Live data from Hacker News

Soros, the Open Society Foundations, and the Continued Political Hacks

riskbasedsecurity.com

41–50 of 83 posts

Re: Soros, the Open Society Foundations, and the Continued Political Hacks

#41
post #25

There is alot at stake in blaming Russia for the breaches. This was broadcasted, without evidence? and readily accepted by the public. For this reason it's essential that some security experts outside the standard government contractor "experts" validate or at least weigh the evidence implicating the Russian state as the attackers. - Security contractors have financial interests in going along with the popular politi…

1) Now we know Manafort potentially received a cash payment of more than $12 million. Which, I mean, seeing how good he is at running a campaign is clearly money based on competence! 2) Donald Trump's campaign's ONLY intervention in the entire GOP platform was to remove anti-Putin language from the platform re: Ukraine. 3) Not only that, but just days before the RNC, Carter Paige, one of Trump's foreign policy advise…

> "Now we know Manafort potentially received a cash payment"

In other words you don't know. Those are weasel words

Re: Soros, the Open Society Foundations, and the Continued Political Hacks

#42
post #14

We, the people of Eastern Europe, already know this geopolitical Satan intimately!

yeah, he is well known a hole, that's for sure. don't look for any altruism/good intentions in his actions, rather ice cold calculation on how to make profit on it in longer term, regardless of consequences

It requires quite a leap to disregard all his public statements and activities, the range of pro-democracy organisations that he has provided financial support for, his advocacy of democracy and the concept of the open society in general, his long-term advocacy for Karl Popper as a major voice in political philosophy and all the other things that point towards a genuine, coherent and consistent belief in the essential qualities a society needs to preserve peace and a functioning civil society.

Most of the anti-Soros conspiracies I have heard have been obviously either ideologically driven or transparent pieces of realpolitik. On balance I'd still bet on the man being motivated by altruism even if you conclude he is wrong-headed in the his beliefs or methods.

Re: Soros, the Open Society Foundations, and the Continued Political Hacks

#43
post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be surprised if inducing religious and racial tensions to destabilize Europe was Soros' goal. Any evidence from non anti-semitic sources? I'm not surprised he'd be pro refugee. He was a refugee himself.

Is Soros himself an anti-semitic source as well? - national borders as the obstacle “His plan treats the protection of national borders as the objective and the refugees as an obstacle,” he said in the statement. “Our plan treats the protection of refugees as the objective and national borders as the obstacle.” http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-10-30/orban-accu... - at least a million asylum-seekers annuall…

So basically EU member states must further in debt themselves to private central banks by borrowing what they don't have to pay for the importation of people who come from a polar opposite ideology. With that very ideology partially to blame for the situations which causes the destruction that lead one to become a "refugee" to begin with. They must also on top of borrowing what they don't have (further enriching the bankers), use the force of taxes to take the money from legitimate hardworking citizens to pay for non-citizens to live within their society. And you wonder why Brexit passed...

Re: Soros, the Open Society Foundations, and the Continued Political Hacks

#44
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have a link to evidence in support of #4? #5 was as expected, taken out of context. All Trump said was that if the Russian did hack Hillary's email, that they release the 'lost/deleted' ones, something FBI wants very much as well. #7 that isn't very surprising considering Obama's policies are so far to the left of most Republicans and frankly so seldom make any sense. #8 again, not surprisingly that this was t…

Can you provide a link with evidence it wasn't? Because every article I've seen cites Russia. Applying Occam's razor and asking "Who benefits?" along with everything about Trump's campaign manager, along with proposed policies re: anti-nato and pro-Russian regional invasions, it all leads to Trump being an unwitting or witting agent of Russia. Trump wants some of that oligarch money. Anyone who doesn't see that is be…

Just admit you hate Trump. It makes these rambling thesis' based on NO EVIDENCE easier to defend.

Re: Soros, the Open Society Foundations, and the Continued Political Hacks

#45
post #25

There is alot at stake in blaming Russia for the breaches. This was broadcasted, without evidence? and readily accepted by the public. For this reason it's essential that some security experts outside the standard government contractor "experts" validate or at least weigh the evidence implicating the Russian state as the attackers. - Security contractors have financial interests in going along with the popular politi…

1) Now we know Manafort potentially received a cash payment of more than $12 million. Which, I mean, seeing how good he is at running a campaign is clearly money based on competence! 2) Donald Trump's campaign's ONLY intervention in the entire GOP platform was to remove anti-Putin language from the platform re: Ukraine. 3) Not only that, but just days before the RNC, Carter Paige, one of Trump's foreign policy advise…

Okay, some of this begs a response.

>> 8) anti-NATO stance Nope. This is actually really really wrong. What is being covered as his anti-NATO stance is a position the US has nailed on quietly for years. As someone who grew up in a Canadian military family, I heard the same criticism for years around the dinner table. A lot of nations, Canada included, do not contribute our fair share to our collective security. For decades Canada has signed on to NATO commitments but our government (liberal, more so than the conservatives) for just as long as yet to put pass the budgets in order to meet those commitments.

One of Trump's stance on NATO is to put pressure on nations like canada who enjoy the collective security afforded by NATO and benefit from it greatly, but consistently, budget after budget, has never met our commitments to ensure said security. The american tax payer is paying for the lion share of our collective security, and our current security environment has been suffering a tragedy of the commons.

>>Trump and NATO pivot to terrorism

One commitment that Canada has met, and something we Canadians should be proud of, is our commitment via NATO to the taskforce in afghanistan. We actually fought and put the necessary dollars to support that fighting. We had to lease transport planes, but eventually spend the billions to buy our own, we upgraded equipment. In terms of spending, we took our military from using 1980s equipment (the prior combat uniform was drab olive) to a fighting military contemporary of 2007.

Britain also met commitments, and, likewise, America did to. Other nations (like france, germany, poland) were reluctant to put their soldiers in combat roles and avoided risks. The issue in Afghanistan highlighted the relucantance and lack of incentive for france, germany and poland to incorporate their troops within a NATO joint chain of command because of their reluctance to see their troops engage in combat.

None of these two issues that Trump has spoken about (NATO in Afghanistan and how horrible it was), and NATO as collective security, is him speaking about disbanding NATO. You americans paid a lot more for our collective security than the EU does, or canada (as percentage of GDP). And because of the tragedy of the commons, leaders will not spend more, or take more risks unless they have to, which NATO has proven year after year, that they wont unless they feel threatened. They would rather direct that budget to domestic needs and get a free ride from you, the american tax payer.

> 7) Trump calling Putin better than Obama Trump believes Obama is the worst thing ever.

Re: Soros, the Open Society Foundations, and the Continued Political Hacks

#46

Can you even imagine the sorts of things Nixon could have gotten away with if he has simple been able to say in his era "I-It was an attempt by the Russians to defame me!"?

What, specifically, do you think someone is currently getting away with?

Re: Soros, the Open Society Foundations, and the Continued Political Hacks

#47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) Now we know Manafort potentially received a cash payment of more than $12 million. Which, I mean, seeing how good he is at running a campaign is clearly money based on competence! 2) Donald Trump's campaign's ONLY intervention in the entire GOP platform was to remove anti-Putin language from the platform re: Ukraine. 3) Not only that, but just days before the RNC, Carter Paige, one of Trump's foreign policy advise…

> "Now we know Manafort potentially received a cash payment" In other words you don't know. Those are weasel words

it is simply 'innocent before proven guilty'. a great american ideal.

also, there are proof dugged up by the great american press.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/15/us/politics/paul-manafort-...

"Handwritten ledgers show $12.7 million in undisclosed cash payments designated for Mr. Manafort from Mr. Yanukovych’s pro-Russian political party from 2007 to 2012"

Re: Soros, the Open Society Foundations, and the Continued Political Hacks

#48
post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you provide a link with evidence it wasn't? Because every article I've seen cites Russia. Applying Occam's razor and asking "Who benefits?" along with everything about Trump's campaign manager, along with proposed policies re: anti-nato and pro-Russian regional invasions, it all leads to Trump being an unwitting or witting agent of Russia. Trump wants some of that oligarch money. Anyone who doesn't see that is be…

Just admit you hate Trump. It makes these rambling thesis' based on NO EVIDENCE easier to defend.

[deleted]

Re: Soros, the Open Society Foundations, and the Continued Political Hacks

#49
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

4.) https://www.yahoo.com/news/exclusive-hacked-emails-of-dnc-op... In mid-June, Democratic Party suspicions about the hackers seemed to be confirmed when CrowdStrike, an outside security firm retained by the DNC, reported that it traced the hackers to two separate units linked to Russia’s security services: the FSB, Russia’s equivalent of the FBI, and GRU, the country’s military intelligence agency. 5.) Trump explic…

If anyone is convinced Russia hacked the DNC, Jake Williams put together a talk[0] about the subject. If you follow him on Twitter, you'll realize quickly he wouldn't dump ice cold water on Trump were he on fire. The reality is there is just no way anyone could honestly claim with the certainty that the DNC has claimed that it was Russia. [0] https://files.sans.org/summit/Digital_Forensics_and_Incident...

They might have hacked the DNC, they might not have. I suspect it was just a leak from someone in the DNC, but we know Russia has motive since they fear a continuation of America's foreign policy would lead to war with the West.

More concerning is apparently our leaders can now deflect proof of misconduct by making unproven allegations against Russia.

Re: Soros, the Open Society Foundations, and the Continued Political Hacks

#50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact the agenda isn't hidden does not make it less evil. I remind you that Soros (through his Open Society Foundations) supports illegal immigration and people smuggling into the EU: http://news.sky.com/story/sky-finds-handbook-for-eu-bound-mi... His organizations and owned media regularly attack every politician or activist who is against uncontrolled immigration, all over the Europe. His goal apparently is to i…

That someone supports a political agenda you disagree with does not make them nefarious and this kind of rhetoric really spoils the whole political process. There are a lot of humanitarian reasons why someone might support migration to Europe from an active war zone, you know.

> migration to Europe from an active war zone

What slowly turns Europe into active war zone itself...

It's not about 'political agenda I disagree', it's about actions and their results.

Post reply on HN