Africa for the Africans, Asia for the Asians, White countries for everyone. Everybody says there is this RACE problem. Everybody says this RACE problem will be solved when the third world pours into EVERY White country and ONLY into White countries.
The Netherlands and Belgium are just as crowded as Japan or Taiwan, but nobody says Japan or Taiwan will solve this RACE problem by bringing in millions of third-worlders and “assimilating” with them.
Everybody says the final solution to this RACE problem is for EVERY White country and ONLY White countries to “assimilate” with all those non-Whites.
What if I said there was this RACE problem and this RACE problem would be solved only if hundreds of millions of non-Blacks were brought into EVERY Black country and ONLY into Black countries?
How long would it take anyone to realize I’m not talking about a RACE problem. I am talking about the final solution to the BLACK problem?
And how long would it take any sane Black man to notice this and what kind of psycho Black man wouldn’t object to this?
But if I tell that obvious truth about the ongoing program of genocide against my race, the White race, liberals and respectable conservatives will agree that I am a NaziwhowantstocloneHitler.
In America, we apply the term ‘Hitler’ to make the aggressor appear like the victim. Certainly, this would be the case in Europe and US foreign policy in terms of Ukraine and Russia, says Patrick Henningsen, geopolitical analyst at 21st Century Wire.com
There have been many attempts by the mass media and some politicians to vilify US President Donald Trump, including labeling him as Adolf Hitler.
One historian has gone so far as to suggest that some of the US President’s views might have been drawn from Mein Kampf, the autobiographical book by the Nazi Party leader.
RT: In recent months President Trump’s critics haven’t been able to resist this particular comparison. What do you make of that?
Patrick Henningsen: Well, the ‘Hitlerization’ – for the lack of a better term – has become a type of celebrity reporting. In other words, the term has become almost meaningless. It is a kind of comical characterization of someone in the past. There have been many Hitlers. Right now it’ll be Donald Trump; in Europe, it’s Vladimir Putin; Viktor Orban from Hungary has been called Hitler. Anybody who is populist, or leaning nationalist – Nigel Farage, another Hitler; Marine Le Pen, a potential Hitler there, as well.
And the US has branded many Hitlers recently [Bashar] Assad, another Hitler; [Muammar] Gaddafi… Manuel Noriega. We can go back to the 80’s: Hosni Mubarak, Ben Ali. Viktor Yanukovych, former President of Ukraine – another Hitler; Slobodan Milosevic… And the list goes on and on.
In the case of America, through the media people are told every day that Trump is threatening their American identity, as it were. So again, the Hitler appropriation is made toward Donald Trump. So it is equating populism with fascism, but then it is not really related to fascism in a historical sense or political sense, and again a label. It doesn’t address National Socialism, which was what Hitler’s party was. Hitler was a fascist.
It all becomes meaningless very quickly. ‘Hitlerization’ – the term has been weaponized. The term fascism has been weaponized. In the case of America, we apply the term ‘Hitler’ to make the aggressor appear like the victim. Certainly, this would be the case in Europe and US foreign policy in terms of Ukraine and Russia. In other words, the US has orchestrated a coup in Kiev: tremendous backing, covert and political to topple an elected government there. But then we’ll use this ‘Hitlerization’ of Vladimir Putin to make it look like Russia was the aggressor when it was the opposite – the West was the aggressor and destabilized Ukraine and created this situation, which it is today.
RT: The mainstream media hasn’t pulled any punches when it comes to President Trump’s policies from front pages depicting him beheading the Statue of Liberty to news pundits pondering the impact of his assassination. Do you think people buy into these stories?
PH: In terms of the people who believe or buy into the Hitler label, or buy into the fascist label, as it is universally applied these days in a kind of commercial sense, there is validity to it. In other words, they do believe Donald Trump is the reincarnation of Hitler, because the media tells them that every day. And certain politicians are using that as a sort of a term of scorn against Donald Trump. So for them it is very real.
