George Soros, billionaire progressive . . . really?

For many years, George Soros has been playing the role of philanthropist and billionaire with a heart and a conscience. But, let us not be fooled. Let us take a closer look at this man who has been very politically active.

In an article written by Heather Cottin, she reveals that George, like Hillary Clinton, has had a close relationship with Henry Kissinger, a man who has never been known for his progressive politics, humanitarianism or integrity.

Soros’ foundations and financial machinations were integral in the destruction of socialism in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. He was involved in dismantling Yugoslavia. Mr. Soros is currently targeting China, a country that certainly has the capacity to compete economically with the U.S. By his own admission, he is without conscience; a capitalist who functions with absolute amorality.

Soros is primarily a businessman who safeguards his business ventures by deeply involving himself in political activities. As Ms. Cottin states, Soros is a leading figure on the Council of Foreign Relations, the World Economic Forum, and Human Rights Watch (HRW).

A Soros foundation now runs CIA-created Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty jointly with the U.S. and RFE/RL, which has expanded into the Caucasus and Asia. Soros is the founder and funder of the Open Society Institute. He created and maintains the International Crisis Group (ICG) which,among other things, has been active in the Balkans since the destruction of Yugoslavia. Soros works openly with the United States Institute of Peace, an overt arm of the CIA. That’s right, you read that correctly . . . he works with the CIA.

Soros is also a partner in the Carlyle Group, a company that has attracted such notables as, George H. W. Bush, former U.S. president and senior advisor to the Carlyle Asia Advisory Board from April 1998 to October 2003.

James Baker III, former United States Secretary of State under George H. W. Bush, staff member under Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush, and Carlyle senior counselor, served in this capacity from 1993 to 2005.

Frank C. Carlucci, former United States Secretary of Defense from 1987 to 1989, Carlyle chairman and chairman emeritus from 1989 to 2005; Arthur Levitt, chairman of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) under President Bill Clinton, Carlyle senior advisor from 2001 to the present.

This is only a partial list of high level political people involved in the Carlyle Group and George Soros is part of it. Does this appear to you to be a group of progressives?

The Carlyle Group makes most of its money from weapons expenditures. The money we are talking about is over $193 billion. The more wars we fight, the more profits they make.

Soros is intimately involved in HRW (Human Rights Watch), although he does his best to hide it. He says he just funds and sets up these programs and lets them run. But they do not stray from the philosophy of the funder. HRW and OSI (Open Society Institute) are close. Their views do not diverge. Are we to believe that this businessman invests millions of dollars in these two organizations and does not exert any control over their policy decisions? This is almost as unbelievable as Hillary Clinton giving speeches to Goldman Sachs, for $250,000 each, and claiming that they do not expect anything in return.

George Soros is funding what appear to be liberal/left foundations and organizations. He appeals mainly to Social Democrats, people who work towards a kinder, gentler capitalism. Soros is a billionaire businessman who supports capitalism . . . it is the source of his wealth and extravagant lifestyle. He is not looking to give up any of his assets and change the system. So, when he invests his money, we have to look beneath the facade and inquire as to what his real goals are.

Again, Heather Cottin supplies us with some pertinent background. “One of Soros’ most influential institutions is the International Crisis Group, founded in 1986. ICG is headed by individuals from the very center of political and corporate power. Its board includes Zbigniew Brzezinski, Morton Abramowitz, former U.S. Assistant Secretary of State; Wesley Clark, former NATO Supreme Allied Commander for Europe; and Richard Allen, former U.S. National Security Adviser. Allen is noteworthy for quitting Nixon’s National Security Council out of disgust with the liberal tendencies of Henry Kissinger.”

With friends like those, can we still look at Soros as a friend of the left?

Which brings me to the present. For the past 20 years, I have relied on Amy Goodman and her program, Democracy Now!, for insights into the real and accurate news. There was a time when she referred to herself and the program as “The Exception to the Rulers.” Democracy Now! was one of the few news reporting outlets that strayed from the misleading, orchestrated news on the national networks.

Amy Goodman did not hesitate to offer interviews with people on the ground, community people, who had a much different narrative about events than did the establishment apologists. Those with a radical point of view were welcome.

When the U.S. began bombing Bagdad, in March of 2003, I was in Florida and was swamped with military experts appearing on all the major networks, informing us of the “smart” bombs and the minimum loss of life on the ground. It wasn’t until I returned to New York that Democracy Now! informed me, in their interviews with the people who were actually being bombed, of the great amount of destruction and deaths that these bombing raids inflicted.

