(1) Hungary bans foreign-funded NGOs - The Economist depicts it as an attack on Rootless Cosmopolitans(2) After Hungary bans NGOs, US State Dept to fund Globalist media outlets in Hungary(3) US Dept of State to fund rural Media outlets in Hungary(4) US to take on Hungarian Media - Regime Change in Budapest?(5) Frank Furedi defends Hungary against Globalists, the EU, and George Soros(6) Hungary resisted the Soviet empire; now it takes on the Soros empire(7) Hungary slams EU ‘Institutionalisation of Mass Migration’(8) The Economist (partly Rothschild-owned) defends George Soros(9) Soros Transfers $18 billion to Open Society Foundation(10) Austria bans Soros Foundations(1) Hungary bans foreign-funded NGOs - The Economist depicts it as an attack on Rootless Cosmopolitanshttps://www.economist.com/news/europe/21723678-hungarys-registry-foreign-funded-ngos-latest-step-its-march-illiberalism-viktorRootless cosmopolitansViktor Orban finds a new target: international NGOsHungary’s foreign-funded NGO registry is the latest step in its march to illiberalismThe EconomistJun 16th 2017 | BUDAPESTIN A speech in 2014 that substantiated his liberal opponents’ worst fears, Viktor Orban, Hungary’s prime minister, said he planned to turn the country into an "illiberal state". On June 13th Hungary’s parliament took its latest step in that direction, passing a law that requires NGOs which receive foreign funding to register with a court, and to declare the fact on websites and official publications. The law applies to all groups that receive more than €24,000 ($29,000) a year from abroad. The law is part of a concerted campaign by Mr Orban against liberal and human-rights organisations, especially those supported by George Soros, a Hungarian-born billionaire and philanthropist. State and pro-government media have spent months railing against Mr Soros and his Open Society Foundation, painting Mr Soros's support of more generous European asylum policies as a liberal plot to flood the continent with migrants and destabilise Hungary.The law has already provoked international anger. In an unusually strong statement, the American embassy in Budapest said the new law "unfairly burdens" civil-society organisations and will "have a chilling effect on the ability of Hungarians to organise themselves". Martin Schaefer, a spokesman for the German foreign ministry, said Hungary had joined the rank of countries like Russia and China whose governments see NGOs which accept foreign funds as enemies. European Union officials said they would study the law to ensure it was compatible with the rules of the internal market and the EU’s Charter of Fundamental Rights.Human rights and civil-society groups were dismayed. The law is a "serious attack on Hungarian democracy, unprecedented anywhere else in Europe", said Goran Buldioski, director of the Open Society Initiative for Europe. Two major civil-rights NGOs, the Hungarian Helsinki Committee and the Hungarian Civil Liberties Union, say they will defy the law, which they believe to be unconstitutional, and refuse to register.Government officials said the law simply aims to ensure transparency and accountability. "Hungarian citizens must be given the right to know about public actors, who they are, and who pays them," said Mr Orban. Civic groups are "an essential part of every democratic society", says Zoltan Kovacs, a government spokesman, but they need to be transparent when they are funded by a "foreign interest".The Venice Commission, a European legal advisory body, followed the government’s reasoning to an extent: it said ensuring transparency of civil-society organisations to prevent undue foreign political influence, money-laundering and financing of terrorism was, in principle, legitimate. But the commission still thought that the law caused "disproportionate and unnecessary interference" with basic political freedoms.The real aim of the law is not to improve public transparency, but to fire up the voting base of the ruling right-wing Fidesz party. "The government wants Hungarians to feel besieged, that their core values are under attack," says Tamas Boros of Policy Solutions, a think-tank in Budapest. The wave of migrants who arrived in Europe in 2015-16, which served Mr Orban as a useful bogeyman, has abated, and the fractured opposition is too harmless to serve as a foil. Fidesz is hunting for a new enemy, says Mr Boros: "It used to be the European Union and the IMF, now it’s George Soros and the NGOs." An article Mr Soros wrote in September 2015, in which he called for the European Union to accept "at least a million asylum-seekers annually" and provide each with a stipend of ?15,000 for two years, has served Mr Orban as ammunition.Mr Kovacs compared the NGO law to America’s Foreign Agents Registration Act, which requires those engaging in political activities on behalf of foreign principals to register and disclose their activities. That is a distortion: the American act only applies to lobbyists for foreign governments, political parties and similar actors. An NGO engaged in aid, education or advocacy of social causes would not be touched by it.Meanwhile, another law is threatening to close down Budapest’s Central European University (CEU), which was founded by Mr Soros in 1991. On April 4th parliament passed legislation requiring all foreign-accredited universities to have a campus in their home country. The only university that meets that description is the CEU, which is accredited both in Hungary and in the American state of New York, where it has no campus. On June 23rd a Hungarian government official will meet in New York with a representative of Andrew Cuomo, the governor, to discuss the university’s future, according to a university spokesperson.(2) After Hungary bans NGOs, US State Dept to fund Globalist media outlets in Hungaryhttp://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-11-13/meddling-us-state-departments-new-program-take-hungarian-media'Meddling'? The US State Department's New Program To Take On Hungarian MediaNov 14, 2017 2:00 AMAuthored by Daniel McAdams via The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity,Hypocrisy may be the only consistent guiding principle of US foreign policy.Here's a prime example of the "do as we say, not as we do" that is the core of how Washington does business overseas: In the same week that the the US Justice Department demanded that the Russian-backed RT America network register as a foreign propaganda entity or face arrest, the US State Department's Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor (DNL) has announced that it is launching a program to massively interfere in NATO-partner Hungary's internal media.So the US Justice Department is cracking down on RT America for what it says is manipulation of US domestic affairs while the US State Department announces a new program to manipulate Hungary's domestic affairs.The State Department's new program would send three-quarters of a million dollars to Washington-selected Hungarian media outlets to "increase citizens’ access to objective information about domestic and global issues in Hungary." On what authority does the United States pick winners and losers in Hungary's diverse media environment? Since when does one government have the right to determine what news is "objective" in another country? Hungary is not a country to be "regime-changed" -- it is a full democracy where the will of the people is regularly expressed at the ballot box and where the media competes freely in the marketplace of ideas.Washington's Hungarian media project is clearly meant to interfere in that country's domestic political environment. Here are the stated objectives of the US government's Hungary program:The program should improve the quality of local traditional and online media and increase the public’s access to reliable and unbiased information.... Projects should aim to have impact that leads to democratic reforms, and should have the potential for sustainability beyond DRL resources. (emphasis added)The State Department's Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor identifies its mission in this call for grantees as "promoting democracy and protecting human rights globally." So what is it doing in Hungary? Hungary has had nearly three decades of democracy since 1989 and hardly needs the United States to tell it what kind of media is allowed (subsidized) and which kind should be suppressed.In reality this is a US government program to ensure that the Hungarian media follows Washington's policy line. Hungarians are all too familiar with this kind of toxic interference from an outside superpower: it was called the Soviet Union. Does Washington really seek to take on that role?Stab in the backThis US government intervention in Hungary's internal affairs must feel like a stab in the back to Orban and his government. Orban was an early -- and rare -- supporter of candidate Donald Trump among his European colleagues. Indeed, where Brusssels saw Trump as a gauche loudmouth, Orban openly admired the soon-to-be-president's position on immigration and particularly on the mass immigration of mostly Muslim "refugees" that has proven to be disastrous for so many European countries. Likewise, Viktor Orban's Fidesz party has managed to retain a high level of popularity through two election cycles by embracing and promoting the kind of nationalism that characterized Trump's successful campaign.Orban's early support for Trump appeared to have paid off. Where Fidesz had struggled to make any headway at all under GW Bush or Obama's State Departments, both of which were openly hostile, one of President-elect Trump's first moves was to invite Orban to the White House. Orban, for his part, hailed Trump on inauguration day, welcoming in an era where national interest takes precedent over multilateralism.As recently as last month, President Trump praised Viktor Orban, saying that the "strong and brave" Hungarian Prime Minister is "on my guest list."Then Trump's State Department launched a program to undermine Hungary's national sovereignty by interfering in the Hungarian media market. It seems national sovereignty is a one-way street for Washington no matter who occupies the Oval Office.Hypocrisy...or policy consistency?But perhaps it's inaccurate to accuse the US government of hypocrisy in this case. After all, pressuring RT America with the intent of silencing the news network and spending our tax dollars propping up US-friendly media outlets in the Hungarian countryside are actually two sides of the same coin: the US government will tell you what kind of media you are allowed to consume.If you are a media network in the United States that allows voices who oppose Washington's neocon-dominated foreign policy they will shut you down. If you are a news outlet in the Hungarian countryside that spews the US party line, they will prop you up. Both cases are the same: your media will toe the US government official line or else.*  *  *Note to Washington: This is not 1950. Hungary has been a fully free and democratic country with plenty of free elections under its belt. It does not need you to come in and attempt to manipulate its newspapers and broadcast media. What would you do if China sent in a few million dollars to prop up US publications who agreed to push the Beijing line? What about if Tehran sent some money to publications pushing the Ayatollah party line? You cannot even tolerate RT America -- which is largely staffed by Americans but dares to feature prominent Americans who challenge the neocon foreign policy line. Hands off Hungary!Note to Viktor Orban: You risked arrest -- and worse -- in June, 1989 when you directly confronted the communists who were occupying your country. Now that Hungary's freedom has been won -- in no small way due to your efforts -- do not allow Washington's neocons to take it away from you! If you do not confront this violation of Hungarian sovereignty, the neocons will continue to increase the pressure. The neocons want you out! Just this week, neocon commentator Anne Applebaum wrote that you are a "neo-Bolshevik" who has "little to do with the right that has been part of Western politics since World War II, and...no connection to existing conservative parties." Do a little research and you will notice that Applebaum is a member of the International Advisory Council of the Center for European Policy Analysis -- the organization your own government funded for a big conference this summer! Neocon knives are out for you. You'd be smart to make a better assessment of who are your friends and enemies in the United States...before it's too late.(3) US Dept of State to fund rural Media outlets in Hungaryhttp://www.reuters.com/article/us-hungary-us-media/u-s-launches-media-fund-for-hungary-to-aid-press-freedom-idUSKBN1DD21CNOVEMBER 14, 2017 / 2:29 AM / 2 DAYS AGOU.S. launches media fund for Hungary to aid press freedomReuters StaffBUDAPEST (Reuters) - The United States said on Monday it would fund rural media outlets in Hungary to help train and equip journalists in defense of an independent media it sees subject to growing pressure and intimidation.Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has increased media control by legal changes, regulatory steps and takeovers of outlets by business sector associates. The moves have alarmed Western partners with the approach of elections, due in April 2018, which he is widely expected to win comfortably.The trend was especially strong in rural Hungary, where government-controlled public media and a handful of outlets friendly to the ruling Fidesz party are the only news sources most people get.That is where the $700,000 U.S. program focuses."The Department of State... seeks a partner for the United States Government who will help educate journalists and aspiring journalists on how to practise their trade," a State Department official said in a statement emailed to Reuters."The United States has publicly and privately expressed our concerns about the status of the free press in Hungary on multiple occasions," the official said. "Hungary has committed to upholding these standards."The government had no immediate comment.The program offers technical and financial assistance to media outlets, as well as increased local and international exposure, small grants and other tools. They can use the funds after May 2018."NUMBERS DWINDLING"Washington denied entry to top officials of his government on corruption charges in 2014, and Orban ruffled feathers with attacks on the U.S.-chartered Central European University, an issue yet to be resolved.The U.S. Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor launched the program after the top U.S. diplomat in Budapest cited an erosion of media freedoms."There are still independent and opposition media outlets here that are able to practise journalism with broad editorial freedom," Chargé d‘Affaires David Kostelancik said last month at a journalism conference. "That is a good thing.""However, their numbers are dwindling, and they face challenges in the advertising market that the pro-government outlets do not. They face pressure and intimidation... as a result, fewer and fewer Hungarians are exposed to the robust debate and discussion that is so important – in fact fundamental – to a representative democracy."Foreign Ministry State Secretary Levente Magyar, reacting to those comments, said the government would "continue to reject all statements that affect Hungarian internal affairs and are based on misrepresentation in the strongest possible terms".The Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe, an intergovernmental human rights and media freedom watchdog, has said media pluralism has declined in Hungary.Reporting by Marton Dunai and Krisztina Than; editing by Ralph Boulton Our Standards:The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.(4) US to take on Hungarian Media - Regime Change in Budapest?https://www.globalresearch.ca/manipulation-washingtons-new-program-to-take-on-hungarian-media-regime-change-in-budapest/5617899Manipulation: Washington’s New Program to Take on Hungarian Media. Regime Change in Budapest? by Daniel McAdamsGlobal Research, November 12, 2017Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity 10 November 2017Hypocrisy may be the only consistent guiding principle of US foreign policy. Here’s a prime example of the "do as we say, not as we do" that is the core of how Washington does business overseas: In the same week that the the US Justice Department demanded that the Russian-backed RT America network register as a foreign propaganda entity or face arrest, the US State Department’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor (DNL) has announced that it is launching a program to massively interfere in NATO-partner Hungary’s internal media.So the US Justice Department is cracking down on RT America for what it says is manipulation of US domestic affairs while the US State Department announces a new program to manipulate Hungary’s domestic affairs.The State Department’s new program would send three-quarters of a million dollars to Washington-selected Hungarian media outlets to "increase citizens’ access to objective information about domestic and global issues in Hungary." On what authority does the United States pick winners and losers in Hungary’s diverse media environment? Since when does one government have the right to determine what news is "objective" in another country? Hungary is not a country to be "regime-changed" — it is a full democracy where the will of the people is regularly expressed at the ballot box and where the media competes freely in the marketplace of ideas.Washington’s Hungarian media project is clearly meant to interfere in that country’s domestic political environment. Here are the stated objectives of the US government’s Hungary program:The program should improve the quality of local traditional and online media and increase the public’s access to reliable and unbiased information. … Projects should aim to have impact that leads to democratic reforms, and should have the potential for sustainability beyond DRL resources. (emphasis added)The State Department’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor identifies its mission in this call for grantees as "promoting democracy and protecting human rights globally." So what is it doing in Hungary? Hungary has had nearly three decades of democracy since 1989 and hardly needs the United States to tell it what kind of media is allowed (subsidized) and which kind should be suppressed.In reality this is a US government program to ensure that the Hungarian media follows Washington’s policy line. Hungarians are all too familiar with this kind of toxic interference