(2005) Soros Shadow Party Stalks DeLay

On the day that Terri Schiavo died — victim of a court order condemning the brain-damaged woman to death by thirst and starvation — Representative Tom DeLay of Texas did what few politicians have the courage to do these days. He spoke his mind.

"This loss happened because our legal system did not protect the people who need protection most," DeLay told Fox News on March 31. "The time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior."

DeLay’s strong language worried some Republicans. They pointed to an ABC News poll of March 21 purporting to show that 63 percent of Americans wanted Mrs. Schiavo’s feeding tube removed and that 70 percent wanted Congress to stay out of the matter.

On the day of Mrs. Schiavo’s death, DeLay told reporters that Congressional investigators, "will look at an arrogant and out of control judiciary that thumbs its nose at Congress and the President." He suggested that some judges involved in the Schiavo case might face impeachment. "I never thought I’d see the day when a U.S. judge stopped feeding a living American so that they took fourteen days to die," he said.

Fainter hearts in the Republican Party cringed. Yet the very next day, on April 1, pollster John Zogby released survey results showing that 79 percent of Americans opposed removing a feeding tube from someone in Terri Schiavo’s condition. Only 9 percent would remove it.

It turned out that ABC had used a push poll — a survey worded in such a way as to ensure a predetermined outcome. The ABC poll had misled respondents into thinking that Mrs. Schiavo had "no consciousness" and that her condition was "irreversible."

In the end, neither poll mattered to DeLay. He had spoken his mind boldly, as was his habit. Americans in the heartland took note. Calls of gratitude swamped radio talk shows, such as Rush Limbaugh’s and Sean Hannity’s.

DeLay had given voice to tens of millions of ordinary, hard-working Americans whose opinions seldom reach mass media organizations nor the elite pollsters they employ. He spoke for an anguished but silent majority which recoiled in horror from Terri Schiavo’s killing, and from the runaway judicial system which had ordered it.

DeLay had given middle Americans more than just a voice. He had given them hope. From the Democrat point of view, that made DeLay a very dangerous man.

Through the Schiavo case, grassroots America discovered why DeLay’s Congressional foes call him, "The Hammer."

At age 58, DeLay stands unrivaled as the most powerful and effective Republican leader in Congress. Virtually every Republican legislative breakthrough of the last decade, from the Contract with America to welfare reform and the Balanced Budget Act owes its passage in large part to DeLay’s skill at persuasion.

His public profile is rising fast. Between September 1999 and February 2005, the proportion of Americans who recognize DeLay’s name soared from 46 to 76 percent, according to a Gallup survey commissioned by CNN and USA Today.

Predictably, his rising stature has made him a priority target for dirty tricksters of the left. His ascent to House Majority Leader in January 2003 triggered an onslaught of non-stop mud-slinging. DeLay has endured a two-year barrage of nebulous, petty and mostly ill-founded ethics charges, attack ads, media smear campaigns and dubious popularity polls.

So far, he has weathered the storm. But his accusers persist. In the last three weeks, their attacks have reached a furious crescendo, with calls for DeLay’s resignation screaming from blog sites, editorial pages and television screens across the land.

Mainstream media portray DeLay’s accusers as disinterested "public interest groups" — non-profit organizations standing guard over public virtue, their judgment unsullied by corruption or party allegiance. In reality, of course, the "public interest groups" attacking DeLay have roots in the partisan struggle as deep as any in Washington.

Much evidence suggests that a hidden agenda lurks beneath the camouflage of this sudden outpouring of "ethics" charges. In certain cases, the organizations promoting these charges evince a history and money trail bespeaking a highly specific allegiance.

If we have interpreted the evidence rightly, it would appear that DeLay may be confronting a political machine far wealthier, more ruthless and better skilled at media manipulation than the Democratic Party itself. When the hysteria subsides and the facts are examined, we may learn that DeLay’s foe all along has been the Shadow Party — a murky and inscrutable entity controlled by leftwing billionaire George Soros.

"Tom DeLay: He’d like to wash his hands of corruption. …," a voice intones, while a man wearing cuff links and a Rolex watch scrubs his hands. "He can’t wash his hands of corruption. But Congress can certainly wash its hands of Tom DeLay."

This 30-second television ad began running in selected Congressional districts on Thursday, March 31 — only the latest in a long series of media smears targeting DeLay.

"Over a five-day span, ending last Thursday, TV and radio stations and print publications from around the country featured at least 290 stories" discussing ethics allegations against DeLay, reports Alexander Bolton in the March 23 edition of The Hill.

The allegations mostly involve aggressive fundraising tactics of the sort the Clintons honed to a science. To what extent DeLay may be guilty of such missteps remains unclear. Crystal clear is the double standard being applied to his case.

A small but dedicated core of self-appointed ethics "watchdog" groups have labored to keep the charges against DeLay brightly aflame – among them, the Center for Public Integrity; Common Cause; Democracy 21; Public Campaign and Public Citizen.

