Infamous 60 Minutes Piece on Soros Emerges Online

11/18/201647 Comments

You’ll no doubt remember the quotes from that 1998 60 Minutes piece on Soros from Episode 113 of The Corbett Report podcast. Well guess what? That clip actually emerged online this week. Let me walk you through a few of the highlights.

SHOW NOTES
Soros bands with donors to resist Trump, ‘take back power’

Proof That Soros Money is Funding the Anti-Trump Leftist Protest-Riots

Episode 113 – Meet George Soros

The 60 Minutes Interview George Soros Tried to Bury

Video DownloadHelper

KeepVid.com

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmail

Filed in: Videos

Comments (47)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. DOWNLOADED, even before watching your vid, James. I use YTD Video Downloader. Tools are awesome! Let’s leverage them.

  2. L. says:

    Just have to put this here:

    Official red cross number of Europeans (jewish and non-jewish) who died in German “death camps” totaled just over 271,000. Most of them died of typhus. Unable to explain the lack of a dramatic reduction of the jewish population after WWII, the “official” number accepted in Germany today has been changed to 1.5 million, which is still completely false. That doesn’t stop the 6 million number from being thrown in our faces every chance Zionist-owned media/hollywood gets a chance.

    Meanwhile, Pols, Germans and Italians were routinely raped and exterminated, imprisoned in camps and left to starve and defecate amongst each other by “Uncle Joe” Stalin’s henchmen. Photos of Soviet atrocities went on to be used as “evidence” against Germany at Nuremberg. Another fun fact here is that FDR was complicit in preventing Red Cross from inspecting the Soviet camps that ethnic Germans were held in after Germany’s surrender.

    The Holocaust is a complete and utter hoax written and propagated by people like George Soros who hide behind the myth like a shield as they ruthlessly conquer the world as puppet masters of war and finance.

    A bit off topic I know, but I just can’t stand to hear/read the words “death camps” after knowing how much an utter fabrication the narrative of WWII is. Its something people have to have their eyes opened about and truly understand before they can possibly reason about the events that have unfolded throughout the world since WWII.

    • danmanultra says:

      Do you have any good sources to share on this? I have been interested in exploring this topic more, but have had trouble finding good sources for this information, largely in part to its “forbidden” reputation.

      • L. says:

        Here’s a good, surprisingly succinct, book: https://www.amazon.com/Bad-War-Truth-NEVER-Taught/dp/1507764995/

        The author also has a great book about how Putin has become the next NWO target, very similar to Hitler’s story and historically crosses over a bit with ‘The Bad War’: https://www.amazon.com/War-Against-Putin-Government-Media-Complex/dp/1500316261/

        And here is a 6+ hour documentary unrelated to but covers much of the same facts presented in ‘The Bad War’ with quite a bit more visual aid: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vnu5uW9No8g

        I recommend checking out the documentary first, its a bit easier to digest, and then the book is good reference for the sequence of events and cementing of facts.

        I have been talking to people about this more and more and they are absolutely shocked at how lied to we are about WWII. I have heard the phrase “you’re never going to convince me that the Nazis were on the right side of WWII” plenty of times. That’s the power of the rockefeller/rothschild education system, where lies completely replace history. But truth always makes more sense than the lie you’ll find. It usually only takes a few facts to get people thinking and then they go off on their own and resurface days or weeks later with wide eyes and a WTF expression on their face. O_O Holy shit, Hitler was on the right side of WWII.

        If you read some of Hitler’s speeches, he decries the banking monopolies, usury, manipulation of markets and provocation of pop up revolutions similar to the one’s people like Soros now fund. Tactics used against Hitler are being rinsed and reused against Putin. I think Putin is a bit more sly and cunning.

        Anyway, I could go on and on, but was glad someone asked for sources, because the above are very good. The Bad War is very well referenced, despite having a somewhat biased and rhetorical tone. Enjoy having your mind blown.

        • Mark K. P. says:

          Well i’ve spent the evening watching the whole video ; mind duly, and truly, blown. Thanks for the resource fella. But i’m still reeling. Holy shit

        • mkey says:

          Don’t give Hitler too much credit, James did several videos on him. I find that he has been overly demonized (due to a number of reasons) but at best he was a collaborator of the cabal whom in the end was hung out to dry.

          On the right side of WW2 there are just dozens of millions of corpses.

          • Mark K. P. says:

            but it’s not just a body count ; and i’m well aware that Hilter committed numerous very personal murders not even addressed here, like the gunning down of von Schleicher AND his wife. The video is also super weak on the notorious halt order, which was nothing less than a stab in the back to the German people and an absurd friendship gesture to the British oligrachy (absurd in an active war context). However, besides so completely exposing the holohoax and the allied mass murders, the key point about this video is the German economic miracle from the mainspring of govt credits replacing garbage bank-debt-notes ; so that Hilter’s Germany had a definite financial plan which worked, and could work still for the whole world. This represents the harnessing of industry and technology for the benefit of all, rather than today’s horrific vice versa, which is the British model since 1694

      • L. says:

        Just FYI, I posted a comment with sources that is awaiting moderation, probably due to the 3 links in it, 2 of which are to Amazon. Here’s the youtube documentary I linked to at least: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vnu5uW9No8g

        • Corbett says:

          Yes, any comment with more than one source will be auto-queued for moderation. You just have to wait for me to wake up to see it!

        • GE⊕ says:

          Interesting, YouTube says: “This video is not available in your country.” I live in Switzerland.

          • L. says:

            Not surprising, it’s illegal to deny the Holocaust in some countries… Truth shouldn’t need laws to protect it from scrutiny, it should be self evident… Hmmmmmm…

            You could use VPN to view it, or search Hitler the greatest story never told. I recall finding it on liveleak and several other places when I searched that.

            The book has very similar information if it is legal to buy LOL.

        • nosoapradio says:

          I don’t know if Hitler was a hero

          or if BRICS champion-Putin’s slated to be a martyr of the Human cause

          But I do know that in my personal experience this subject has not been conducive to discussion or opening minds. Quite the contrary.

          It has been quite effective in its mission of stigmatizing, exacerbating emotions and locking views and opinions. As a sort of herding dog or gatekeeper.

          Which, of course, should not render it taboo.

          However not good for openers. In relation to this topic, just evoking the subjectivity of history as written by the victors, has destroyed any credibility I might have had and any possibility of discussion among certain members of my entourage.

          • danmanultra says:

            Well I find there are no “right” sides in these affairs in history. Most of the big actors have committed crimes of some kind or another, so its best not label anyone a hero. For example, JFk often gets held in high approval by Alt News cause of his martyr status and such. And while he did do admirable things, and paid for it, its not to say he was wholly blameless or a “hero” either. The more we can understand history without such labels the better we can understand today as well.

            • nosoapradio says:

              Actually I agree.

              I used the word “hero” as Hitler was referred to as a “hero” in L’s linked video.

              And I used the word “martyr” as she’d recommended a book explaining that Putin might be the next NWO target comparing this to Hitler’s story.

      • Mark says:

        Probably the best and most accessible things I’ve seen on the web regarding details of holocaust revisionism are the works of “DenierBud” Dean Irebodd (One-Third of the Holocaust, Buchenwald: a Dum-Dum Portrayal of Evil, Auschwitz – Why The Gas Chambers Are A Myth) and Eric Hunt (starting with The Last Days of the Big Lie, which addresses Jewish holocaust propaganda related to the Spielberg “documentary” film). They’re easy to find. Ryan Dawson did an abbreviated compilation of Bud’s first two, called More Than Taboo.

    • Mark says:

      “The Holocaust is a complete and utter hoax written and propagated by people like George Soros who hide behind the myth like a shield as they ruthlessly conquer the world as puppet masters of war and finance.”

      As a minor aside on this, I looked into Timothy Snyder’s Black Earth a bit a while back, a work on the holocaust published last year. It seems to be initiation of the next revision in the conventional holocaust story, but what it mostly seems to do is to clarify that a lot the entire holocaust occurred outside of Germany (97% of the deaths), which anyone who knows anything about the holocaust already knows, and focuses on the work of the Einsatzgruppen in Eastern Europe, which is most of the “other 3M” who died by firing squad and gas vans (regarding which not a single example is in existence today, as I understand it). These seem like very hard numbers to quantify.

      What this seems to do is to move the holocaust story even farther east and away from the gas chambers, which is what the revisionists really focus on and is the weakest part of the holocaust story. Tha movement east is an old tactic, moving the focus on the gas chambers from Auschwitz, Majdanik and Chelmno (where the Soviet-claimed numbers used to be much higher) to the three Operation Reinhard camps on the eastern Polish border, at Treblinka, Sobibor and Belzec. Since there’s basically nothing left there, it’s tougher to attack that story. Snyder fully supports the talisman-like 6M number, btw, I think claiming there were 5.85M killed, so 750k higher than Raul Hilberg claimed in his seminal work. But this overall seems like laying the groundwork for defense of the overall narrative even if the gas chamber piece starts to crumble.

      Snyder, who is a goy, is a history professor at Yale, is a member of the CFR, and his wife is a Jew who also teaches at Yale. So the marks are there for a state actor on a mission.

      • mkey says:

        “Since there’s basically nothing left there, it’s tougher to attack that story.”

        It’s also tougher (if not downright impossible) to uphold the original claim.

        I.e. ze Germans pulled out building foundations and replanted trees, shrubs and grass. They also knew when allied spy planes will be flying over head so that they could completely stop their operation for clean shots of uncontested nature in the death camp area.

        Didn’t know about the gas van theory, it seems even more ridiculous than the electrified retractable killing floor mechanism. I guess mass shootings claim simply isn’t enough, gas has to somehow be made a central part of the narrative.

        • Mark says:

          “It’s also tougher (if not downright impossible) to uphold the original claim.”

          The story at these camps is totally absurd, Jews gassed using a Soviet tank (sunmarine?) diesel motor, bodies buried and dug up to be burned in the open in stacks on grills made from railroad rails, etc. The clear test here is to take some ground samples and try to find the evidence of that kind of activity re 900k bodies at Treblinka, and so on. But that’s sacred ground, no longer protected by the Soviet state, is now protected by rabbis, kind of like Kissinger heading the 9/11 commission, so…

          “Didn’t know about the gas van theory, it seems even more ridiculous than the electrified retractable killing floor mechanism. I guess mass shootings claim simply isn’t enough, gas has to somehow be made a central part of the narrative.”

          When you take a story which was cobbled together from psych war propaganda teams (gas chambers disguised as shower rooms), war trial “evidence” (shrunken heads), and various “survivor” Jews trying to make a buck (human soap, electrified floors), it’s not going to make much sense. But they have tried to clean it up over time, which now should be somewhat easier since all the “eyewitnesses” have pretty much died out…

          • Mark says:

            I want to make one more comment on the gas van thing. If you do a search and look at photos, I think a lot of what you see are trucks powered by wood gas generators, typical in Germany without their own controlled source of petroleum. But they look the part, of course. If you look at the Wiki article on the vans it says these were invented and first used by the Soviets, which may give us a hint who was actually gassing Jews in the east. If you look at the holocaust denial laws you will see under the recent Russian law: “In May 2014, Russia’s President Vladimir Putin signed a law making the denial of Nazi crimes and ‘wittingly spreading false information about the activity of the USSR during the years of World War Two’ or portraying Nazis as heroes a criminal offence.” So that leads back to what the Soviets might have been doing along the eastern front, and of course they controlled the post-war narrative. In any case, the gas van story certainly has a gassy smell about it.

    • peace.froggs says:

      So let me try to wrap my mind around this….most of you don’t believe NAZI’s had “death camps”, yet accuse Soros (a Jew) of being a NAZI sympathizer/collaborator, and of helping round up Jews, in order to deliver them to “death camps”.

      Which is it? Evil Soros that helped deliver his fellow Jews to “death camps” or “death camps” never existed?

      • Mark says:

        The Jews rounded up in Budapest were sent to Auschwitz, which was mostly a labor camp which provided workers for German factories in the area, mostly war-related industries. The camp also served to control peoples considered potential enemies of the state, which was what most of the camps in Germany also did. There’s no question Auschwitz existed or that many people, including many Jews, spent time interned there; there were also many deaths there, including some murders and many more due to mismanagement of the facility, including late in the war when Germany was starting to break down under the pressure of allied bombing and losing the war.

        So the answer is that Soros was involved in the German effort to use Hungarian Jews by shipping them out of the country, but not to “death camps” in the sense of systematic homicidal facilities. Of course Soros would never try to use that defense… 😉

        • peace.froggs says:

          First, let me correct you, there were no “camps in Germany”, most were in Poland and Ukraine.

          Secondly, lets say these camps were “death camps”. I highly doubt Soros at the time knew what was happening. For all we know, he thought he was helping Jews immigrate to Palestine.

          May seem like a far fetched theory, however it was well known that the Nazi’s and the Zionists collaborated to transfer German Jews to Palestine prior to 1939, therefore for all we know, after WW2 broke out, Soros was helping Polish and Ukrainian Jews immigrate to Palestine (a continuation of the transfer agreement).

          My point is this, you can’t have it both ways. Either Soros knowingly helped send 10’s of thousand of Jews to their death, or there weren’t any “death camps”!

          It seems most here have a hate fetish for Soros, but if “death camps” never existed, then why make such a big deal about what he said in this 60 minute interview.

          • peace.froggs says:

            First, let me correct you, there were no “death camps in Germany”, most were in Poland and Ukraine.

          • Mark says:

            The only death camp reference I ever make are the six claimed death camps in Poland; there were many camps in Germany, and many claimed to be death camps right after the war but revised later on – no homicidal gas chambers in Germany is now the official position and has been for decades. And the Transfer of Hungarian Jews didn’t happen until ’44, which was a world away from the pre-war German-aided transfer of Jews to Palestine.

            The issue with Soros is the casual way that he excuses his behavior – “doesn’t bother me, because if I didn’t do it someone would have”. Understand that the narrative has Auschwitz as some notorious murderous hellhole, which means people knew about “it” at the time, and you can find testimonies to that effect. Soros is a bit trapped in that narrative, but again the issue is how he has dealt with it in interviews, and not the actual reality. I certainly don’t condemn him for what he did at the time, because I have no idea what that actually was or the context, given the mountain of distortions, exaggerations and lies surrounding the whole story.

            If you know the holocaust mythology in detail, you can compare that to the Dario Gabbai sonderkommando story, he and his family supposedly working the death machine on tens or hundreds of thousands of Jews at Auschwitz and living to tell the tale for profit. If that story was actually real, why isn’t he in a madhouse, or dead at the hands of his brother Jews? It simply doesn’t pass the basic stress test for reality.

            • peace.froggs says:

              “Soros is a bit trapped in that narrative, but again the issue is how he has dealt with it in interviews, and not the actual reality.”

              –I’ll come to Soros defense somewhat, because he’s totally trapped in the Holocaust narrative. He can’t deny it happened, yet he has to admit he helped round Jews up, not for extermination, more than likely for them to immigrate (to Palestine).

              What I try to point out here, is how some people, mostly Nazi sympathizers say “death camps” didn’t exist, and in the same breath will seek to demonize Jews like Soros for sending Jews to “death camps”.

              Ultimately, peace between Israel and Palestine is the issue at hand, and instead of extending an olive branch to people like Soros than find themselves in an impossible situation, they proceed instead to twist the facts in order to blame who? The Jews of course!

              I just wish people would think things through a little more. It’s not always Black and White. Checkers is fun, but people need to learn how to play chess.

              Like you said: “If that story was actually real, why isn’t he in a madhouse, or dead at the hands of his brother Jews? It simply doesn’t pass the basic stress test for reality.”

              • Mark says:

                As I said, I have no idea what really happened with Soros in Budapest, but I think to say he thought he was helping Jews to get to Palestine seems pretty laughable to me – I don’t think there’s any evidence of that at all, and I’ve never heard Jews of Hungary thinking they were being sent there (right at the height of the most intense war Europe has ever seen). That simply doesn’t play.

                Israel and Palestine isn’t the issue at hand, and the political activities of Soros shows that very clearly. He’s been trying to divide the US and Europe via various forms of multicultiraism and conflict, and has been at war with Russia for at least 30 years. He and his fellow oligarchic pipe-hitters of the tribe have been trying to and succeeding in take control of power structures in the US and Europe for decades. This is MUCH bigger than the mainstream narrative of what to do with the Palestinians in Israel, and even with the notion of a Greater Israel.

                The Jews/Zionists experienced a series of great victories in the 1960s – the codifying of the holocaust narrative (the Eichmann seizure and trial, the Hilberg book, various films), the civil rights act of ’64, the immigration law of ’65, the “Jewish bomb”, the victory in the expansionist war in ’67 (including getting away with the Liberty attack), etc. – and have been on a roll since. That can be seen, I believe, in the shift from left to right in the ’70s with the initial rise of neoconservatism.

                One aspect of this new-found power might well be seen in something touched on elsewhere here, the “holocaust denial” laws around the world. Looking at those, it appears every one of those laws has been enacted in the last 20 years, I think the earliest in ’98, and I believe that’s meaningful. To some extent that must have been a reaction to the initial rise of revisionist thinking in the decade prior to that, but it signals both a weakness in the story and the strength of Jewish power that laws so anti-free speech could be adopted so broadly in the west.

                This also speaks to the the false and corrupt nature of Jewish political thinking and activity, that a people so progressive and so wronged historically could stand by laws which jail people for thought crimes. To me this is one of those things that’s just as inconceivable as many of the holocaust lies, obvious on its face. They should be the first ones trying to get these laws repealed, and they are not.

              • peace.froggs says:

                “I’ve never heard Jews of Hungary thinking they were being sent there (right at the height of the most intense war Europe has ever seen). That simply doesn’t play.”

                Of course they weren’t aware, this would have had to be kept secret.

                Of course I can’t prove it, however if we look at the timing of it all, it makes sense.

                1- Zionism was a movement created by Theodor Herzl in 1897 to re-establishment a Jewish nation in Palestine.

                2- At the time, only about 10% of the Palestinian population was Jewish, and was controlled by the Ottoman Empire, immigration was limited, and tightly controlled.

                3- The first step to achieving their goal of creating Israel was to wrestle control of Palestine away from the Ottoman Empire.

                4- Enter World War One, a war that pitted Ottoman Empire and Germany vs the Allied Powers.

                5- At wars end, step 1 had been achieved and solidified with the Balfour Declaration and the British Palestinian mandate.
                Europe can now begin mass Jewish immigration to Palestine.

                6- However this proved to be a slow and tedious process, given that most European Jews had been emancipated decades earlier by Napoleon, therefore they were well rooted, owning land and businesses, not wanting uproot their families, in order to become laborers and farmers in a foreign land. Jewish population in Palestine only grew to about 15% by 1930.

                7- Zionists, frustrated at the progress being made, entered an agreement with Hitler in 1933 called the “Haavara Agreement” better known as the Transfer agreement. Thus began increasing antisemitic attacks in the hopes they’d be able to scare the German Jewish population into immigrating to Palestine.

                8- This tactic probably would have worked in the long run, however time was running out. Palestinians had become increasingly agitated, and started to revolt.

                9- The White Paper issued on 23 May 1939 by the British government in response to the 1936–39 Arab Revolt, relegated the Jews in Palestine to minority status in a future majority-Arab state.

                10- Obviously, Zionists weren’t about to let that happen, their goal was to create a Jewish State after all, and in order to accomplish that, they needed to become the majority. Therefore Hitler got the go ahead to start World War Two in Sept 1939.

                11- During the war years, the Jewish population in Palestine had increased to more than 50%. In 1948, Palestine was partitioned and Israel was created.

                It’s all chronicled, in history books.

  3. mkey says:

    This guy is such a despicable excuse for a human being.

    Makes John Kirby look good in comparison.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pV80Wec9IBs

  4. pablo says:

    I wonder, if Trump is “another player as Soros in the economic game”, have him something to do with the release of this video?, or is just more noise in the 3D chess game?, anyway, the video clearly show the kind of persons that control the world

  5. Mark K. P. says:

    the release of this vid on utube looks like infighting among the various financier vermin factions ; an example of Steve Pieczenik & co. still on the march against Hitlery & co. ?

  6. Ben says:

    Thanks for this. Now if only someone would dig up the full interview with Madeleine “we think the price is worth it” Albright.

  7. Mark says:

    Until the media, mainstream and alternative, are willing to truly address the “Zionist” angle infecting the world today, people are never going to understand the real narrative underlying world events over the last 50, 100, 150 years. Take a look at these two Washington Post articles on Clinton contributors:
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/how-mega-donors-helped-raise-1-billion-for-hillary-clinton/2016/10/22/a92a0ee2-9603-11e6-bb29-bf2701dbe0a3_story.html
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/11/19/the-top-20-donors-who-have-given-the-most-to-support-hillary-clintons-political-runs/

    Sorros, Saban, Sussman, Katzenberg, Lee, Silberstein, Abrams, Sandler, Spielberg, they’re all Jews. Sorros we all know, I recently posted something on Baban, Spielberg (and his goy puppet Hanks) is the great propagandist of our day, never one to let the truth get in his way, etc. So 95% of the largest donors to the “establishment’s” choice come from a people who make up only 2% of the population, and surely they have an agenda. And that doesn’t address the other side and people like mega-donor Sheldon Adelson (many of whom abandoned Trump and his “America First” campaign, btw).

    This piece briefly talks about an aspect of Sorros vs Russia, and looking at the history of the 200-year conflict between Russia and the Jews is perhaps the most visibly instructive thing on can do, from the empire’s expansion into what became the Pale of Settlement, the anarchists who killed tsar Alexander II, the Jews who made up so much of the Bolshovis and Menshevics at the beginning of the last century that finally overthrew the tsarist state and their funding by Trotsky-supporter Jewish mega-banker Jacob Schiff (whose bank Kuhn Loeb also supplied half of the funding for the Japanese in their war against Russia in 1904-05), the Jewish oligarchs who raped the Russian economy in the ’90s while Yeltzin drank, the aid received from “the Harvard Boys” and Sorros himself in those efforts (Harvard paid the US Government a $25M fine for that), the funding of various anti-Russian color revolutions, the role of neocon Victoria Nuland (who might have become Secretary of State in a Clinton II presidency) in the Ukraine, on and on. It’s too bad that Solzhenitsyn’s Two Hundred Years Together is perhaps “the most banned book in the world” in English (by the Jewish-controlled publishing industry, of course), or maybe we’d have available the most-complete history of that history.

    I don’t see how anyone can look at 9/11 and not see the same hands at play, from the Bush White House and Pentagon neocons to critical players like Larry Silverstein, to the most-obvious black ops choice in the required tying of this to state actors in Mossad, to the five dancing Israelis on the day, to the best explanation of the middle east wars which followed – cui bono? And of course there’s the critical media role in framing the story and covering it up, and who controls the mainstream media in this country?

    Beyond that on Sorros, we have seen his funding of the anti-Trump violence all year, and the revving up of ethnic tensions in the US by funding Black Lives Matter, which surely is a strawman instrumentalization of blacks. And on the dark side of multiculturalism, what has been the Jewish role in US immigration policy over the last 50 or 100 years? This sort of thing as much as anything has made the alt-right Trumps’s strongest supporters.

    That the powerful elite of this small ethnic group can exert this level of control and initiate this level of chaos around the world should be THE issue of our day, but no one dares to speak it. Until people really understand the problem it cannot possibly be addressed. Not until people are no longer paralyzed by fear of being called anti-semitic and by white/European/Christian holocaust (myth) guilt.

