- js reader version
- view hidden posts
- tags and related articles
View article without comments
Sunday, Dec. 29, 2002 at 7:17 PM
This is an interesting analysis of Billionaire finanical predator, George Soros, and his covert funding and sponsorship of the pro-establisment "Peace movement" in the USA. Soros' empire not only has its tentacles in the Peace movement but also in the (cough, cough)"Alternative" media outlets which have desperately tried to downplay and smear any questioning of US government sponsorship/involvement in 9-11 as "conspiracy theory." Soros has also provided funding to Indymedia(!) with its contribution to LA Indymedia during the protests at the Democratic Party convention in 2000.
George Soros' "Parallel Anti-War Media/Movement"
by bob feldman
Perhaps Amy Goodman should finally make full disclosure of all foundation grants that either the Pacifica Foundation, WBAI, Democracy Now, WBAI, KPFA, the Indymedia Centers, Free Speech TV, Deep Dish TV, the Pacifica Campaign or the Downtown studio from which she broadcasted in 2000 and/or in 2001 have received since 1992?
Regarding George Soros's U.S. alternative media gatekeeping/censorship network, the following recap might be of use to U.S. grassroots anti-war activists whose political work is not being subsidized by Establishment Foundations such as Billionaire Global Speculator George Soros' Open Society Institute:
1. In 1999, George Soros's Open Society Institute gave a $50,000 grant to the Nation Institute "to support project to improve performance and reach of Radio Nation, weekly public radio news and commentary program." George Soros' personal advisor for politics, Hamilton Fish III, is also a top executive at The Nation Institute.
2. In 1999, George Soros's Open Society Institute gave a $50,000 grant to the National Federation of Community Broadcasters, which used to be headed by former Pacifica Foundation Executive Director Lynn Chadwick.
3. In 1999, George Soros's Open Society Institute apparently gave a $125,000 grant to the Citizens for Independent Public Broadcasting [CIPB} group (on whose board sits FAIR/CounterSpin co-host Janine Jackson) "to cover administrative and start-up costs for launching national campaign entitled Citizens for Independent Broadcasting."
4. In 1999, George Soros's Open Society Institute gave a $78,660 grant to Don Hazen's Institute for Alternative Journalism/IMI/Alternet in San Francisco "to fund start-up of Youth Source, a youth Web site which will be part of a larger web poral, Independent Source."
5. In 1999, George Soros's Open Society Institute gave a $126,000 grant to the International Center for Global Communications Foundation "toward launch of Media Channel, first global media and democracy supersite on the Internet."
6. In 1999, George Soros's Open Society Institute gave 4 grants, totalling $118,000, to the Internews Network.
7. In 1999 George Soros's Open Society Institute gave a $12,000 grant to Downtown Community Television Center. (There's a possibility that this was the group which provided studio facilities for Democracy Now after the 1999 WBAI Christmas coup).
8. In 1999, George Soros's Open Society Institute gave a $150,000 grant to the Fund for Investigative Journalism. (Is this the same media group which provided some funding for KPFA's Dennis Bernstein during the 1990s?)
9. In 1999, George Soros' Open Society Institute gave a $35,000 grant to American Prospect magazine.
10. In 1999, George Soros's Open Society Institute gave a $30,000 grant to the Center for Defense Information.
11. In 1999, George Soros's Open Society Institute gave a $75,000 grant to the Center for Investigative Reporting.
12. In 1999, George Soros's Open Society Institute gave 4 grants, totalling $220,000 to the Committee to Protect Journalists--on whose board sits NATION magazine co-owner and editorial director Victor Navasky.
13. In 1999, George Soros' Open Society Institute gave 2 grants, totalling $272,000, to the "Project on Media Ownership."
14. In 1999, George Soros' Open Society Institute gave a $100,000 grant to the Public Media Center in San Francisco.
15. In 1999, George Soros's Open Society Institute gave a $73,730 grant to the dance company of a Pacifica Network News staffperson's domestic partner.