from an outside superpower: it was called the Soviet Union. Does Washington really seek to take on that role?Stab in the backThis US government intervention in Hungary’s internal affairs must feel like a stab in the back to Orban and his government. Orban was an early — and rare — supporter of candidate Donald Trump among his European colleagues. Indeed, where Brusssels saw Trump as a gauche loudmouth, Orban openly admired the soon-to-be-president’s position on immigration and particularly on the mass immigration of mostly Muslim "refugees" that has proven to be disastrous for so many European countries. Likewise, Viktor Orban’s Fidesz party has managed to retain a high level of popularity through two election cycles by embracing and promoting the kind of nationalism that characterized Trump’s successful campaign.Orban’s early support for Trump appeared to have paid off. Where Fidesz had struggled to make any headway at all under GW Bush or Obama’s State Departments, both of which were openly hostile, one of President-elect Trump’s first moves was to invite Orban to the White House. Orban, for his part, hailed Trump on inauguration day, welcoming in an era where national interest takes precedent over multilateralism.As recently as last month, President Trump praised Viktor Orban, saying that the "strong and brave" Hungarian Prime Minister is "on my guest list."Then Trump’s State Department launched a program to undermine Hungary’s national sovereignty by interfering in the Hungarian media market. It seems national sovereignty is a one-way street for Washington no matter who occupies the Oval Office.Hypocrisy…or policy consistency?But perhaps it’s inaccurate to accuse the US government of hypocrisy in this case. After all, pressuring RT America with the intent of silencing the news network and spending our tax dollars propping up US-friendly media outlets in the Hungarian countryside are actually two sides of the same coin: the US government will tell you what kind of media you are allowed to consume. If you are a media network in the United States that allows voices who oppose Washington’s neocon-dominated foreign policy they will shut you down. If you are a news outlet in the Hungarian countryside that spews the US party line, they will prop you up. Both cases are the same: your media will toe the US government official line or else.Note to Washington: This is not 1950. Hungary has been a fully free and democratic country with plenty of free elections under its belt. It does not need you to come in and attempt to manipulate its newspapers and broadcast media. What would you do if China sent in a few million dollars to prop up US publications who agreed to push the Beijing line? What about if Tehran sent some money to publications pushing the Ayatollah party line? You cannot even tolerate RT America — which is largely staffed by Americans but dares to feature prominent Americans who challenge the neocon foreign policy line. Hands off Hungary!Note to Viktor Orban: You risked arrest — and worse — in June, 1989 when you directly confronted the communists who were occupying your country. Now that Hungary’s freedom has been won — in no small way due to your efforts — do not allow Washington’s neocons to take it away from you! If you do not confront this violation of Hungarian sovereignty, the neocons will continue to increase the pressure.The neocons want you out!Just this week, neocon commentator Anne Applebaum wrote that you are a "neo-Bolshevik" who has "little to do with the right that has been part of Western politics since World War II, and…no connection to existing conservative parties." Do a little research and you will notice that Applebaum is a member of the International Advisory Council of the Center for European Policy Analysis — the organization your own government funded for a big conference this summer! Neocon knives are out for you. You’d be smart to make a better assessment of who are your friends and enemies in the United States…before it’s too late.The original source of this article is Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity(5) Frank Furedi defends Hungary against Globalists, the EU, and George SorosEditor's note: Frank Furedi is a Jewish Professor of Sociology in Britain. Like George Soros, he grew up in Hungary. Furedi used to be a Trotskyist (he helped found the Revolutionary Communist Party). He participated in the 1956 Hungarian uprising, as a Trotskyist. After the fall of the Soviet Union, the RCP disbanded and its Jewish members turned Zionist. They set up Living Marxism (later LM Magazine), which morphed into Spiked Online. Despite their Trotskyist origins, these magazines have long campaigned against Political Correctness. Furedi has been one of their leading writers; others include Melanie Phillips, author of The Sex-Change Society - Peter M.http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/why-i-wrote-a-radical-democratic-defence-of-populism/20231Why I Wrote A Radical Democratic Defence Of Populism, by Frank FurediSociologist And CommentatorFrank Furedi on his new book and defending national sovereignty.22 AUGUST 2017I felt a sense of urgency when I sat down to work on my new book, Populism and the European Culture Wars. Initially I did not want to write it. My mind was elsewhere, researching a longer-term project on the fear of freedom through history. But then Brexit happened, and a culture war against populism exploded in Europe. Residing in Hungary for much of last year, I could see that the attacks levelled against that country by the EU-influenced media were motivated by the same impulses driving the anti-populist crusade across Europe. These attacks said more about the undemocratic spirit of Brussels than anything that was going on in Budapest.There were many reasons I changed my plans and decided to write Populism and the European Culture Wars. Observing the debates on populism, I became irritated and concerned by the widely held idea that the EU has some kind of monopoly over the stewardship of Europe. In debates on things like Brexit or the status of Eastern European states like Hungary and Poland, it is frequently assumed that the EU represents the European ideal, politically and morally. Consequently, it can be casually asserted that anyone who supports Brexit must be anti-European.Yet one of the reasons I was so enthusiastic about Brexit, and remain so, was precisely because I see the EU as detrimental not only to public and political life in Britain, but also to the future of Europe. My book is devoted to explaining how the values espoused by the EU oligarchy are actually alien to the longstanding values of European civilisation. Brussels likes to talk up European civilisation, but its rhetorical acknowledgment of this continent’s past achievements and ideals are continually negated by its behaviour and policies.In Populism and the European Culture Wars, I explain that the EU is actually embarrassed by Europe’s history. It regards anything that happened before 1945 as the bad old days; it views that date as the beginning of the ‘real’ Europe. Examine its cultural and social policies and you will see that the EU is hostile to many of the values celebrated by the European Renaissance and Enlightenment. That I am an atheist does not prevent me from appreciating the contribution Christianity made to the formation and development of what can loosely be called European civilisation; yet for the EU, Europe’s religious past and many of its traditions constitute embarrassing, outdated prejudices.One of the most important so-called ‘outdated prejudices’ that the EU thoroughly despises is that of national sovereignty.For EU ideologues, ‘populism’ is now a term of moral condemnation. Supporters of the EU express a palpable elitist disdain for the people of Europe, and clearly regard democracy as merely a technical instrument with no inherent virtues. People who dare to assert their views, particularly through a referendum, are decried as uneducated simpletons under the influence of some insidious force, whether it be the media or political demagogues. Apparently the various big issues in public life today are too complex for ordinary people to understand. Their opinion can be safely ignored by the sophisticated operatives in the corridors of elitist institutions in Europe.Anti-populist propaganda constantly condemns ordinary people who vote the ‘wrong way’ – that is, against Brussels – as fanatics, xenophobes, racists, anti-Semites, Islamophobes or nationalists. What these terms of condemnation really convey is incomprehension of, and hostility towards, any values that contradict those of the EU elites. I wrote this book to offer a radical democratic defence of populism. It offers a sociological critique of the way populism has been pathologised, turned into a toxin poisoning the continent.I wanted to reassert the case for national sovereignty. National sovereignty has its limits, of course, but it offers a far more democratic and meaningful setting for the conduct of public life than the trans-national institutions favoured by EU cosmopolitans do.These days, any expression of national feeling, pride or consciousness is condemned by the EU-supporting media as a form of xenophobia. National identity is portrayed as the first step on the road to racism, fascism and finally to the Holocaust. EU leaders often deploy this simplistic, ahistorical scare tactic of linking national sentiment to the terrible days of the Nazi era.The moral condemnation of national sentiment and pride speaks to a profound double standard on people’s identities and affiliations. The EU continually upholds the identities of minorities, regions and ethnic and other groups, but the one identity it singles out for attack is that of the nation. The EU prides itself on its celebration of identity politics and diversity; but its love affair with diversity doesn’t extend to appreciating the diversity of this continent’s national cultures. In my book, I argue that the EU is carrying out a culture war against national pride and consciousness.National sovereignty is important for two reasons. First because it provides the largest terrain that humankind has discovered so far where democratic accountability can be exercised and have real meaning. Popular sovereignty can occur within a local community, a city or a nation – but it cannot be exercised in a territory larger than the nation. And the second reason national sovereignty is important is that it provides a context for the cultivation of a real, felt identity. There are other possible ways for people to develop their identities, but for most people the nation constitutes the largest area within which their identity can be forged and gain real purchase.And I wrote this book to offer an alternative view of the culture war between the EU and Hungary. The Hungary that is portrayed in the Western media bears little relationship to the real place or to life as I experienced it in Budapest. There are many legitimate criticisms to be made of government policy and public life in Hungary. However, in these respects, Hungary’s problems are not all that different to those facing most European societies. And yet, as I argue in the book, Hungary is held to a different standard than other EU nations; it is often criticised for policies and actions for which other EU member states are given a free pass.In the course of researching this book, I came to the conclusion that, from the EU’s perspective, the main crime of the Hungarian government is that on many issues it promotes values that directly contradict those of the EU. The cultural and political conflict between the EU and Hungary may seem like a side issue for many people living in the West, but the questions it raises touch directly on the future of Europe – and on the issues of national sovereignty, democracy and populism that my book is devoted to addressing.