What do you give the man who has everything? The obvious answer is penicillin, but George Soros, one of the world’s richest men, wants his own continent. And it’s ours.
He doesn’t want to own Europe, merely remake it. Soros is the Hungarian-American multi-billionaire with a penchant for using his vast wealth to further causes seeking to dismantle Western culture and the social and political structures to which it has given birth.
Soros, ‘The Man Who Broke the Bank of England’, made £1bn profit selling sterling short when it crashed out of the European exchange rate mechanism in 1992. During the 1997 Asian financial crisis, Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir bin Mohamad accused Soros of bringing down the nation’s currency through his trading activities.
Soros uses his profits relentlessly to support progressive causes. In 2015 the Soros-funded Open Society Institute (now renamed Open Society Foundations) approved $650,000 to ‘invest in technical assistance and support for the groups at the core of the burgeoning #BlackLivesMatter movement’.
Soros does not confine his activity to the US. According to Hungarian Prime Minister Victor Orbán, Soros’s network has ‘a vast sphere of influence’ in the European Parliament and other EU institutions. Orbán’s claim that the aim of the ‘Soros network’ is to create a mixed population in Europe is not too far-fetched.
As well as spending his own money in pursuit of changing Europe, Soros, who describes himself as a ‘stateless statesman’, is also keen on spending our money. In a plan revealed in 2015 Soros made clear how he would solve Europe’s immigration crisis. Basically, it was to make it easier for immigrants to come in.
Soros reckons that for the foreseeable future the EU must accept at least a million asylum-seekers annually. Further, the EU should provide 15,000 euros per asylum-seeker for each of the first two years to help cover housing, health-care and education costs — and to make accepting refugees more appealing to member states.
We are not only to fund the immigrants pouring into Europe from the Middle East, we are to fund the propaganda which will make us welcome them. We can do this by going into even greater debt. According to Soros, the EU ‘can raise these funds by issuing long-term bonds using its largely untapped AAA borrowing capacity’.
In the Soros plan, the annual influx of 1,000,000 immigrants is accompanied by a diminution of national identity. To ensure the immigrant influx occurs smoothly, ‘the EU must immediately start building a single EU Asylum and Migration Agency and eventually a single EU Border Guard. The current patchwork of 28 separate asylum systems does not work’.
Possibly the creation of an extremely large bureaucratic organisation can lead to better results: the larger the agency the greater the efficiency. Or perhaps one large bureaucracy is easier to manipulate than many small ones.
Soros wants safe channels to be created within Europe enabling immigrants to reach their ‘destination countries’ with the least inconvenience. Once these are established, the ‘logical step is to extend safe avenues to the front-line region, thereby reducing the number of migrants who make the dangerous Mediterranean crossing’.
Soros’s plan envisages an unimpeded conveyor belt from the Middle East and Africa for 1,000,000 immigrants a year, all paid for by the European taxpayer. Added to this Soros encourages us to ‘provide adequate funding to Lebanon, Jordan and Turkey to support the four million refugees currently living in those countries’.
He estimates that annual costs are at least 5,000 euros per refugee, or a total of 20bn euros. Of this, up to 10bn euros is to be provided by the EU with the balance coming from the US and the rest of the world. Again, the source of this largesse is European debt: ‘This could be added to the amount of long-term bonds issued to support asylum-seekers in Europe.’
Soros has form when it comes to societal manipulation. Recently he transferred about $18bn (£13.7bn) to his Open Society Foundations, bringing his lifetime giving to the organisation to $32bn and making it the third-largest charitable foundation in the world. OSF works globally to ‘build vibrant and tolerant democracies’ and has given away nearly $14bn since it was founded in 1979.
Soros used OSF to fund opposition research on critics of radical Islam and to discredit the Israeli government, according to more than 2,500 documents put online by hackers. The sum of $200,000 was given to the Center for American Progress, a liberal think-tank, to conduct ‘high-quality opposition research’ to fight ‘anti-Muslim xenophobia and to promote tolerance’. Internal records, made public by the hacking group DC Leaks, show that OSF spent $40million between 2008 and 2010 on programmes aimed at weakening US counter-terrorism policy.
The OSF additionally funded a study by the New America Foundation which equated the terror threat posed by Right-wing extremists with the threat posed by Al-Qaeda.
A memo discussing grants of October 17, 2011, notes that New America received $250,000, partly to write two reports. The first was aimed at creating a ‘safe space in which Muslims in America feel free to hold controversial political dialogues, [and] organize without fear of unwarranted government surveillance’. The second aimed to ‘correct mistaken public beliefs that Al-Qaeda’s brand of terrorism is unique to Islam and that most terrorists are Muslim’.
Soros’s actions indicate a wish to hamstring authorities everywhere when it comes to restricting Muslim immigration and monitoring Islamic extremism. In October 2016, the Open Society Foundations released a report asserting that the ‘UK government should repeal 2015 legislation that imposes a legal obligation on education and healthcare professionals to report individuals believed to be at risk of being drawn into terrorism’.
The health and education sectors are the most frequent contact-points of Muslim communities with non-Muslims. It is likely that employees in these sectors could notice the first indications of radicalisation, and by reporting it contribute to fight against radical Islamism.
Money talks, and sometimes what it has to say is dangerous.