|
|
 |
George Soros and America's Coming Election Crisis (A Three-Part Series) Part 3: The Lies of |
WHO IS GEORGE SOROS and what does he really want? Answering these questions is no easy feat. Good information on Soros is sparse. Most is heavily sanitized.
I noted, for instance, that Soros is a militant atheist who despises men of faith such as George W. Bush. He is a Jew who loathes Jewish "tribalism;" a Holocaust survivor who likens Israel to Hitler's Germany; a naturalized U.S. citizen who considers himself "stateless;" a critic of "Darwinian" capitalism who ruthlessly exploited the fallen USSR in the crony-capitalist free-for-all known as "Russiagate."
 will be outside forces -- something unforeseen that suddenly happens -- that tilts the election one way or the other." |
Above all, Soros is a man ever-hungry for money and power. His dark appetites yawn too vast to find fulfillment in any ordinary life.
Despite the many books he has written and the many interviews he has granted, Soros remains elusive. The simplest details of his life have a tendency to evaporate like dry ice in the investigator's palm.
Part of the problem is that Soros lies. Any journalist scrutinizing this enigmatic man must cultivate a healthy disregard for his public utterances. Not only does Soros lie, but he lies fluently, frequently, pointedly and with a master's virtuosity.
Following the November 2003 uprising that toppled Georgian President Eduard Shevardnadze, Soros categorically denied press reports linking him to the coup.
"Everything in Georgia was done by its people, not by me. I had nothing to do with it," Soros told reporters on March 31, 2004. On July 5, however, he told the Los Angeles Times, "I'm delighted by what happened in Georgia, and I take great pride in having contributed to it."
Whatever.
Soros evinces, at times, what can only be called a professional pride in his skill at deception. In a 1995 profile in The New Yorker, Soros told journalist Connie Bruck that the "subversive" mission of his Open Society foundations – which have supported coups and rebellions in many lands – required him to wear a variety of masks through the years. In some countries, Soros might adopt a pro-communist pose while in others he would play the anti-communist. Only Soros himself knew where he stood -- and perhaps not even Soros.
"I would say one thing in one country, and another thing in another country," Soros boasted, with a laugh.
Soros still wears many masks. In a June 3 speech at the Democrats' Take Back America conference, he played the role of political neophyte, claiming that he had only recently involved himself in U.S. politics, due to his outrage over Bush’s invasion of Iraq.
"[I]t is the first time that I feel that I need to stand up and… become really engaged in the electoral process in this country," Soros said.
This was a lie. Soros has been neck-deep in Democrat intrigue since at least 1994. Three weeks after Republicans swept Congress that year, Soros announced in a November 30, 1994 speech that he wished to "do something about… the distortion of our electoral process by the excessive use of TV advertising."
Eight months later, Democrat Senator Russ Feingold obligingly rose on the Senate floor to denounce soft money abuses, thus setting in motion the juggernaut that would ultimately give us the McCain-Feingold Act of March 27, 2002.
Few Americans realize that it was George Soros who bankrolled the seven-year lobbying effort that gave us McCain-Feingold.
"Combine… the $1.7 million that Mr. Soros gave the Center for Public Integrity, the $1.3 million he gave Public Campaign, the $300,000 to Democracy 21, the $625,000 to Common Cause, and the $275,000 to Public Citizen – and you can be forgiven for believing Mr. Soros got campaign finance passed all by himself," notes a Wall Street Journal editorial.
McCain-Feingold neatly accomplishes Soros’ goal of regulating political discourse on the airwaves. It bars "special interest groups" from placing ads for or against any candidate for federal office on TV or radio 60 days before a general election, and 30 days before a primary. These "special interest groups" can be anything from corporations to grassroots networks of concerned citizens.
Big Media networks, on the other hand, are exempted from the blackout. Unlike other corporations, they are not classified as "special interest groups." During the blackout period, Big Media networks may say whatever they like about any candidate on their news reports and talk shows.
