Free Republic

LittleLinda wrote: It’s not a surprise to me since I learned that Trudeau’s press secretary has an office in Toronto in the same building as the Soros outfit.

How the British Invented George Soros
By Richard Poe | June 18, 2021

INTRODUCTION: Prior to 1992, few people had ever heard of George Soros. Then the British media made him an instant celebrity, touting him as the greatest investment genius of the age. Is Soros really a genius? Or is he just a front, created to provide cover for British economic warfare operations? The man chiefly responsible for promoting Soros and creating his legend during the early '90s was Lord William Rees-Mogg, a prominent journalist; friend and confidant of the Royal Family; close friend and business associate of Lord Jacob Rothschild; and father of British politician Jacob Rees-Mogg. Continue...

Seems to me that the Purple Revolution was signaled when HRC was defeated at the last election—and is continuing to ramp up for the grand finale at the 2020 election.

______________________________

Actually, you're right.

The Purple Revolution began when Bill and Hillary appeared dressed in purple at Hillary's 2016 concession speech.

Whatever happens after Nov. 3, 2020 will be the "finale," as you say.

In the best case scenario, there won't be a "finale," because the perps will have been arrested beforehand. But I'm trying to be realistic.

11.3 is a marker.

_________________________

Nov. 3 is the day the Color Revolution will commence.

As soon as Trump's victory is announced, Soros & Co. will cry voter fraud and take to the streets. Color Revolutions ALWAYS start on election day. They never change the game plan. It's always the same 7 STEPS, as described in this article:

"Velvet Revolution, USA," July 23, 2004 | NewsMax.com

Note that Rosenstein wore a purple tie at today's hearing, showing solidarity with the Purple Revolution. Symbols will be their downfall.

I guess most people here know these riots are part of a Soros-style "Color Revolution." Back in 2010, I went on the Glenn Beck show to warn this was coming.

A record audience of 3 million people watched Glenn's 3-part Soros exposé "The Puppetmaster," based on The Shadow Party, a book that I co-wrote with David Horowitz.

Fox News cancelled Glenn's show soon after.

You can watch the three episodes on my Twitter account @RealRichardPoe.

Thank you, FreeQs, for all the good work you do!

Thanks for posting this, Yosemitest.

This was the second part of Glenn's 3-part Puppetmaster series. I was interviewed on camera in part one. Below are links to the whole series.

_________________________

The Puppet Master, Nov. 9, 2010

Five-Step Plan, Nov. 10, 2010

Making of the Puppetmaster, Nov. 11, 2010

_________________________

The series was based on The Shadow Party, a book that I co-wrote with David Horowitz.

The Five Steps were originally Seven Steps. Glenn's producers thought seven steps were too many, so we honed them down to five.

The original seven steps appeared in an article I wrote for Newsmax.

Velvet Revolution, USA
Newsmax.com | July 16, 2004

Oops! I left out the most important person in post #31. I left out Jim Robinson! Here's how I should have written it:

"Hillary's Secret War was based on exclusive, in-depth interviews with New Media pioneers such as Joseph Farah, Christopher Ruddy, David Horowitz, Andrew Breitbart, Binyamin Jolkovsky, Missy Kelly, J.J. Johnson... AND JIM ROBINSON."

jla wrote: "I've read [Hillary's Secret War] and it was awful. Poe doesn't reveal anything one cannot find on the www, whether true or not. It's basically nothing more than a composite of articles written about the Clintons. Very speculative; no hard facts."

Dear jla:

I am sorry that you did not like my book. Of course, you are entitled to your opinion. However, your post went beyond mere opinionating. It contained misleading information, which I must now correct.

Contrary to what you wrote, Hillary's Secret War is not a "composite of articles written about the Clintons." In fact, the book does not even pretend to be "about the Clintons." It is about the "New Underground" -- my name for the New Media pioneers who battled the Clintons, through dissident Web sites such as NewsMax, WorldNetDaily, FrontPageMag, JewishWorldReview, The Drudge Report, FreeRepublic and the now-defunct SierraTimes.

Hillary's Secret War was based on exclusive, in-depth interviews with New Media pioneers such as Joseph Farah, Christopher Ruddy, David Horowitz, Andrew Breitbart, Binyamin Jolkovsky, Missy Kelly, J.J. Johnson, and many more -- including various Freepers who took part in street actions during the disputed election of 2000.

From this research, I was able to demonstrate that dissident Web sites -- especially FreeRepublic and WorldNetDaily -- played a major role in thwarting Democrat efforts to steal the 2000 election. Not only was this fact unknown to the general public when I wrote the book, but mainstream journalists and historians, to this day, remain completely in the dark regarding those events.

