Top 5 Revolutions Backed by George Soros

(Lisa Graas) Multi-billionaire George Soros has been using his vast wealth at least since 1984 to “build vibrant and tolerant democracies whose governments are accountable to their citizens”, in his words. He has been “credited” or, more accurately, blamed for providing funding for several revolutions in which his preferred people took power. If you are a leftist, of course you might consider this to be a good thing as the groups Soros funds to do his dirty work are invariably leftist, including an enormous chunk of the radical Left here in America. Here are the top 5 revolutions, some ongoing, which have received substantial backing from George Soros.

1. The ‘Bulldozer Revolution’ in Serbia

On October 5, 2000, in the “Bulldozer Revolution“, a movement funded partly by George Soros swept Slobodan Milosevic from power. The LATimes reported on Soros’ role, noting the problems it would cause if he were to get too much credit for his activities. By providing lots of money to already existing but struggling groups that Soros believed to be “pro-democracy”, including the student group Otpor, Soros was able to topple that country’s government.

It’s an accomplishment that Hungarian-born financier George Soros doesn’t flaunt. Bragging about it, after all, could just make his global democracy-building mission more difficult.

But the multibillionaire philanthropist quietly played a key role in the dramatic overthrow last year of President Slobodan Milosevic. His Soros Foundations Network helped finance several pro-democracy groups, including the student organization Otpor, which spearheaded grass-roots resistance to the authoritarian Yugoslav leader.

In a 2003 news conference, Soros owned up to his involvement, not only to the revolt in Yugoslavia but other countries, as well.

“It is necessary to mobilize civil society in order to assure free and fair elections because there are many forces that are determined to falsify or to prevent the elections being free and fair,” Mr. Soros said. “This is what we did in Slovakia at the time of [Vladimir] Meciar, in Croatia at the time of [Franjo] Tudjman and in Yugoslavia at the time of Milosevic.”

In 2004, Richard Poe, in Velvet Revolution, USA, outlined the seven-step strategy used by Soros to topple Milosevic. This strategy, Poe writes, is the same “blueprint” used repeatedly by Soros in other countries: Form a Shadow Government, Control the Airwaves, Bleed the State Dry, Sow Unrest, Provoke an Election Crisis, Take the Streets, and above all, Outlast your Opponent.

2. Georgia’s “Rose Revolution”

After Yugoslavia, Soros set his sights on Georgia. Though he originally backed President Eduard Shevardnadze, when Shevardnadze met with Soros’ disapproval, Soros sought to replace him forthwith in the same manner that he had replaced Milosevic. He prepared for his goal to topple Shevardnadze by sending a young activist to Serbia to be trained by those who had successfully overthrown Milosevic.

[…] [F]unds from his Open Society Institute sent a 31-year-old Tbilisi activist named Giga Bokeria to Serbia to meet with members of the Otpor (Resistance) movement and learn how they used street demonstrations to topple dictator Slobodan Milosevic. Then, in the summer, Mr. Soros’s foundation paid for a return trip to Georgia by Otpor activists, who ran three-day courses teaching more than 1,000 students how to stage a peaceful revolution.

In December, 2003 , the Melbourne Herald-Sun offered a basic overview of George Soros‘ Open Society Institute‘s [OSI] impact in Georgia’s Rose Revolution (Radio Islam):

[…] [Soros] backed Georgia’s former justice minister, Mikhail Saakashvili, and spent some $4 million on a protest movement against the president. His organisations brought in experts in “non-violent revolution” from Serbia, gave $700,000 to an activist group that bussed in protesters, and financed an anti-government TV station and newspaper.

It worked. Last month, protesters smashed into Georgia’s parliament, yelling — probably correctly — that Shevardnadze had stolen the elections a month ago and must quit. Shevardnadze fled, and Saakashvili looks set for leadership.

Georgian Foreign Minister Salomé Zourabichvili told the French journal Hérodote that Soros’ Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) were not only responsible for toppling Shevardnadze, but had subsequently became an integral part of the resulting governmental power structure:

[…] [O]ne cannot end one’s analysis with the revolution and one clearly sees that, afterwards, the Soros Foundation and the NGOs were integrated into power.

Indeed, the record clearly shows Soros’ influence in Georgian policy, and Soros was in no way shy about it. In 2004, Soros, Saakashvili, and United Nations Development Program (UNDP) administrator Mark Malloch Brown,publicly announced their push for ”governance reforms in Georgia that would reflect the Soros version of an “open society“. By 2005, an anti-Soros group arose, somewhat reminiscent of America’s Tea Party Movement, to protest the “Western” influence that had, in their view, attached their government to Soros’ puppet strings.

