Mentioning George Soros Is 'Verboten' On FOX

Please do your homework. No, he wasn't "pointing out Jews to the Nazis." Do you really need a history lesson on this? The Nazis told him to distribute pamphlets to Jews. His father realized what the pamphlets were for and told him not to. So he didn't.

That's the real history. Please show these historical events the gravity they are due and stop spreading fake accusations. Is that too much to ask for?

 

The Economist is another camouflaged appendage of the MSM. Unless I'm mistaken it is owned by the Rothchilds. From what I read, they gave Khodorovsky the money to buy up the Siberian oil fields under the company name of Yukos.

Later on Khodorovsky was jailed by Putin for refusing to pay taxes and Yukos was nationalized. Eventually he was released by Putin out of sympathy for his mother, who was supposedly sick and Khodorovsky is now wanted on a murder charge in Russia by the wife of the mayor who tried to collect taxes from his company.

I would not believe anything coming from the Economist about Russia and especially Vladimir Putin. There's a lot of grievances there - about 100 billion lost profit I would say.

 

Wait. Your whole premise for this thread was that Soro's name is not to be mentioned on Fox - then you post a link from Fox bad-mouthing Soros.
The Kremlin needs to get its story straight.

 

I gave a video of an interview of Soros on 60 minutes.

I recall Soros saying once that if he didn't cover up the elation or power how he felt during the Nazi era, people would think he's insane. Those are not his exact words, but that's how I took it.

Of course Soros was young, so what he was doing could be excused. To me the worrisome part is not what he did or didn't do, but how he felt, since it gave the impression that he had a 'messianic' vision of himself - something he proved time and time again with his actions.

I once heard Soros say that he believes in a one world government and currency. This would explain his support of liberal NGO's, regime changes and anarchists over the years.

To me a one world government is an enslavement of humanity, so of course I am adamantly against George Soros and anything he does.

 

And what about my account is incorrect?

Then it is a fabrication. You say he was "saying" one thing . . . while admitting that's not what he actually said.

I'd ask for sources, but you've shown you are willing to simply invent words for him instead of referring to what he's actually said.

 

I used to subscribe, it's excellent. "camouflaged appendage" doesn't make sense.

Not another Jew!!! Where are the torches and pitchforks when you need them.

Putin deliberately screwed Khodorovsky, and you know it. It's an excellent example of what dictators do to people they don't like.

Since most of your output is fiction, and I don't have a problem with what you do not believe.

 

He was 14, he wasn't doing much of anything. What you have there is a monstrous and anti-Semitic lie.

 

Yes it does! The Economist camouflages itself and tries to appear that's it's above the propaganda and lies that are so prevalent in the NYT's, Guardian, BBC and all the MSM's. But like them, it's nothing more than an appendage under the same influences. Personally I liked the Economist since it was informative, but like the NYT's and the BBC, I threw it on the wayside when I realized it was no different than the rest.

Why should I support something that runs contrary to my beliefs? I have nothing against Vladimir Putin and the Russian people.

So it was okay for Khodorovsky to screw the Russian people by not paying his taxes, or doesn't that matter to you? Well it did to Putin. Khodorovsky also went to sell Yuko's to Exxon Mobil, which makes him a Russian traitor. His allegiance to outside sources was obvious. In the past he would have been hung.

Those are your words, not mine!

They project, you project
it's what some do!
For that's the way that others see you.

It's also how you see me too.
So what you say reflects a-new,
and throws your faults right back to you - Jeannette






​

 

I know Soros was 14 and that's excusable. I was more concerned with his feelings at the time, since it showed he had some kind of messianic vision of himself. His actions later on to further his ideology of a one world government, proved that my assumption was right.

I believe in individual freedom and small governments, and that nothing should be imposed on people with other beliefs and standards. A one world government similar to the USSR, would be an enslavement of humanity.

 

Enough BS for one day..​

 

Hold on! Are you saying Putin isn't Stalin 2.0??!! But the media tells us...
Thanks for the Yukos information. Good insight.

 

He's just Diet Stalin. Which is still pretty bad. Just less filling.

 

And there it is.... The only thing worse than being a run of the mill racist is an anti-semite...

I think most Christians today would denounce Jesus before saying anything critical of Israel or Jews in general.

 

Did Jesus make up lies about people corroborating with the Nazis? I don't remember seeing that part in the Bible.

 

He was a nazi collaborator, said so himself

https://freedomoutpost.com/fact-che...g5PFIgx6IRfyrG7iwr77Z_f-O-w0PB3ZU-kp_MBzSeSZA

 

Why?

 

post deleted

 

And you would be right.

 

It's been over 10 years, so it's a little difficult to recall Soros exact words on how he felt, especially when the videos have been removed. But the anarchy his NGO's have caused in so many countries, and that they banned him because of it, I should think would be enough proof of his messianic vision and intent. He did say that he had to hide how he felt when he was young, or people would think he's insane.

Never judge a tree by its stature,

nor the power of the name it wears. ​

One's judgement should only come,

through the merits of the fruit it bears - Jeannette​

 

I believe in individual freedom and the smaller the governing entity, the greater voice a person has.

 

At the risk of seeming obtuse I don't see any direct relationship between the size of an individual's influence in society (or their "voice") and their actual amount of freedom. Indeed, many people who are very influential in society seem to have very little if any freedom to do what they really wish to at all, and that is often BECAUSE they are very influential.

 

So that explains why sole Dictatorships allow individuals to speak and act freely ... holy crap, the Kremlin needs to reexamine their arguments before
they are posted.

 

YEAH! YEAH! YEAH! YEAH!


Some thinkest others not too bright
so falsity must rule.
But thinking thus is but a blight
that makest them the fool - Jeannette


​

 

Actually, if anything it's not 'paranoid' enough. It's a constant source of disappointment that those deemed useful idiots by this power cabal, aren't aware they're being used to create a permanent wealth divide with master/slave societies.

It's all about dismantling personal autonomy in the masses.

 

Power, of course - though not in the cartoonish sense that implies. It's about CONTROL. The only way that the 'elite' (I'll leave it to you to decide what that means) can secure the future for themselves in a world of seven billion, is to enslave the rest of us via permanent disenfranchisement. When we can no longer provide for ourselves, they have us over a barrel. That's exactly what they're seeking.