Often dubbed "non-partisan" by the press, these groups have a long history of coordination with Soros and his Shadow Party. They are beholden to Soros personally for his financial support. His influence often shows itself in their choice of targets.

For instance, the TV ad campaign cited above is sponsored by two groups, both heavily funded by Soros. One, the Campaign for America’s Future (CAF), has received more than $300,000 from Soros' Open Society Institute. The other group, the Public Campaign Action Fund, is a spin-off from the Soros-funded Public Campaign.

In fact, most of the public-interest "watchdogs" currently hounding DeLay are beneficiaries of Soros largesse. Every one of the groups named above have received large contributions from Soros’ Open Society Institute ranging from $275,000 to nearly $2 million.

George Soros is one of the most powerful men in the world. His foundations disburse as much as $400 million per year. As a global investor, Soros has amassed a personal fortune estimated at $7.5 billion. He controls an additional $11 billion or so through his investment funds. Soros is one of a handful of mega-investors who can move global markets simply by expressing an opinion on CNN’s Moneyline.

Despite his power, most Americans never heard of Soros until November 11, 2003, when he declared in a Washington Post interview that, "America under Bush is a danger to the world." Ousting Bush, said Soros, "is the central focus of my life… a matter of life and death." Asked if he would spend his last penny to defeat Bush, Soros replied, "If someone guaranteed it."

In the end, Soros did not spend anything close to his last penny on the campaign. But he didn’t need to. Soros achieved something far more important than merely putting John Kerry in the White House. He gained control of the Democratic Party itself.

Soros’ power grab was ten years in the making. Beginning in 1994, he began pouring millions into the campaign finance reform lobby. The result was the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA), commonly known as the McCain-Feingold Act.

As a Wall Street Journal editorial noted on December 30, 2003: "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."

Note that all five of the organizations listed above are now attacking Tom DeLay.

What did the McCain-Feingold Act do for George Soros? Why did he spend seven years and millions of dollars pursuing it? It now appears to have been a power play, whose purpose was to gain control of the Democratic Party.

The McCain-Feingold Act barred political parties from collecting "soft money" — that is, donations which are earmarked for no particular candidate, and which are therefore exempt from federal limits on their size. Under McCain-Feingold, the parties could only accept heavily regulated "hard money" donations limited to $2,000 per donor, per candidate.

This rule put the Democratic Party in peril. Republicans had long enjoyed a three-to-one advantage over Democrats in raising hard money. Consequently, Democrats depended for their survival on huge donations from unions, corporations and wealthy individuals — that is, they depended on soft money.

Now Soros had cut off the Democrats’ soft-money supply. The Party seemed doomed. But Soros showed them a way out. He offered Democrats an alternate money source — one which he personally controlled. That source was the Shadow Party.

Journalists first started using the term "shadow party" in 2003 to describe the network of leftwing NGOs, activist Web sites, Section 527 "stealth PACs," public employee unions and radical foundations which Democrat activists used to circumvent McCain-Feingold in the 2004 campaign. Working independently of the Democratic Party, these private groups managed to raise a record $300 million in political contributions for Democrats running in 2004.

The Shadow Party has gotten a fair amount of press. However, most reporters failed to describe it accurately. They characterized the Shadow Party as a loose network of private groups that arose more or less spontaneously from grassroots America. Nothing could have been further from the truth.

The Shadow Party is a top-down creation. George Soros founded it, organized it and runs it to this day, through a tightly-integrated, corporate-style command structure. Soros fulfills a role in the Shadow Party comparable to that of chairman of the board, while former Clinton deputy chief of staff Harold Ickes serves as de facto CEO.

It took years of patient sleuthing to penetrate the Shadow Party’s secrets — a research effort led by conservative activist David Horowitz, who heads the Center for the Study of Popular Culture (CSPC) in Los Angeles. Much of this research can now be found at DiscovertheNetwork.org — a searchable, online database of the organized left which Horowitz launched in February 2005.

DiscovertheNetwork.org illuminates the intricate personal and financial relationships binding leftwing organizations together. While compiling this database, Horowitz and his team uncovered the hidden command structure that drives Soros’ Shadow Party.

Through these Seven Sisters, Soros and his team convey money, information and marching orders down the line to a much larger network encompassing radical public employee unions, leftwing foundations and street-level activist groups.

The network has emerged as a veritable shadow government, wielding the power to make or break politicians at the highest level. The sudden convergence of Soros-sponsored "public interest" groups in the attack on DeLay smacks of coordination. It suggests that Soros has focused the full might of his Shadow Party on an effort to discredit Tom DeLay and force his resignation as House Majority Leader.

With DeLay neutralized, Democrats will be free to pursue another priority goal of George Soros — to spend the next three years packing our federal courts with leftwing extremists, right up to the U.S. Supreme Court. They will fill the benches with corrupt, radical judges cut from the same cloth as those who sent Terri Schiavo to her grave.