Jean-Bertrand Aristide is a Haitian politician who became Haiti‘s first democratically elected president. He won the Haitian general election between 1990 and 1991, with 67% of the vote and was briefly president of Haiti, until a September 1991 military coup.

Aristide was out of office until 1994 when he again was able to assume the office of president of Haiti. However, Aristide was ousted in a 2004 coup d’état orchestrated by the U.S. and was forced to leave Haiti in the middle of the night and live in exile in the Central African Republic. It shocked me to learn that Amy Goodman flew along with Aristide to Africa, interviewing him and broadcasting the interview.

These are just two examples of what Democracy Now! had to offer. But for the past several years, the tone and coverage of the program has changed dramatically. Amy is no longer the “exception to the rulers.” In fact, she doesn’t bother to refer to herself that way any longer.

While Syria burns, NATO surrounds Russia with a growing military presence, the Ukraine overthrows an elected government that had an established relationship with Russia and NATO supported its replacement by a pro-Western government largely controlled by neo-Nazis, the genocide of the Palestinian people in Gaza and the West Bank, and Saudi Arabia decimating the country of Yemen, Amy remained silent, rarely attending to these events, events that threaten to throw us into WW3.

The issues she chooses to cover are those MSNBC wouldn’t hesitate to cover; the guests she invites on the program are most often establishment people, most of whom have recently written and published books. The radical point of view and perceptions have disappeared.

What has changed, what has caused a dilution of the coverage of controversial issues? Democracy Now! receives indirect funding from George Soros, and direct funding from the Ford Foundation, the Glaser Foundation, and Soros’ Open Society Institute, none of whom would qualify as progressive. Everyone knows that Goodman and her stage, Democracy Now!, has received millions and millions of dollars from Gorge Soros directly. Of course, no one knows how much exactly, because, Democracy Now! is never available to answer that question when asked: Just that one Soros-funded operation is heard ”on over 900 stations, pioneering the largest community media collaboration in the United States.”

An example of the change of tone of Democracy Now! is found in the May 13, 2016, program. After months of basically ignoring Syria, Amy Goodman’s guest for this particular show was Yassir Munif, a Syrian scholar who specializes in grassroots movements in Syria. He’s a sociology professor at Emerson College in Boston and a co-founder of the Campaign for Global Solidarity with the Syrian Revolution.

Mr. Munif immediately categorized the conflict in Syria as a revolution and that there were, “massive protests in the liberated areas, in the Idlib and Aleppo areas, and they were demanding the fall of the Syrian regime, and they were chanting for the revolution of dignity and freedom and for democracy and so on.”

Mr. Munif’s statements went unchallenged despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. In the latest election, Assad won 86% of the popular vote which appears to indicate that he wasn’t that unpopular. Also, in those areas in which the SAA (Syrian Arab Army) defeated ISIS and drove them out, there are photos of the residents being out in the streets welcoming back Assad’s troops. It has been noted that some of the refugees who had fled the ISIS occupied territories began returning to their homes.

We also must be aware of the language used by Mr. Munif. He consistently refers to what’s happening in Syria as a revolution and rebellion, terms that indicate that this is an uprising within the Syrian communities. To do this, Munif must ignore the fact that ISIS, al Qaeda, and al Nusra are not revolutionaries but are paid mercenaries, hired by NATO and the U.S. to go into Syria and overthrow Assad’s government.

Munif, in the interview, makes reference to the chemical attack on Syrian civilians in Ghouta in 2013 and frames his comments to lead us to the conclusion that it was Assad’s army that was responsible. He claims that that act radicalized the Syrian people to join with ISIS or al Nusra. Unfortunately, for Mr. Munif, it has been clearly demonstrated that Assad had nothing to do with the chemical attack and that it was more likely the responsibility of the U.S. supported “moderate” rebels who wanted to provoke the U.S. to get involved militarily.

At no time, did Amy Goodman challenge Mr. Munif or present alternative views about the Syrian conflict. His distortions were allowed to stand.

This type of reporting by Amy Goodman is dangerous, it is the kind of reporting one would expect from CNN or MSNBC, reporting that progressives do not take seriously. Amy’s followers are liberals and progressives who rely on her for accurate and truthful reporting and usually accept the points of view expressed on Democracy Now! as truth.

Can we assume that Soros’ millions of dollars buys him influence of what gets covered and what doesn’t, who will appear on the program, who will not? In accepting his donations, has Amy allowed herself to be compromised?


Dave Alpert has masters degrees in social work, educational administration, and psychology. He spent his career working with troubled inner city adolescents.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Comments are closed.