writes that an example of the good Wall Street would be someone like Steve Jobs, the late founder of Apple: “These people create, run or finance money-making companies and serve the community with much-needed jobs and employment, products and services. The good Wall Street includes the general public mutual funds, retirement portfolios, common investors, banks and venture capital investors who finance and fund the loans for our homes and businesses. They fund and finance economic growth and expansion.” By contrast, “An example of the bad Wall Street would be someone like George Soros. These people are the financial hedge fund short-selling operators who make money by betting on company collapse, economic calamities and catastrophes.” Diamond says:
The only financial reform needed today is to regulate and monitor the hedge funds and the hedge fund short sellers, some of them which are registered off-shore to avoid scrutiny. These global operators, with investors who remain mostly anonymous, must be compelled to register with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), publicly disclose their positions in the markets, and maintain accounting and trading records for a period of 10 years so their activities can be monitored and scrutinized. Just like mutual funds, they must be prohibited from engaging in day trading activities. Many people do not realize that the hedge funds are responsible for 75-90 percent of all trading activities on Wall Street. They are responsible for the extreme market volatility. They are responsible for everything that is bad on Wall Street.
In addition to regulating the hedge funds just like mutual funds and pension funds are regulated, his recommendations include:
Reinstate the uptick rule.
Remove mark-to-market accounting and replace it with historic cost accounting.
Dismantle and discontinue trading on all the short Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs), also called leveraged inverse ETFs.
Reinstate the circuit breakers and the trading curb to kick in whenever the Dow Jones drops 150 points.
It is significant that Soros has expressed his sympathy for the “Occupy Wall Street” protests. According to one report, “Soros, during a presentation at the United Nations in Monday, told reporters he sympathized with the protesters’ anger over such matters as the bailout of banks and the inequities between rich and poor.” Soros said, “Actually I can understand their sentiment, frankly.” Soros says this because he knows that the protests represent no threat to the way he does business. He operates off-shore, outside the jurisdiction of the Securities and Exchange Commission and any laws or rules and regulations which may be passed or implemented. The “Occupy Wall Street” protests only threaten the “good Wall Street” businesses and banks which need and provide capital to create jobs and offer goods and services to the public.
Financing the Progressive Movement
Soros is, in the jargon of the left, a “fat cat” — perhaps the biggest fat cat of all time. And his funding recipients constitute a who’s who of the left, including the extreme left. These are the forces in society that want to see more government control over the private sector. However, their agenda is economic, social, and global. This “fat cat” supports the causes embraced by the organizations he bankrolls. These include drug legalization, strengthening the United Nations, opposition to the death penalty, euthanasia, tax increases (including a global tax), immigrant rights, prisoner rights, feminism, abortion rights, and homosexual rights. One notices that Soros finances the establishment of a number of “rights” that have never been self-evident or God-given rights under the American system. This reflects the influence of Soros’s mentor, philosopher Karl Popper, a communist in his youth who writings were later adopted as a basis for “democratic socialism” and the notion that government can bestow rights and manipulate the transformation of society on a gradual basis. Popper thought this approach would make Marxism’s emphasis on the alleged inevitable historical process and violent revolution unnecessary. One right that he does not favor — the right to life from conception to natural death — is neutralized and undermined by his financial support for “abortion rights” and the “right to die.” His now-defunct $45 million “Project on Death in America” was used to promote euthanasia and assisted suicide. Calvina Fay of the Drug Free America Foundation calls Soros an “extremely evil person” because of his support for and financing of drug legalization groups. Writer Jeffrey Kuhner called him the “21st Century Lenin” because of his extreme left-wing agenda. Soros ignored most of the attacks until, in November 2010, Glenn Beck used his Fox News channel program to present an in-depth look at “the Puppet Master” and “one of the most powerful forces in the Progressive Movement.” The scrutiny led to a backlash against Fox News from Soros and his supporters, leading to Beck’s departure from the channel. One of the groups attacking Beck was Media Matters, recipient of $1 million from Soros. Soros had justified his money to Media Matters by saying in an October 20, 2010 statement: Media Matters is one of the few groups that attempts to hold Fox News accountable for the false and misleading information they so often broadcast. I am supporting Media Matters in an effort to more widely publicize the challenge Fox News poses to civil and informed discourse in our democracy. Hence, this billionaire hedge fund short seller was openly declaring war on a private media organization with First Amendment protections under the U.S. Constitution. His war had an effect – Fox News channel personality Glenn Beck was eventually forced out. This slide from a Van Jones Power Point presentation illustrates the segments of the progressive movement tied to Obama. They also represent the organizations, groups and movements financially supported by Soros. Jones himself has benefited from the Soros largesse. But our major media would rather talk about the Koch Brothers. In a major article entitled “Covert Operations: The billionaire brothers who are waging a war against Obama,” New Yorker author Jane Mayer claimed that the Tea Party and other “right-wing causes” have received more than a hundred million dollars from the Koch Brothers, David and Charles, who are libertarians. The figure and characterizations of where their money goes are disputed. In any case, Soros, by his own estimate, has been spending far more. Mayer had written a previous New Yorker article on Soros depicting him as well-intentioned, not that concerned about money, the victim of scurrilous attacks, and someone who simply wants his “ideas” to “be heard.” 