McCain-Feingold thus grants to Viacom (which owns CBS); Disney (which owns ABC); GE (which owns NBC); Time Warner (which owns CNN) and to other multibillion-dollar media conglomerates what amounts to a government-enforced monopoly on political speech during election season. Curiously, wealthy individuals such as George Soros are also exempt from the TV and radio blackout.
The U.S. Supreme Court upheld McCain-Feingold on December 10, 2003. In a dissenting opinion, Justice Antonin Scalia wrote:"Who could have imagined that the same Court which, within the past four years, has sternly disapproved of restrictions upon such inconsequential forms of expression as virtual child pornography, tobacco advertising, dissemination of illegally intercepted communications and sexually explicit cable programming would smile with favor upon a law that cuts to the heart of what the First Amendment is meant to protect: the right to criticize government?"
Who indeed?
But this is the age of George Soros. What was unthinkable yesterday has become ordinary today. By shrewdly applying his money in the right places, Soros succeeded in ripping the guts out of our First Amendment. He simultaneously purchased for himself and his Big Media allies the privilege of indulging in political speech denied to ordinary Americans.
Election Day will be upon us in less than four months. Given the money and power at the Democrats' disposal -- and given the desperate, mass hysteria that appears to have gripped the Party of the Left -- almost anything is possible.
I do not often cite Hillary Clinton as an authority, but, in this case, allow me to make an exception. Every American should consider what Hillary told the New York Post on March 30, 2004: "It will be outside forces -- something unforeseen that suddenly happens -- that tilts the election one way or the other."
Now, of course, there are many sorts of "unforeseen" events that might "tilt" America toward Velvet Revolution: assassination; financial collapse; nuclear or biological terror; the last-minute release of trumped-up charges against the President. That sort of thing.
How can ordinary Americans prepare for it all? How can we chart the right course through this tangled morass of fear, chaos, rumor, lies and confusion?
History offers some guidance. Consider Switzerland's plight in April 1940, when fifteen German divisions prepared to invade the tiny country. Switzerland would have been crushed.
Yet the Swiss resolved to fight. In accordance with centuries-old tradition, every able-bodied man was enrolled for life in the militia, armed and trained to fight independently, in small units. The Swiss commander, General Henri Guisan and the Swiss Federal Council famously broadcast a joint order to the entire country, instructing the militia to fight to the death. There would be no surrender. Even if the government itself appeared to be surrendering, said Guisan, the militia should fight on, ignoring any orders to the contrary. Guisan's message stated: "If by radio, leaflets or other media any information is transmitted doubting the will of the Federal Council or of the Army High Command to resist an attacker, this information must be regarded as lies of enemy propaganda. Our country will resist aggression with all means in its power and to the bitter end."
The Germans wisely backed down. They did not invade Switzerland.
Listen well, gentle reader. I am not here counseling armed rebellion. That is not the point of my story. Violent insurrection, more often than not, ends in dictatorship, no matter which side wins.
Instead I counsel patience and clear heads. Remember that Big Media opposes us. Should some "unforeseen" event occur around election time, as Hillary predicts, we may rest assured that major media will spin that event to the Democrats' advantage.
Close your ears to them. Do not listen. Like the Swiss in 1940, let us treat their words as "lies of enemy propaganda." Let us rely instead upon our own good sense and love of liberty. And let us turn to Almighty God, who alone grants victory or defeat.
|
Velvet Revolution, USA PART 1 (July 16, 2004) If you enjoyed the election crisis of 2000, you’re going to love what Democrat leaders are cooking up for November. More... Freeper Comments Here (Part 1) The Democrats' Digital Brownshirts PART 2 (July 17, 2004) Will the real digital brownshirts please stand up? More... Freeper Comments Here (Part 2) |
=============================================
Richard Poe is a New York Times-bestselling author and cyberjournalist. He is a contributing editor for NewsMax Magazine and NewsMax.com, and runs his own blog at RichardPoe.com. Poe's new book is Hillary's Secret War. His previous book, The Seven Myths of Gun Control, is now available in paperback.