Let me add that, when I interviewed and wrote about Andrew Breitbart in Hillary's Secret War, most people did not even know that Breitbart existed.

jla wrote: "I’ve read it and it was awful. Poe doesn’t reveal anything one cannot find on the www, whether true or not. It’s basically nothing more than a composite of articles written about the Clintons. Very speculative; no hard facts."

netmilsmom wrote: Are you sure you have the right book? I was just sitting here rereading the part about Andrew Breitbart and marveling at how much it’s similar to Breitbart’s new book."

Thanks for defending my book (against jla's criticism)!

netmilsmom wrote: "If you doubt that, read the book, 'Hillary's Secret War' by FReeper Richard Poe. You will see how it happened back in the 90's. You'll see FReepernames you know, and you'll see Jim Robinson wrote the forward."

Thanks for the plug!

mnehring wrote: courtesy ping FRiend.

netmilsmom wrote:My apologies Mr. Poe, I forgot to ping you.

Thanks for the pings!

Since its founding in 1969, “The activities of the [Hastings] Center” included research into “death and dying, behavior control, genetic engineering and counseling, and population control,” according to bioethicist Albert R. Jonsen, writing in his book The Birth of Bioethics.

Please note that Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel -- Obama's special advisor for health policy -- is a Hastings Center fellow.

Deagle writes:

Waiting for a reasonable response from you regarding my responses to your questions...

Richard Poe responds:

Sir, you have made no responses to my questions at all, other than crude denials and evasions.

Deagle wrote:

I am not unreasonable, just a bit of an old fashioned elderly gentleman...

Richard Poe responds:

With all due respect, sir, we have only your word that you are "old-fashioned" and "elderly." It is very easy, on the Internet, for people to pretend to be something other than what they are. For all I know, you may be a college student, pretending to be an "old-fashioned, elderly gentleman."

Very few 64-year-old men, in my experience, would refer to themselves as "elderly." College students, on the other hand, probably think of 64 as quite an advanced age.

If you are "old-fashioned," I certainly see no sign of it in your comments. Medical rationing is not an "old-fashioned" concept.

QUESTION 3

You claim to oppose Obamacare. Yet you support the key point of Obamacare, which is used to justify all the rest. You support the idea that Grandma and Grandpa must die so Junior can have a good life.

As you are well aware, sir, this argument leads directly to Obamacare. It cannot possibly lead anywhere else. It is absurd to pretend that people today are going to be left alone to make their own choices about how they will die. The government will decide for them. You know this as well as I do.

Here is my final question for the night. You have expressed concern for your son. Yet, your support of Obamacare presents a deadly threat to your son.

Your son will have to live with the consequences of Obamacare long after you are dead. He will live in fear. The government will have the right to end his life whenever it pleases, for whatever reason it chooses.

Is that what you want for your son?

Deagle, actually, the best response to your argument was made by Uncle Chip, in comment 51. He wrote:

Children worth anything would do all they could to keep their parents around and with them as long as possible. So these kids who you are describing can't be worth diddly squat.

I would like to hear your response to Uncle Chip on this point.

Deagle writes:

Okay...fine... Ask me your DIRECT questions and I will answer them the best that I can...

Richard Poe responds:

With all due respect, sir, all of my questions have been direct. You are simply asking me to repeat myself. But never mind. I'll repeat my questions, if you like.

QUESTION 1

You are saying that we spend too much money on health care for the elderly and that the young and fit should get that money instead. The problem is that the young and fit don't need that money.

A 2006 study by the Department of Health and Human Services shows that half the U.S. population “spends little or nothing on health care… with annual medical spending below $664 per person.” The study is talking here about healthy young people.

Obviously, if you are a healthy young person spending less than $664 per year on health care, you do not need to raid Grandma and Grandpa's piggybank in order to pay your doctor's bills. Grandma and Grandpa don't need to die, so you can live.

The statistics are clear. Money is not the real issue here. So what is the real issue? Why is it so important to you to convince us that Grandma and Grandpa need to die?

QUESTION 2

You say the younger generation would revolt if "we were to think like the '50s." I'm not sure what you mean by that. How did people think about these questions during the '50s? And why do you say that such thinking would cause revolts among the young?

Deagle writes

I’m not sure that you either understand or care even after several posts saying the same...

Richard Poe responds

Sir, it is true that you have posted several comments saying exactly the same thing, over and over again. However, that is not particularly helpful.

I am trying to get you to clarify and elaborate your position, rather than simply repeating it. That is why I am asking you questions.

Rather than running away, I wish that you would stay and answer my questions.

Deagle wrote:

Life is a choice and when you are drawing upon your kids' and grand kids' futures to prolong and ease yours, you are selfish. That is my philosophy - like it or not.

I can understand yours but I do think it is a selfish attitude that continues to prevail today. If we were to think like the 50’s, your ideas would cause revolts in the younger generation for sure...

Richard Poe responds:

You say the younger generation would revolt if "we were to think like the '50s." I'm not sure what you mean by that.

How did people think about these questions during the '50s? And why do you say that such thinking would cause revolts among the young?