13 In his 2002 book, George Soros on Globalization, he himself estimated that he had “provided foreign aid on a significant scale – roughly $425 million annually in the last five years – for the promotion of open societies.” 14 His 2004 book, The Bubble of American Supremacy, said his foundations had been operating “with total annual budgets averaging around $450 million for the last decade” and that he had spent “nearly $5 billion over the years.” 15 Other observers say the amount reaches $8 billion. While the Koch brothers make money from refining, chemicals, building materials, and energy production, Soros makes money by manipulating currencies and betting on economic calamities and catastrophes. In protesting a Soros appearance hosted by the University of Toledo, Edwin J. Nagle III, president and CEO of the Nagle Companies, highlighted “the immoral and unethical means by which he achieved his wealth.” He added, “I certainly didn’t see included in his bio the stories on how he collapsed whole country’s currencies for his own self interests so that many may suffer.” Another difference is that the Koch brothers practice and support capitalism, while Soros is dedicated to undermining the American system. While Soros has contributed billions of dollars to the transformation of America, Drummond Pike of the Tides Foundation, a Soros ally, has alone funneled $1 billion into the effort. His own bio declares, “Tides provides fiscal sponsorship for over 200 nonprofit projects across the country, launches and operates green nonprofit centers and has granted more than $1 billion dollars since 2000 alone.” Pike, Tides Center founder, was given the ” America’s Future Lifetime Leadership Award” at the 2011 Campaign for America’s Future conference, a group whose Institute for America’s Future arm is subsidized by Soros. Tides Center is now part of the Tides Network, which includes Tides Foundation, Tides Center, Tides Shared Spaces, and Thoreau Center for Sustainability. The Tides organizations’ aggregate annual expenditures have exceeded $200 million since 2007.16 Pike is the treasurer of the Democracy Alliance. The Washington Post reported that the Democracy Alliance was formed in 2005 with major backing from billionaires such as George Soros and Colorado software entrepreneur Tim Gill. Publicly, however, the group will only say, “The Democracy Alliance Community is made up of progressive investors/donors and movement leaders committed to a stronger democracy and more progressive America. Our Partners hail from business, politics, and philanthropy and provide millions of dollars of support for progressive causes.” The Democracy Alliance says: “Membership in the Alliance is by invitation-only. “We provide you with personalized products and services to help you navigate the progressive landscape and make the most of your philanthropy. “Each Partner receives professional investment recommendations including due diligence, analysis and ongoing performance monitoring that measures organizational impact, as well as access to a dynamic community of like-minded change-makers. “In addition to the investment products and services, engagement in the Democracy Alliance includes: invitations to exclusive events and conference calls, regular communications, such as updates on important issues and the work of recommended organizations and quarterly newsletters and access to members-only community website and comprehensive Partner Directory.” The leadership of the group consists of: Board of Directors
Robert McKay – Chair
Steven Phillips – Secretary
Drummond Pike – Treasurer
James D. Gollin
Mary Kay Henry
S. Donald Sussman
Rob Stein – Founder Emeritus
Michael Vachon is the director of communications at Soros Fund Management, a spokesman for George Soros, and oversees Soros’ political contributions. He was previously the director of communications for the Open Society Institute and for The Commonwealth Fund. On October 28, 2004, Michael Vachon interrupted a press conference called by the National Legal and Policy Center (NLPC) to present evidence that Soros has been violating campaign finance laws in his multimillion dollar effort to put Democrat John Kerry in the White House. Vachon interrupted the question-and-answer period by shouting that the NLPC allegations were false and that he and a Soros lawyer were there to answer any questions. NLPC filed a formal complaint with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) against Soros, alleging that he may have made illegal expenditures by failing to fully disclose expenses related to his swing-state speaking tour. This tour concluded on October 28 with his speech at the National Press Club. The NLPC noted that, according to FEC filings, Soros reported the expenditures for two-page newspaper ads he bought in swing states titled “Why We Must Not Re-Elect President Bush,” and for mailings with a similar theme. But nothing apparently has been reported for the significant travel, public relations and the other costs associated with his speaking tour. NLPC President Peter Flaherty said, “Soros is a hypocrite. First, he bankrolled the groups that lobbied for passage of McCain-Feingold, but now he’s pouring millions through the law’s loopholes. And he has apparently violated the Federal Election Campaign Act by not disclosing the substantial sums he is spending on this speaking tour.” In the end, the FEC said that it “found probable cause to believe that a violation by