But the reality is when you dig down, and you scrape away all the rhetoric and the hyperbole, we have a President Donald Trump in America now, who is basically courting labor unions. This is the antithesis, some might say, of fascism – certainly something that Hitler didn’t do in his rise to power in Germany. So Trump is basically recapturing a portion of the electorate, in this case you could say the white-working class, but really any working class union people that were basically cast aside by the Democratic Party over the last 20-30 years in favor of an expedite corporate policy, or the corporatization policies that created off-shoring of US jobs, which gave credence to what Trump’s campaign was all about. The media has completely inverted – they have basically turned reality on its head by using these terms like “the next Hitler,” or “Fascism.” The language has been rendered completely meaningless now; it’s just a hyperbolic label.
The activities of organizations funded by US billionaire investor George Soros in Hungary are “anti-democratic,” as they want to undermine the government in Budapest, the foreign minister of Hungary told RT.
Soros “would like this government to fail, he would like to kind of fire this government because he doesn’t like our approach, doesn’t like our policies,” Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto told RT’s Sophie Shevardnadze.
“We find it very anti-democratic if someone from abroad would like to influence Hungarian voters on whom to vote for,” he asserted.
Several days before the interview, the Hungarian parliament began to discuss a bill allowing authorities to audit NGO executives and request detailed reports on their foreign donations.
Earlier in January, chairman of the ruling Fidesz party Szilard Nemeth said that “these organizations must be pushed back with all available tools, and I think they must be swept out, and now I believe the international conditions are right for this with the election of the new president [Donald Trump].”
Last September, Nemeth, who is also the deputy chairman of Hungary’s National Security Committee, submitted a list of 22 NGOs “connected to the Soros network for the purpose of having these organizations screened.”
Foreign Minister Szijjarto said it is obviously the right of his country to be protected from foreign influence. “This is what we have heard a lot from the US for the last months – that external influence is so dangerous… So, it’s a good reason – if this is the American position, it can be our position as well.”
Hungary, which lies at the very heart of Europe, last year became a main passageway for hundreds of thousands of migrants and refugees eager to reach northern European countries. The government, led by right-wing President Viktor Orban, responded by erecting fences along Hungary’s borders and introducing strict border controls. Budapest has consistently refused EU-backed mandatory resettlement quotas, calling them a blow to member states’ sovereignty.
Szijjarto cited intelligence reports alleging that “there were organizations which helped illegal migrants find ways to Hungary, to find where they could violate our border, to find out how to apply for asylum status, and these reports have said that George Soros was in the background of these organizations.”
Countries to Hungary’s east and south are concerned about Soros’ operations, too. In Macedonia, an organization called Stop Operation Soros (SOS) has been launched. Its founder, Nikola Srbov, accused Soros of hijacking civil society, calling upon followers to “fight against one-mindedness in the civil sector, which is devised and led by Soros,” according to Vecer newspaper.
Russian prosecutors branded the Open Society Foundation (OSF), a major Soros asset, and Open Society Institute’s Assistance Foundation threats to the country’s constitutional order and national security in 2015, and banned them from providing grants to Russian partners.
Groups run by Soros have also been accused of meddling in Ukrainian affairs and supporting the 2013 Euromaidan protests that led to the ouster of democratically-elected President Viktor Yanukovich.
Soros behind mass Muslim migration in Europe
Jamie White | Infowars.com – JANUARY 26, 2017
A new initiative called Stop Operation Soros (SOS) is launching in the Balkan nation of Macedonia to counter the influence of globalist billionaire George Soros.
The founders of the group called on all “free-minded citizens” to join them in the “fight against one-mindedness in the civil sector, which is devised and led by George Soros,” reports a Slovenian newspaper.
Soros-funded non-government organizations have monopolized civil society in Macedonia and used their influence to suppress dissenting views, said SOS cofounder Nikola Srbov.
“The Open Society Foundation, operating under the Soros umbrella, used its funding and personnel to support violent processes in Macedonia,” he said in a press conference Tuesday. “That is unacceptable and goes beyond the principles of civic organizing.”
Soros set up the Open Society Foundation in in the 1980s with the stated goal of helping former Soviet bloc countries transition from communism, but in reality, the foundation is used to destabilize governments and foment discontent within countries.