In the 2004 election cycle, Soros donated about $27 million of his personal funds to anti-Bush forces — the largest political contribution from a single individual in U.S. history. More importantly, the Shadow Party Soros created raised more than $300 million for the cause.

John Kerry may have lost the election, but the Shadow Party emerged triumphant. The Democrats can no longer function without Shadow Party cash.

Regarding the Democratic Party, MoveOn PAC director and Soros operative Eli Pariser boasted, "Now it’s our party. We bought it, we own it."

The Shadow Party’s ascendancy marks a victory for the left — and in particular for Soros’ idiosyncratic vision of social utopia. Soros’ philanthropy has long promoted a phantasmagoria of radical causes such as medical rationing, euthanasia, gay rights, gun control, avant-garde education, regulation of political speech through campaign finance laws and the promotion of judicial activism. In his 1998 book The Crisis of Global Capitalism, Soros foretold the end of free enterprise.

His Shadow Party has emerged today as the ultimate instrument for inflicting his radical agenda on America.

In the November 29, 2004 issue of the Marxist journal The Nation, Robert L. Borosage co-wrote an article with Nation editor Katrina Vanden Heuvel. They wrote: "[P]rogressives drive this party now - we provide the energy, the organizers, the ground forces, the ideas, and much of the money. We should organize the opposition [against Republicans]. Progressives should mount a powerful assault on Republican boss Tom DeLay."

Borosage typifies the sort of people who fill high-level leadership positions in the Shadow Party. A hard-left militant during the '60s and a graduate of Yale Law School — where he served as a political mentor to young Hillary Rodham - Borosage subsequently headed the National Lawyers Guild, a radical organization that began in the 1930s as a Soviet front, operated in conjunction with the Communist Party and to this day basks comfortably in its Communist heritage. Later Borosage headed the Institute for Policy Studies, a far left Washington think tank that has enjoyed close and unsavory involvements with Soviet and Cuban intelligence operations.

In a July 25, 2004 article, Shadow Party operative Simon Rosenberg — who is president of the New Democrat Network — told Matt Bai of The New York Times Magazine that the independent 527 committees which form the backbone of Soros’ Shadow Party would spearhead a "more defiant kind of politics." As Bai put it, these independent groups could go where no Democrat could go before. They could confront head-on the "sharp ideological divide between them and the Rush Limbaugh right." They would be free to attack ideological foes with a Machiavellian abandon previously unknown in mainstream politics — ideological foes such as Tom DeLay.

Of course, DeLay is not the sort of man who would suffer such attacks without a fight. On April 7, as a rising chorus of journalists, pollsters, leftwing activists and "public interest groups" screamed for his resignation as House Majority Leader, DeLay went on the offensive.

Speaking by video to the Judeo-Christian Council for Constitutional Restoration — a conservative religious group — DeLay warned sternly of "a judiciary run amok."

"The judiciary branch of our government has overstepped its authority on countless occasions, overturning and in some cases just ignoring the legitimate will of the people…," he said. "Our next step, whatever it is, must be more than rhetoric."

And so it will be. Americans today are aboil with rage that no push poll can hide. DeLay may stand or fall before his attackers. No one can predict his fate. But with or without DeLay, that "next step" of which he spoke will come, and the people will be heard.

Richard Poe is a writer for the Center for the Study of Popular Culture, as well as managing editor of David Horowitz's group blog Moonbat Central. He is a New York Times-bestselling author and journalist whose blog appears at RichardPoe.com. Poe's latest book is Hillary’s Secret War: The Clinton Conspiracy to Muzzle Internet Journalists.

The Southampton Meeting

To the extent that the Shadow Party can be said to have an official launch date, July 17, 2003 probably fits the bill.[10] On that day, a team of political strategists, wealthy donors, leftwing labor leaders and other Democrat activists gathered at Soros’ Southampton beach house on Long Island. Aside from Soros, the most noteworthy attendee was Morton H. Halperin. Soros had hired Halperin in February 2002, to head the Washington office of his tax-exempt Open Society Institute – part of Soros’ global network of Open Society institutes and foundations located in more than 50 countries around the world. Given Halperin’s history, the appointment revealed much about Soros’ political goals.

Halperin has a long and controversial track record in the world of Washington intrigue, dating back to the Johnson Administration. Journalists sympathetic to Halperin’s leftwing sentiments give him high marks for blowing the whistle on the Vietnam War, but his activism helped undermine America’s war effort and contributed to the Communist victory.

The Johnson Defense Department placed Halperin in charge of compiling a secret history of U.S. involvement in Vietnam, based on classified documents. This secret history later emerged into public view as the so-called “Pentagon Papers.” Halperin and his deputy Leslie Gelb assigned much of the writing to leftwing opponents of the war, such as Daniel Ellsberg who, despite his background as a former Marine and a military analyst for the Rand Corporation, was already evolving into a New Left radical. In his memoir, Secrets, Ellsberg admits to concluding, as early as 1967, that, “we were not fighting on the wrong side; we were the wrong side” in the Vietnam War. [11] Evidently Ellsberg had come to view Ho Chi Minh’s Communist regime as the wave of the future.

