New World Order Report





The BLM/Trans Connection

Kevin Shipp July 28, 2020 


Black Lives Matter (BLM) is not only comprised of Marxist/Nation of Islam (NOI) leadership, but a significant number of BLM leaders and members are LBGTQ and Transgender activists. Two of the founders of BLM began as committed LBGTQ activists. Because of this, a significant number of BLM members are also Transgender. Transgender members have been caught changing shirts during protests, first posing as BLM, then changing into Antifa shirts and then changing into shirts posing as, “Moms” who have joined the movement. 

It is clear, once again, that BLM is not about Black civil rights, something we all hold dear. BLM rebels against the non-violent racial unity philosophy of Martin Luther King (MLK). What made MLK’s movement so successful was the fact that it was non-violent and based on King’s long held Christian values. Based on the statements made by its leaders, BLM has no intention of being peaceful, decries racial unity and espouses the Nation of Islam’s anti-Christian view that white people are devils and Jews are descended from apes. 

BLM leaders make it clear that the movement has one goal, to overturn the current capitalist and Constitutional system and replace it with a Marxist system based on Black supremacy. It is also determined to assault and remove police officers from civilian life and empty prisons in US cities. BLM has formed a new Black Panther Party and several Black, heavily armed militias have formed and are marching in the streets of America. 


This is a clear and present danger to law and order in America and an assault on the unity of Black and White Americans found in Christian churches around the country; churches that stand on the principles taught by MLK. As the BLM/NOI/Transgender movement escalates its violence, and it will, it is highly likely that a counter revolution will begin, when peace loving Americans have had enough. The result could be a serious, civil war. Somehow, State and Federal governments must come up with a strategy to keep this from happening and maintain law and order in the streets of America. As long as Democratic governors of blue states defund and stand down police departments and allow protestors to loot, damage property and threaten citizens, there will be no local solution, only escalating anarchy.

Image Attribution: Racey Knight / Public domain



**************************************************************************************************************************************************
** This is prime evidence the Council on Foreign Relations should be dismantled and liquidated! 

They have been a One World Organization from their creation. They are exasperated because our new president, who is pro America and not a part of this evil cabal is standing up to them and dismantling their system they have worked hard for decades to establish! 

This report reveals it all!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WIKILEAKS EXPOSES HOW COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS CONTROLS MOST ALL MAINSTREAM MEDIA

January 31, 2018 A Media Comments Offon WikiLeaks Exposes How Council on Foreign Relations Controls Most All Mainstream Media


It is no secret that over the last 4 decades, mainstream media has been consolidated from dozens of competing companies to only six. Hundreds of channels, websites, news outlets, newspapers, and magazines, making up ninety percent of all media is controlled by very few people—giving Americans the illusion of choice.

While six companies controlling most everything the Western world consumes in regard to media may sound like a sinister arrangement, the Swiss Propaganda Research center (SPR) has just released information that is even worse.
The research group was able to tie all these media companies to a single organization—the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).

Defend Assange Campaign@DefendAssange

Council on Foreign Relations links to major media holdings

Full graphic here: https://swprs.files.wordpress.com/2017/08/cfr-media-network-hdv-spr.png …




11:07 PM - Jan 28, 2018

For those who may be unaware, the CFR is a primary member of the circle of Washington think-tanks promoting endless war. As former Army Major Todd Pierce describes, this group acts as “primary provocateurs” using “‘psychological suggestiveness’ to create a false narrative of danger from some foreign entity with the objective being to create paranoia within the U.S. population that it is under imminent threat of attack or takeover.”

A senior member of the CFR and outspoken neocon warmonger, Robert Kagan has even publicly proclaimed that the 
US should create an empire.

The narrative created by CFR and its cohorts is picked up by their secondary communicators, also known the mainstream media, who push it on the populace with no analysis or questioning.

When looking at the chart from SPR, the reach by this single organization is so vast that it is no mystery as to how these elite psychopaths guide Americans into accepting endless war at the expense of their mothers, fathers, sons, and daughters.

Top journalists and executives from all major media companies are integrated into the CFR. As the chart below illustrates, the CFR has even more control in the mainstream media than even the nefarious Bilderberg Group and the Trilateral Commission.

                                                                   
As SPR points out, Richard Harwood, former managing editor and ombudsman of the Washington Post, wrote about the Council on Foreign Relations Recognizing that its members most likely correspond to what one might call the “ruling establishment of the United States.”

Harwood continued, “The membership of these journalists in the council, however they may think of themselves, is an acknowledgment of their active and important role in public affairs and of their ascension into the American ruling class. They do not merely analyze and interpret foreign policy for the United States; they help make it.”

Let that sink in. This group of unaccountable, un-elected, professional propagandists in America doesn’t simply analyze US government policy—they make it.

YouTube Video


While only five percent of the members of CFR work within the media, as SPR points out that is all they need to implement the will of its other members that includes: several US presidents and vice presidents of both parties; almost all foreign, defense and finance ministers; most chiefs of staff and commanders of the US military and NATO; nearly all National Security Advisers, CIA Directors, UN Ambassadors, Fed Chairmen, World Bank Presidents, and Directors of the National Economic Council; some of the most influential members of Congress (especially foreign and security politicians); numerous media managers and top journalists, as well as some of the most famous actors; numerous prominent academics, especially in the key areas of economics, international relations, political and historical sciences, and journalism; numerous executives from think tanks, universities, NGOs, and Wall Street; and key members of the 9/11 Commission and the Warren Commission (JFK)

To highlight just how much control over the media the CFR wields we need only look at the fact that they operate—in the open—and receive nearly no media coverage. The former chairman of the CFR, High Commissioner for Germany, co-founder of the Atlantic Bridge, World Bank president, and an adviser to a total of nine US presidents, John J. McCloy actually bragged publicly about the CFR hand picking US politicians.

“Whenever we needed a man [in Washington], we just thumbed through theroll of Council members and put through a call to New York [to the CFR’s headquarters office],” said McCloy.

Until the election of Trump the past four presidents have been the director of the CFR, George HW Bush, who was replaced by a member of the CFR, Bill Clinton, who was replaced by a family member of the CFR, George W Bush, who was then replaced by CFR aspirant candidate Barack Obama—who filled his cabinet with members of the elite group.

Although Donald Trump was never a public member of the CFR, that did not stop him from filling the White House with dozens of CFR members.

Here are just a few of the CFR members appointed by Trump: Elaine Chao, United States Secretary of Transportation (CFR individual member) Jamie Dimon, Member of Strategic and Policy Forum (CFR corporate member) Jim Donovan, Deputy Treasury Secretary (CFR corporate member) Larry Fink, Member of Strategic and Policy Forum (CFR corporate member)
Neil M. Gorsuch, Supreme Court Justice (individual CFR member) Vice Admiral Robert S. Harward, National Security Advisor (declined appointment) (CFR corporate member)

Even though Trump wasn’t a CFR member outright, his cabinet is made up almost entirely of its members. As this information illustrates—democracy is an illusion. If ever you needed another reason to tune out of mainstream media and seek out information for yourself—this is it. It also explains why information like this, which challenges this worldview is under attack.

By Matt Agorist
Source: The Free Thought Project


A Council on Foreign Relations Report

Managing Global Disorder: Prospects for Transatlantic Cooperation


Insights From a CFR WorkshopAugust 20, 2018     







French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, and U.S. President Donald J. Trump confer at the Group of Twenty meeting in Hamburg, Germany, on July 7, 2017 John MacDougall/Reuters






In July 2018, the Council on Foreign Relations’ Center for Preventive Action convened a workshop to examine areas of cooperation between the United States and the European Union. The workshop was made possible by the generous support of the Carnegie Corporation of New York. The views described here are those of the workshop participants only and are not CFR or Carnegie Corporation positions. The Council on Foreign Relations takes no institutional positions on policy issues and has no affiliation with the U.S. government.

Introduction

Despite recent turbulence in the transatlantic relationship, the United States and the European Union share a common interest in managing emerging sources of global disorder. To explore prospects for and challenges to transatlantic cooperation, the Center for Preventive Action at the Council on Foreign Relations convened an international group of twenty-three experts at the Tufts University Center in Talloires, France, on July 12–13, 2018, for the workshop “Managing Global Disorder: Prospects for Transatlantic Cooperation.” The workshop is the third in a series of meetings supported by the Carnegie Corporation of New York. It is premised on the belief that the United States, China, the European Union, and Russia not only share a common interest in preventing the world from becoming more dangerous and disorderly, but also that the nature and scope of this task necessitates cooperation among them.