Soros occurred but in a 3-3 vote declined to authorize the FEC to file suit against him. The Commission closed the file and took no further action.” Later the same day, a grieving parent who lost one of his children to a drug overdose attempted to tell the National Press Club that billionaire George Soros had to be stopped in his campaign to put John Kerry in the White House. But as he held up a photograph of his dead child and began to speak, Steve Steiner was quickly surrounded by security personnel who grabbed and muzzled him. He was roughed up and led away, suffering a dislocated shoulder, a punch to the back, threats of more physical violence, and five hours in the hospital undergoing X-rays and other tests. After the commotion, Soros gave his own speech and received a National Press Club coffee mug as a token of appreciation. Interestingly, Soros was represented on that speaking tour by David Fenton, chairman of a controversial public-relations firm, Fenton Communications, and a one-time registered foreign agent. Fenton has represented the Soros-funded MoveOn.org and has worked for the Heinz Family Foundations. His career began as a photographer for Liberation News Service, which boasted contacts with communist guerrilla forces during the Vietnam War. Liberation News Service was named in honor of the National Liberation Front of South Vietnam, the phony “nationalist movement” established by Hanoi. In the past, Fenton has represented the Salvadoran guerrillas, the Nicaraguan Sandinistas, CIA defector Philip Agee, the Marxist government of Grenada, communist Angola, the AFL-CIO, and the Campaign for America’s Future. Fenton represented the “Freedom to Marry” homosexual rights group and hired Cathy Renna, formerly of the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD). Other Fenton clients have included the Ford Foundation, the (Ted) Turner Foundation, and the Tides Foundation. While Soros spokesman Vachon had a lot to say in criticism of the NLPC complaint, he has been silent about alleged Soros involvement in the LightSquared scandal that is currently unfolding. Timothy P. Carney of the Washington Examiner reported 17 that Soros invested in the telecom company LightSquared through a hedge fund, and that many of the nonprofits he finances backed LightSquared in regulatory and policy disputes. Those four Soros-funded groups were Free Press, Media Access Project, the New America Foundation, and Public Knowledge. This may be an example of how Soros manipulates the system in order to make money. His investment is followed by agitation or lobbying by organizations he supports, in order to maximize his investment. Carney noted that LightSquared is embroiled in controversy because it wants to construct a mobile broadband network to compete with AT&T, Verizon and Sprint but that its plan to do so could potentially disrupt or interfere with the global positioning satellite industry. The GPS is used by private businesses as well as the U.S. military. In her article about the Koch Brothers, Jane Mayer had quoted Soros spokesman Michael Vachon as saying that Soros’s giving is “transparent” and that “none of his contributions are in the service of his own economic interests.” But when Carney tried to get a response for his article, he was told, “As a matter of policy, we [Soros & Company] don’t confirm or deny information on our investments.” Soros Fund Management, which advises the Quantum Funds, recently announced that it was being converted into a family office to sidestep new Dodd-Frank financial regulations that require hedge funds to register with the Securities and Exchange Commission and meet exacting reporting standards. The bill may have been passed knowing that Soros could easily avoid its rules and regulations. However, its impact on businesses which have to comply is in the billions of dollars.
The “Open Government” Fraud
His close relationship with President Barack Obama can be seen in the financial and other support provided by his Open Society Institute to the “Open Government Partnership” project, announced at the United Nations on September 20, 2011, by President Obama and Brazil’s President Dilma Rousseff, a former Marxist terrorist. “We applaud presidents Obama and Rousseff for having launched this initiative,” the Open Society Foundations said in a statement. “We intend to work with partners around the world to wholeheartedly support and monitor the efforts of governments to make these commitments and to fulfill them.”18 Obama used his U.N. speech the day following the announcement to urge the world to “harness the power of open societies” in order to fight corruption. This sounded very much like George Soros himself, who has been spending hundreds of millions of dollars a year promoting “open societies” in the U.S. and around the world. His network is called the “Open Society Foundations” and Soros named one of his foundations the “Open Society Institute.” A possible Soros role in the Obama Administration’s curious dealings with Brazil continues to generate controversy. At a time when the Obama administration is resisting the issuing of more offshore permits for U.S. domestic oil exploration, it is doing just the opposite with Brazil. The administration officially launched an “energy partnership” with Brazil in August. “We want to work with you. We want to help with technology and support to develop these oil reserves safely, and when you’re ready to start selling, we want to be one of your best customers,” Obama had told a group of Brazilian business leaders in May 2011. The U.S. Export-Import Bank had proposed $2 billion in loans to the Brazilian oil company Petrobras to ensure the purchase of U.S. goods as the company explores for oil. The Ex-Im Bank had approved the loans on April 14, 2009, during a time when Soros was buying and selling millions of shares in the company. It appears that the Open Government Partnership is making use of U.S. taxpayer dollars to create the public impression that Obama is open and accountable to the American people. Soros, who is funding the effort, stands to gain from this perception.