With Halperin’s tacit encouragement – and perhaps active collusion – Ellsberg stole the secret history and released it to The New York Times, which published the documents as “The Pentagon Papers” in June 1971.[12] This was a violation of the Espionage Act, which forbids the removal of classified documents from government buildings. Not surprisingly, “The Pentagon Papers” echoed Halperin’s long-standing position that the Vietnam War was unwinnable, and ridiculed Presidents Kennedy and Johnson for stubbornly refusing to heed those of their advisors who shared this opinion. It marked a turning point in America’s failed effort to keep Indo-China from falling to the Communists. The government dropped its case against Ellsberg as Nixon’s power collapsed during the Watergate intrigues.

Halperin went on to become the director of the American Civil Liberties Union from 1984 to 1992 and head of its "National Security Archives." From this position, he waged open war against U.S. intelligence services, through the courts and the press, seeking to strip the government of virtually any power to investigate, monitor or obstruct subversive elements and their activities.[13] It did not take long for Halperin to go the next logical step and argue for abolishing America’s intelligence services altogether. “Using secret intelligence agencies to defend a constitutional republic is akin to the ancient medical practice of employing leeches to take blood from feverish patients. The intent is therapeutic, but in the long run the cure is more deadly than the disease,” Halperin wrote in his 1976 book, The Lawless State: The Crimes of the U.S. Intelligence Agencies.[14]

In a March 21, 1987 article in The Nation, Halperin expanded on this theme and, like Ellsberg, took the position that America was the real villain in the Cold War. He wrote, “Secrecy does not serve national security. Covert operations are incompatible with constitutional government and should be abolished.”[15] This was a call for unilateral disarming of our intelligence services to match the universal disarmament of our military which has long been a staple of the radical agenda.

Evidently, Soros wishes Halperin to continue his war on America’s intelligence services. According to an Open Society Institute press release, one of Halperin’s principal assignments on the Soros team is to battle “post-September 11 policies that threaten the civil liberties of Americans.” [16]

The Plan

No one has published a full list of the attendees at Soros’ July 17 meeting in Southampton, at which Soros laid out his plan to defeat President Bush.[17] However, a partial list is available in accounts that appeared in the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal. These include an impressive array of former Clinton administration officials, among them Halperin. Prior to working for Soros, Halperin had served eight years under Clinton, first as Under Secretary of Defense for Policy and finally as Director of Policy Planning for the Clinton State Department.

The guests at Soros’ beach house also included Clinton’s former chief of staff John Podesta; Jeremy Rosner, former special advisor to Clinton’s Secretary of State Madeline Albright; Robert Boorstin, a former advisor to Clinton’s Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin; and Steven Rosenthal, a leftwing union leader who served the Clinton White House as an advisor on union affairs to Labor Secretary Robert Reich. Carl Pope, executive director of the Sierra Club, and Ellen Malcolm, founder and president of the pro-abortion lobby Emily’s List, also attended the meeting, as did such prominent Democrat donors as auto insurance mogul Peter B. Lewis; founder and CEO of RealNetworks Rob Glaser; Taco Bell heir Rob McKay; and Benson & Hedges tobacco heirs Lewis and Dorothy Cullman.

Months earlier, Soros had hired two political analysts to probe Bush’s defenses. They were Tom Novick, a lobbyist for the Western States Center – a group of radical environmentalists in Oregon – and Democrat media strategist Mark Steitz, president of TSD Communications in Washington DC, whose clients have included the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton presidential campaigns of 1992 and 1996. Jeanne Cummings of The Wall Street Journal reports that both Novick and Steitz were present at the Southampton meeting, to brief the team in person.

Working independently, the two analysts had reached similar conclusions. Both agreed that Bush could be beaten. Voter turnout was the key. The analysts proposed massive get-out-the-vote drives among likely Democrat voters in seventeen “swing” or “battleground” states: Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Iowa, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Washington.

“By morning,” reports Cummings, “the outlines of a new organization began to emerge, and Mr. Soros pledged $10 million to get it started.” The name of that organization was America Coming Together (ACT) – a grassroots activist group designed to coordinate the Shadow Party’s get-out-the-vote drive. ACT would dispatch thousands of activists – some paid, some volunteers – to knock on doors and work phone banks, combining the manpower of leftwing unions, environmentalists, abortion-rights activists and minority race warriors from civil rights organizations.