16. In 1999, George Soros' Open Society Institute gave a $50,000 grant to Youth Radio in Berkeley.
17. In 1999, George Soros's Open Society Institute gave 2 grants, totalling $393,000, to the Tides Foundation.
18. George Soros's Open Society Institute recent gave a $102,025 grant to Radio Bilingue.
19. George Soros's Open Society Institute has also apparently been providing funds to subsidize a "parallel left" section of the prisoner solidarity movement. Critical Resistance, the Prison Moratorium Project, the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights and The Sentencing Project are all being funded by George Soros's Open Society Institute.
20. In 2001, George Soros's Open Society Institute also gave grants to help subsidize the Jews for Racial and Economic Justice group, the Malcolm X Grassroots Movement group, the Million Mom March group and the Center for Investigative Reporting.
21. After 9/11, George Soros's Open Society Institute gave a $75,000 grant to the American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee Research Institute, a $250,000 grant to the ACLU and a grant to the LCEF group on whose board Mary Frances Berry used to sit.
Billionaire Soros's War Stock Investments
Like the former Corporation for Public Broadcasting Chairperson who owns a major chunk of the Columbia University-linked Nation magazine, Clinton-Gore Campaign Fundraiser Alan Sagner, the global speculator whose Open Society Institute gave KPFA a $40,000 grant in 1995 has some interesting special economic interests.
In his 1990 book The New Money Masters, John Train has a chapter entitled "George Soros: Global Speculator" in which he indicated how Soros obtained his surplus wealth:
"Soros...has always had partners on the management side, such as Jim Rogers...In 1969, aged 39, he [Soros] ...joined with Jim Rogers to found Quantum Fund... "It is not registered with the SEC...so the shareholders are foreigners, mostly Europeans...It engages in multidirectional international speculation in commodities, stock, and bonds...Thanks to Rogers, the fund was one of the first to recognize the investment merits of defense stocks."
According to The New Money Masters book, Soros's business partner in the 1970s and early 1980s, Jim Rogers, "became the largest outside shareholder of Lockheed in 1974."
As of 1989, the portfolio of Soros Fund Management Equity Holdings included $27 million worth of Boeing stock, $106 million worth of RJR Nabisco tobacco company stock, $3.5 million worth of Lockheed stock, $2.2 million worth of CBS stock, $2.3 million of Time Inc. stock, $12.8 million worth of Warner Communications stock and $6.5 million worth of Wal-Mart stock.
A Senior Fellow at the Soros Foundation's Open Society Institute who is a former president/ceo of Twin Cities Public Television in St. Paul, Minnesota "is aiding the Open Society Institute in considering issues of professionalism in media and related public policy questions," according to the Soros Foundation/Open Society Institute website.
Report this post as:
by the dude
Sunday, Dec. 29, 2002 at 7:19 PM
This is an excerpt of a Portland Indymedia post I made a while back, which can be read in full at: http://portland.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=38611&group=webcast
I take direct aim at QuestionsQuestions.net, a website that does indeed ask some very important questions -- and details some great work. But nevertheless, goes overboard at times (see below):
"the *fake liberal media* issue"
FLAME MODE GOING ON NOW:
I do think there are some folks that take their rage-against-the-pseudo-left gig way too far. Yeah, there are plenty examples of the liberal media being infiltrated, compromised and/or next to useless. But I submit that in the case of the Nation, it's really not all that dire, because they are far more a force for change in our general direction -- regardless of how you define "our general direction," but I recognize that's the weak leg premise of my argument. In fact, in a twisted sort of way, all those CIA types would like nothing more than the left to rage against itself, to throw the baby out with the bath water. The infiltrating intelligence community operatives are no doubt laughing at all the high moral chest pounding by "the real left."
Some of the writers/research over at QuestionsQuestions.Net are a good example of those taking it too far. Yes, CIA manipulation via foundation funding is fact. Yes, the actual CIA documents on Project Mockingbird are now in the public domain. Yes, we all know about how much of our liberal media is in fact fake. But within that very same fake liberal media, there's real liberal media too, real dissent media. As soon as someone starts telling me something is monolithic, my bullshit radar starts beeping as loud as can be.