The Frank Marshall Davis Cover-up
This emphasis on an “open society” and “open government” is ironic for many reasons, especially because of the lack of information that was made available by the Obama campaign to the American people when Obama ran for president. Through Frank Marshall Davis, Obama had an admitted relationship with someone who was publicly identified as a member of the Communist Party USA (CPUSA) and under FBI surveillance for 17 years. The record shows that Obama was in Hawaii from 1971-1979, where, at some point in time, he developed a close relationship, almost like a son, with Davis, listening to his “poetry” and getting advice on his career path. But Obama, in his 1995 book, Dreams From My Father, refers to him repeatedly as just “Frank.” With the release of a 40-page “Unfit for Publication” report attacking Jerome Corsi’s book, The Obama Nation, which drew upon material uncovered by Trevor Loudon and America’s Survival, Inc., the Obama campaign acknowledged that the mysterious “Frank” in Dreams From My Father was in fact Davis. But the Obama report made no admission that Davis was a communist and didn’t dispute what had been documented about Davis’s membership in the Communist Party. Instead, the report tried to put some distance between Obama and Davis and played down instances in which Obama soaks up Davis’s anti-American thoughts and pro-communist “poetry.” But if the relationship were so innocent, why didn’t Obama identify Frank by his full name in his book and denounce his communist and anti-American views? The answer may lie in the nature of the network that Davis represented. It was secretive and designed to serve the interests of the Soviet-funded and controlled Communist Party USA. An investigation of Obama’s relationship with Davis leads to Davis’s attorney, Harriet Bouslog, another identified member of the CPUSA. Bouslog was a member-at-large of the executive board of the National Lawyers Guild, a CPUSA front, at the 1956 and 1957 conventions of the NLG. 19 She also represented Harry Bridges, a secret CPUSA member who served as president of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU). All of this is relevant to Soros because of his support for organizations closely tied to this network. Perhaps the most obvious example is the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), which works hand-in-glove with the National Lawyers Guild. The CCR is a major recipient of Soros funds. The CCR, in fact, is regarded as an off-shoot of the National Lawyers Guild, which was once officially designated a communist front and still remains the American affiliate of the International Association of Democratic Lawyers, the old Soviet front. To show their solidarity with the Marxist terror networks that bombed police stations and killed police officers in the 1970s and 1980s, the CCR’s board and staff took out a full-page ad in a November 2010 “commemorative solidarity booklet” distributed at a memorial service for the dead Communist terrorist Marilyn Buck. It described her as a “fierce warrior, human rights defender and fighter for justice.” A member of the Weather Underground and the Black Liberation Army, which carried out a robbery of a Brinks truck in 1981 that killed two policemen and a security guard, Buck had been serving a prison term in California for her involvement in a long list of terrorist crimes. These included the Brinks heist and helping convicted killer Joanne Chesimard escape from prison. Chesimard fled to Cuba, where she is now living under the protection of the Castro brothers. She killed a New Jersey State Trooper and the FBI is offering $1 million for information leading to her apprehension. When I inquired of the CCR why they had hailed Buck in such flattering terms, a press representative by the name of Alison Roh Park said, “We recognized her as a human rights leader,” adding, “There are hundreds of thousands of people who did celebrate her life.” If this is true, then we have a much bigger internal security problem than anyone realizes. It means that, in addition to Islamic terrorists, revolutionary Marxism and its adherents still pose a threat. Significantly, Weather Underground leaders Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn also paid tribute to Buck in the “commemorative solidarity booklet.” Several members of the Weather Underground, including Linda Evans, and two Puerto Rican terrorists were at the service in person, paying tribute to their “comrade” and “sister.” Curiously, however, Soros not only ignores this threat by helps finance it. Former Weather Underground terrorist Bernardine Dohrn appeared at functions sponsored by his Open Society Institute. Linda Evans accepted a Soros grant. As part of this effort to threaten and undermine America internally, Soros vigorously promotes the “rights” of criminals. Soros has provided the bulk of the money behind a well-organized “criminals lobby” in the U.S. that is working to make “prisoners’ rights” into the next big cause of the liberal-left. The book, The New Jim Crow, is by Michelle Alexander, a former ACLU official who won a 2005 “Soros Justice Fellowship.” The thesis is that the criminal justice system is racist, that criminals deserve to be treated more leniently and that even convicted felons ought to have the right to vote. The acknowledgements section of the Alexander book gives special thanks to the Open Society Institute of George Soros. Michael P. Tremoglie has written a report for ASI in which he notes: If there is one issue in America that represents the fault line between liberals and conservatives, left and right, communist and capitalist, the middle class and the liberal intelligentsia – it is that of crime and punishment. Yet, the line is becoming distorted as liberals exploit libertarian fears of big government and