ACT was not exactly new. A group of Democrat activists had been trying for months to get it off the ground. But, until George Soros stepped in, ACT had languished for lack of donors. Laura Blumenfeld of The Washington Post describes the scene at the July 17 meeting at Soros’ beach house: “Standing on the back deck, the evening sun angling into their eyes, Soros took aside Steve Rosenthal, CEO of the liberal activist group America Coming Together (ACT), and Ellen Malcolm, its president. … Soros told them he would give ACT $10 million. …Before coffee the next morning, his friend Peter Lewis, chairman of the Progressive Corp., had pledged $10 million to ACT. Rob Glaser, founder and CEO of RealNetworks, promised $2 million. Rob McKay, president of the McKay Family Foundation, gave $1 million and benefactors Lewis and Dorothy Cullman committed $500,000. Soros also promised up to $3 million to Podesta's new think tank, the Center for American Progress,” which would function as the policy brains of the new network.[18]

The Shadow Party had been born. Three weeks later, on August 8, The New York Times announced the official roll-out of America Coming Together (ACT), describing it as a political action committee led by Ellen Malcolm and Steven Rosenthal.

Soros next summoned California software developer Wes Boyd to meet him in New York on September 17. Boyd was best known among computer users for his “Flying Toasters” screen saver. The political world knew him as founder of the radical Web site MoveOn.org, the Internet force behind Howard Dean’s anti-war presidential campaign. Boyd had launched the Web site during the Clinton impeachment trial in 1998, offering a petition to censure the President and “move on” to more important matters. Hundreds of thousands of readers responded, and Boyd quickly began milking his growing membership for political contributions. His Web site raised millions for Democrat candidates in three national elections – two mid-terms and one presidential race. When they met in New York, Soros offered Boyd a deal. He and his associate Peter Lewis would donate $1 to MoveOn.org for every $2 Boyd could raise from his members, up to $5 million total from Soros and Lewis combined. Boyd accepted.[19]

By November 2003, the Shadow Party was ready to go public. As Cummings notes in the Wall Street Journal, Soros calculated that the best way to launch his network would be to issue a public statement, calling attention to the record-breaking contributions he had pledged to the Shadow Party. Such an announcement would “stimulate other giving” from Democrat donors still sitting on the fence, Soros thought.[20]

He chose The Washington Post to carry his message. Soros sat down with reporter Laura Blumenfeld and issued his now-famous call for regime change in the USA. “America under Bush is a danger to the world,” Soros declared in that November 11, 2003 interview. Toppling Bush, he said, “is the central focus of my life… a matter of life and death. And I’m willing to put my money where my mouth is.” Would Soros spend his entire $7-billion fortune to defeat Bush, Blumenfeld asked? “If someone guaranteed it,” Soros replied.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/articles/readarticle.asp?ID=15392

>>>There are other people who also allege that the money were coming directly from Moscow. Well, since Janouch was a communist and possible GRU agent, this is no surprise at all.

I think some of the money came from the assests that were taken from the Jews too.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1344150/posts

One of the Nazis who met Haj Amin el-Husseini in the years of Nazi triumphs was one Francois Genoud, an early admirer of Hitler and a founder and militant of the pre-war Swiss Nazi party, the National Front. He met
Husseini in 1936 in the Middle East and once again in Berlin in 1943, while he was an agent of the Abwehr (German intelligence agency) and while Husseini, the British-appointed Mufti of Jerusalem, was urging on the
Holocaust and recruiting Arabs and other Muslims into the Nazi service.

Genoud met him several times in Beirut after the war, until the Mufti died in 1974.
Meanwhile, unrepentant, veteran Nazi Genoud got a management position with
the Red Cross in Brussels4 and later (1958) opened a bank in
Geneva called the Banque Commerciale Arabe (backed by Syrian funds).
Through his connections in Cairo, a post-war sanctuary for sundry Nazi war
criminals, he met leaders of the Algerian FLN and was later invited to run a
bank in newly independent Algeria, the Banque Populaire Arabe. In another role,
he participated in organizing and/or financing the defense of Eichmann in
Israel, of Klaus Barbie in France, and of PLO terrorists in Europe. He counted
among his friends Wadi Haddad and Ali Hassan Salameh, PLO master terrorists
who accomplished airliner hijackings and other high-profile terrorist acts.
Genoud claimed in recent years that what Hitler did "was
proper and in support of peace."5 Carlos met Genoud in the 1970s through
mutual friends in the Habash gang, known as the Popular Front for the
Liberation of Palestine. This was a Marxist faction of the PLO, which Habash
built out of a pan-Arab outfit he led called the Arab Nationalist Movement.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1344150/posts?page=1#1

What do these clients have in common with their lawyer? The same characteristics as another Verges associate, the ex-Nazi, now Islamist sympathizer Francois Genoud—who, as owner of the Arab Commercial Bank in Switzerland, was the apparent paymaster in the Barbie and some Palestinian terrorist cases. They are ideologues and defenders (Garaudy), practitioners (Milosevic, Barbie, Saddam) or would-be practitioners (Bouhired, Kelkal).of mass murder or genocide. Their ideology is totalitarian at its core, and they share yet another common trait of 20th century European totalitarianism and present Islamism–hatred of Jews and Israel.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1320747/posts?page=44#44