And Macedonia isn’t the first country that’s turned against Soros.
Earlier this month, Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban announced that the Hungarian government would begin cracking down on any organizations linked to Soros.
“In every country, they will want to displace Soros,” Orban said in December. “In the coming year, Soros and his forces will be squeezed out.”
In 2014, Soros openly admitted on CNN that the OSF was involved in the violent overthrow of Ukraine’s government, which resulted in Russia banning Soros and his NGOs from the country the following year, calling him a “security threat” to the former Soviet nation.
“It was found that the activity of the Open Society Foundations and the Open Society Institute Assistance Foundation represents a threat to the foundations of the constitutional system of the Russian Federation and the security of the state,” reads the Russian press statement.
As nationalism continues to rise around the world fueled by President Trump’s election, it’s reasonable to assume that this won’t be the last instance a European country kicks out Soros and his shadowy groups.
By Jay Syrmopoulos
An investigation by a New York Times affiliate has revealed that billionaire globalist financier, George Soros, who recently called Donald Trump a “would-be dictator” during an interview at Davos, and whose Open Society Foundation works to finance and forward progressive causes across the world, and is intimately connected to numerous color revolutions, the Arab Spring, and various other political uprisings across the globe, has been revealed to be connected to more than 50 of the groups that organized the nationwide “Women’s Marches” that saw millions of Americans take to the streets across the country.
The march’s official website says, “We stand together, recognizing that defending the most marginalized among us is defending all of us.” Many people turned out to be a manifestation of that ideal, but it’s important to understand the reality of what is happening on a strategic political level as an inorganic politically contrived and funded event. This, in no way, takes away from the validity of standing up for women’s issues but is important to note that women are being used as pawns in a larger ideological political game that has international overtones of power politics.
These marches were largely billed as “spontaneous” and “grassroots” actions, by publications like The Guardian and Vox. However, the reality exposed by an investigation by self-described liberal feminist, Asra Q. Nomani, writing for New York Times affiliate Women in the World, revealed that after studying the “funding, politics and talking points of the some 403 groups that are ‘partners’ of the march,” contrary to the non-partisan rhetoric used in these marches, they were not really “women’s march” but were rather “for women who are anti-Trump.”
Nomani reveals that the “Women’s Marches” were actually organized as political tools to be used to strategically forward a progressive political agenda against President Donald Trump — exposing the protests to largely be an organized, top-down driven political operation — and not an organic movement of concerned Americans taking to the streets as reported by the mainstream media.
According to Nomani’s Women in the World/New York Times report:
Following the money, I poured through documents of billionaire George Soros and his Open Society philanthropy, because I wondered: What is the link between one of Hillary Clinton’s largest donors and the “Women’s March”?
I found out: plenty.
By my draft research, which I’m opening up for crowd-sourcing on GoogleDocs, Soros has funded, or has close relationships with, at least 56 of the march’s “partners,” including “key partners” Planned Parenthood, which opposes Trump’s anti-abortion policy, and the National Resource Defense Council, which opposes Trump’s environmental policies. The other Soros ties with “Women’s March” organizations include the partisan MoveOn.org (which was fiercely pro-Clinton), the National Action Network (which has a former executive director lauded by Obama senior advisor Valerie Jarrett as “a leader of tomorrow” as a march co-chair and another official as “the head of logistics”). Other Soros grantees who are “partners” in the march are the American Civil Liberties Union, Center for Constitutional Rights, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. March organizers and the organizations identified here haven’t yet returned queries for comment…Much like post-election protests, which included a sign, “Kill Trump,” were not “spontaneous,” as reported by some media outlets, the “Women’s March” is an extension of strategic identity politics that has so fractured America today, from campuses to communities. On the left or the right, it’s wrong. But, with the inauguration, we know the politics. With the march, “women” have been appropriated for a clearly anti-Trump day. When I shared my thoughts with her, my yoga studio owner said it was “sad” the march’s organizers masked their politics. “I want love for everyone,” she said.
