George Soros — manipulating for money
Bookworm on Sep 26 2007 at 8:47 am | Filed under: Uncategorized
If you haven’t been reading the Investor’s Business Daily series about George Soros, why the heck not? It reveals a man without political principles, who is, instead, driven by a greed that recognizes that there is money to be made from chaos — so he creates the chaos. He has a knack for gathering around him useful idiots who won’t profit from (and may well be hurt by) his nihilistic policies, but who self-righteously follow him down the path to anarchy.
The most recent article in the series tackles the issue of transparency or, in other words, the way in which Soros uses his money to manipulate the public so that they think they’re seeing brave crusaders or grass roots efforts in action, rather than understanding that this is one man and his fellow travelers using vast amounts of invisible cash to shift national opinion.
Email This Post To A Friend
5 Responses to “George Soros — manipulating for money”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
So why aren’t Dan Rather and Ted Koppel “speaking truth to power” by digging into Soros’s affairs?
Because they’re both retired?
Hmm, I’d never considered the possibility that for Soros, this crusade of his might be completely motivated by money. I always thought it was idealogical for him. I’d need some kind of a smoking gun before I’d agree that this is purely about money for Soros.
What do the rest of the readers here think?
Scary stuff.
Another interesting Soros story here:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,297483,00.html
More transparency WOULD be nice. The Fox News article raises more questions, but indicates that Soros manipulates ideological issues for financial gain.
The one connects to the other, Mike. You can get more money through ideology, just look at Jackson Rainbow boy. You also need money for ideologies, since revolutions ain’t cheap.
I don’t think it really matters which one is primarily Soros’ interest. I believe ideologically he has psychological guilt and such, or maybe he is dead inside and simply sees money as a quantifiable goal. It doesn’t really matter, since he still has to focus on both ideology and money, regardless of his real motives.