Workshop participants discussed their perceptions of the growing sources of disorder in the world, examined areas of strategic cooperation, and explored where the United States and the European Union might work together to address a variety of regional concerns emanating from Africa, China, the Middle East, and Russia. While how the two can work together to address increasing political instability and violent conflict, participants also cited the importance of the transatlantic relationship in preventing or mitigating the demise of the liberal international order.

The Changing Domestic Context for Transatlantic Cooperation

Participants agreed that the United States and the European Union are facing a seismic shift in the global order. A Western agenda no longer determines global norms; rather, the West has fragmented and the digital age has undermined the social and international order, creating systemic social dislocation. Compounded by fears over the future of work and employment in the face of artificial intelligence, automation, and globalization, this dislocation is reflected in the rise of nationalism and nativism across the United States and the European Union. Domestic politics have merged with international trends.

Participants largely agreed that three domestic issues trouble most American voters: the future of work, the future of the U.S. immigration system, and the future role of the United States on the international stage. Several participants argued that the election of President Donald J. Trump reflects these voter concerns, and suggested that the post–World War II liberal international order has been an aberration in the arc of U.S. foreign policy.

Europe faces similar challenges. Participants posited that anxieties over work and globalization have prompted concerns about the future of the European Union and have contributed to the rise of the far right in EU member states such as Hungary and Poland as well as in Turkey. For some participants, the rise of the far right could be an indicator of the transatlantic alliance’s future: an alliance among far right parties focused on undermining global institutions. Moreover, participants agreed that the manipulation of public opinion will increasingly affect the future of political systems. Europe in particular has witnessed the manipulation and polarization of political parties and public opinion on issues like capitalism and free trade.

Anxieties over work and globalization have prompted concerns about the future of the European Union.

Acknowledging these trends, one participant stated that “the primary challenge facing the West is the West itself.” All participants agreed the United States and the European Union should work both independently and together to address the future of work, immigration, and socioeconomic integration and focus on sustaining a narrative of popular support for the transatlantic relationship in order to resolve the underlying issues of nationalism and populism. As the United States retreats from its global leadership role, one participant suggested that the European Union should continue to prepare for strategic autonomy and that “preparing for a post-American future is not inconsistent with preparing for the return of a future American partner.”

The Future of Global Governance

YouTube Video


All participants agreed that the election and subsequent actions of President Trump catalyzed the decline of the liberal international order. Global governing institutions were already under-performing before Trump assumed office, straining under numerous transnational challenges, but the Trump administration’s pursuit of U.S. autonomy and its apparent abandonment of global, multilateral leadership roles has resulted in the degradation of transatlantic relations.

Participants questioned whether the U.S. abdication of leadership represents a lack of trust in international institutions or an actual crisis of democracy. They also asked whether the transatlantic agenda will continue to uphold the liberal international order, or become simply transactional cooperation when needs collide (e.g., on regional security concerns in Asia, Europe, and the Middle East and on strategic concerns over the future of cyberspace). The United States and the European Union continue to share common policy goals and interests, but the lack of predictability in U.S. foreign policy has resulted in what one participant described as a return to Hobbesian international relations.

Although U.S. and EU political leaders diverge over their strategic aims, participants agreed that agreements may still function in what one participant termed “compartmentalized cooperation.” The United States and the European Union remain broadly aligned on counterterrorism efforts, deterring cyber aggression, and the prevention of the proliferation of nuclear weapons and weapons of mass destruction. In contested areas, such as climate change, migration, outer space, and trade, participants suggested that subnational agreements (e.g., California Governor Jerry Brown’s climate change partnership with EU leaders) and civil society forums (e.g., French President Emmanuel Macron’s Paris Peace Forum) could function in the absence of high-level U.S. leadership.

But although participants accepted that compartmentalized cooperation will serve short-term interests, they disagreed over whether continued cooperation illustrates the resilience of the global governance system. Some participants argued that future cooperation will take place at the subnational level as short-term issues are favored over long-term strategic problems and that formal global governance will be substituted over time by informal, ad hoc cooperation on an array of issues.

Participants agreed that strategic autonomy will be critical in the absence of U.S. leadership.

For the European Union, participants agreed that strategic autonomy will be critical in the absence of U.S. leadership. One participant argued that the European Union should adopt a global strategy and approach democracy as a critical infrastructure project, clarifying how and why democracy matters. For the sake of the transatlantic alliance and the future of the West, participants agreed that the United States and the European Union should become advocates for the liberal international order or risk losing primacy to competing narratives from China and Russia.

Potential Areas of Regional Cooperation

Despite these concerns, participants identified four regions where the United States and the European Union could coordinate in areas of strategic interest to prevent conflict and potentially bolster the transatlantic alliance. Despite Russian aggression, participants agreed that the United States and the European Union should continue to hold dialogues and identified strategic arms control as one area of interest ripe for cooperation. Participants agreed that the United States and the European Union should remain in discussions with Russia on the New START and Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces treaties. Participants also agreed that the United States and the European Union should adopt a unified approach to Russian cyber efforts, but acknowledged that the likelihood of reaching an agreement with Russia itself was slim.

Participants were more optimistic in discussing areas of U.S.-EU-Russia regional cooperation, particularly in the Middle East. Participants recognized that solutions to the conflicts in Iraq, Libya, and Syria would not be possible without including Russia in negotiations. However, to prevent Russia from overtaking transatlantic interests in the region, participants agreed that the United States and the European Union should adopt a unified transatlantic strategy (though they also acknowledged that creating such a strategy is not realistic under the Trump administration).

Finally, participants discussed the security architecture in Europe and suggested that the United States and the European Union work to deescalate tension with Russia by clarifying rules of the road for contact, including political interference. Participants suggested that dialogue would build a foundation for mutual confidence and cooperation that could cross over into other areas of strategic interest.

China

Participants agreed that China views global governance, trade, sovereignty, and human rights in a fundamentally different way than the United States and the European Union do, leaving opportunity for transatlantic coordination on areas of strategic interest. Unfortunately, participants also acknowledged that, given internal European politics and the Trump administration’s policies, it may be difficult for the United States and European Union to develop a cohesive China strategy. On trade, the United States and the European Union have been largely successful in advocating for stronger intellectual property protections, promoting market access, and coordinating pushback against laws and regulations discriminating against foreign entities. However, several participants noted that EU member states are divided in their response to Chinese investment and trade, as some EU states privilege short-term money flows over long-term consequences, thus making high-level U.S.-EU-China trade agreements difficult.

With Chinese President Xi Jinping’s consolidation of power, participants noted that China has asserted sovereignty claims more firmly in critical areas, including Taiwan and the South China Sea. Participants noted that the United States and European Union agree on the strategic importance of Taiwan and the South China Sea, but differ in their approaches to both. The United States has made Taiwan an important component of its China policy, while the European Union has not. In the South China Sea, the United States and European Union do coordinate on freedom of navigation operations, but differ in the manner in which they exercise their rights.In terms of future cooperation, participants agreed that the United States and European Union should continue to challenge China on its human rights violations, hold Xi to account on China’s climate change advocacy, attempt to reach an agreement with China on internet governance (which may be difficult given divergent U.S. and EU views), and work with China to establish common standards and lending regulations for its Belt and Road Initiative.

The Middle East

In the Middle East, participants agreed that the United States and the European Union share concerns over terrorism and the stabilization of Libya and Yemen, but diverge on approaches to Iran and the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), as well as the conflict between the Israelis and the Palestinians. Some participants also emphasized that, although the Middle East is geostrategically critical for EU security, EU member states do not follow a coordinated Middle East strategy. Moreover, several participants identified a potential flashpoint in U.S.-EU coordination in the Middle East over a possible Iran-Israel confrontation; they expressed misgivings over whether the United States and European Union would present a united transatlantic front in the face of armed conflict. Regardless, opportunities for cooperation exist and include counterterrorism initiatives and stabilization efforts across the Middle East, particularly in Syria, Tunisia, and Yemen. Participants flagged the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS as an example of multiple consecutive U.S. and European administrations sharing best practices, intelligence, and labor. As postconflict situations emerge, participants agreed that the United States and European Union will continue to coordinate on regional stabilization, but that the United States is less likely to commit itself to any long-term reconstruction efforts.

Africa

Participants agreed that the need for a coordinated transatlantic strategy toward Africa is paramount, as Africa faces the “perfect storm” of a demographic bulge, climate change, and the uncertainty of the future of work on the continent. However, although the United States and the European Union share concerns over migration, peacekeeping, and terrorism in Africa, participants recognized that a coordinated transatlantic approach may be difficult. The United States does not currently prioritize Africa in its foreign policy agenda, nor does it involve African countries in high-level dialogues, preferring bilateral interactions and military approaches to resolving conflict. Participants noted that the converse is true for Europe: African stability is critical for regional security, particularly as it affects migration, but the European Union often opts for diplomacy and multilateral initiatives over military operations.

Although the United States and the European Union have adopted different strategic approaches to African relations, participants identified several areas for a coordinated transatlantic strategy: counterterrorism efforts in the Sahel against international criminal and terrorist networks, democracy promotion in fragile states, and civil society and private sector work on climate change. Recognizing that current crises are the result of short-term policy and spillover from ongoing conflicts, participants agreed that the United States and the European Union should develop security agreements in Africa, focusing on economic and humanitarian tools to address the needs of younger generations. Participants concluded that diplomacy and prevention in Africa will be critical in handling the approaching perfect storm.

Recommendations
Participants noted that the international system faces fundamental, strategic, and systemic shifts that may outlast current U.S. and EU governments. Participants remain pessimistic that China and Russia will seek to keep the liberal international order as both countries see little incentive to do so and have experienced limited repercussions in deviating from established international norms. Participants also agreed that the United States and European Union are unlikely to adopt a cohesive transatlantic strategy toward China and Russia, but expressed hope for cooperation in other areas of strategic and regional importance, including in Africa and the Middle East.

As a result, participants suggested that the United States and European Union use this inflection point to reconsider the benefits of the liberal international order, and potentially ensure its survival by developing a cohesive strategy and pursuing the following: Identify areas where civil society and private sector actors can take the lead on contentious issues, including climate change. Pursue specific strategic areas of cooperation below the senior levels of government to maintain dialogue and ensure the pursuit of national security interests. Potential areas of cooperation include arms control agreements and counterterrorism efforts.

Prepare for European strategic autonomy, despite internal European political disputes. Though Europe is preparing for a post-American future, its efforts do not preclude the return of U.S. power.Empower the periphery: those actors who operate at the sub-state level. As societies grow increasingly interconnected, the traditional state-based framework may need to flex and allow for nonstate civil society actors to work on transnational issues.

One main evil source who has supporting, funding, and manipulating everybody and everything is the devil in the man, "George Soros"!

List Of 206 U.S. Organizations Funded By George Soros

May 30, 2020

By Sylvie FOURCADE  – November 24, 2019

One may well be familiar with many of these organizations, but the complete list can be staggering even to those who are aware. 206 U.S. organizations funded by George Soros… what is the number in other countries?


On peut être familier avec bon nombre de ces organisations, mais la liste complète est impressionnante, même pour ceux qui sont au courant. 206 organisations américaines financées par George Soros… et quel est le nombre dans les autres pays ?

206 U.S. organizations funded by George Soros posted by Dr. Eowyn on April 11, 2017, source: DiscoverTheNetworks.org and the connections :



A. Organizations directly funded by George Soros and his Open Society Foundations (OSF) :

  1. Advancement Project (AP): This organization works to organize “communities of color” into politically cohesive units while disseminating its leftist worldviews and values as broadly as possible by way of a sophisticated
    communications department.
  2. Air America Radio (AAR): Now defunct, this was a self-identified “liberal” radio network.
  3. Al-Haq (AH): This NGO produces highly politicized reports, papers, books, and legal analyses regarding alleged Israeli human-rights abuses committed against Palestinians.
  4. All of Us or None (AUN): This organization seeks to change voting laws — which vary from state to state — so as to allow ex-inmates, parolees, and even current inmates to cast their ballots in political elections.
  5. Alliance for Justice (AFJ): Best known for its activism vis a vis the appointment of federal judges, this group consistently depicts Republican judicial nominees as “extremists.”
  6. America Coming Together (ACT): Soros played a major role in creating this group, whose purpose was to coordinate and organize pro-Democrat voter-mobilization programs.
  7. America Votes (AV): Soros also played a major role in creating this group, whose get-out-the-vote campaigns targeted likely Democratic voters.
  8. America’s Voice (AV): This open-borders group seeks to promote “comprehensive” immigration reform that includes a robust agenda in favor of amnesty for illegal aliens.
  9. American Bar Association Commission on Immigration Policy (ABA):
    This organization “opposes laws that require employers and persons
    providing education, health care, or other social services to verify
    citizenship or immigration status.”
  10. American Bridge 21st Century (AB21): This Super PAC conducts opposition research designed to help Democratic political candidates defeat their Republican foes.
  11. American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU): This group opposes virtually all post-9/11 national security measures enacted by the U.S. government. It supports open borders, has rushed to the defense of suspected terrorists and their abettors, and appointed former New Left terrorist Bernardine Dohrn to its Advisory Board.
  12. American Constitution Society for Law and Policy (ACS): This Washington, DC-based think tank seeks to move American jurisprudence to the left by recruiting, indoctrinating, and mobilizing young law students, helping them acquire positions of power. It also provides leftist Democrats with a bully pulpit from which to denounce their political adversaries.
  13. American Family Voices (AFV): This group creates and coordinates media campaigns charging Republicans with wrongdoing.
  14. American Federation of Teachers (AFT): After longtime AFT President Albert Shanker died in in 1997, he was succeeded by Sandra Feldman, who slowly “re-branded” the union, allying it with some of the most powerful left-wing elements of the New Labor Movement. When Feldman died in 2004, Edward McElroy took her place, followed by Randi Weingarten in 2008. All of them kept the union on the leftward course it had adopted in its post-Shanker period.
  15. American Friends Service Committee (AFSC): This group views the United States as the principal cause of human suffering around the world. As such, it favors America’s unilateral disarmament, the dissolution of American borders, amnesty for illegal aliens, the abolition of the death penalty, and the repeal of the Patriot Act.
  16. American Immigration Council (AIC): This non-profit organization is a prominent member of the open-borders lobby. It advocates expanded rights and amnesty for illegal aliens residing in the U.S.
  17. American Immigration Law Foundation (AILF): This group supports amnesty for illegal aliens, on whose behalf it litigates against the U.S. government.
  18. American Independent News Network (AINN): This organization promotes “impact journalism” that advocates progressive change.
  19. American Institute for Social Justice (AISJ): The goal is to produce skilled community organizers who can “transform poor communities” by agitating for increased government spending on city services, drug interdiction, crime prevention, housing, public-sector jobs, access to healthcare, and public schools.
  20. American Library Association (ALA): This group has been an outspoken critic of the Bush administration’s War on Terror — most particularly, Section 215 of the USA Patriot Act, which it calls “a present danger to the constitutional rights and privacy rights of library users.”
  21. The American Prospect, Inc. (TAP): This corporation trains and mentors young leftwing journalists, and organizes strategy meetings for leftist leaders.
  22. Amnesty International (AI): This organization directs a grossly disproportionate share of its criticism for human rights violations at the United States and Israel.
  23. Applied Research Center (ARC): Viewing the United States as a nation where “structural racism” is deeply “embedded in the fabric of society,” ARC seeks to “build a fair and equal society” by demanding “concrete change from our most powerful institutions.”
  24. Arab American Institute (AAI): The Arab American Institute denounces the purportedly widespread civil liberties violations directed against Arab Americans in the post-9/11 period, and characterizes Israel as a brutal oppressor of the Palestinian people.
  25. Aspen Institute (AI): This organization promotes radical environmentalism and views America as a nation plagued by deep-seated “structural racism.”
  26. Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN): This group conducts voter mobilization drives on behalf of leftist Democrats. These initiatives have been notoriously marred by fraud and corruption.
  27. Ballot Initiative Strategy Center (BISC): This organization seeks to advance “a national progressive strategy” by means of ballot measures—state-level legislative proposals that pass successfully through a petition (“initiative”) process and are then voted upon by the public.
  28. Bend The Arc: A Jewish Partnership for Justice (BTA): This organization condemns Voter ID laws as barriers that “make it harder for communities of color, women, first-time voters, the elderly, and the poor to cast their vote.”
  29. Bill of Rights Defense Committee (BORDC): This group provides a detailed blueprint for activists interested in getting their local towns, cities, and even college campuses to publicly declare their opposition to the Patriot Act, and to designate themselves “Civil Liberties Safe Zones.” The organization also came to the defense of self-described radical attorney Lynne Stewart (1939/2017), who was convicted in 2005 of providing material support for terrorism.
  30. Black Alliance for Just Immigration (BAJI): This organization seeks to create a unified movement for “social and economic justice” centered on black racial identity.
  31. Blueprint North Carolina (BNC): This group seeks to “influence state policy in North Carolina so that residents of the state benefit from more progressive policies such as better access to health care, higher wages, more affordable housing, a safer, cleaner environment, and access to reproductive health services.”
  32. Brennan Center for Justice (BCJ): This think tank/legal activist group generates scholarly studies, mounts media campaigns, files amicus briefs, gives pro bono support to activists, and litigates test cases in pursuit of radical “change.”
  33. Brookings Institution (BI): This organization has been involved with a variety of internationalist and state-sponsored programs, including one that aspires to facilitate the establishment of a U.N.-dominated world government. Brookings Fellows have also called for additional global collaboration on trade and banking; the expansion of the Kyoto Protocol; and nationalized health insurance for children. Nine Brookings economists signed a petition opposing President Bush’s tax cuts in 2003.
  34. Campaign for America’s Future (CAF): This group supports tax hikes, socialized medicine, and a dramatic expansion of social welfare programs.
  35. Campaign for Better Health Care (CBHC): This organization favors a single-payer, government-run, universal health care system.
  36. Campaign for Youth Justice (CFYJ): This organization contends that “transferring juveniles to the adult criminal-justice system leads to higher rates of recidivism, puts incarcerated and detained youth at unnecessary risk, has little deterrence value, and does not increase public safety.”
  37. Campus Progress (CP): A project of the Soros-bankrolled Center for American Progress (CAP), this group seeks to “strengthen progressive voices on college and university campuses, counter the growing influence of right-wing groups on campus, and empower new generations of progressive leaders.”
  38. Casa de Maryland: This organization aggressively lobbies legislators to vote in favor of policies that promote expanded rights, including amnesty, for illegal aliens currently residing in the United States.
  39. Catalist: This is a for-profit political consultancy that seeks “to help
    progressive organizations realize measurable increases in civic participation and electoral success by building and operating a robust national voter database of every voting-age American.”
  40. Catholics for Choice (CFC): This nominally Catholic organization supports women’s right to abortion-on-demand.
  41. Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good (CACG): This political nonprofit group is dedicated to generating support from the Catholic community for leftwing candidates, causes, and legislation.
  42. Center for American Progress (CAP): This leftist think tank is headed by former Clinton chief of staff John Podesta, works closely with Hillary Clinton, and employs numerous former Clinton administration staffers. It is committed to “developing a long-term vision of a progressive America”
    and “providing a forum to generate new progressive ideas and policy proposals.”
  43. Center for Community Change (CCC): This group recruits and trains activists to spearhead leftist “political issue campaigns.” Promoting increased funding for social welfare programs by bringing “attention to major national issues related to poverty,” the Center bases its training programs on the techniques taught by the famed radical organizer Saul Alinsky.
  44. Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR): This pro-Castro organization is a core member of the open borders lobby, has opposed virtually all post 9/11 anti-terrorism measures by the U.S. government, and alleges that American injustice provokes acts of international terrorism.
  45. Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR): This group opposed welfare reform, supports “living wage” laws, rejects tax cuts, and consistently lauds the professed achievements of socialist regimes, most notably Venezuela.
  46. Center for International Policy (CIP): This organization uses advocacy, policy research, media outreach, and educational initiatives to promote “transparency and accountability” in U.S. foreign policy and global relations. It generally views America as a disruptive, negative force in the world.
  47. Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR): The mission is to guarantee safe, affordable contraception and abortion-on-demand for all women, including adolescents. The organization has filed state and federal lawsuits demanding access to taxpayer-funded abortions (through Medicaid) for low-income women.
  48. Center for Responsible Lending (CRL): This organization was a major player in the subprime mortgage crisis. According to Phil Kerpen (vice president for policy at Americans for Prosperity), CRL “sh[ook] down and harass[ed] banks into making bad loans to unqualified borrowers.” Moreover, CRL negotiated a contract enabling it to operate as a conduit of high-risk loans to Fannie Mae.
  49. Center for Social Inclusion (CSI): This organization seeks to counteract America’s “structural racism” by means of taxpayer-funded policy initiatives.
  50. Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP): Reasoning from the premise that tax cuts generally help only the wealthy, this organization advocates greater tax expenditures on social welfare programs for low earners.
  51. Center on Wisconsin Strategy (COWS): Aiming to redistribute wealth by way of higher taxes imposed on those whose incomes are above average, COWS contends that “it is important that state government be able to harness fair contribution from all parts of society – including corporations and the wealthy.”
  52. Change America Now (CAN): Formed in December 2006, Change America Now describes itself as “an independent political organization created to educate citizens on the failed policies of the Republican Congress and to contrast that record of failure with the promise offered by a Democratic agenda.”
  53. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW): This group litigates and brings ethics charges against “government officials who sacrifice the common good to special interests” and “betray the public trust.” Almost all of its targets are Republicans.
  54. Coalition for an International Criminal Court (ICC): This group seeks to subordinate American criminal-justice procedures to those of an international court.
  55. Color Of Change (COC): This organization was founded to combat what it viewed as the systemic racism pervading America generally and conservatism in particular.
  56. Common Cause (CC): This organization aims to bring about campaign-finance reform, pursue media reform resembling the Fairness Doctrine, and cut military budgets in favor of increased social-welfare and environmental spending.
  57. Constitution Project (CP): This organization seeks to challenge the legality of military commissions; end the detainment of “enemy combatants”; condemn government surveillance of terrorists; and limit the President’s
    executive privileges.
  58. Defenders of Wildlife (DOW) Action Fund : Defenders of Wildlife opposes oil exploration in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. It condemns logging, ranching, mining, and even the use of recreational motorized vehicles as activities that are destructive to the environment.
  59. Democracy Alliance (DA): This self-described “liberal organization” aims to raise $200 million to develop a funding clearinghouse for leftist groups. Soros is a major donor to this group.
  60. Democracy 21 (D21): This group is a staunch supporter of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, also known as the McCain-Feingold Act.
  61. Democracy Now! (DN): created in 1996 by WBAI radio news director Amy Goodman and four partners to provide “perspectives rarely heard in the U.S. corporate-sponsored media,” i.e., the views of radical and foreign journalists, left and labor activists, and ideological foes of capitalism.
  62. Democratic Justice Fund (DJF): opposes the Patriot Act and most efforts to restrict or regulate immigration into the United States — particularly from countries designated by the State Department as “terrorist nations.”
  63. Democratic Party (DP): Soros’ funding activities are devoted largely to helping the Democratic Party solidify its power base. In a November 2003 interview, Soros stated that defeating President Bush in 2004 “is the central focus of my life …  a matter of life and death.” He pledged to raise $75 million to defeat Bush, and personally donated nearly a third of that amount to anti-Bush organizations. “America under Bush,” he said, “is a danger to the world, and I’m willing to put my money where my mouth is.”
  64. Demos: This organization lobbies federal and state policymakers to “addres[s] the economic insecurity and inequality that characterize American society today”; promotes “ideas for reducing gaps in wealth, income and political influence”; and favors tax hikes for the wealthy.
  65. Drum Major Institute for Public Policy (DMI): This group describes itself as “a non-partisan, non-profit think tank generating the ideas that fuel the progressive movement,” with the ultimate aim of persuading “policymakers and opinion-leaders” to take steps that advance its vision of “social and economic justice.”
  66. Earthjustice (EJ): This group seeks to place severe restrictions on how U.S. land and waterways may be used. It opposes most mining and logging initiatives, commercial fishing businesses, and the use of motorized vehicles in undeveloped areas.
  67. Economic Policy Institute (EPI): This organization believes that “government must play an active role in protecting the economically vulnerable, ensuring equal opportunity, and improving the well-being of all Americans.”
  68. Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC): This organization has been a harsh critic of the USA PATRIOT Act and has joined the American Civil Liberties Union in litigating two cases calling for the FBI “to publicly release or account for thousands of pages of information about the government’s use of PATRIOT Act powers.”