The way Soros operates is as an “ideological philanthropist,” whose Open Society Foundation provides funding for organizations whose interests align with his own, and which blurs the line between political advocacy and social justice – thus being able to leverage selected/funded social justice organizations to affect political discourse.
This method is confirmed in a memo released by WikiLeaks, which was sent to Soros by Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta. The Clinton campaign reveals the political motives behind using grassroots organizations to “control political discourse.” Podesta wrote to Soros that he wanted to “better utilize these networks to drive the content of politics through a strong echo chamber.”
Control the political discourse. So much effort over the past few years has been focused on better coordinating, strengthening, and developing progressive institutions and leaders. Now that this enhanced infrastructure is in place—grassroots organizing; multi-issue advocacy groups; think tanks; youth outreach; faith communities; micro-targeting outfits; the netroots and blogosphere—we need to better utilize these networks to drive the content of politics through a strong “echo chamber” and message delivery system.
Anyone familiar with the history of the Soros Open Society Foundations in Eastern Europe and around the world since the late 1980s, will know that his supposedly philanthropic “democracy-building” projects in Poland, Russia, or Ukraine in the 1990s allowed Soros the businessman to literally plunder the former communist countries’ wealth, according to the New Eastern Outlook.
A report in New Eastern Outlook revealed exactly how Sores-affiliated organizations across the world operate:
The totality of what is revealed in the three hacked documents show that Soros is effectively the puppet-master pulling most of the strings in Kiev. Soros Foundation’s Ukraine branch, International Renaissance Foundation (IRF) has been involved in Ukraine since 1989. His IRF doled out more than $100 million to Ukrainian NGOs two years before the fall of the Soviet Union, creating the preconditions for Ukraine’s independence from Russia in 1991. Soros also admitted to financing the 2013-2014 Maidan Square protests that brought the current government into power.
Soros’ foundations were also deeply involved in the 2004 Orange Revolution that brought the corrupt but pro-NATO Viktor Yushchenko into power with his American wife who had been in the US State Department. In 2004 just weeks after Soros’ International Renaissance Foundation had succeeded in getting Viktor Yushchenko as President of Ukraine, Michael McFaul wrote an OpEd for the Washington Post. McFaul, a specialist in organizing color revolutions, who later became US Ambassador to Russia, revealed:
Did Americans meddle in the internal affairs of Ukraine? Yes. The American agents of influence would prefer different language to describe their activities — democratic assistance, democracy promotion, civil society support, etc. — but their work, however labeled, seeks to influence political change in Ukraine.
Additionally, during the 2016 presidential cycle, Soros committed $25 million dollars to the 2016 campaign of Hillary Clinton. Per the standard Clinton operating procedure, this was indicative of the symbiotic relationship of favors between the billionaire and his array of political puppets across the globe.
Soros has often been accused of using his wealth to attempt to socially engineer the national domestic politics of entire states. He was accused of being connected to organizations that organized and funded the nationwide protests after the election of Donald Trump — a claim that Soros denies.
“There have been many false reports about George Soros and the Open Society Foundations funding protests in the wake of the U.S. presidential elections. There is no truth to these reports,” said a spokewoman from Soros’s Open Society Foundations in a statement, adding, “We support a wide range of organizations — including those that support women and minorities who have historically been denied equal rights. Many of whom are concerned about what policy changes may lie ahead. We are proud of their work. We of course support the right of all Americans to peaceably assemble and petition their government—a vital, and constitutionally safeguarded, pillar of a functioning democracy.”
Make no mistake that the events you’re seeing transpire nationwide are largely being coordinated, in part, by a billionaire political elite class that is looking to strategically forward a political agenda. Soros has used the same formula to foment domestic unrest to affect political goals in numerous nations –and it certainly looks as if he now has the United States in his sights. It’s clear that Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals is being employed by the left in an effort to destabilize and undermine political discourse in the U.S.
Women’s rights are unquestionably a human rights issues, not a political issue, which makes it disappointing that we, as free individuals, don’t organically create manifestations like these large-scale marches, without oligarchs and their vested political interests essentially making it happen as a means of forwarding their particular ideologically driven political agenda.