Preston, David Lee. "Hitler's Swiss connection". Philadelphia Inquirer(January 5, 1997).
Note: One month after Swiss banking officials and Jewish leaders announced an agreement to set up an independent commission, chaired by former US Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volker, to search for the whereabouts of funds deposited in Switzerland by Holocaust victims, a Swiss citizen named Francois Genoud committed suicide. Author David Lee Preston suggests that Genoud's suicide may be linked to the new commission as well as to Senator D'Amato's investigations for the U.S. Senate Banking Committee and class action lawsuits against Swiss banks filed by Holocaust survivors and victims' heirs. Genoud, a Nazi enthusiast and friend of Hitler's, worked with Swiss and German intelligence during WWII; he was then active in setting up the ODESSA network for the transfer of money from Germany and the evacuation of key Nazi leaders at the end of the war. Postwar, Genoud used his wartime contacts to become an advisor to Arab causes and anti-Israel activities.

Adding on to post 63:

Union Banque Privee and the 'Swiss connection'

Another member of the board of Soros's Quantum Fund is the head of one of
the most controversial Swiss private banks, Edgar de Picciotto, who has been
called "one of the cleverest bankers in Geneva"---and is one of the most
scandal-tainted. De Picciotto, from an old Portuguese Jewish trading family,
who was born in Lebanon, is head of the Geneva private bank CBI-TDB Union
Bancaire Privee, a major player in the gold and offshore hedge funds
business. Hedge funds have been identified by international police agencies
as the fastest-growing outlet for illegal money laundering today.

De Picciotto is a longtime friend and business associate of banker Edmond
Safra, also born in Lebanon, whose family came from Aleppo, Syria, and who
now controls the Republic Bank of New York. Republic Bank has been
identified in U.S. investigations into Russian organized crime, as the bank
involved in transferring billions of U.S. Federal Reserve notes from New
York to organized crime-controlled Moscow banks, on behalf of Russian
organized crime figures. Safra is under investigation by U.S. and Swiss
authorities for laundering Turkish and Columbian drug money. In 1990,
Safra's Trade Development Bank (TDB) of Geneva was merged with de
Picciotto's CBI to create the CBI-TDB Union Banque Privee. The details of
the merger are shrouded in secrecy to this day. As part of the deal, de
Picciotto became a board member of American Express Bank (Switzerland) SA of
Geneva, and two American Express Bank of New York executives sit on the
board of de Picciotto's Union Banque Privee. Safra had sold his Trade
Development Bank to American Express, Inc. in the 1980s. Henry Kissinger
sits on the board of American Express, Inc., which has repeatedly been
implicated in international money-laundering scandals.

De Picciotto's start as a Geneva banker came from Nicholas Baring of the
London Barings Bank, who tapped de Picciotto to run the bank's secret Swiss
bank business. Barings has for centuries been private banker to the British
royal family, and since the bank's collapse in March 1995, has been
overhauled by the Dutch ING Bank, which is reported to be a major
money-laundering institution.

De Picciotto is also a longtime business partner of Venetian businessman
Carlo De Benedetti, who recently was forced to resign as head of Olivetti
Corp. Both persons sit on the board of the Societe Financiere de Geneve
investment holding company in Geneva. De Benedetti is under investigation in
Italy for suspicion of triggering the collapse of Italy's Banco Ambrosiano
in the early 1980s.The head of that bank, Roberto Calvi, was later found
hanging from the London Blackfriar's Bridge, in what police believe was a
masonic ritual murder.

De Picciotto and his Union Banque Privee have been implicated in numerous
drug and illegal money-laundering operations. In November 1994, U.S. federal
agents arrested a senior official of de Picciotto's Geneva bank,
Jean-Jacques Handali, along with two other UBP officials, on charges of
leading a multimillion-dollar drug-money-laundering ring. According to the
U.S. Attorney's Office in Miami, Handali and Union Banque Privee were the
"Swiss connection" in an international drug-money-laundering ring tied to
Colombian and Turkish cocaine and heroin organizations. A close business and
political associate of de Picciotto is a mysterious arm dealer, Helmut
Raiser, who is linked in business dealings with reputed Russian organized
crime kingpin Grigori Luchansky, who controls the Russian and Swiss holding
company Nordex Group.

Another director of Soros's Quantum Fund is Isodoro Albertini, owner of the
Milan stock brokerage firm Albertini and Co. Beat Notz of the Geneva
Banque Worms is another private banker on the board of Soros's Quantum Fund,
as is Alberto Foglia, who is chief of the Lugano, Switzerland Banca del
Ceresio. Lugano, just across the Swiss border from Milan, is notorious as
the financial secret bank haven for Italian organized crime families,
including the heroin mafia behind the 1980s "Pizza Connection" case. The
Banca del Ceresio has been one of the secret Swiss banks identified in the
recent Italian political corruption scandals as the repository of bribe
funds of several Italian politicians now in prison.

Right you are.

One thing has to be under stood about London.

This city was always a major KGB hub for the entire western Europe.

According to French intelligence officer Pierre de Villamarest analysis, he uncovered that Gestapo organized major operation code name Vampire at the end of WW2, when the Nazis infiltrated most of the underground groups around Europe, and these agents sleepers had orders to keep promoting the Nazi ideology and evidentially take over such groups, political parties and so on.

Well, one man who was the closest to Hitler at the end of WW2 was suspected Soviet agent Martin Borman.

There is a suspicion that he actually made it out, when the Russian Red Army came to Berlin.

Russians got their hand on all these files, so now they basically own Europe.

Since Soros family was involved with the Nazis [but Soros's father was a prisoner at the Bolshevik prison camp in Siberia - and you don't leave such a camp alive, unless you sign on], and there had to be a Nazi gestapo file on the entire family, these people were approached by the Russians and used as agents for the communists.

It is estimated that in Western Europe, there are at least 30 thousand financiers and industrialists, who were recruited based on such compromising data and subsequent blackmail from the KGB, as Soviet agents.

Soros made it to London, was able to survive and start a financial company alone, just by a pure luck ?

When you take [only] into consideration that the whole collapse of communism was orchestrated by Moscow, and since Soros's main credibility is that he supported Solidarity [Poland] and Charter 77 [Czechoslovakia], with money, if we consider that, it all makes sense, how this is playing out.

Soros basically owns the Demo-rat party, so if he's a mole, Russia basically runs one side of our political spectrum.

Were all the democrats protecting Clinton from impeachment ? Yes.

Were the democrats preventing the drilling in Alaska, so the oil would be cheaper ?
Yes.

I like how the Democrats plan to make our oil in Alaska a
protected wildlife park (If desolation and ice can be considered wildlife) hang a UN sign on it and give it to the communists. (NOT)!

Through an international treaty, the United States is allowing the United Nations and its member countries access to and control of American soil - in particular, our historic buildings and treasured wilderness.
Through an international treaty, the United States is allowing the United Nations and its member countries access to and control of American soil - in particular, our historic buildings and treasured wilderness.

68 percent of all US national parks, monuments and preserves have been designated as World Heritage Sites.2

1972 Treaty Grants the United Nations Control Over American Historical Landmarks
http://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA341.html
http://www.nationalcenter.org/PRLandSov299.html
Our National Parks Now Belong to United Nations
http://www.texemarrs.com/061997/PARKS.HTM

Are these people ideologically close to communists, or some perhaps secret communists themselves ?
Yes.

Read Golitsyn, read what he wrote in The Perestroika Deception, you'll get the picture.

We may be in a nuclear war with commies soon [Russia, China, and the rest of them], and so better get ready, their plan is working, we are still blind to it.

The KGB's Man
Moscow turned Arafat into a terrorist.

BY ION MIHAI PACEPA
Saturday, September 27, 2003 12:01 a.m. EDT

The Israeli government has vowed to expel Yasser Arafat, calling him an "obstacle" to peace. But the 72-year-old Palestinian leader is much more than that; he is a career terrorist, trained, armed and bankrolled by the Soviet Union and its satellites for decades.

Before I defected to America from Romania, leaving my post as chief of Romanian intelligence, I was responsible for giving Arafat about $200,000 in laundered cash every month throughout the 1970s. I also sent two cargo planes to Beirut a week, stuffed with uniforms and supplies. Other Soviet bloc states did much the same. Terrorism has been extremely profitable for Arafat. According to Forbes magazine, he is today the sixth wealthiest among the world's "kings, queens & despots," with more than $300 million stashed in Swiss bank accounts.

"I invented the hijackings [of passenger planes]," Arafat bragged when I first met him at his PLO headquarters in Beirut in the early 1970s. He gestured toward the little red flags pinned on a wall map of the world that labeled Israel as "Palestine." "There they all are!" he told me, proudly. The dubious honor of inventing hijacking actually goes to the KGB, which first hijacked a U.S. passenger plane in 1960 to Communist Cuba. Arafat's innovation was the suicide bomber, a terror concept that would come to full flower on 9/11.

In 1972, the Kremlin put Arafat and his terror networks high on all Soviet bloc intelligence services' priority list, including mine. Bucharest's role was to ingratiate him with the White House. We were the bloc experts at this. We'd already had great success in making Washington--as well as most of the fashionable left-leaning American academics of the day--believe that Nicolae Ceausescu was, like Josip Broz Tito, an "independent" Communist with a "moderate" streak.

