Soros: To get things done, Buy the Government

[Alerter_]

"That he has installed his own paid representatives in the government of Ukraine — and, in the words of a longtime associate, believes that you "buy" governments to get things done — might also, conceivably, be viewed as a minor indiscretion of an idiosyncratic but beneficent individual. Connie Bruck, The World According to Soros, The New Yorker, 23-Jan-1995, p. 73."

Soros is anti-Bush - who isn't? But I'm disappointed to see so many DUers gladly sell out our movements to the first billionaire CEO that gives us the time of day. Soros is SERIOUS danger to the Democratic party and liberals and progressives in general. Soros' money comes with STRINGS ATTACHED.

http://ukar.org/soros01.html

Soros makes no bones about the interventionist nature of his role in Ukraine. At one point, he remarked, jocularly, "If this isn't meddling in the affairs of a foreign nation, I don't know what is!"

...

Part time philanthropist, part time plunderer? How to avoid noticing that this particular philanthropist's career consists in getting rich by taking money away from others in a vast, international poker game, in which no goods or services trade hands, and in which the only goal is to pauperize all opponents by outwitting them? How does a poker player who thrives under the guidance of this motivation find room in his personality for selfless philanthropy? How can such a philanthropist manage to avoid viewing the very people that he is giving money to as sheep that he will be able to shear tomorrow just like the sheep that he sheared yesterday? Had it been the case that subsequent to George Soros's intervention in Ukraine, the nation had prospered, then we would be obligated to consider thanking him. But as, instead, Ukraine has instead been plundered, what thanks are owed George Soros? — Perhaps that without his intervention, Ukraine would have been plundered even worse?

Or full time plunderer? More cynical observers might tend to quite a different view — that George Soros disburses his funds primarily to buy a controlling interest in the government of the nation that he purports to help, even while scattering beads and mirrors to the natives in the streets. Their turn to top up George Soros's coffers will not be long in arriving.

[The Backlash Cometh]

1. I hope Democrats don't make the same mistake the Republicans made

I know the Democratic party does have power-hungry capitalist in their midst. And nothing wrong with that, as long as you don't use the party to advance your personal fortunes. Let's put some objectivity back in government; let's hire some honest brokers, not just for the finance world, but for journalism as well. Let's strengthen our whistle-blower laws. That might be a good start to put an end to wealthy people who try to hijack our government.

[bain_sidhe]

2. Interesting...

Just came back from reading the article about "GOP has Soros in it's sights" (http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x599473)

GOP HAS SOROS IN ITS SIGHTS
http://www.nypost.com/news/nationalnews/22241.htm

June 3, 2004 -- WASHINGTON — Republicans launched an attack on billionaire financier and anti-Bush fanatic George Soros, mocking him as the "Lord of the Democrats" and outlining a plan to rip his out-of-the-mainstream views.

[Alerter_]

5. All this info about Soros is from the 1990s

It's typical for Dems and Pukes to snipe at each other's billionaire's, and the GOP is going to go after Soros, since he has "identified" himself with the Democratic party now.

That's one of the dangers of letting this guy "buy" our party and movement.

[sangh0]

14. And resurrected by you

coincidentally I'm sure, a day after the news reports that the Bush* admin plans to go after Soros.

[outinforce]

17. If You Have Something To Say, Mrs. Bush,....

If you want to accuse someone of being something, Mrs. Bush, then why don't you just do it?

[sangh0]

3. Do you frequent anti-semitic web sites?

http://ukar.org/tax.html

[sangh0]

4. Do you like Holocaust deniers and Nazi apologists?

http://ukar.org/demlinks.html

[sangh0]

6. More anti-Semitism

blaming Jews for a massacre

http://ukar.org/lvivpogr.htm

[Alerter_]

8. First link I found with Soros info from 1990s

Forget the site - look at the mainstream sources referenced. The quotes come from a pro-Soros biography. Or, just attack the messenger, that works too!

[sangh0]

9. "Forget the site "???

You'd like that, wouldn't you?

And it makes no sense to ignore some sources (the owner of the web page) while focusin on others.

[Alerter_]

12. anything for you sangh0

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=120x18301

Here, I've asked for the post to be removed, since it has anti-semitic stuff on it. I'll find a better link and use that tomorrow, okay?

But please remember to always question my motives in the future - vague hints and intimations work well...

[sangh0]

13. Someone who does nothing to check credibility

is someone who is obviously NOT concerned with credibility, and if you're not concerned with credibility, than I am justified in questioning your motives.

Even worse, after I pointed it out, you continued to defend the article it carried. If you had made an honest mistake, I would think you'd acknowledge that when the sources lack of credibility was pointed out to you. Instead, you continued to defend it.

If you demonstrate no commitment to the truth, there's no reason why I shouldn't question your commitment to the truth.

[Alerter_]

15. I have no idea if the site is credible or not, the SOURCE is credible

Question my motives all you want - I'm familiar with your posts. The quotes from Soros and his friends are accurate. The SOURCE of the quotes are credible, even if the site they were quoted on is not.

Soros' history as a crook and his arbitrage is well known and not a secret.