(6) Hungary resisted the Soviet empire; now it takes on the Soros empirehttp://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/11/17/battle-for-the-west-hungarian-pm-says-silent-majority-will-prevail-over-globalist-elites-and-the-soros-empire/Battle for the West: Hungarian PM Says ‘Silent Majority’ Will Prevail Over ‘Globalist Elites’ and ‘The Soros Empire’by JACK MONTGOMERY17 Nov 2017592Hungary’s Viktor Orbán has launched a stunning denunciation of globalism, declaring that the "true spirit of the age" points to a resurgence of conservative values centred on country, family, and tradition.The Hungarian premier drew battle lines between a "silent majority" of ordinary people who "provide for their families, love their homelands, and insist on their Christian roots" on the one hand, and the "globalist elites, the bureaucrats who serve them, the politicians in their pay, and the agents of the Soros-type networks that embody their interests" on the other."We should realise that the soothing melodies pouring out of the speakers of powerful global corporations and global political organisations – siren voices encouraging breezy irresponsibility, frenzied consumption, and boundless self-indulgence – are not at all the same as the spirit of the age," he said."Under the soft blanket of dreams laid down by the global elite, one finds the cold, hard reality of life."We see tens of millions of Europeans working hard and struggling day in, day out to keep themselves and their families afloat."We see how they yearn for security and order."We see how they cleave ever more firmly to their cultural identity, and fight every day for every square metre of their normal European life," he said.Orbán said the globalists understand tide is turning against them, "and therefore they’ve invented the magic word ‘populism’ to denigrate all that is national, popular, Christian, and civic — but they repeat this magic word in vain, their incantations are in vain, and their political voodoo is in vain."Reality, flesh-and-blood people, real-life instincts, real human desires, dreams and hopes will conquer the globalist elite still ruling Europe today. And they will make Europe – and within it Hungary – great again."The Fidesz leader contrasted the Hungarian ideal of the productive citizen, tied to his neighbours by the bonds of national identity rather than race or social class, with the globalist ideal of Homo Brusselicus — Brussles Man — a creature "wrenched out of its cultural, national, religious, and gender identity … a new type of human being for a new age".Orbán suggested this was part of a process in which some European countries have "decided to forsake Christianity, and to forsake their own national identity. They want to enter a post-Christian and post-national era" — the so-called ‘United States of Europe’."It is well known that we Hungarians have no desire for empires – and especially not for their viceroys," he said."Today an empire is threatening us once again. We stand in the way of a plan which seeks to eliminate nations … We stand in the way of a financial and political empire which seeks to implement this plan – at whatever cost."Let’s not beat about the bush: in order to implement the Soros Plan, across the whole of Europe they want to sweep away governments which represent national interests – including ours."Orbán said NGOs tied to George Soros, the billionaire open borders campaigner, "have penetrated all the influential forums of European decision-making".He described how they "operate like the activists of the Department for Agitation and Propaganda of the old Soviet Communist Party."We old war horses recognise them by their smell. Although the Soros troops use somewhat more refined methods, they nonetheless want to tell us what to do, what to say, what to think – and even how we should see ourselves."The former anti-communist campaigner explained: "Migration is not the goal of the Soros Plan, but merely its means."Millions of people … are being encouraged to come to Europe; indeed they are even being transported here, in order to debilitate nations and deliver the coup de grâce to Christian culture." [...](7) Hungary slams EU ‘Institutionalisation of Mass Migration’http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/10/24/soros-plan-orban-eu-attacking-sovereignty-new-asylum-rules/‘Soros Plan’: Hungary Slams EU ‘Institutionalisation of Mass Migration’ with New Asylum Rulesby VICTORIA FRIEDMANBreitbart News24 Oct 2017Prime minister of Hungary Viktor Orbán blasted the European Parliament for adopting changes to the bloc’s asylum system which the Hungarian government sees as the implementation of the ‘Soros Plan’ to flood the continent with an unlimited number of third-world migrants.On Friday, the European Parliament’s Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice, and Home Affairs (LIBE) adopted a report on the amendment of the Dublin Agreement, which regulates the EU’s Common Asylum System, which would see all member states forced to accept asylum seekers against the will of their people and for funds to be withheld from nations that refuse to comply."The musket is not only primed but loaded: in Europe in the future a permanent and mandatory migrant relocation quota mechanism will be established, with no upper limit on numbers: the mandatory relocation quota," Mr. Orbán told press."It is true that we are waist-deep in the struggle to protect this slice of our national sovereignty, but so far we have succeeded, because until now we have been the ones who decide who can live on Hungarian territory," Mr. Orbán said, "but the attack on our sovereignty that the European Parliament has now launched is fiercer than any previous one."The raft of proposals would see:Scrapping the rule that the first country of safe arrival is responsible for asylum seekers who reach its borders;Asylum seekers’ preference would be taken into consideration with migrants being able to choose between four countries which, at that time, had received the fewest number of asylum seekers;Faster family reunification;Applicants will have the "option to register as a group" of up to 30 on arrival in Europe;"All member states must participate and share responsibility for asylum seekers"; and"Member states refusing to accept relocation of applicants… would face limits on their access to EU funds".Members of European Parliament (MEPs) from centre-right EPP, socialist S&D, liberal Alde, Greens/EFA, and the far-left GUE/NGL voted 43-16 in favour.The Council of the European Union has yet to approve the amendments, and the plenary will be asked to formally confirm the decision by LIBE to enter into negotiations during its November session in Strasbourg.Parliament’s lead MEP on the revision, Cecilia Wikström (ALDE, Sweden) said the new asylum system would be "based on solidarity, with clear rules and incentives to follow them, both for the asylum seekers and for all member states".Hungarian government spokesman Zoltán Kovács told Kossuth Radio that the Hungarian government intends to oppose the draft reforms, saying it amounts to the "institutionalisation of migration and the opening up of the European Union’s external borders".Robustly defending his country, Orbán said: "While this government is in power and I am at its head, there will be no kind of relocation or quota in Hungary."