Yes Virginia, conspiracies sometimes exist. Sometimes, even Congressional committees on Assassinations even say as much (JFK, 1970s), or note in official yet circumspect form of high crimes like Iran-Contra (never mind that all concerned walked!). And yes, I too believe Kennedy was assassinated by conspirators (don't know who, and I'm angry that the Nation can't get a grip and deal with this fact, after all these years, but ultimately, I'm a paying subscriber of the Nation because they deserve support!). And yes, there's far more that is rotten with the National Security State.
And yes, the perpetuation of an official story on 9-11 that is impossible, given inconsistencies of the elements of that official story, is representative of a comatose media at best, seasoned with fear of being the nail that stands up first at the individual reporter level. The "wonderful" thing about 9-11 is that the "official story" is so riddled with inconsistencies that you don't have to be a conspiracy theorist to conclude that something is seriously wrong, and that alone is the strongest debating point, the first salvo to lob at anyone you're trying to influence. Study 9-11 and you'll quickly learn of these inconsistencies
Mr. Corn and corny kind, at the Nation and elsewhere, have little hope to use ignorance and laziness as their future defense; the magnitude of contradictions in the official story are so vast that history will shred the reputations of Corn and kind -- it's just a mater of time. But all of this is a piss poor reason to piss all over The Nation. Recognize their faults. Use them for what they are worth and recognize that they are a force for marginally pushing society in a direction that's for the better. And yeah, I also recognize that all you hardcore radicals will jump all over my premise that there can be good to come from "liberalism," incremental and "progressive" (progressive literally meaning a progression of incremental steps by some of the word's referents). But the thing is, even all you folks that want revolution would have a hard time arguing that a more educated and true liberal view spread throughout culture and organically rooted wouldn't further the possibility of a ______ revolution (fill in the blank, per your ideological bent). So there. Untenable argument? Perhaps. But to split hairs at that level doesn't seem all that productive to me.
I'm not asking anyone here to agree with the analysis of this dude. I'm just a dude. But we really would be doing ourselves a big favor if we took a deep breath and stepped back a bit before swashbuckling with ideological dogmas. I, for one, find all the questions asked at questionsquestions.net very much in need of sunshine. But they're also a good example of going too far in the rage against the fake left. I pick on them only because their CIA money foundation graph is making the rounds all over the place, but they're a good example of the screw-the-Nation backlash. It's counter-productive, folks. The CIA is laughing at us.
RANT MODE OFF
Now, back to your regularly scheduled program.
Report this post as:
Sunday, Dec. 29, 2002 at 8:03 PM
Report this post as:
by the dude
Sunday, Dec. 29, 2002 at 10:24 PM
Report this post as:
by fuck phony progressives
Monday, Dec. 30, 2002 at 4:08 AM
phony_left_gatekeepers.gif, image/gif, 1039x601
More on the Phony 'Left' Gatekeepers:
Report this post as:
Tuesday, Dec. 31, 2002 at 11:19 AM
As much as I love to rail against PBS, NPR and all the white-bread middle-class, elite, lefties for their namby-pambyness and arrogant denial of CIA/Bush involvement in 911, (regardless of mountains of evidence), I still find this chart and the original posting (Soros' Evil Empire) to be misleading and over-board. Just because some struggling non-profit gets a donation from Open Society, or Ford or MacArthur Foundations, doesn't automatically make them pawns or puppets of George Soros and the CIA. Let's get real here!
Most radical or progressive media organizations need funds desperately to continue their work. They often righteously shun advertising and direct corporate money, by going to the "foundations". Not all of them are aware of the connections that these foundations have with big -money capitalists, others may know it but figure, what the hell, we'll take thier money and do something positive with it. What's wrong with that? It's only a problem when the oraganizations become financially dependent on these one or two big money contributions, and then become afraid to "rock the boat" in the fear of losing that funding. Which is probably the case of PBS, NPR (how come NPR was not on that cart?) and maybe even the Nation. BUT, as a previous commentary said, "Let's not throw the baby out with the bath water".