    • Mark K. P. says:

      lots of good points here Mark, but Israelis too get no relief from the money-is-debt grind, and if David Cole isn’t a man of highest integrity then who is ? The anti-Semitic label is easily dealt with — Judaeans were Semites, modern Jews barely so at all, since Khazaris are Turkic-Mongolian in the main. Bombing and flaying Palestinians on the other hand, is real anti-Semitism. It’s the powerful elite that commit the crimes, and probably despise their own general population no less than every other, or view them as equally expendable. But the powerful elite are not just Jews either ; they are French and German too and above all Anglo-Saxon Venetians. Zionists might be the best label, but Jews and Jewish is wide of the mark, way too much. This is a narrow self absorbed clique of finance vermin, not a nation or people.

      • Mark says:

        A few points. First, I’ll follow Kevin MacDonald’s lead and dismiss the whole Khazar thing, which I believe is sourced from Arthur Koestler without much scientific confirmation; Kev says the gene analysis puts Jews closest to Palestinians, which makes them Semites. That explains patterns of behavior that do seem much more middle eastern than European. In any case, they control the terminology; Cole and other questioning Jews are always “self-hating”. My thinking is Jewishness is a culture and a blood overall, not so much a religion, and I do believe to some extent the elite operates to service the chosen people as a whole. Of course much of this is a kind of hate or revenge on others, which falls into E. Michael Jones’ view of Jews as habitual revolutionaries trying to undermine European/Christian culture. [I am working my way into his work The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit now.]

        If you follow MacDonald’s work perhaps the biggest problem in recognizing this and understanding it is all the influence of Jews on areas of 20th century western intellectualism – Freudian psycho-analysis, Boasian anthropology, the Frankfurt School of Social Research, etc. All that results in political correctness in its broader sense, and we all have been trained to render this kind of thing invisible, not possible, unthinkable, like a heard of elk who have been trained not to see and recognize wolves.

        • Mark K. P. says:

          Self-hating as a generic label for sincere Jewish sceptics sounds a bit far fetched. Any evidence that this applies specifically to Cole himself?

          I thought the genetics research was from Israel and says just the opposite, but dont have any hard source to hand so maybe from Koestler. I’ll check. My thinking is that Jewishness is a culture and a religion with two bloods, and the Khazaris numerically predominant over the Judaeans. The habitual revolutionaries thesis would have to rest heavily on the Russian 19th-20th centuries experience, but whatever the size of the Judaean diaspora northwards over the centuries its unlikely to outnumber the Khazars in their own homelands, which were the lower Don and Volga basins ; ultimately gobbled up by the Romanov Tsars and probably harbouring an even older grudge since it was the Kievan Rus chief Sviatoslav who permanently unhinged the traditional power of the Khazar kaghanate in his 960s campaigns.

          I also take the view that Zionism stems from Pharisaism which has quite a long history and seems more predatory on its own people than protective or supportive. Chosen people is a two-edged sword in class terms, especially where the inheritors of privilege are a priestly oligarchy.

          In any case a plain fact of history is that Zionism gets nowhere without British imperial collusion, and the English educational and scholarship systems. Fractional reserve banking (private counterfeiting converted into a state financial system) was an innovation with a fundamentally European (English/Dutch/Venetian) pedigree, so I think you and your sources might be letting these Euro commercial imperialist cultures off the hook to an unwarranted degree.
          However I don’t know the works of Kevin MacDonald or E. M. Jones, so thanks for the pointer.

          • Mark says:

            Self-hating is the term used for “anti-semitic” Jews, because calling them that in a generic sense seems a little strange, I assume. Cole got more than that from other Jews, he got a death warrant issued by Irv Rubin of the JDL, and had to go underground to get out from under that.

            My sense of the Jewish distribution in the Pale after the explosion in the Ashkenazi population is based on the numbers I understand in the 1930s, prior to “it”, and that was about 1M in the Ukraine, 2M in Russia and 3.5M in Poland. I’m not really aware of migration of significance after the early 19th century westward expansion of the Russian empire. On the Khazar thing, I tend to think of the role of Jews in acceptance of that as possibly more Jewish crypsis, claiming they are more Caucasian than they really are, another way of hiding in plain sight in European peoples’ societies.

            I don’t really know the longer history of Zionism, but Theodor Herzl is credited as the father of the modern version, at that was late 19th century. I see the Balfour declaration of 1917 as the real initiation of active Palestine-based Zionism, which was a deal (proposed to Walter Rothschild) that the British kind of welshed on.

            I think you may be letting Jews off the hook some in the development of banking, as they were broadly used as tools for usury which was banned as a sin by the Catholic Church. There was a migration of Sephardic Jews into the (Habsburg) Netherlands after the 1492 expulsion from Spain, and they likely played a significant role in the development of that state as an economic powerhouse; there were also Jewish bankers in the financial centers in Italy. And then there were the Rothschilds; Schiff was a satellite of theirs, his family sharing a home with them in Frankfurt before he migrated to the US as a young man.

            Jones has a monstrous work (1400 pages) called Barren Metal: the Conflict between Labor and Usury that I’ve also been working through that’s on the history of banking and finance. He’s done a series of interviews with Tim Kelly that I think are very good; the one related to the specific topic here is on the revival of the black/Jewish alliance and the Sorros role in BLM, and touches on many other topics. Jones general view of Jews and revolution is that it started with Christ, when they rebelled against their messiah, then revolted against Rome around 70 AD and again in 135. After the latter began the development of modern Judaism, based on the Talmud, the synagogues and the rabbis, superseding the temple, the priesthood and the Torah, making Judaism a younger religion than Christianity. That foundation of revolution and opposition to Europeans/Christians has continued since; at least that’s the idea.

            On MacDonald, there’s an excellent interview with Mark Green on Flashpoint discussing his Culture of Critique, which is the third of his three works on Jews and probably the most well-known and contriversial – he’s become the intellectual darling of the alt-right. These are well worth a watch, they’re easy to track down on youtube.

  8. ad says:

    hello james,

    interesting clip. however, i think your comment on his being a psychopath may be a bit short through the curve.
    funny thing is soros almost litterally quotes henry ford about the jewish character, as in his 05 june 1920 article “Jewish History in the United States ” in THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT. see http://www.jrbooksonline.com/Intl_Jew_full_version/ij03.htm

    ford says:

    Business to the Jewish mind is money; what the successful Jew may do with the money after he gets it is another matter, but in the getting of it he never permits “idealistic slush” to interfere with the dollar. His dollar of profit is never “clipped” by any of the voluntary reforms by which a few men are trying to ameliorate the condition of the workers.

    This is not by any means due to the hardness of the Jewish heart, but to the hardness of the Jewish view of business. Business is to it a matter of goods and money, not of people. If you are in distress and suffering, the Jewish heart would have sympathy for you; but if your house were involved in the matter, you and your house would be two separate entities; the Jew would naturally find it difficult, in his theory of business, to humanize the house; he would deal with it after a manner which other people would call “hard,” but he would not feel the charge to be just; he would say that it was only “business.”

    if soros is a psychopath, as you concluded based on his remarks about the isolation of business from the social sphere and if there is any truth in ford’s saying, then all jews must be psychopaths, well..
    maybe there exist alternative points of view that not necessarily lead to a psychiatric diagnosis.

    i like ford’s articles, never expected so much nuance from a business tycoon. times were different, of course.

    • roger.k says:

      This way of thinking is not limited to Jews.
      In fact most of western civilization believe in the perfectness and infallibility of markets. And they claim it’s something divine which is impartial to politics, class, creed etc. As if it’s a force of nature like gravity and not actually a human construct.
      Same goes for the consequences which we’re told should be seen as ‘force-majeure’.. which is ironic since normally when nature creates a disaster there is a relief program.

      Don’t get me wrong, I’m pro-capitalist as I think we need it to ensure freedom of exchange. However markets and capital are as much a part of humanity as any other human construct like religion, politics and culture in general. It’s not above it at all, quite the contrary. They keep saying don’t hate the player, hate the game.. but the players ARE the game and that goes double for “players” like Soros.

      It’s not like it’s an even field where the markets express the will of the commoner. And even if it was the actors are not rational robots, but human beings with all their foibles. It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy as markets, price-discovery and monetary-systems are both subject to irrational feelings like greed and fear while it’s also being controlled by a select few.

      And who created all this and shaped it as it grew throughout history? Did most people get together and vote on the current debt based monetary system?

      We don’t even teach basic economics in school, let alone money-creation and macro-economics. And money is now mostly numbers in computers. So that’s really our limitation today? So it’s not resources and technology combined with our antiquated socioeconomic system? No I guess people starve to death because we ran out of numbers in the computer! It boggles the mind..

      Sure we do have some power collectively, but our agendas point in all directions and mostly cancel out. The people at the top however is pretty much aligned. This does not mean they get together and plan out everything, and they don’t have to as their own rational self maximization points more or less in the same direction. Sure, not every decision taken by the banks, the courthouses or parliaments/senate go in their favor. But over time it accumulates in a BIG way.

      People like Soros, Gates etc might seem like they are doing good but none of them ever attacked and changed the system that made them rich to begin with. Sure they send some tents and blankets, some water and medicine. And next year they have to send more, because nothing they do will change the status-quo.

      I don’t know if Soros is a psychopath. It’s hard to tell these days. Normal people have done crazy things because of ideology and religion etc. But after reading some of the leaked documents, seeing videos like this etc I have to wonder what’s going on.

      Either Soros is a confused old man that throws money into things that on the surface are “good causes”, perhaps to make up for past sins? Or he has an agenda..
      But the only common thread I see is chaos. It’s almost like a distraction campaign for the masses. Perhaps so the Elite can do their work in peace? And sometimes of course he uses his apparatus to help vested interests and friends in high places.