KGB chairman Yuri Andropov in February 1972 laughed to me about the Yankee gullibility for celebrities. We'd outgrown Stalinist cults of personality, but those crazy Americans were still naïve enough to revere national leaders. We would make Arafat into just such a figurehead and gradually move the PLO closer to power and statehood. Andropov thought that Vietnam-weary Americans would snatch at the smallest sign of conciliation to promote Arafat from terrorist to statesman in their hopes for peace.

Right after that meeting, I was given the KGB's "personal file" on Arafat. He was an Egyptian bourgeois turned into a devoted Marxist by KGB foreign intelligence. The KGB had trained him at its Balashikha special-ops school east of Moscow and in the mid-1960s decided to groom him as the future PLO leader. First, the KGB destroyed the official records of Arafat's birth in Cairo, replacing them with fictitious documents saying that he had been born in Jerusalem and was therefore a Palestinian by birth.
The KGB's disinformation department then went to work on Arafat's four-page tract called Falastinuna ("Our Palestine"), turning it into a 48-page monthly magazine for the Palestinian terrorist organization al-Fatah. Arafat had headed al-Fatah since 1957. The KGB distributed it throughout the Arab world and in West Germany, which in those days played host to many Palestinian students. The KGB was adept at magazine publication and distribution; it had many similar periodicals in various languages for its front organizations in Western Europe, like the World Peace Council and the World Federation of Trade Unions.

Next, the KGB gave Arafat an ideology and an image, just as it did for loyal Communists in our international front organizations. High-minded idealism held no mass-appeal in the Arab world, so the KGB remolded Arafat as a rabid anti-Zionist. They also selected a "personal hero" for him--the Grand Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini, the man who visited Auschwitz and reproached the Germans for not having killed even more Jews. In 1985 Arafat paid homage to the mufti, saying he was "proud no end" to be walking in his footsteps.

Arafat was an important undercover operative for the KGB. Right after the 1967 Six Day War, Moscow got him appointed to chairman of the PLO. Egyptian ruler Gamal Abdel Nasser, a Soviet puppet, proposed the appointment. In 1969 the KGB asked Arafat to declare war on American "imperial-Zionism" during the first summit of the Black Terrorist International, a neo-Fascist pro-Palestine organization financed by the KGB and Libya's Moammar Gadhafi. It appealed to him so much, Arafat later claimed to have invented the imperial-Zionist battle cry. But in fact, "imperial-Zionism" was a Moscow invention, a modern adaptation of the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion," and long a favorite tool of Russian intelligence to foment ethnic hatred. The KGB always regarded anti-Semitism plus anti-imperialism as a rich source of anti-Americanism.

The KGB file on Arafat also said that in the Arab world only people who were truly good at deception could achieve high status. We Romanians were directed to help Arafat improve "his extraordinary talent for deceiving." The KGB chief of foreign intelligence, Gen. Aleksandr Sakharovsky, ordered us to provide cover for Arafat's terror operations, while at the same time building up his international image. "Arafat is a brilliant stage manager," his letter concluded, "and we should put him to good use." In March 1978 I secretly brought Arafat to Bucharest for final instructions on how to behave in Washington. "You simply have to keep on pretending that you'll break with terrorism and that you'll recognize Israel--over, and over, and over," Ceausescu told him for the umpteenth time. Ceausescu was euphoric over the prospect that both Arafat and he might be able to snag a Nobel Peace Prize with their fake displays of the olive branch.

In April 1978 I accompanied Ceausescu to Washington, where he charmed President Carter. Arafat, he urged, would transform his brutal PLO into a law-abiding government-in-exile if only the U.S. would establish official relations. The meeting was a great success for us. Mr. Carter hailed Ceausescu, dictator of the most repressive police state in Eastern Europe, as a "great national and international leader" who had "taken on a role of leadership in the entire international community." Triumphant, Ceausescu brought home a joint communiqué in which the American president stated that his friendly relations with Ceausescu served "the cause of the world."
Three months later I was granted political asylum by the U.S. Ceausescu failed to get his Nobel Peace Prize. But in 1994 Arafat got his--all because he continued to play the role we had given him to perfection. He had transformed his terrorist PLO into a government-in-exile (the Palestinian Authority), always pretending to call a halt to Palestinian terrorism while letting it continue unabated. Two years after signing the Oslo Accords, the number of Israelis killed by Palestinian terrorists had risen by 73%.

On Oct. 23, 1998, President Clinton concluded his public remarks to Arafat by thanking him for "decades and decades and decades of tireless representation of the longing of the Palestinian people to be free, self-sufficient, and at home." The current administration sees through Arafat's charade but will not publicly support his expulsion. Meanwhile, the aging terrorist has consolidated his control over the Palestinian Authority and marshaled his young followers for more suicide attacks.

Mr. Pacepa was the highest ranking intelligence officer ever to have defected from the former Soviet bloc. The author of "Red Horizons" (Regnery, 1987), he is finishing a book on the origins of current anti-Americanism

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110004075

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.