I'd like to see more concrete examples of how these foundation grants have actually manipulated reporting, either by censoring unflattering news (like CIA & 911) or by watering down heavy issues or by propagating false myths (HIV=AIDs=Death).
Just because Noam Chomsky writes for The Nation or FAIR or Z-Mag and they in turn got money from Open Society, Ford or the MacArthur Fund doesn't make him part of the "phony" left media. This sounds just like a CIA divide and conquer tactic to get the "radicals" even more distant and marginalized from the "liberals".
What we should be doing is supporting those same groups with our own subscrtiptions and donations so they don't have to rely on shady foundation money. We should also point out the real sell-outs in the liberal media who have already succumbed to the "bribery" of big donations and comprimised their reporting in accordance. PBS is the most obvious. I'd also like to see more evidence of CIA infiltration into the Boards of Directors of such groups. Pacifica was an obvious example, but most liberals don't even like to acknowledge that.
Also just because the CIA manages to place an undercover agent on the Board of PBS or Pacifica or Whatever, doesn't mean everyone else involved with that organization is forever tainted.
Lets support radical change, real investigation and truth in journalism, no matter who funded it! And just realize that there are and will be CIA operatives in most every major media organization worldwide, and giant capitalist foundations are always going to try to influence the liberal media by giving them piles of cash.
We should be able to spot them (the CIA operatives and the sell-outs) eventually if we keep our eyes open and learn how to discriminate between truth and fiction. And they hate it when they are revealed, so if you've got evidence let's analyze it and present it - but PLEASE beware of the witchhunt tendency. Amy Goodman and Noam Chomsky are not the enemies, don't get confused! That's what the CIA want you to think.
Report this post as:
by Mickey Mouth
Tuesday, Dec. 31, 2002 at 12:20 PM
I once read a book by a woman named Starhawk who presented the scenario that Los Angeles and San Francisco would ultimately be divided along the lines of good and evil, with LA of course being the evil slave abusing environmental washout and SF being the hippie paradise with tribal councils and gondolas for public transportation. In the book, soldiers from lA came to SF to conquer the water supply (sound farmilliar). The soldiers were dependant on immuno boosters to survive and were fed drugs to keep them loyal ( hmmm, too true). When they arrived however, and discovered the better way of life, and that no Franciscan would raise arms against them, they began to flee the army and kick the habit so to speak of the drugs they were on. You can preech, you can say leftist this, anarchist that, ADL this and whooey on everyone. Or you can do the best you can every day to show people by example and education that you know and are using a better way. How can we get enough people to agree? How can we get a large enough collective to effect change? The only way is to live the good life as you see it and promote yourself and how well you can do despite denying all help from corporations. The link to evil is greatest at Ralph's and the gas station. That's where good money goes bad. As soon as the armored trucks go back to the bank at night the money is put into the hands of obviously evil people. Because money corrupts absolutely, they can be nothing but. We have to stop pointing fingers at them because we the people are so damn collectively complacent in our daily eating and driving. We need to join hands to create alternative means of living and at the very least make it easier for people to be independant of these corporate resources for life. True anarchism demands that you depend on no one to live. Please, for the world's sake, no more bashing, of anyone, just put your nose to the grindstone and be creative about real things that need to get done. Calling anyone names is childish. Even slave owners have had amazing grace and changed. You have to get along to show someone a good and healthy alternative, people don't listen to people who hate them. This is not us against them, this is us against the greater collective and destructive us. We are a Jacob's ladder of ricochets seperate by less than six degrees now. Go ahead, be a facist anarchist, it's still not gonna change the fact that your car runs on blood. But you can call Toyota and ask them to speed up fuel cell car production. You can do many positive things to derail the mighty rich without even acknowledging that they exist or judging that they're all ass holes. We've all done some negative and positive ricochets down the ladder, making your impact independant and postive is all you can do. Speak with your hands, your body, your wallet and you will have the effect you want more than any propoganda can match. The minute you make it us against them, left against right, commies vs. capitalists, it is pure evil that wins. Unity, and ingenuity in the face of hard times, are the only means to good.
Report this post as:
Tuesday, Dec. 31, 2002 at 3:26 PM
Report this post as: