Almost half of anti Israel protesters are professional agitators

[Momto2boys973]

His social ideology is far left. Democrats can be hypocritical too.
I mean, look at the #metoo movement…

Hungarian Jewish billionaire, philanthropist and Holocaust survivor George Soros

Yes, he’s a far left

Left? Maybe.

Far left? You're kidding, right? He's was a successful hedge fund manager - that's about as capitalist as you can get.

It is also notable that Putin absolutely hates him, because of how much Soros has done to support things like freedom, democracy, transparency and accountability in Russia.

[SouthernIslander]

posted in wrong thread

[Aletheia]

{George Soros} is a far left

Left? Maybe.

Far left? You're kidding, right? He's was a successful hedge fund manager - that's about as capitalist as you can get.

His social ideology is far left.

“The political controversy on the role of the state in the economy is raging in full force today,” said Soros, “but the standards of political discourse have greatly deteriorated since then.” The two opposing sides in politics “have each got hold of one half of the truth.”

“Although I am often painted as the representative of the far left and I am certainly not free of political bias,” said Soros, “I readily recognize that the other side is half right in claiming that the government is wasteful and inefficient and ought to function better. But I also continue to cling to the other half of the truth, namely that financial markets are inherently unstable and need to be regulated. Moreover, I am profoundly worried that those who proclaim half truths as the whole truth, whether they are from the left or the right, are endangering our open society.”

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/201 ... hayek.html



His Open Societies Foundations, the massive philanthropy that controls most of the assets in his $25 billion family office

his son, Alexander, who took over management of OSF in December

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newslett ... -in-europe


right-wingers should also be praising George Soros, another one of their undeserved bogeymen. Both are paying big money to limit government’s involvement in our lives, a pillar of the intellectual foundation of modern-day conservatism.

You could argue that modern-day conservatism doesn’t bear much resemblance to the classic small-government model. You would probably be right.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chrisrober ... ve-heroes/

[Della]

Left? Maybe.

Far left? You're kidding, right? He's was a successful hedge fund manager - that's about as capitalist as you can get.

His social ideology is far left.

“The political controversy on the role of the state in the economy is raging in full force today,” said Soros, “but the standards of political discourse have greatly deteriorated since then.” The two opposing sides in politics “have each got hold of one half of the truth.”

“Although I am often painted as the representative of the far left and I am certainly not free of political bias,” said Soros, “I readily recognize that the other side is half right in claiming that the government is wasteful and inefficient and ought to function better. But I also continue to cling to the other half of the truth, namely that financial markets are inherently unstable and need to be regulated. Moreover, I am profoundly worried that those who proclaim half truths as the whole truth, whether they are from the left or the right, are endangering our open society.”

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/201 ... hayek.html



His Open Societies Foundations, the massive philanthropy that controls most of the assets in his $25 billion family office

his son, Alexander, who took over management of OSF in December

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newslett ... -in-europe


right-wingers should also be praising George Soros, another one of their undeserved bogeymen. Both are paying big money to limit government’s involvement in our lives, a pillar of the intellectual foundation of modern-day conservatism.

You could argue that modern-day conservatism doesn’t bear much resemblance to the classic small-government model. You would probably be right.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chrisrober ... ve-heroes/

Imo, this proves that many on the right don't even question what they're told by their chosen news sources.

[EarlGrayHot]

I remember from the 60s and the Vietnam war era that the authorities were ALWAYS claiming that anyone who disagreed with the war was just an underhanded outside agitator and that every red-blooded American supported the war effort. That wasn't true then and it is not true now. There were/are outside agitators but many people who complain about this situation have legitimate reasons.

Hamas had no right to attack Israelis on October 7th and Israel has a right to defend itself. Palestinians are being harmed who did nothing to Israelis on October 7 and that is appalling. I don't want to see any innocent people harmed and the best way to accomplish that is for the war to stop and for all hostages to be released and returned. I pray for peace but doubt that will come about any time soon. I hope I am wrong.