(8) The Economist (partly Rothschild-owned) defends George Soroshttps://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21722176-attacked-politicians-washington-skopje-george-soros-runs-gauntletPublic Enemy Number 1George Soros runs the gauntlet: Attacked by politicians from Washington to SkopjeThe EconomistMay 18th 2017 | NEW YORKIN "MASQUERADE", Tivadar Soros’s memoir of Nazi-occupied Budapest, he describes how he procured false IDs for fellow Jews, including his 14-year-old son George. The elder Soros’s approach to the forgeries is enlightening. With wealthy clients, he "asked for whatever the market would bear". From the desperate he made nothing: "I felt that I was just a little responsible for everyone." George posed as the godson of an official who conducted inventories of confiscated Jewish estates. "Without risks," his father says of a time when each day was a life-or-death gamble, "there’s no life."An appetite for risk made George Soros a billionaire, but also made him enemies, as has his congenital philanthropy. In recent months these resentments have reached a new, alarming pitch. Two strands of criticism, in America and abroad, seem to have fused, a confluence epitomised by a pair of obscure letters sent by Republican politicians. A group of senators wrote to Rex Tillerson, the secretary of state, and a clutch of congressmen to the comptroller-general, taking aim at the same detail: the role of USAID, America’s foreign-aid agency, in Macedonia, specifically its collaboration with the local arm of Mr Soros’s Open Society Foundations (OSF).Mr Soros has supported democratic reform in central and eastern Europe since he distributed photocopiers among activists in the 1980s. His programmes avowedly promote free media, fair elections and clean government, rather than opposition parties, but local autocrats often miss the distinction. The Kremlin, which blamed Mr Soros for peaceful uprisings in Russia’s ex-Soviet neighbours in the 2000s, kicked his affiliate out in 2015. Belarus and Uzbekistan have also given him the push.A name to conjure withAs Russia revives its influence in Europe, antipathy to Mr Soros is redoubling: in Romania, Poland and especially Macedonia, where, amid a political crisis and allegations of graft and vote-rigging against a former prime minister, a "Stop Operation Soros" movement was launched. Meanwhile Viktor Orban—prime minister of Mr Soros’s native Hungary and himself a recipient of a Soros-funded scholarship—reviles his benefactor’s "transnational empire". Hungary’s parliament passed a law that might close Central European University, which was founded by Mr Soros in 1991. Another pending law could be used against his foundation.His political views and hefty donations have led to vitriol in America as well. Denunciations of George W. Bush and the Iraq war made him a bogeyman among right-wing fulminators and conspiracy theorists. His support for Hillary Clinton and disparagement of Donald Trump—an "impostor" and "would-be dictator"—have reinvigorated his assailants. Recently he has developed a controversial sideline in local prosecutorial races, from Louisiana to Illinois, betting that reformist prosecutors can help change the criminal-justice system. Sometimes the candidates he backs seem as baffled by his interest as their rivals, but 12 out of his 15 picks have won.Still, even if they disliked his influence at home, mainstream American politicians of both parties have mostly endorsed his foreign goals. Now the distinction is crumbling, as the Macedonian letter shows. It is a bizarre intervention: American politicians are in effect aligning themselves with a far-away, scandal-plagued party that is also backed by Russia, and which has allies who have resorted to violence, while disparaging their own government and, of course, Mr Soros. They have got their facts wrong, too: USAID has never funded Mr Soros’s outfit in neighbouring Albania, as the senators alleged. In the scheme of the agency’s budget and the Foundations’, the sums involved are tiny.In any case, Mr Soros’s infamy from the bayous to the Balkans is odd. He is certainly no saint. Some of his wealth comes from currency speculation, as when, short-selling the pound in 1992, he "broke the Bank of England". He has a French conviction for insider trading in 1988. Yet he has given billions to worthy causes. Michael Vachon, a longtime adviser, points out that Mr Soros derives no personal benefit from his advocacy of, say, the rights of Roma or the abolition of the death penalty. In politics, Mr Vachon says, unlike many big-time donors he "is always lobbying for a public purpose, never for private gain". Often he promotes policies, as on tax, that could cost him.Canary in the global mineIn part his predicament is an indicator of authoritarianism’s advances. As Radek Sikorski, a former Polish foreign minister, puts it, Mr Soros "has been a consistent advocate of the liberal order, and the liberal order is itself under attack". European regimes may see an opening in the ascendancy of Mr Trump, who is sceptical of exporting democratic ideals (and whose own campaign demonised Mr Soros). For their part, some in Congress may see him as a tool as much as a target, their real aim being to discredit overseas aid.Whatever the causes, as Soros-bashing spreads—the idea of his global meddling gaining a meretricious credibility with repetition—so do other troubling views. One is the cynical claim that peaceful protesters, whether against Mr Trump’s policies or corruption in Romania, take to the streets only if they are bribed: usually, run the calumnies from Bucharest to Washington, by Mr Soros. "If we’d paid all the protesters they say we have," jokes Laura Silber of OSF, "we’d be bankrupt