  69. Ella Baker Center for Human Rights (EBC): Co-founded by the revolutionary communist Van Jones, this anti-poverty organization claims that “decades of disinvestment in our cities” — compounded by “excessive, racist policing and over-incarceration” — have “led to despair and homelessness.”
  70. EMILY’s List (EL): This political network raises money for Democratic female political candidates who support unrestricted access to taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand.
  71. Energy Action Coalition (EAC): Founded in 2004, this group describes itself as “a coalition of 50 youth-led environmental and social justice groups working together to build the youth clean energy and climate movement.” For EAC, this means “dismantling oppression” according to its principles of environmental justice.
  72. Equal Justice USA (EJUSA): This group claims that America’s criminal-justice system is plagued by “significant race and class biases,” and thus seeks to promote major reforms.
  73. Fair Immigration Reform Movement (FIRM): This is the open-borders arm of the Center for Community Change.
  74. Faithful America (FA): This organization promotes the redistribution of wealth, an end to enhanced interrogation procedures vis a vis prisoners-of-war, the enactment of policies to combat global warming, and the creation of a government-run heath care system.
  75. Families USA (FUSA): This Washington-based health-care advocacy group favors ever-increasing government control of the American healthcare system.
  76. Feminist Majority Foundation (FMF): Characterizing the United States as an inherently sexist nation, this group focuses on “advancing the legal, social and political equality of women with men, countering the backlash to women’s advancement, and recruiting and training young feminists to encourage future leadership for the feminist movement in the United States.”
  77. Four Freedoms Fund (FFF): This organization was designed to serve as a conduit through which large foundations could fund state-based open-borders organizations more flexibly and quickly.
  78. Free Exchange on Campus (FEC): This organization was created solely to oppose the efforts of one individual, David Horowitz, and his campaign to have universities adopt an “Academic Bill of Rights” as well as to denounce Horowitz’s 2006 book . Member organizations of FEC include Campus Progress (CP), a project of the Center for American Progress (CAP); the American Association of University Professors (AAUP); theAmerican Civil Liberties Union (ACLU); People for the American Way (PFAW); the United States Student Association (USSA); the Center for Campus Free Speech (CCFS); the American Library Association (ALA); Free Press (FP); and the National Association U.S. Public Interest Research Group (USPIRG).
  79. Free Press (FP): This “media reform” organization has worked closely with many notable leftists and such organizations as Media Matters for America (MMFA), Air America Radio (AAR), Global Exchange (GE), Code Pink: Women for Peace, Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR), the Revolutionary Communist Party (RCP), Mother Jones Magazine, and Pacifica Radio (PR).
  80. Funding Exchange (FEX): Dedicated to the concept of philanthropy as a vehicle for social change, this organization pairs leftist donors and foundations with likeminded groups and activists who are dedicated to bringing about their own version of “progressive” change and social justice. Many of these grantees assume that American society is rife with racism, discrimination, exploitation, and inequity and needs to be overhauled via sustained education, activism, and social agitation.
  81. Gamaliel Foundation (GF): Modeling its tactics on those of the radical Sixties activist Saul Alinsky, this group takes a strong stand against current homeland security measures and immigration restrictions.
  82. Gisha: Center for the Legal Protection of Freedom of Movement (GCLPFM): This anti-Israel organization seeks to help Palestinians “exercise their right to freedom of movement.”
  83. Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect (GCRP): This group contends that when a state proves either unable or unwilling to protect civilians from mass atrocities occurring within its borders, it is the responsibility of the international community to intervene — peacefully if possible, but with military force if necessary.
  84. Global Exchange (GE): Established in 1988 by pro-Castro radical Medea Benjamin, this group consistently condemns America’s foreign policy, business practices, and domestic life. Following the 9/11 terrorist attacks,
    Global Exchange advised Americans to examine “the root causes of
    resentment against the United States in the Arab world — from our
    dependence on Middle Eastern oil to our biased policy towards Israel.”
  85. Grantmakers Without Borders (GWB): tends to be very supportive of leftist environmental, anti-war, and civil rights groups. It is also generally hostile to capitalism, which it deems one of the chief “political, economic, and social systems” that give rise to a host of “social ills.”
  86. Green For All (GFA): This group was created by Van Jones to lobby for federal climate, energy, and economic policy initiatives.
  87. Health Care for America Now (HCAN): This group supports a “single payer” model where the federal government would be in charge of financing and administering the entire U.S. healthcare system.
  88. Human Rights Campaign (HRC): The largest “lesbian-gay-bisexual-transgender” (LGBT) lobbying group in the United States, HRC supports political candidates and legislation that will advance the LGBT agenda. Historically, HRC has most vigorously championed HIV/AIDS-related legislation, “hate crime” laws, the abrogation of the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, and the legalization of gay marriage.
  89. Human Rights First (HRF): This group supports open borders and the rights of illegal aliens; charges that the Patriot Act severely erodes Americans’ civil liberties; has filed amicus curiae briefs on behalf of terror suspect Jose Padilla; and deplores the Guantanamo Bay detention facilities.
  90. Human Rights Watch (HRW): This group directs a disproportionate share of its criticism at the United States and Israel. It opposes the death penalty in all cases, and supports open borders and amnesty for illegal aliens.
  91. I’lam: This anti-Israel NGO seeks “to develop and empower the Arab media and to give voice to Palestinian issues.”
  92. Immigrant Defense Project (IDP): To advance the cause of illegal immigrants, the IDP provides immigration law backup support and counseling to New York defense attorneys and others who represent or assist immigrants in criminal justice and immigration systems, as well as to immigrants themselves.
  93. Immigrant Legal Resource Center (ILRC): This group claims to have helped gain amnesty for some three million illegal aliens in the U.S., and in the 1980s was part of the sanctuary movement which sought to grant asylum to refugees from the failed Communist states of Central America.
  94. Immigrant Workers Citizenship Project (IWCP): This open-borders organization advocates mass immigration to the U.S.
  95. Immigration Advocates Network (IAN): This alliance of immigrant-rights groups seeks to “increase access to justice for low-income immigrants and strengthen the capacity of organizations serving them.”
  96. Immigration Policy Center (IPC): an advocate of open borders and contends that the massive influx of illegal immigrants into America is due to U.S. government policy, since “the broken immigration system […] spurs unauthorized immigration in the first place.”
  97. Independent Media Center (Indymedia) (IMC): This Internet-based, news and events bulletin board represents an invariably leftist, anti-capitalist perspective and serves as a mouthpiece for anti-globalization/anti-America themes.
  98. Independent Media Institute (IMI): administers the SPIN Project (Strategic Press Information Network), which provides leftist organizations with “accessible and affordable strategic communications consulting, training, coaching, networking opportunities and concrete tools” to help them “achieve their social justice goals.”
  99. Institute for America’s Future (IAF): supports socialized medicine, increased government funding for education, and the creation of an infrastructure “to ensure that the voice of the progressive majority is heard.”
  100. Institute for New Economic Thinking (INET): Seeking to create a new worldwide “economic paradigm,” this organization is staffed by numerous individuals who favor government intervention in national economies, and who view capitalism as a flawed system.
  101. Institute for Policy Studies (IPS): This think tank has long supported Communist and anti-American causes around the world. Viewing capitalism as a breeding ground for “unrestrained greed,” IPS seeks to provide a corrective to “unrestrained markets and individualism.” Professing an unquestioning faith in the righteousness of the United Nations, it aims to bring American foreign policy under UN control.
  102. Institute for Public Accuracy (IPA): This anti-American, anti-capitalist organization sponsored actor Sean Penn’s celebrated visit to Baghdad in 2002. It also sponsored visits to Iraq by Democratic Congressmen Nick Rahall and former Democrat Senator James Abourezk
  103. Institute for Women’s Policy Research (IWPR): This group views the U.S. as a nation rife with discrimination against women, and publishes research to draw attention to this alleged state of affairs. It also advocates unrestricted access to taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand, stating that “access to abortion is essential to the economic well-being of women and girls.”
  104. International Crisis Group (ICG): One of this organization’s leading figures is its Mideast Director, Robert Malley, who was President Bill Clinton’s Special Assistant for Arab-Israeli Affairs. His analysis of the Mideast conflict is markedly pro-Palestinian.
  105. J Street: This anti-Israel group warns that Israel’s choice to take military
    action to stop Hamas’ terrorist attacks “will prove counter-productive and only deepen the cycle of violence in the region”
  106. Jewish Funds for Justice (JFSJ): This organization views government intervention and taxpayer funding as crucial components of enlightened social policy. It seeks to redistribute wealth from Jewish donors to low-income communities “to combat the root causes of domestic economic and social injustice.” By JFJ’s reckoning, chief among those root causes are the inherently negative by-products of capitalism – most notably racism and “gross economic inequality.”
  107. Joint Victory Campaign 2004: Founded by George Soros and Harold Ickes, this group was a major fundraising entity for Democrats during the 2004 election cycle. It collected contributions (including large amounts from Soros personally) and disbursed them to two other groups, America Coming Together (ACT) and the Media Fund (MF), which also worked on behalf of Democrats.
  108. Justice at Stake (JAS): This coalition calls for judges to be appointed by nonpartisan, independent commissions in a process known as “merit selection,” rather than elected by the voting public.
  109. LatinoJustice PRLDF (LJ) (Formerly the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund): This organization supports bilingual education, the racial gerrymandering of voting districts, and expanded rights for illegal aliens.
  110. Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law (LCCR): This group views America as an unremittingly racist nation; uses the courts to mandate race-based affirmative action preferences in business and academia; has filed briefs against the Department of Homeland Security’s efforts to limit the wholesale granting of green cards and to identify potential terrorists; condemns the Patriot Act; and calls on Americans to “recognize the contribution” of illegal aliens.
  111. Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights (CCHR): This organization views the United States as a nation rife with racism, sexism, and all manner of social injustice; and it uses legislative advocacy to push for “progressive change” that will create “a more open and just society.”
  112. League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC): This group views America as a nation plagued by “an alarming increase in xenophobia and anti-Hispanic sentiment”; favors racial preferences; supports the legalization of illegal Hispanic aliens; opposes military surveillance of U.S. borders; opposes making English America’s official language; favors open borders; and rejects anti-terrorism legislation like the Patriot Act.
  113. League of Women Voters (LWV): Education Fund: The League supports taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand; supports “motor-voter” registration, which allows anyone with a driver’s license to become a voter, regardless of citizenship status; and supports tax hikes and socialized medicine.
  114. League of Young Voters (LYV): This organization seeks to “empowe[r] young people nationwide” to “participate in the democratic process and create progressive political change on the local, state and national level[s].”
  115. Lynne Stewart: Defense Committee: IRS records indicate that Soros’s Open Society Institute made a September 2002 grant of $20,000 to this organization. Stewart was the criminal-defense attorney who was later convicted for abetting her client, the “blind sheik” Omar Abdel Rahman, in terrorist activities connected with his Islamic Group (IG).
  116. Machsom Watch (MW): This organization describes itself as “a movement of Israeli women, peace activists from all sectors of Israeli society, who oppose the Israeli occupation and the denial of Palestinians’ rights to move freely in their land.”
  117. MADRE: This international women’s organization deems America the world’s foremost violator of human rights. As such, it seeks to “communicat[e] the real-life impact of U.S. policies on women and families confronting violence, poverty and repression around the world,” and to “demand alternatives to destructive U.S. policies.” It also advocates
    unrestricted access to taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand.
  118. Malcolm X Grassroots Movement (MXGM): This group views the U.S. as a nation replete with racism and discrimination against blacks; seeks to establish an independent black nation in the southeastern United States; and demands reparations for slavery.
  119. Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition (MIRA): This group calls for the expansion of civil rights and liberties for illegal aliens; laments that illegal aliens in America are commonly subjected to “worker exploitation”; supports tuition-assistance programs for illegal aliens attending college; and characterizes the Patriot Act as a “very troubling” assault on civil liberties.
  120. Media Fund (MF): Soros played a major role in creating this group, whose purpose was to conceptualize, produce, and place political ads on television, radio, print, and the Internet.
  121. Media Matters for America (MMFA): This organization is a “web-based, not-for-profit … progressive research and information center” seeking to “systematically monitor a cross-section of print, broadcast, cable, radio, and Internet media outlets for conservative misinformation.” The group works closely with the Soros-backed Center for American Progress (CAP), and is heavily funded by Democracy Alliance (DA), of which Soros is a major financier.
  122. Mercy Corps (MC): Vis a vis the Arab-Israeli conflict, Mercy Corps places all blame for Palestinian poverty and suffering directly on Israel.
  123. Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF): This group advocates open borders, free college tuition for illegal aliens, lowered educational standards to accommodate Hispanics, and voting rights for criminals. In MALDEF’s view, supporters of making English the official language of the United States are “motivated by racism and anti-immigrant sentiments,” while advocates of sanctions against employers reliant on illegal labor seek to discriminate against “brown-skinned people.”
  124. Meyer, Suozzi, English and Klein, PC (law firm): This influential defender of Big Labor is headed by Democrat operative Harold Ickes.
  125. Midwest Academy (MA): This entity trains radical activists in the tactics of direct action, targeting, confrontation, and intimidation.
  126. Migration Policy Institute (MPI): This group seeks to create “a North America with gradually disappearing border controls … with permanent migration remaining at moderate levels.”
  127. Military Families Speak Out (MFSO): This group ascribes the U.S. invasion of Iraq to American imperialism and lust for oil.
  128. Missourians Organizing for Reform and Empowerment (MORE): This group is the rebranded Missouri branch of the now-defunct, pro-socialist, community organization ACORN.
  129. MoveOn (MO): This Web-based organization supports Democratic political candidates through fundraising, advertising, and get-out-the-vote drives.