conservative fears of being labeled racist. He writes that some conservatives “have embraced the idea that incapacitation and deterrence do not work. By doing so, they have unwittingly accepted the doctrine of Marxist criminology which hypothesizes that criminal behavior is a function of society.” Tremoglie adds: Marxist criminology sheds light on one of the major differences between liberals and conservatives when it comes to criminal justice – the idea of deterrence. Marx (and Engels) rejected the deterrence doctrine. Instead they hypothesized that crime will only be eliminated by changing society’s social system. This is what Alexander and people like Angela Davis believe. Davis is leading a movement to abolish prisons entirely. She is a former Black Panther and was for a time during the 1970′s an FBI fugitive. She was acquitted of murder charges after her capture and trial. She was also a Communist Party candidate vice presidential candidate during the 1980′s. People like Alexander and Davis use the racism argument to validate their cause that prisons should be abolished. Their justification is the racial disproportionate percentage argument, which is fallacious. There is a disproportionately greater percentage of African –Americans who are professional athletes in relation to the percentage of African-Americans in the general population. Does this mean that more millionaire black athletes are a sign of a “racial caste system?” There are also a disproportionate percentage of men in prison in relation to their percentage of the total population. Is this an indication that the criminal justice system is a sexist caste system? Tremoglie also takes note of who is behind the Alexander book: Alexander’s book was published by The New Press. According to its website The New Press was “established in 1990 as a major alternative to the large, commercial publishers, The New Press is a not-for-profit publishing house operated editorially in the public interest. It is committed to publishing in innovative ways works of educational, cultural, and community value that, despite their intellectual merits, may be deemed insufficiently profitable by commercial publishers. Like the Public Broadcasting System and National Public Radio as they were originally conceived, The New Press aims to provide ideas and viewpoints under-represented in the mass media.” The Board of Directors reads like a Who’s Who of leftwing activism. Among the Board of Directors are:
BARBARA EHRENREICH, Honorary Chairwoman, Democratic Socialists of America and an author and columnist
FRANCES FOX PIVEN, also an Honorary Chairwoman, Democratic Socialists of America
MICHAEL RATNER, President, Center for Constitutional Rights. The Center was a leading advocate for freeing Lynne Stewart who was convicted in 2005 of providing material support to terrorist
The New Press authors include William Ayers, founder of the Weather Underground, and Marxist Noam Chomsky.
A Private Foreign Policy
Aryeh Neier, president of the Soros-funded Open Society Foundations, began his career with the American Civil Liberties Union and Human Rights Watch before coming to the Soros network. In talking about this transition, he wrote in his book, Taking Liberties:
I knew I could do many things that mattered to me through a foundation with such large resources. What I did not realize was that George Soros was in the process of becoming, as he has been described, the only private citizen in the United States – or, perhaps the world – with his own foreign policy and the capacity to implement it. He is unique in possessing the resources, the institutional mechanisms, the status, and the will to promote his policy on a global scale. 20
This extraordinary statement puts Soros in violation of the Logan Act. The Logan Act, codified at 18 U.S.C. § 953, states:
Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both. This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply, himself or his agent, to any foreign government or the agents thereof for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.
A Congressional Research Service report, “Conducting Foreign Relations Without Authority: The Logan Act,” states:
The Logan Act was intended to prohibit United States citizens without authority from interfering in relations between the United States and foreign governments. There appear to have been no prosecutions under the Act in its more than 200 year history. However, there have been a number of judicial references to the Act, and it is not uncommon for it to be used as a point of challenge concerning dealings with foreign officials. Although attempts have been made to repeal the Act, it remains law and at least a potential sanction to be used against anyone who without authority interferes in the foreign relations of the United States.21
Writing in a Forbes article entitled “Are George Soros’ Billions Compromising U.S. Foreign Policy?,” Richard Miniter said:
Soros’ foreign policy is different. He pursues his own vision, undisturbed by his effect on other nations or the interests of his own. It is hard for foreign governments to hold him accountable and his goals and methods are usually kept secret. While the risks of Soros’ foreign policy to the U.S. are clear, they are clearly ignored by Washington policy makers and the White House press corps. Why? 22
Miniter’s answer is that because Soros has been perceived as an anti-communist by some and a left-wing Democrat by others, commentators on both sides of the ideological spectrum have refrained from attacking him. He goes on:
Soros is hated because many Eastern Europeans and Central Asians believe that he is using his money to subvert their political systems. Rightly or wrongly, this view tends to promote anti-Americanism. And it gives dictators a talking point to use against American diplomats.