"If you demonstrate no commitment to the truth, there's no reason why I shouldn't question your commitment to the truth."

Lol! So far, you have managed to completely remove the focus from Soros - the point of the thread. You're good, sangh0!

[sangh0]

19. The SOURCE is an anti-semitic website

for all you know, they made up the "sources" you seem to like

The quotes from Soros and his friends are accurate

How do you know that? Because the anti-semites on that website told you? Do you always believe what Holocaust deniers tell you?

Soros' history as a crook and his arbitrage is well known and not a secret.

Then there should be no need to cite an anti-semitic website.

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sangh0]

20. "Level charges"?

All I did was ask a question. You do that ALL of the time.

[On the Road]

7. I am Having Some Trouble Figuring Out Where the Site is Coming From

They describe themselves as:



They also state that the site is censored in France:

Users of the French Google at www.google.fr should be aware that it will never point to any document on the UKAR web site, no matter what string is searched for. The same censorship is exercised by the Lycos search engine, which could be a reason for boycotting Lycos.

They seem to have a number of links defending various Ukrainians accused of different things, of opposing anti-holocaust revisionists, and of publicizing historical crimes against Ukraine. They seem to be, or to portray themselves as, nonpartisan nationalists.

I can understand how such a group would be opposed to George Soros's influence in Ukraine (think of how bent out of shape Americans get about relatively small foreign campaign contributions).

I just don't know enough about the situation to judge. Some of the articles claim corrupt involvement in the Ukraine by Al Gore, Hillary Clinton, and the Clinton administration. Could be true. I'm sure that there's more to the story, though.

None of the charges against George Soros make sense the way they're presented. Apparently he didn't profit financially, at least not according to the article. I realize that Leonid Kuchma is a former Soviet and is considered corrupt. It is also true that free-market and neoliberal governments have engaged in enormous looting in former Soviet states as well.

I've heard George Soros talk about finances in government. He has always refrained from using his wealth to change policies in the US. His current 527 organization is a big change, and one that I welcome.

[Alerter_]

10. I have no idea who or what the site is about

The quotes posted are from a mainstream bio of Soros, and it's quoting his friends. If the rest of the site is full of nonsense, sorry, I didn't take the time to research it beyond the Soros page and their "Who are we" page.

It's irrelevant - Soros' activities have been well known for years. Isn't he still wanted in some countries for currency fraud?

[On the Road]

16. Well, If I Don't Know a Site

I subject any claims to extra scrutiny. I read the excerpts from the New Yorker article, and didn't see anything daming other than that Soros is Jewish and that he financally supports Kuchma:

Kuchma was rated an outsider in a large field of candidates, but in early July he won an upset victory. Soros says that he had nothing to do with it. However, Evelyn Herfkens, of the World Bank, says, "The Bank cannot support election campaigns of reformers; in the Ukraine, Soros did." There was, at the least, a massive effort to level the playing field: the April, 1994, bulletin of the Soros foundation lists twelve grants, in the areas of civil society, education, economics, and mass media, eleven of them for amounts ranging from five thousand dollars to thirty-one thousand eight hundred dollars, with most in the lower range. But the twelfth — to support independent television stations' coverage of the Ukrainian elections — was for $363,100, an extraordinary infusion of capital in Ukraine, and one that would be spent in a three month period.

Everything else just seems to be innuendo and accusations -- and amazingly, the article really doesn't seem to accuse him of anything other than undue influence. It just smacks of a lot of the anti-Gore and anti-Clinton pieces in the 90's. If Demcrats tossed everyone overboard who has articles like this written about them, we wouldn't have any leaders or prominent supporters.

Here's another article more supportive of Soros. It is originally from the New York Times, although other than that I can't vouch for the content:

MINSK, Belarus—For the past decade, George Soros, the Hungarian-born financier and philanthropist, has spent more than a billion dollars promoting a free press and political pluralism abroad—everything the world’s authoritarian rulers despise.

Now some of those political leaders are fighting back. In Albania, Kyrgyzstan, Serbia and Croatia, Soros’ foundations have been accused of shielding spies and breaking currency laws. His employees have been assaulted and threatened with imprisonment or financial sanction for alleged crimes.

---snip

Soros’ philanthropy has its critics. Some say it is too impulsive and mercurial, too arrogant and micromanaged, too confined to friends on the left of center and not as open to public scrutiny. Others criticize his investment in countries to which he gives; Soros’ defenders reply by citing strict rules within the foundations for avoiding conflicts of interest.

http://www.chronicle.home.by/9707/9707141102.htm

[sangh0]

21. I wonder if you'll be accused of "ignoring the messenger"

Because I pointed out that this website lacked credibility, I was accused of "attacking the messenger" and "ignoring the message" (In fact, the 2nd charge was just repeated). Since you have actually taken the time to examine the message, and found it just as lacking in credibility, I wonder how Alerter_ will try to blow this one off.

[Dr Fate]

11. Republicans expect DEMS to bring a knife to gun fight.

Dr Fate is not buying it.

[Moderator]

22. Locking

it's been established that the source here is not a good one.

thx