many times over. It’s an insult to people standing up for their beliefs." Second, ever-more supposedly democratic leaders are relying on external adversaries to bolster their positions, confecting them if necessary.Finally, there is the particular kind of foe that Mr Soros is made to embody. Portrayals of him as an octopus, or, as in a Hungarian billboard, as a puppet-master, inevitably recall the last century’s anti-Semitic propaganda. Some such echoes may be accidental, the conspiracists unconsciously defaulting to ancient tropes, but they are striking. In a tweet praising Mr Orban, for example, Steve King, a Republican congressman, called Mr Soros a "Marxist billionaire". That chimes with the old slur against Jews whereby, as Tivadar Soros says in his book, "at one and the same time they held in their hands…the Western capitalist countries and Russian Bolshevism." "He survived the Nazis," Mr Vachon says of Mr Soros’s current situation, "and he takes a long view." No doubt, but in some ways this must be depressingly familiar.This article appeared in the United States section of the print edition under the headline "Public Enemy Number 1"(9) Soros Transfers $18 billion to Open Society Foundationhttps://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/17/business/george-soros-open-society-foundations.htmlGeorge Soros Transfers Billions to Open Society FoundationsBy DAVID GELLESOCT. 17, 2017George Soros, the billionaire hedge fund manager and a major Democratic donor, has given $18 billion to his Open Society Foundations, one of the largest transfers of wealth ever made by a private donor to a single foundation.The gift, made quietly over the past several years but disclosed only on Tuesday, has transformed Open Society into the second-biggest philanthropic organization in the United States, behind the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. It will also place Mr. Soros, a lightning rod for conservative critics, squarely in the middle of the social and political debates convulsing the country.Founded by Mr. Soros more than 30 years ago, Open Society promotes democracy and human rights in more than 120 countries. In recent years, the organization has increased its attention on the United States, investing in programs to protect gays and lesbians and reduce abuses by the police. [...]Patrick Gaspard, the vice president of the Open Society Foundations, who will take over as president at the end of the year, said the election of President Trump had given the organization’s work a new sense of urgency.Mr. Gaspard specifically cited Mr. Trump’s commission on voter fraud, a panel that has faced much criticism from Democrats and that Mr. Gaspard said "utterly lacks integrity." "Our work on equal access and protection is more vital than it’s ever been," he said. [...]For decades, Mr. Soros funded the Open Society Foundations through annual donations of around $800 million or $900 million per year. But beginning a few years ago, he increased his contributions as part of his estate planning, bringing the organization’s endowment to about $18 billion this year. The total donation figure was first reported by The Wall Street Journal.Mr. Soros is expected to contribute at least another $2 billion in the coming years."There is no foundation in the world, including the Ford Foundation, that has had more impact around the world than the Open Society Foundations in the last two decades," said Darren Walker, president of the Ford Foundation. "Because there is no part of the world that they have not been. Their footprint is deeper, wider and more impactful than any other social justice foundation in the world." [...]A version of this article appears in print on October 18, 2017, on Page B1 of the New York edition with the headline: Soros Gives Billions to His Charity, Now the Second Biggest in the U.S.(10) Austria bans Soros Foundationshttp://yournewswire.com/youngest-leader-george-soros/Youngest World Leader Bans George Soros’s Foundations From AustriaOctober 19, 2017Baxter Dmitry NewsNewly-elected Sebastian Kurz has informed George Soros that his Open Society Foundation has 28 days to cease and desist operations in Austria or face legal action.The world’s youngest leader, newly-elected Sebastian Kurz, has informed George Soros that his Open Society Foundation has 28 days to cease and desist operations in Austria or face legal action for "attempting to undermine the democracy of the nation."31-year-old Sebastian Kurz, Austria’s youngest ever leader, has told colleagues that action must be taken immediately, after news broke that George Soros has donated $18 billion of his $24 billion dollar fortune to his Open Society Foundation."The situation has become critical," Kurz said. "Soros is throwing everything he has behind his push for global control. Misinformation and media manipulation has already increased exponentially overnight. We have no room for complacency."Kurz, a self-described truther who says he was "red pilled" by the 9/11 film Loose Change, claims that he understands the Soros agenda, and "there is no way in hell this country will be his fifth victim."It is understood the Austrian chancellor is referring to the number of national economies Soros has crashed in order to gain enormous personal profit and political influence.Asked why he was banning George Soros’s Open Society Foundations, Kurz said, "Because it’s 2017."The news that Soros has released 75% of his vast fortune to push his political and social agenda has caused shockwaves around the world, with many democratically elected leaders expressing fear that the sheer weight of his billions, used to buy politicians and journalists, will be difficult to fight against.Kurz agrees. This is why he has taken fast action."The specter of Soros is the greatest challenge humanity is facing in the world in 2017. He is a great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming his blood funnel into anything that smells like money, using this money to corrupt politicians, journalists and the public sector, and attempting to create the world in his image."The people of Austria have rejected the New World Order, and it is my duty and my privilege to uphold their will."-- Peter Myerswebsite: http://mailstar.net/index.html