The “Anti-Soros Movement” also plans to oust Saakashvili’s government but in a constitutional manner. The anti-Soros group claims that Saakashvili’s government places instructions from Soros above the Georgian Constitution.

In October, 2010, critics accused Saakashvili of trying to “rig the political system in his favor.” Indeed, the new constitution of Georgia was structured in such a way as to allow Saakashvili to retain power.

It should be noted that the 2004 announcement was by no means the first joint effort of Soros and Mark Malloch Brown. In 1993, Brown served on the Soros Advisory Committee on Bosnia. In 2002, Soros and Brown worked together to gain UN funding for people in countries with “bad governments”. In 2005, Brown rented property from Soros in New York worth $120,000 a year, though his annual salary from the UN was not much more than that: $125,000. Finally, in 2007 Brown was appointed Vice Chairman of Soros Fund Management and the OSI. This is a cozy relationship indeed.

3. George Soros Puts A Radical in the White House

A “shining city on a hill”, the United States of America has proven to be far less vulnerable to George Soros‘ tactics than other countries have been, but though Soros has been unable to “fundamentally transform” America, in the words of his candidate Barack Obama, it is clear that he played a game-changing role in the election of this radical leftist who carried with him to the White House a long list of Islamist and politically radical influences. These influences have made themselves evident throughout the Obama presidency on a wide variety of issues, including an unConstitutional provision in the healthcare law which could, if upheld through leftist judicial activism, be the key to opening the door to truly socialistic wealth redistribution in America.

In December of 2006, Obama, who by then was contemplating a run for the presidency, met in New York with billionaire financier George Soros, who previously had hosted a fundraiser for Obama during the latter’s 2004 campaign for the U.S. Senate.[…]

[…] On January 16, 2007, Obama announced the creation of a presidential exploratory committee. Within hours after the announcement, Soros sent the senator a contribution of $2,100, the maximum amount allowable under campaign finance laws. Later that week, the New York Daily News reported that Soros would back Obama over Senator Hillary Clinton, whom he had supported in the past.

At the time Obama announced the formation of his exploratory committee, he had logged a mere 143 days of experience in the U.S. Senate (i.e., the number of days the Senate had been in session since his swearing in on January 4, 2005).

NewsRealBlog has offered continual coverage of George Soros’ machinations in bringing Obama to power — including the driving of a wedge between Catholics — and in influencing policy. There are ongoing attempts to push the Soros blueprint, but thanks in large part to the Tea Party Movement, that agenda has been slowed, and sometimes thwarted. The “Anti-Soros” movement in America has thankfully been more effective than its counterpart in Georgia.

4. George Soros: A ‘Founding Father’ of an Islamist Turkey?

June, 2006, while in Turkey pressing for Turkish membership in the EU, George Soros was questioned about his role in regime changes. It was already painfully clear to many that Soros had established himself as, in the words of Neil Clar of the NorthStar Compass, the “uncrowned king” of Eastern Europe. Soros rejected the claim, but his influence in Turkey is manifest. OSI has been actively studying politics and religion in Turkey since at least the 1990s and setting forth policy recommendations on these issues. More troubling, perhaps, is that OSI is seeking a new constitution for Turkey based on OSI values.

Can Paker, the head of OSI’s Assistance Foundation in Turkey, is also head of the Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation (TESEV), an organization lobbying for Turkey’s newly elected Parliament to adopt a brand new constitution. TESEV has commissioned a report on the “essential principles” to be included in that constitution.

Creating a framework of consensus is of critical importance to increase participation and legitimacy while preparing the new constitution, Ergun Özbudun, a prominent academic on constitutional law and a member of the commission set up by the Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation, or TESEV, said at a press conference Thursday in Istanbul.

The commission formed this month will prepare a report on the essential principles of a constitution, which will also include issues like identity, freedom of conscience, separation of powers, civil-military relations, local governance and decentralization, TESEV Director Can Paker told the media.

Much of this may sound well and good to those of us who may take basic human rights for granted, but there is a danger involved even beyond the danger of allowing some Western investor to determine what’s in your Constitution. TESEV seeks a Constitution based on pluralism.

Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation (TESEV) President Can Paker has called on the country’s politicians and civil society organizations to adopt a new, democratic constitution based on participatory and pluralistic politics.

“Pluralism”, generally speaking, is the rejection of the idea that something can be (1) held as absolutely true and (2) legitimately adhered to, or valued. An example of something that is accepted as “absolutely true” in America’s Constitution is that human rights are “unalienable”. The less a Constitution includes absolutes in regard to human dignity, property rights, due process, etc., the more the door is opened for communities, regions, or a whole country to adopt systems opposed to these values through pure democratic voting. One example of this would be Sharia Law.