  130. Ms. Foundation for Women (MFW): This group laments what it views as the widespread and enduring flaws of American society: racism, sexism, homophobia, and the violation of civil rights and liberties. It focuses its philanthropy on groups that promote affirmative action for women, unfettered access to taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand, amnesty for illegal aliens, and big government generally.
  131. Muslim Advocates (MA): Opposed to U.S. counter-terrorism strategies that make use of sting operations and informants, MA characterizes such tactics as forms of “entrapment” that are inherently discriminatory against Muslims.
  132. NARAL Pro-Choice America: This group supports taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand, and works to elect pro-abortion Democrats.
  133. National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) Legal Defense and Education Fund: The NAACP supports racial preferences in employment and education, as well as the racial gerrymandering of voting districts. Underpinning its support for race preferences is the fervent belief that white racism in the United States remains an intractable, largely undiminished, phenomenon.
  134. The Nation Institute(TNI): This nonprofit entity sponsors leftist conferences, fellowships, awards for radical activists, and journalism internships.
  135. National Abortion Federation (NAF): This group opposes any restrictions on abortion at either the state or federal levels, and champions the introduction of unrestricted abortion into developing regions of the world.
  136. National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty (NCADP): This group was established in 1976 as the first “fully staffed national organization exclusively devoted to abolishing capital punishment.”
  137. National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy (NCRP): This group depicts the United States as a nation in need of dramatic structural change financed by philanthropic organizations. It overwhelmingly promotes grant-makers and grantees with leftist agendas, while criticizing their conservative counterparts.
  138. National Committee for Voting Integrity (NCVI): This group opposes “the implementation of proof of citizenship and photo identification requirements for eligible electors in American elections as the means of assuring election integrity.”
  139. National Council for Research on Women (NCRW): This group supports big government, high taxes, military spending cuts, increased social welfare spending, and the unrestricted right to taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand.
  140. National Council of La Raza (NCLR): This group lobbies for racial preferences, bilingual education, stricter hate-crime laws, mass immigration, and amnesty for illegal aliens.
  141. National Council of Women’s Organizations (NCWO): This group views the United States as a nation rife with injustice against girls and women. It advocates high levels of spending for social welfare programs, and supports race and gender preferences for minorities and women in business and academia.
  142. National Immigration Forum (NIF): Opposing the enforcement of present immigration laws, this organization urges the American government to “legalize” en masse all illegal aliens currently in the United States who have no criminal records, and to dramatically increase the number of visas available for those wishing to migrate to the U.S. The Forum is particularly committed to opening the borders to unskilled, low-income workers, and immediately making them eligible for welfare and social service programs.
  143. National Immigration Law Center (NILC): This group seeks to win unrestricted access to government-funded social welfare programs for illegal aliens.
  144. National Lawyers Guild (NLG): This group promotes open borders; seeks to weaken America’s intelligence-gathering agencies; condemns the Patriot Act as an assault on civil liberties; rejects capitalism as an unviable economic system; has rushed to the defense of convicted terrorists and their abettors; and generally opposes all U.S. foreign policy positions, just as it did during the Cold War when it sided with the Soviets.
  145. National Organization for Women (NOW): This group advocates the unfettered right to taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand; seeks to “eradicate racism, sexism and homophobia” from American society; attacks Christianity and traditional religious values; and supports gender-based preferences for women.
  146. National Partnership for Women and Families (NPWF): This organization supports race- and sex-based preferences in employment and education. It also advocates for the universal “right” of women to undergo taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand at any stage of pregnancy and for any reason.
  147. National Priorities Project (NPP): This group supports government-mandated redistribution of wealth — through higher taxes and greater expenditures on social welfare programs. NPP exhorts the government to redirect a significant portion of its military funding toward public education, universal health insurance, environmentalist projects, and welfare programs.
  148. National Public Radio (NPR): Founded in 1970 with 90 public radio stations as charter members, NPR is today a loose network of more than 750 U.S. radio stations across the country, many of which are based on college and university campuses.
  149. National Security Archive Fund (NSA): This group collects and publishes declassified documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act to a degree that compromises American national security and the safety of intelligence agents.
  150. National Women’s Law Center (NWLC): This group supports taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand; lobbies against conservative judicial appointees; advocates increased welfare spending to help low-income mothers; and favors higher taxes for the purpose of generating more funds for such government programs as Medicaid, food stamps, welfare, foster care, health care, child-support enforcement, and student loans.
  151. Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC): One of the most influential environmentalist lobbying groups in the United States, the Council claims a membership of one million people.
  152. New America Foundation (NAF): This organization uses policy papers, media articles, books, and educational events to influence public opinion on such topics as healthcare, environmentalism, energy policy, the Mideast conflict, global governance, and much more.
  153. New Israel Fund (NIF): This organization gives support to NGOs that regularly produce reports accusing Israel of human-rights violations and religious persecution.
  154. NewsCorpWatch (NCW): A project of Media Matters For America, NewsCorpWatch was established with the help of a $1 million George Soros grant to Media Matters.
  155. Pacifica Foundation: This entity owns and operates Pacifica Radio (PR), awash from its birth with the socialist-Marxist rhetoric of class warfare and hatred for capitalism.
  156. Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR): This NGO investigates and documents what it views as Israeli human-rights violations against Palestinians.
  157. Peace and Security Funders Group (PSFG): This is an association of more than 60 foundations that give money to leftist anti-war and environmentalist causes. Its members tend to depict America as the world’s chief source of international conflict, environmental destruction, and economic inequalities.
  158. Peace Development Fund (PDF): In PDF’s calculus, the United States needs a massive overhaul of its social and economic institutions. “Recently,” explains PDF, “we have witnessed the negative effects of neo-liberalism and the globalization of capitalism, the de-industrialization of the U.S. and the growing gap between the rich and poor …”
  159. People for the American Way (PFAW): This group opposes the Patriot Act, anti-terrorism measures generally, and the allegedly growing influence of the “religious right.”
  160. People Improving Communities Through Organizing (PICO): This group uses Alinsky-style organizing tactics to advance the doctrines of the religious left.
  161. Physicians for Human Rights – Israel (PHRI): This group is selectively and disproportionately critical of the United States and Israel in its condemnations of human rights violations.
  162. Physicians for Social Responsibility (PSR): This is an anti-U.S.-military organization that also embraces the tenets of radical environmentalism.
  163. Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA): This group is the largest abortion provider in the United States and advocates taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand.
  164. Ploughshares Fund (PF): This public grantmaking foundation opposes America’s development of a missile defense system, and contributes to many organizations that are highly critical of U.S. foreign policies and military ventures.
  165. Prepare New York (PNY): This group supported the proposed construction of a Muslim Community Center near Ground Zero in lower Manhattan – a project known as the Cordoba Initiative, headed by Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf.
  166. Presidential Climate Action Project (PCAP): PCAP’s mission is to create a new 21st-century economy, completely carbon-free and based largely on renewable energy. A key advisor to the organization is the revolutionary communist Van Jones.
  167. Prison Moratorium Project (PMP): This initiative was created in 1995 for the express purpose of working for the elimination of all prisons in the United States and the release of all inmates. Reasoning from the premise that incarceration is never an appropriate means of dealing with crime, it deems American society’s inherent inequities the root of all criminal behavior.
  168. Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC): This organization works “to elect bold progressive candidates to federal office and to help [them] and their campaigns save money, work smarter, and win more often.”
  169. Progressive States Network (PSN): PSN’s mission is to “pass progressive legislation in all fifty states by providing coordinated research and strategic advocacy tools to forward-thinking state legislators.”
  170. Project Vote (PV): This is the voter-mobilization arm of the Soros-funded Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN). A persistent pattern of lawlessness and corruption has followed ACORN/Project Vote activities over the years.
  171. ProPublica (PP): Claiming that “investigative journalism is at risk,” this group aims to remedy this lacuna in news publishing by “expos[ing] abuses of power and betrayals of the public trust by government, business, and other institutions, using the moral force of investigative journalism to spur reform through the sustained spotlighting of wrongdoing.”
  172. Proteus Fund: This foundation directs its philanthropy toward a number of radical leftwing organizations.
  173. Psychologists for Social Responsibility (PSR): This anti-capitalist, anti-corporate, anti-military, anti-American organization “uses psychological knowledge and skills to promote peace with social justice at the community, national and international levels.”
  174. Public Citizen Foundation (PC): Public Citizen seeks increased government intervention and litigation against corporations — a practice founded on the notion that American corporations, like the capitalist system of which they are a part, are inherently inclined toward corruption.
  175. Public Justice Center (PJC): Viewing America as a nation rife with injustice and discrimination, this organization engages in legislative and policy advocacy to promote “systemic change for the disenfranchised.”
  176. Rebuild and Renew America Now (aka Unity `09) (RRAN) : Spearheaded by MoveOn.org (MO) and overseen by longtime activist Heather Booth, this coalition was formed to facilitate the passage of President Obama’s “historic” $3.5 trillion budget for fiscal year 2010.
  177. Res Publica (RP): Seeking to advance far-left agendas in places all around the world, RP specializes in “E-advocacy,” or web-based movement-building.
  178. Roosevelt Institute: Proceeding from the premise that free-market capitalism is inherently unjust and prone to periodic collapses caused by its own structural flaws, RI currently administers several major projects aimed at reshaping the American economy to more closely resemble a socialist system.
  179. Secretary of State Project (SOSP): This project was launched in July 2006 as an independent “527” organization devoted to helping Democrats get elected to the office of Secretary of State in selected swing, or battleground, states.
  180. Sentencing Project (SP): Asserting that prison-sentencing patterns are racially discriminatory, this initiative advocates voting rights for felons.
  181. Social Justice Leadership (SJL): This organization seeks to transform an allegedly inequitable America into a “just society” by means of “a renewed social-justice movement.”
  182. Shadow Party (SP): This is an elaborate network of non-profit activist groups organized by George Soros and others to mobilize resources — money, get-out-the-vote drives, campaign advertising, and policy iniatives — to elect Democratic candidates and guide the Democratic Party towards the left.
  183. Sojourners: This evangelical Christian ministry preaches radical leftwing politics. During the 1980s it championed Communist revolution in Central America and chastised U.S. policy-makers for their tendency “to assume the very worst about their Soviet counterparts.” More recently, Sojourners has taken up the cause of environmental activism, opposed welfare reform as a “mean-spirited Republican agenda,” and mounted a defense of affirmative action.
  184. Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC): This organization monitors the activities of what it calls “hate groups” in the United States. It exaggerates the prevalence of white racism directed against American minorities.
  185. State Voices (SV): This coalition helps independent local activist groups in 22 states work collaboratively on a year-round basis, so as to maximize the impact of their efforts.
  186. Talking Transition (TT): This was a two-week project launched in early November 2013 to “help shape the transition” to City Hall for the newly elected Democratic mayor of New York, Bill de Blasio.
  187. Think Progress (TP): This Internet blog “pushes back, daily,” by its own account, against its conservative targets, and seeks to transform “progressive ideas into policy through rapid response communications, legislative action, grassroots organizing and advocacy, and partnerships with other progressive leaders throughout the country and the world.”
  188. Thunder Road Group (TRG): This political consultancy, in whose creation Soros had a hand, coordinates strategy for the Media Fund (MF), America Coming Together (ACT), and America Votes (AV).
  189. Tides Foundation and Tides Center: Tides is a major funder of the radical Left.
  190. U.S. Public Interest Research Group (USPIRG): This is an umbrella organization of student groups that support leftist agendas.
  191. Universal Health Care Action Network (UHCAN): This organization supports a single-payer health care system controlled by the federal government.
  192. Urban Institute (UI): This research organization favors socialized medicine, expansion of the federal welfare bureaucracy, and tax hikes for higher income-earners.
  193. USAction (USA): Education Fund, USAction lists its priorities as: “fighting the right wing agenda”; “building grassroots political power”; winning “social, racial and economic justice for all”; supporting a system of taxpayer-funded socialized medicine; reversing “reckless tax cuts for millionaires and corporations” which shield the “wealthy” from paying their “fair share”; advocating for “pro-consumer and environmental regulation of corporate abuse”; “strengthening progressive voices on local, state and national issues”; and working to “register, educate and get out the vote … [to] help progressives get elected at all levels of government.”
  194. Voter Participation Center (VPC): This organization seeks to increase voter turnout among unmarried women, “people of color,” and 18-to-29-year-olds — demographics that are heavily pro-Democrat.
  195. Voto Latino (VL): This group seeks to mobilize Latin-Americans to become registered voters and political activists.
  196. We Are America Alliance (WAAA): This coalition promotes “increased civic participation by immigrants” in the American political process.
  197. Working Families Party (WFP): An outgrowth of the socialist New Party (NP), WFP seeks to help push the Democratic Party toward the left.
  198. World Organization Against Torture (WOAT): This coalition works closely with groups that condemn Israeli security measures against Palestinian terrorism.
  199. Young Women’s Christian Association (YWCA): World Office, Switzerland: The YWCA opposes abstinence education; supports universal access to taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand; and opposes school vouchers.

