![[object Object]](https://protectedsociety.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/According-to-an-American-Rabbi-Trumps-criticism-of-Soros-is.jpeg "According to an American Rabbi, Trump’s criticism of Soros is")
In his post on website X, Rabbi Dov Fischer points out that Trump is absolutely right in saying that the “suicidal leftist” Schumer-Soros-Emhoff “Jews” “need to have their heads examined” for voting for the Obama-Biden-Harris Democrats. When Sid Rosenberg, a proud Jewish radio host in New York, said that these types are “bad Jews,” Trump agreed, and I said, “Amen, brother!”
“I am an Orthodox rabbi, and I know that we, millions of Orthodox and traditional Jews, feel this way, just as devout Catholics are ashamed of hypocrites like Biden, Pelosi, and the masses who daily confront the Vatican,” Rabbi Dov Fischer concludes his post as the Western Regional Vice President of the Coalition for Jewish Values (link).
“I am an organization-wide vice president for a group of 2,500 Orthodox rabbis. We lead a community of over a million Jews. (…) However, no one is more frustrated with us when someone like Bernie Sanders, Chuck Schumer, George Soros, or Doug Emhoff identifies as Jewish,” Fischer says in his recent article.
“To use an expression: ‘Not in our name.’
These individuals do not observe the Jewish Sabbath according to its laws. They do not eat kosher. They are proud of their children who marry homosexuals or lesbians (Schumer) or Israel-hating Arab Muslims (Soros), or simply non-Jews who would pressure Israel, while their children raise money for ‘Palestinians’ (Emhoff),” Fischer adds.
Since the European migration crisis of 2015, the experiences of the past nearly 10 years provide clear evidence of the chilling consequences and risks for Europe of mass migration. Just think of the collapse of internal security (tragedies and innocent victims in Paris, Berlin, Brussels, etc.) or the overload of social welfare systems across Western Europe.
And although this hypocritical leftist argument constantly tries to refute it, the truth is that the tragic developments were already predictable at the beginning of the migration crisis. However, the Open Society of Soros already spent unimaginable sums back then to discredit and undermine right-wing voices warning about the expected consequences, whether from the world of politics, science, or civil society.
It is therefore obvious that promoting or supporting immigration is not in the interest of the European Union, the sovereign member states that make up the community, or, above all, European citizens. The question then arises: whose interest is it, and why does George Soros assist in all this and why does the current EU bureaucracy, supposedly tasked with enforcing, serving, and defending European interests, eager to assist in the extension of its power?
Soros recognized the (immoral) business opportunity in immigration in the early stages of the crisis caused by the misguided policies of the EU leadership. He presented his plan in an article published in September 2015 on the website Project Syndicate, financed by him and several other international leftist network actors. This infamous article in which the “philanthropist” without any democratic legitimation gave instructions above the heads of European citizens that EU member states should welcome and financially support masses of immigrants.
He specifically stated that “the EU must take responsibility for the lack of a common refugee policy, which has turned this year’s growing refugee influx from a manageable problem into a new political crisis,” and therefore in the future, the EU must “admit at least one million asylum seekers [actually economic migrants] annually.”
The EU needs to provide each member state with 15,000 euros for every immigrant “to cover the costs of accommodation, healthcare, and education, and to make the acceptance of refugees more acceptable for member states.” In addition, the community needs to “lead the global effort to provide sufficient funds to support four million refugees currently living in Lebanon, Jordan, and Turkey in these countries,” which would amount to at least 5,000 euros in annual expenses per refugee, totaling 20 billion euros. Soros believes that “the EU should commit itself to giving at least 8 to 10 billion euros more to the countries along the external borders.” And we have not even talked about elements of his plan such as establishing special economic zones in Tunisia or Morocco, which would also come with significant cost implications.
Therefore, the implementation of these measures would cost the EU tens of billions of euros annually, even with an optimistic estimate. (It is worth noting that effective border protection could be achieved for a fraction of this amount.)
Regarding how to finance mass migration, Soros has an answer: through joint borrowing and issuing long-term bonds.
This would result in the collapse of the European economy and the long-term indebtedness of European citizens for generations, while financial circles offering high-interest loans could double their profits by realizing additional profits from the consumption of government-supported migrants. Moreover, by providing loans to the EU, Soros would effectively transfer his resources from one pocket to another, while continuing to enrich himself through interest. In his instructions, he emphasizes that “non-governmental organizations […] as sponsors” are essential for the success of mass immigration and the change in demographic structure, so there would be ample funding for the Open Society network as well, enabling his network of financial organizations to become a migration-based industry.
Therefore, one of the most active and ruthless speculators of global financial power, who built his billionaire fortune by speculating on crisis-stricken countries (Great Britain, Thailand, Korea, etc.), once again wants to make money from the destruction of economies and millions of people. In this regard, it is worth recalling one of Soros’ earlier revealing statements: “In January 1997, we really bet on a currency depreciation in both the Thai baht and the Malaysian ringgit. […] If we had been actively involved [in the crisis], I would have no remorse. Markets are there to be used. And we take advantage of the opportunities the market offers us.”
But why does the liberal leadership of the European Union assist in serving the business and political (power) interests clearly contrary to the interests of European citizens and why does it support Soros’ efforts to promote immigration? The answer is as disheartening as it is obvious.
On the one hand, the crises of recent times have repeatedly shown that the current EU leadership has become a total subordinate to the interests of global financial power, just think of the various aspects of the coronavirus pandemic or the Russo-Ukrainian war.
On the other hand, the Brussels elite sees in migration and the resulting joint borrowing an opportunity and tool for the extension of its power and the dismantling of national sovereignty. Behind the common financial commitment, which, no one knows better than our country, experiences negative effects, profit-oriented considerations are combined with ideological motivations, allowing the EU to take another step towards federalization and once again exert pressure on member states in the distribution of funds based on vague, non-existent rules, and unrecorded conditions.
But it should not be forgotten that on numerous occasions in the past, it has been proved that creditors also want to buy the right to shape history with their money, as Soros does, who immediately orders in his article that immigration policy must be brought from national jurisdiction to EU jurisdiction and central control, thus ensuring that the citizens of member states have the slightest influence on (migration) processes.
Therefore, the ongoing offensive led by the Soros family’s central figures includes Republican Donald Trump alongside Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, as Alex Soros attacks Trump in a sharp, confrontational article in The Washington Post, calling the former president an “autocrat” and urging his prevention of return.
It must be seen that behind the promotion of migration are ruthless business and political (power) interests that would subjugate the indebted European citizens of global financial power under a democratically unauthorized European superstate leadership, which is willing to do anything except represent European interests. Only an immediate, patriotic turn in the EU leadership can thwart this ambition.