[Della]

HAHAHAHAHA NYT!!
I wouldn’t let my dog poop in the NYT. No dog deserves that insult

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/202 ... =url-share

"THE NEW YORK TIMES instructed journalists covering Israel’s war on the Gaza Strip to restrict the use of the terms “genocide” and “ethnic cleansing” and to “avoid” using the phrase “occupied territory” when describing Palestinian land, according to a copy of an internal memo obtained by The Intercept.

The memo also instructs reporters not to use the word Palestine “except in very rare cases” and to steer clear of the term “refugee camps” to describe areas of Gaza historically settled by displaced Palestinians expelled from other parts of Palestine during previous Israeli–Arab wars. The areas are recognized by the United Nations as refugee camps and house hundreds of thousands of registered refugees.

The memo — written by Times standards editor Susan Wessling, international editor Philip Pan, and their deputies — “offers guidance about some terms and other issues we have grappled with since the start of the conflict in October.”

(...)

“I think it’s the kind of thing that looks professional and logical if you have no knowledge of the historical context of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict,” said a Times newsroom source, who requested anonymity for fear of reprisal, of the Gaza memo. “But if you do know, it will be clear how apologetic it is to Israel.”

https://theintercept.com/2024/04/15/nyt ... -coverage/

[Momto2boys973]

It’s war. It’s sad and ugly and innocent people get caught up in it. Israel goes above and beyond to protect civilian lives.

https://www.newsweek.com/israel-has-cr ... on-1883286

Even with that, it’s a well known fact that “civilians” entered Israel with Hamas to contribute to the atrocities. They celebrated the attacks and many were actively helping Hamas which automatically makes them combatants according to International Law. Several hostages claimed to be held captive in civilian homes, in schools and hospitals. Plies, it’s well known that Hamas uses civilians- especially children, women and elderly- as human shields. They openly admit to it.
This war isn’t different from any other. Civilian casualties happen. Half a million Germans died just from Allied bombings, does that mean that the Allies weren’t on the right side? Should they have stopped and let Hitler go on? I really wish someone could finally explained to me why Israel is held to a very different standard than the rest of the world. Anyone care to Ventura an attempt at an explanation? Because what’s appalling is the double standard when it comes to Israel and how people happily turned a blind eye- or contribute- to blatant antisemitism using this standard as an excuse.
I don’t remember Russian owned businesses being vandalized after Russia’s uncalled invasion of Ukraine. Never heard of Russian Chirches having threats. Or students of Russian descent being afraid to go to school because their classmates were calling for their genocide. Russia purposely targets a children’s and maternity hospital and a couple of days of outrage, some sanctions here and there and the world moves on. Israel destroys a hospital that was used as a terror base without the loss of any civilian life and its “genocide” and “war crimes”. Don’t even mention that using a hospital as a military target IS a war crime…
Why? Maybe you can explain it to me?

And here’s the thing- this could be over today. All Hamas has to do is release the hostages- dead and alive- and surrender and there will be peace today. So why isn’t anybody asking for that and are still bullying and pressuring Israel into backing off leaving Hamas to do this over again in a couple of years. Because they vowed to do so over and over again until Israel is destroyed. Maybe if the world pressures the aggressors instead of the defenders and doesn’t reward terrorism by giving in to demands, this won’t happen again.

I remember from the 60s and the Vietnam war era that the authorities were ALWAYS claiming that anyone who disagreed with the war was just an underhanded outside agitator and that every red-blooded American supported the war effort. That wasn't true then and it is not true now. There were/are outside agitators but many people who complain about this situation have legitimate reasons.

Hamas had no right to attack Israelis on October 7th and Israel has a right to defend itself. Palestinians are being harmed who did nothing to Israelis on October 7 and that is appalling. I don't want to see any innocent people harmed and the best way to accomplish that is for the war to stop and for all hostages to be released and returned. I pray for peace but doubt that will come about any time soon. I hope I am wrong.