B. Organizations that do not receive direct funding from Soros and OSF, but are funded by one or more organizations that do:

  1. Center for Progressive Leadership (CPL): Funded by the Soros-bankrolled Democracy Alliance (DA), this anti-capitalist organization is dedicated to training future leftist political leaders.
  2. John Adams Project (JAP):This project of the American Civil Liberties Union was accused of: (a) having hired investigators to photograph CIA officers thought to have been involved in enhanced interrogations of terror suspects detained in Guantanamo, and then (b) showing the photos to the attorneys of those suspects, some of whom were senior al-Qaeda operatives.
  3. Moving Ideas Network (MIN): This coalition of more than 250 leftwing activist groups is a partner organization of the Soros-backed Center for American Progress (CAP). MIN was originally a project of the Soros-backed The American Prospect, Inc. (TAP) and, as such, received indirect funding from the Open Society Institute. In early 2006, The American Prospect relinquished control of the Moving Ideas Network.
  4. New Organizing Institute (NOI): Created by the Soros-funded MoveOn.org, this group “trains young, technology-enabled political organizers to work for progressive campaigns and organizations.”
  5. Think Progress (TP): This “project” of the American Progress Action Fund, which is a “sister advocacy organization”of the Soros-funded Center for American Progress (CAP) and Campus Progress (CP), seeks to transform “progressive ideas into policy through rapid response communications, legislative action, grassroots organizing and advocacy, and partnerships with other progressive leaders throughout the country and the world.”
  6. Vote for Change (VFC): Coordinated by the political action committee of the Soros-funded MoveOn.org (MO), Vote for Change was a group of 41 musicians and bands that performed concerts in several key election “battleground”states during October 2004, to raise money in support of Democrat John Kerry‘s presidential bid.
  7. Working Families Party (WFP): Created in 1998 to help push the Democratic Party (DP) toward the left, this front group for the Soros-funded ACORN functions as a political party that promotes Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN)-friendly candidates.