      I doubt even he is down right evil and perhaps some, perhaps many, of the organizations he funds are actually doing good in this world. However the ideology and power structures he represent is utterly reprehensible and should be fought tooth and nail.

      • Mark says:

        “Either Soros is a confused old man that throws money into things that on the surface are “good causes”, perhaps to make up for past sins? Or he has an agenda… But the only common thread I see is chaos.”

        The former is a non-starter. On the latter, the agenda IS chaos. The goal of multi-culturalism is to create friendly ground for the Chosen People while creating conflict between the other peoples, as a distraction and to weaken possible unification against the CP (meaning as a whole, which really means their elites). The US is unique in that it ranks with Israel as the most populous Jewish state in the world, and its power allows for Jewish imperial ambitions, if controlled and manipulated. The strongest example of opposition in modern times were the Germans under the Nazis, when a people were unified under a nationalist philosophy; that simply can’t happen again in their minds.

        “I doubt even he is down right evil”

        Just a thought – that sort of moralistic definition is worthless in serious discussion and perhaps dangerous; it implies a sort of religious/spiritual notion where none applies. Soros isn’t possessed by the devil, whatever that is; he may be a sociopath or psychopath (most truly powerful people fall into one or both of these categories, in my opinion), but that’s not the same thing.

  9. VoltaicDude says:

    This is gold James – an important artifact documenting the profound sickness of our civilization.

    However I don’t entirely just see a strange scary monster when I observe Soros (especially in this context) – his pathology seems to fit right in with our everyday culture.

    Perhaps we need to control our instinct to marginalize Soros, and instead delve deeply into observations and analysis of the vast repercussions of this story.

    It is difficult not to come up with analogies that are not alienating and patronizing, but Soros can also be understood as a victim, which of course does not change the destructiveness of the horrors he may organize and fund today.

    Think of the example of a rabies victim in the full throws of the final stages of the disease. You wouldn’t blame the victim or his “innate personality” for being in that predicament.

    (It might also be useful to be a bit introspective about that example and compare our reactions to permutations of it. Change the disease in the hypothetical above from rabies to syphilis and suddenly many people would indeed easily justify blaming the victim’s “innate personality,” interestingly enough, perhaps less so today than when syphilis was incurable.)

    I don’t see Soros as an entity apart from the rest of humanity except for the vastness of his wealth and thus political power. Most people engaged in similar sociopathic behaviors and ideations apply their pathologies at a smaller scale. And often widespread sociopathic behavior is based on mendacious mythologies inculcated in popular culture – “norms.”

    That’s why it’s so important to do what you have done here, and state plainly that this is an example of heinous, schizoid mentality and that it is pathological.

    Here are some directly and some tangentially related questions and associations that sketchily draw-out some of my reactions to this vastly complex subject:

    The circumstances in which Soros was abused as a young person during WWII are macabre and warrant very close analysis. Why would his “protector” (who was his “protector”?), knowing Soros was Jewish, engage in such a structured type of psychological abuse?

    Did Hitler have any clue he was a quarter Rothschild? (I presume he didn’t – and I’m not trying to suggest exactly the same associative-structure about Soros.)

    How is it that someone who went through Soros’ experiences as a young person, and was ultimately shaped intellectually into a very sophisticated but schizoid type of understanding of the world, is then somehow given (in what we know to be a highly centralized and secretly controlled marketplace) the opportunity to “play” the currency market to the effect of joining the ranks of the richest people on earth?

    This is an interesting documentary dealing with social/political control systems and academic institutions: Inside Job – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inside_Job_(2010_film)

    Kay Griggs revelations are also very important, but interestingly she inadvertently perpetuates misunderstanding about Existentialist philosophy – Kay Griggs: Colonel’s Wife Deep State Tell-All 1 of 4: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQNitCNycKQ

  10. Mina says:

    Hey James & co,

    I just stumbled upon a video which is new to me and (if we could believe the title) maybe new online.

    “WE FOUND IT! The Video George Soros & Hillary Clinton Tried To Bury!”
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B11DueI6rok#t=11.206947

    I’ve done a mini-investigation, according to my limited skills.

    It’s a Link Media (Soros funded) 2004 production found also on Internet Archive:

    Interview with George Soros
    https://archive.org/details/Soros20041022

    Uploaded on 10/23/2004
    Views 5,661

    So:
    – 5k views in 12 years
    – less then 125k views total on two YT links from 2016
    – couldn’t find it on (what looks like) official Soros Channel on YT

    Does it mean it’s not really interesting or it was really buried for 12 years for a reason?
    I would love to hear from more knowledgeable people, like James and his happy bunch on the site, if it’s anything new and/or meaningful to you or we can dismiss it.

    Personally I’m glad i saw that, even tho I got the chills hearing him announcing and justifying start of focus on US politics, after he ‘helped out’ other parts of the world (including mine).

    There are Hillary and Wesley Clark praising his efforts, too.

    20 mins, take a look if you haven’t so far.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Back to Top