In fact, however, Miniter notes that “Soros does not have a particularly pro-America foreign policy, even though he does champion selected human-rights issues and bring down dictators.” He notes that Soros, in his book The Age of Fallibility, writes that “the main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.” Miniter explains, “He opposes America’s war on terror and sees America’s global leadership as a net negative for the world.” In his book, The Bubble of American Supremacy, Soros attacks “neocons” and the Project for the New American Century, a group he describes as “a neoconservative think tank and policy advocacy group.” Neocons are mostly anti-communists who left the Democratic Party. Critics charge that neocons are motivated by a desire to protect Israel. Soros seems to be attacking neocons for their perceived role in getting the U.S. into the Iraq war. Yet, in 1999 the neocons supported the NATO war on Yugoslavia launched by President Clinton. It was a war which did not benefit America, Israel or NATO. It only benefited the Muslim terrorists in the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA), which had links to Osama bin Laden. Like the neocons, Soros supported the Clinton Administration’s military intervention in the former Yugoslavia, which established the Muslim state of Kosovo. Congress did not authorize the Kosovo war under the War Powers Act. Clinton waged the war through executive orders without approval from Congress. Soros opposed the Bush Administration’s invasion of Iraq, which was authorized by Congress and was designed in part to prevent the radicalization of the region by the expansionist Arab socialist Saddam Hussein regime. The war was based on questionable intelligence but the result of the intervention, the establishment of a democratic Iraq, could be some as beneficial to the region in the long term. Still, the invasion of Iraq was a major gamble by Bush. Soros opposes unilateral U.S. military action and wrote Toward a New World Order: The Future of NATO, back in 1993. He figured that NATO could take on the military responsibilities of the “New World Order” until the U.N. was ready to do the job. The Soros plan was to make NATO, once an anti-Communist alliance, into a military arm of the U.N. This happened in Kosovo and then Libya, where Obama used NATO to enforce the U.N.’s “Responsibility to Protect” doctrine. NATO, which came into being through a treaty as a defensive military force, has been illegally transformed without the benefit of a treaty into an offensive military force. Although Soros strongly supports the concept, the “Responsibility to Protect” was mostly the work of the World Federalist Movement, a group dedicated to world government by strengthening the United Nations system. His 2004 book, The Bubble of American Supremacy, was subtitled, “The Costs of Bush’s War in Iraq.” He wasn’t concerned about the costs associated with the illegal intervention in Kosovo. And he doesn’t object to forcing U.S. taxpayers to spend more on the U.N.
The National Security Archive
He has put enormous resources into an organization called the National Security Archive, which describes itself as “an independent non-governmental research institute and library located at The George Washington University…[which] collects and publishes declassified documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act” and “serves as a repository of government records on a wide range of topics pertaining to the national security, foreign, intelligence, and economic policies of the United States.”23 The group says, “The Archive’s $2.5 million yearly budget comes from publication revenues, contributions from individuals and grants from foundations such as the Carnegie Corporation of New York, the Ford Foundation, the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, and the Open Society Institute. As a matter of policy, the Archive seeks no U.S. government funding.” An example of this was the 2002 book, The Pinochet File, published by the New Press, the same controversial left-wing publisher cited earlier. Written by Peter Kornbluh, director of the National Security Archive’s Chile Documentation Project, it purports to be an analysis of U.S. intelligence support for the anti-communist government of Chile after the overthrow of Chilean Marxist President Salvador Allende. The acknowledgements section of the book notes the author’s deep involvement with individuals from the Marxist Institute for Policy Studies (IPS). This is critical information because IPS provided cover for such figures as Chilean Marxist Orlando Letelier, a paid agent of Cuba assassinated in Washington, D.C. in 1976 in a car bomb explosion tied to the Pinochet regime. This fact alone helps explain why Kornbluh would want to investigate and “expose” the U.S.-Chile relationship. This act of terrorism, which also took the life of Ronni Moffitt of the IPS, was the apparent result of an increasingly desperate and isolated regime in Chile that believed it had been betrayed by the United States after initial support for the anti-Allende coup. Kornbluh gives thanks to many figures, including Robert Borosage, then with the IPS; Saul Landau of IPS; and Morton Halperin, who had been working in the “Policy Planning” Department at the Department of State under Madeleine Albright. The one-sided treatment of Chile and the world’s first “freely-elected Marxist president,” as Allende was called, was not legitimate scholarship. It was propaganda designed to prevent the U.S. from countering other Marxist experiments in Latin America. This kind of material has had the desired and intended effect – making it practically impossible for U.S. intelligence agencies to assume an anti-communist posture in subsequent events, such as keeping Marxist Hugo Chavez from taking and consolidating power in Venezuela. Efforts like those of the National Security Archive have another intended effect – to suggest to the media that the activities of Cuba and other hostile foreign intelligence services are to be ignored or dismissed in importance. In his book, The Prince of Darkness, the late journalist Robert Novak described how the Washington Post censored one of his columns concerning the Washington, D.C. activities of Letelier. Novak said the Post’s editorial page editor, Philip Geyelin, “spiked” the column because of “displeasure with the column’s content” about Letelier’s Cuban connections. Novak had received Letelier’s incriminating briefcase papers, recovered after his death. They showed Letelier getting money from Cuba. The story is worth retelling now because America’s enemies continue to be very well organized in Washington, D.C., especially in regard to the “new Cuba” — Venezuela. I had the opportunity soon after I came to Washington to understand first-hand why a paper like the Post shies away from exposing the activities of communist agents of influence in the nation’s capital. Lawrence Stern, the national news editor of the paper, passed away in 1979, and Reed Irvine of Accuracy in Media asked me to attend and observe his memorial service. I was astounded when a man identified as Teofilo Acosta was introduced and told the service: “I’m from Cuba. I am Marxist-Leninist. I am human. Larry Stern was my friend, one of my best friends. I loved him.” Acosta was publicly known as a First Secretary in the Cuban Interests Section that has been set up inside the Czech Embassy in Washington. In reality, he was a Cuban intelligence agent. Hence, one reason the Post shies away from exposing the activities of communist agents is that their reporters and editors may associate with them. The husband of Post reporter Dana Priest works for the Center for International Policy (CIP), a far-left and Soros-funded group created with the assistance of Orlando Letelier. On the eve of the 10th anniversary of 9/11, the Washington Post published excerpts of Top Secret America, a book based on a series of articles in the Post by Dana Priest and William M. Arkin. The book refers to “the new national security state,” meaning the U.S. military, the CIA, the FBI, and other public entities and even private contractors engaged in defense or intelligence work. One waits in vain for the Post to investigate and expose not only the international communist network, which still exists, but the strategic plans of the Muslim Brotherhood and other groups that want to destroy us. “More than a dozen Washington Post journalists spent two years developing Top Secret America,” we were told. The answer to the expansion of the “national security and intelligence system,” which is presented as a major problem in the work of Priest and Arkin, can be found in the activism of Priest’s husband, the silent partner in the series, a left-winger by the name of William Goodfellow. This is the open “secret” that the Post wants desperately to conceal from its readers. It leads to the exposure of the far-left networks behind much of the “real news” we see, read, and hear in the mainstream media. Goodfellow runs the Soros-funded Center for International Policy (CIP), which “is in the vanguard of the movement to develop an alternative foreign and defense policy based on international cooperation, demilitarization and respect for human rights,” its newsletter proclaims. Its other goals include:
Finding “new ways to encourage cooperation” with the Castro dictatorship.
“Reining in the CIA.”
“Ending the war in Afghanistan,” and
“Building public support for peace.”
William M. Arkin, a columnist and reporter with The Washington Post and washingtonpost.com since 1998, is the co-author of the book and the series and “has worked on the subject of government secrecy and national security affairs for more than 30 years,” his bio says. In fact, he has made it his mission to expose the means by which the United States defends itself, in order to disarm the nation in the face of threats from the old Soviet Union and international communism and now from global Islam. In the 1980s he worked for the IPS. The IPS affiliation is not noted in an old Post bio of Arkin but it is mentioned that he “co-authored Nuclear Battlefields in 1985, revealing the locations of all U.S. and foreign nuclear bases worldwide” and that the book was “condemned by the Reagan Administration” for obviously threatening the security and safety of those weapons. Publicity for the book’s release was handled by Fenton Communications and its president, David Fenton, later to become a paid agent of George Soros when he campaigned in 2004 to defeat George Bush for re-election. Exposing communist influence activities is not on the agenda of the National Security Archive or Soros. Indeed, there’s no evidence that Soros has any interest in funding information collection efforts to obtain and disseminate congressional hearings and reports on domestic and foreign threats to the U.S.