Why mention Sharia? The Turkish newspaper Sabah has reported that OSI has shown itself to be “pro-AKP“. The AKP is the Islamist party in Turkey.

To many observers, the [2007] election marked another milestone in the development of Turkey’s brand of political Islam. The AKP is an offshoot of a more rigorously Islamist party, but Erdogan and other senior party figures have made little effort to bring personal piety into the public sphere.

That has done little to quell secularists’ wariness. Many are convinced that the AKP harbors a hidden Islamist agenda, one now more likely to make inroads into public policy.

“We see the danger of Sharia and fundamentalism,” said Hatice Ozbay, a volunteer for the main secular group, the Republican People’s Party, known in Turkish as the CHP. “We will keep on fighting that.”

Will George Soros succeed in his push for a constitution in Turkey that is heavy on democracy but low on absolutes that protect life, freedom of worship, property rights, etc., despite the risk of ushering in the spread of Sharia Law? This is still an open question, but he is certainly trying.

5. Soros Funds Unrest in Egypt

May, 2007, OSI consultant Dr. Kian Tajbakhsh, was arrested by Iranian officials along with a colleague Haleh Esfandiari, for allegedly trying to undermine Iran’s government according to the Soros blueprint. Tajbakhsh said at the time:

“The Soros centre’s job in eastern Europe is nearly finished. Its main focus now is the Islamic world, Arab countries, Turkey, Pakistan, Afghanistan, etc.”

This claim’s timeline, at least, is certainly correct. Having become the uncrowned king of Eastern Europe, and working hard for a government in Turkey that has the Soros stamp of approval, Soros’ focus clearly turned from Eastern Europe to the Islamic world.

In April of last year, a Soros-funded organization in Egypt launched a weekly newspaper called Wasla.

The weekly Wasla – or “The Link” – is being touted as a first for the Arab world, with plans for articles by bloggers as a way of giving them a wider readership.

It is published by the Arabic Network for Human Rights Information and financially supported by the Open Society Institute created by Soros, said ANHRI director Gamal Eid.

The Daily News Egypt reported that “ElBaradei Fever” was an important topic at Wasla. Elbaradei, Muslim Brotherhood-backed, is believed to have attempted to destroy (along with Soros) George Bush’s hopes for re-election in 2004.

The first issue of Wasla includes entries published on tahyyes.blogspot.com, and demaghmak.blogspot.com on the “ElBaradei fever .

Elbaradei and Soros both serve on the board of directors of the International Crisis Group, an organization that also has connections within the Democratic Party including President Obama.

On January 18, Wasla headlined the story “Tunisia is the answer”.

The issue interconnects all uprises in the Arab world with Tunisian revolution which overthrew Ben Ali.

On February 5, Jihad Watch offered an overview of the dangers faced here.

Reports on the role of Islamic movements in the Tunisian and Egyptian uprisings have placed considerable faith in the “secular” elements of those societies to resist Sharia’s regressive influence on human rights. But one cannot passively invoke as protection the institutions that Sharia will attack and destroy once its proponents are strong enough to go on the offensive, especially not when recalling how flimsy the veneer of a modern, secular society turned out to be in Iraq.

Indeed, secularism in and of itself hasn’t a chance in resisting Sharia.

Where is the Bright Side in This?

America has a strong Constitution which, though not perfect, has enshrined absolutes that are in accord with true human dignity and that have been resilient even in the face of George Soros‘ attempts to “fundamentally transform” our country. Soros will never become the uncrowned king of America as he has done in Eastern Europe. Pluralism may work for a time in that part of the world, perhaps even with Soros pulling the strings, but Soros errs considerably if he believes pluralism will hold in the face of Islam. His agenda will be squashed like a gnat in the Islamic world.

In the long history of the world, time and time again we have witnessed that core Judeo-Christian values which have inherent emphasis on freedom of conscience while protecting the weakest among us and the liberties that make a strong citizenry — though struggles have been many across the centuries — hold strong in the face of Islam. Israel and America both continue in these values. Secularism which focuses on pluralism and pure democracy, however, will crumple like a daisy.

Despite the troubling events occurring around the world, much of which is due to one seriously misguided individual, we are all truly blessed to be able to hold onto the fact that Israel still stands as a beacon of democracy in the Middle East, and America still remains a “shining city on a hill” — heralding the blessings of liberty to a broken, hurting, and sometimes very angry world.