The above 206 organizations are just the Soros-funded groups in America.
And that’s why the evil “SOB” who looks like a corpse wields so much power and influence.

“ORIGINAL CONTENT LINK”

Read more Geörgy Schwartz (a.k.a. George Soros) news

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

By Tyler Durden 

A consortium of investors led by the Soros Economic Development Fund (SEDF) and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation are buying UK-based COVID testing company, Mologic, which has developed a 10-minute coronavirus test – and is best known for its deep-nostril swab test for the virus.

https://johnbwellsnews.com/why-are-soros-and-gates-buying-uk-covid-testing-company/

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


According to the Daily Mail, uber progressive candidate for Mayor of the Big Apple Maya Wiley has received $500,000 from George Soros that was funneled to 1199 for Maya, an independent expenditure group that supports Wiley’s bid for Mayor.






https://johnbwellsnews.com/anti-billionaire-socialist-and-nyc-mayoral-hopeful-receives-half-a-million-from-billionaire-george-soros/


















~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Remdesivir: George Soros & Bill Gates Partner with China on Coronavirus Drug!

June 4, 2021


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Warren Buffett CEO, Berkshire Hathaway

Photo by Timothy Archibald/The Forbes Collection

REAL TIME NET WORTH
$101B as of 8/2/21

2021 Billionaires NET WORTH
$96B as of 4/6/21

Known as the "Oracle of Omaha," Warren Buffett is one of the most successful investors of all time.

Buffett runs Berkshire Hathaway, which owns more than 60 companies, including insurer Geico, battery maker Duracell and restaurant chain Dairy Queen.

(website creators note:) The companies he owns are all in alignment with the NWO's agenda and guidelines! Remember that next time you buy ice-cream from Dairy Queen!

The son of a U.S. congressman, he first bought stock at age 11 and first filed taxes at age 13.

He has promised to donate over 99% of his wealth. So far he has given more than $41 billion, mostly to the Gates Foundation
and his kids' foundations.

In 2010, he and Bill Gates launched the Giving Pledge, asking billionaires to commit to donating at least half of their wealth to charitable causes.
(website creators note:) If you pay attention and read between the lines, Warren Buffet has given 41 billion to a globalist who has been promoting  depopulation, and World control! I don't exactly see that as a benefit to society, do you?

Bill Gates finally alienated Warren Buffet by his rhetoric, but believe me, Buffet just didn't want his reputation to go bad so he distanced himself from Gates in a public manner as to throw some smoke at people! But read between the lines, no hard feeling Billy, as I resign, let me throw another 4.1 billion at you ok?

Jun 23, 2021

Warren Buffett Donates Another $4.1 Billion And Resigns From Gates Foundation

Warren Buffett announced a new $4.1 billion donation to the charity Wednesday morning while simultaneously announcing that he’s stepping down as an inactive trustee at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Here's the list of globalist companies that are subsidiaries of Berkshire Hathaway


BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY INC.

Acme Brick Company

International Dairy Queen, Inc.

Ben Bridge Jeweler

IMC International Metalworking Companies

Benjamin Moore & Co.

Johns Manville

Berkshire Hathaway Automotive

Jordan's Furniture

Berkshire Hathaway Direct Insurance Company (THREE)

Justin Brands

Berkshire Hathaway Energy Company

Kraft Heinz

Berkshire Hathaway GUARD Insurance Companies

Larson-Juhl

Berkshire Hathaway Homestate Companies

LiquidPower Specialty Products Inc. (LSPI)

Berkshire Hathaway Specialty Insurance

Louis - Motorcycle & Leisure

biBERK Business Insurance

Lubrizol Corporation

BoatU.S.

Marmon Holdings, Inc.

Borsheims Fine Jewelry

McLane Company

Brooks

MedPro Group

BNSF

MiTek Inc.

Business Wire

MLMIC Insurance Company

Central States Indemnity Company

National Indemnity Company

Charter Brokerage

Nebraska Furniture Mart

Clayton Homes

NetJets®

CORT Business Services

Oriental Trading Company

CTB Inc.

Pampered Chef®

Duracell

Precision Castparts Corp.

Fechheimer Brothers Company

RC Willey Home Furnishings

FlightSafety

Richline Group

Forest River

Scott Fetzer Companies

Fruit of the Loom Companies

See's Candies

Garan Incorporated

Shaw Industries

Gateway Underwriters Agency

Star Furniture

GEICO Auto Insurance

TTI, Inc.

General Re

United States Liability Insurance Group

Helzberg Diamonds

XTRA Corporation

H.H. Brown Shoe Group


HomeServices of America


https://berkshirehathaway.com/subs/sublinks.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~





May 16th revision - 5

Comments