Anatomy of a Smear
The Soros-funded Open Society Policy Center, headed by Morton Halperin, organized opposition to John Bolton as U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. and was caught, as part of the effort, paying money to a political consultant, Robert B. Creamer, who had pleaded guilty to bank fraud and a failure to pay federal income taxes. He served time in prison for these offenses. This smear of Bolton helped prevent his confirmation and eventually resulted in his recess appointment by President George W. Bush to the post. Creamer, a prominent Democratic political consultant, is the husband of Illinois Democratic Rep. Jan Schakowsky. He is the author of a 628-page book, Stand Up Straight! How Progressives Can Win, that describes how the Democrats can become the permanent majority party by passing a national health care bill and giving amnesty to illegal immigrants. He was invited to the White House for the first state dinner in November 2009. Creamer’s book is full of praise for Obama and even reprints Obama’s 2004 Democratic National Convention keynote address. The acknowledgements section describes how he, like Obama, was influenced by Saul Alinsky, described as “the legendary community organizer.” Book endorsements are featured from Obama adviser David Axelrod; Greg Galluzo of the Gamaliel Foundation, which originally sponsored Barack Obama’s work as a community organizer in Chicago; and Andy Stern of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). Ironically, Soros talks frequently about promoting an “open society” when much about his own background remains hidden. Born in Hungary, it has been reported that he became an American citizen. Answers.com claims, “He is a naturalized American citizen. Since 1961.” 24 This claim may be based on a Business Week account from 1993 which reported, “George Soros became a naturalized American citizen in New York on Dec. 18, 1961, according to the Immigration & Naturalization Service.” 25 But the publication went on:
His Americanism, like his Judaism, is not something that Soros openly embraces.
It is not clear how the phrase “according to the Immigration & Naturalization Service” means that the publication verified Soros’s citizenship. The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) agency does not provide that data directly to anyone except the person being naturalized or the original petitioner. 26 On the other hand, a person can lose his U.S. citizenship under certain conditions, including being convicted for an act of treason against the United States:
Treason is a serious crime, and the Constitution defines the requirements for convicting someone of treason. Treason is waging a violent war against the United States in cooperation with a foreign country or any organized group. It includes assisting or aiding any foreign country or organization in taking over or destroying this country including abolishing the Constitution. Treason also consists of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the US government or of betraying our government into the hands of a foreign power. If you are caught and convicted of treason, you can pretty much count on losing your US citizenship as well as serving lots of jail time.27
It would be unfair to call Soros, who is Jewish, a Nazi sympathizer. Nevertheless, during a December 20, 1998, interview with 60 Minutes, Soros acknowledged that as a 14-year-old Jewish boy in Hungary, his identity was protected and that he actually assisted in confiscating property from Jews as they were being shipped off to death camps. Asked by interviewer Steve Kroft if he had any sense of guilt over what he did, Soros replied, “no.” In the interview, Soros went on to compare his predicament at the time to the operation of economic markets, saying, “if I weren’t there, of course, I wasn’t doing it, but somebody else would-would-would be taking it away anyhow.” Soros then insisted he was only a “spectator” and had “no role in taking away that property.” That is why, he said, “I had no sense of guilt.” While Soros has a lot to answer for, the Open Government Partnership (OGP) is making use of U.S. taxpayer dollars to create the public impression that Obama has been open and accountable to the American people, despite the evidence to the contrary. The Global Integrity group is managing the project and says that it is “supported by a diverse mix of charitable foundations, governments, multilateral institutions, and the private sector.” The list includes:
Center for International Private Enterprise (CIPE), an affiliate of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce
Inter-American Development Bank
National Endowment for Democracy
Open Society Institute (Soros-funded)
Open Society Justice Fund (also Soros-funded)
U.S. Department of State
Wallace Global Fund
The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation
The World Bank
Google is listed separately as having provided $350,000. OGP says that it is “overseen by a multi-stakeholder International Steering Committee comprised of government and civil society representatives” that includes Tom Blanton of the Soros-funded National Security Archive. Incredibly, the National Security Archive was among several organizations presenting Obama with an “anti-secrecy award” at a ceremony last March that was closed to the public and the press. Politico reported, “…Obama met quietly in the Oval Office with Gary Bass of OMB Watch, Tom Blanton of the National Security Archive, Danielle Brian of the Project on Government Oversight, Lucy Dalglish of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, and Patrice McDermott of OpenTheGovernment.org, without disclosing the meeting on his public schedule or letting photographers or print reporters into the room.” Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press Executive Director Dalglish said that Obama was given the award for “encouraging agencies to release information to the public…” Even some left-wingers were offended by this, saying that the award should be rescinded and that “Such false awards only stand to backfire and hurt the cause of open government.” FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds, the founder and president of the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition, posted a video about the Obama award, exposing funding for some of the pro-Obama groups from George Soros and others.