5 ms·

Taking refugees is not the same as open borders and mass migration. Nation cooperation is not the same as world government. Your statement is true. But Soros a

Taking refugees is not the same as open borders and mass migration. Nation cooperation is not the same as world government. Your statement is true. But Soros and his foundation supports the latter in both cases, so it's also not relevant. Here are some quotes to show this is true. Note that I am not Hungarian and don't particularly care about Soros myself. However the criticisms of what he's doing aren't conspiracy theories or the ravings of lunatics. It's quite well documented and open. For instance, after a memo was leaked from his foundation, the OSF said this: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3743479/Left-wing-billionaire-group-s-plan-use-migrant-crisis-influence-immigration-policies-worldwide-Plans-George-Soros-s-think-tank-revealed-leaked-memo.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3743479/Left-wing-bi... The OSF told MailOnline: 'We are committed to making sure that anyone who chooses to migrate—regardless of motivation—is able to do so safely and with dignity ... we support local organizations and policymakers who are working to ensure vulnerable populations are protected, that migrants are empowered to contribute to host societies and home countries, and that migrant voices are heard. Note the foundation talks about migration in general, not refugees. With respect to one world government, Soros has said: “Insofar as there are collective interests that transcend state boundaries, the sovereignty of states must be subordinated to international law and international institutions.” Albeit, this quote is old, I do not know offhand if he's said similar things recently. I got this from a few minutes Googling, not deep personal knowledge. Suffice it to say that he's a big supporter of the EU and its vision of replacing national governments. Note that the EU is currently trying to force Hungary to take migrants (not refugees), against the Hungarian government's will. So that's one reason they don't like him there. I'm not even sure what the problem with legal abortion everywhere is I have no problem with it. I used it as an example of the kinds of policies he funds. For instance, to try and change the politics of Ireland. Again, "likely"... Likely why? What does he gain from migration policies? Who knows? It seems to be something of an over-reaction to the Soviet Union, perhaps, but I wouldn't like to speculate without more research. However, if you go to the website of the OSF or look at what things Soros has funded, they're all very much in the area of highly controversial or even unpopular policies that have nothing to do with children but which frequently crop up on social media. The only thing visible on the OSF web page above the fold is about migration. So, I'm not surprised people might look for ulterior motives. In your last paragraph you just argue with straw men. I haven't mentioned the Koch brothers, or even argued that rich men lobbying politicians is wrong. Just pointed out why some people don't like Soros.

rainingmonkey 9y ago
You reference an article from The Daily Mail. In case you weren't aware, the Mail is so prone pushing their agenda over the facts that Wikipedia consider citations from the Mail invalid, given their "reputation for poor fact checking, sensationalism and flat-out fabrication”.
jacobolus 9y ago
There are interests which transcend state boundaries: environmental pollution, fisheries management, maritime law, response to large-scale disasters, war crimes, slavery, human trafficking, resettlement of refugees, weapons of mass destruction, pandemic disease, ... There already exist a variety of international organizations to tackle these in various ways, established by international treaties... This does not by any means replace national government.
croon 9y ago
> In your last paragraph you just argue with straw men. I haven't mentioned the Koch brothers, or even argued that rich men lobbying politicians is wrong. Just pointed out why some people don't like Soros. The sixth hit for your Soros quote is Breitbart (most prior being googles own hits, and most following being glenn beck and other right wing "pundits"), which is almost entirely funded by Rebekah Mercer, previously Robert Mercer I'm not questioning it's accuracy, only the motive for posting it. Also relevant for the dailymail link: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/daily-mail/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/daily-mail/ >> Again, "likely"... Likely why? What does he gain from migration policies? > Who knows? It seems to be something of an over-reaction to the Soviet Union, perhaps, but I wouldn't like to speculate without more research. And yet you did. > Here are some quotes to show this is true > "... we support local organizations and policymakers who are working to ensure vulnerable populations are protected, that migrants are empowered to contribute to host societies and home countries, and that migrant voices are heard." Emphasis mine. I don't know what quote they got, or in what context they used it, but I know what you linked and their motives, and that I could find a charitable interpretation of the quote.
- peoplewindow 9y ago
  The first part of your reply is irrelevant smearing, isn't it? You don't dispute the accuracy or relevance of the quotes, but instead bring up websites on which they can be found in search engines, and then make vague handwaves about "motives" - as if this has any impact at all. To be clear, although it's also irrelevant, my motive in this thread has been to explain the long since flagged and dead comment about why George Soros specifically is not the best person to call for strict regulation of tech firms. I don't know what quote they got, or in what context they used it Why don't you open the link I helpfully provided and find out then? The relevant part of the quote is the part you removed: "We are committed to making sure that anyone who chooses to migrate—regardless of motivation—is able to do so safely and with dignity". This quote demonstrates my point that Soros supports the latter, and so your point that it's not equivalent to something else doesn't matter.

rainingmonkey 9y ago

You reference an article from The Daily Mail. In case you weren't aware, the Mail is so prone pushing their agenda over the facts that Wikipedia consider citations from the Mail invalid, given their "reputation for poor fact checking, sensationalism and flat-out fabrication”.

jacobolus 9y ago

There are interests which transcend state boundaries: environmental pollution, fisheries management, maritime law, response to large-scale disasters, war crimes, slavery, human trafficking, resettlement of refugees, weapons of mass destruction, pandemic disease, ... There already exist a variety of international organizations to tackle these in various ways, established by international treaties... This does not by any means replace national government.

croon 9y ago

> In your last paragraph you just argue with straw men. I haven't mentioned the Koch brothers, or even argued that rich men lobbying politicians is wrong. Just pointed out why some people don't like Soros. The sixth hit for your Soros quote is Breitbart (most prior being googles own hits, and most following being glenn beck and other right wing "pundits"), which is almost entirely funded by Rebekah Mercer, previously Robert Mercer I'm not questioning it's accuracy, only the motive for posting it. Also relevant for the dailymail link: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/daily-mail/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/daily-mail/ >> Again, "likely"... Likely why? What does he gain from migration policies? > Who knows? It seems to be something of an over-reaction to the Soviet Union, perhaps, but I wouldn't like to speculate without more research. And yet you did. > Here are some quotes to show this is true > "... we support local organizations and policymakers who are working to ensure vulnerable populations are protected, that migrants are empowered to contribute to host societies and home countries, and that migrant voices are heard." Emphasis mine. I don't know what quote they got, or in what context they used it, but I know what you linked and their motives, and that I could find a charitable interpretation of the quote.

peoplewindow 9y ago
The first part of your reply is irrelevant smearing, isn't it? You don't dispute the accuracy or relevance of the quotes, but instead bring up websites on which they can be found in search engines, and then make vague handwaves about "motives" - as if this has any impact at all. To be clear, although it's also irrelevant, my motive in this thread has been to explain the long since flagged and dead comment about why George Soros specifically is not the best person to call for strict regulation of tech firms. I don't know what quote they got, or in what context they used it Why don't you open the link I helpfully provided and find out then? The relevant part of the quote is the part you removed: "We are committed to making sure that anyone who chooses to migrate—regardless of motivation—is able to do so safely and with dignity". This quote demonstrates my point that Soros supports the latter, and so your point that it's not equivalent to something else doesn't matter.