Frank Smith Says NB: George Soros: Britain may have to seek IMF rescue - Times Online

Saturday, March 28, 2009

George Soros: Britain may have to seek IMF rescue - Times Online

George Soros: Britain may have to seek IMF rescue - Times Online

5 comments:

Anonymous said...: Most of the mush brains don't realize that this is the puppeteer pulling Obama's strings. Now he is criticizing the way socialism has destoryed Great Britain, while pushing Obama to take us down the same road that Britain took.; March 28, 2009 at 1:32 PM
Brian Barker said...: Did you know that George Soros would not be a multi-billionaire if it were not for the international language Esperanto?

Born in Hungary in 1930 as Gyorgy Schwartz, the family changed its name in 1936 to Soros, which in Esperanto means "to soar."

The Soros name-change was an effort to protect the Jewish family from the rise of fascist rulers and the whole family spoke Esperanto at home.

As a native Esperanto speaker, (someone who has spoken Esperanto from birth), George Soros defected to the West in 1946, while attending an Esperanto youth meeting in Switzerland.

Esperanto enabled Soros both to defect, and to become the 28th most wealthy man in the World, according to the Forbes rich list.; March 28, 2009 at 4:02 PM
Anonymous said...: Brian, and now he supports the same kind of communism that he defected from? How fast we forget?; March 28, 2009 at 4:52 PM
Anonymous said...: Close Window

Print this page

From The Sunday TimesMarch 29, 2009

US tries to defuse a ticking timebomb
Martin Ivens in Jerusalem
All eyes will be on Barack Obama at the G20 summit this week. Among the great and good, the dull and dreary, in London’s Docklands he will be the only superstar. But the young president knows that what is decided inside a gleaming tower block in Tel Aviv will have more bearing on whether his presidency is accounted a success or failure than this talking shop.

High in the defence ministry building Major-General Amos Gilad points to a photograph on his wall of three Israeli F-15 jets flying over the site of Auschwitz. “I put it here to remind us of what happened and what may happen,” says the old fire-eater. The press claims he has been the real leader of the state for the past six months while the politicians have been out wooing the voters.

On his shelves one book holds pride of place. It is a story written in childhood by Gilad Shalit, an Israeli soldier kidnapped almost three years ago by Hamas, the Islamic militant group that controls the Gaza strip. As Israel’s security and foreign policy chief, Gilad has been negotiating for Shalit’s release. He is prepared to free hundreds of Palestinian prisoners to secure the return of one soldier. The Hollywood myth of Saving Private Ryan is national policy here.

The spectre of an Iranian nuclear bomb is also never far from Gilad’s thoughts. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Islamic republic’s Holocaust-denying president, has called for Israel to be wiped from the map. Iran funds and arms Israel’s enemies to its immediate north and south: Hezbollah, the armed Shi’ite movement that dominates southern Lebanon, and Hamas in Gaza.

The clock is ticking on the clandestine Iranian nuclear programme. Despite a series of United Nations security council resolutions and mild western sanctions, the process of uranium enrichment to make a bomb will soon be complete. The experts do not agree when that day will come — any time between nine months and three years is suggested – but come it will.

Whatever Iran’s ultimate intentions, the Arab neighbourhood is as nervous as Israel of an Iranian bomb. Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Algeria and non-Arab Turkey could swiftly join a nuclear arms race . They fear Iran’s revolutionary support for Shi’ite populations in the region and its traditional ambitions in the Gulf as heir to Persian imperialism. So far the Arab nations have been able to live with a balance of terror next door between India and Pakistan. Israel’s own nuclear arsenal is unwelcome but tolerable as it has not threatened their internal stability.

The danger to the rest of the world will be that the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, to which Iran is a signatory, will be in ruins. The old hopes of atoms for peace will become atoms for war as unlovely regimes everywhere reach for the nuclear trigger. The doctrine of mutually assured destruction (Mad) kept the United States and the Soviet Union from blowing us all up and making the rubble bounce. Whether Mad works among multiple hostile powers has never been put to the test. It’s an experiment we can do without. The crazy regime of nuclear-armed North Korea has already rattled its neighbours to breaking point.

The Americans have ruled out a pre-emptive strike on Iran for now but the Israeli air force has been on manoeuvres, conducting dummy bombing runs as far afield as the Strait of Gibraltar. Such a course would be militarily hazardous – “it’s at the very outer limit of our capabilities” says a security source – and, because of the distance to the target and the dispersal of the Iranian nuclear programme, even a successful hit might only postpone the evil day.

Few Israeli politicians show any appetite for such a mission. They would far rather work with the United States and their European friends to stop it. Gilad, however, muses: “To delay the Iranian bomb is not a bad idea.” As for the dangers, “in 1981 our intelligence agencies also advised against a strike on Iraq”. That was when Saddam Hussein’s nuclear reactor at Osirak was levelled by an Israeli bombing raid. (I am meeting Gilad on a trip arranged by the British Israel Communications and Research Centre. The sabre-rattling is for my benefit.)

George Bush refused to give the nod to an Israeli raid on Iran, because retaliation against targets in Iraq, the Gulf and the West as well as Israel might follow. Obama will be more reluctant still: the White House’s attempt to reach out to old enemies would be ruined. The president is not standing still as this danger beckons. New US strategies are being applied at breakneck speed across the world – all the old verities are being challenged. This has profound implications for the Middle East: the problem child of the world is about to get a kindly but firm American uncle.

Obama’s most breathtaking stroke so far has been to offer reconciliation with the ayatollahs in an attempt to put an end to the 30-year quarrel between America and Iran. In a message to mark the Persian new year he praised Iranian cultural achievements, dropped talk of regime change and reached out the hand of friendship. The two countries have mutual interests in pacifying Afghanistan and Iraq. If Iran gains acceptance as a legitimate status quo power, will it cast off its revolutionary ambitions?

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s political and religious supreme leader, gave a generally dusty answer to Obama’s appeal. But it was significant that he, rather than Ahmadinejad, replied rapidly within 24 hours and conceded: “If America changes its behaviour, we will change ours.”

The new administration is also impatient for a two-state solution to the conflict of Jew and Arab. The last time I came here Israel was withdrawing settlers and soldiers from Gaza. Since then there has been a violent split among the Palestinian factions, missile attacks on Israel and bloody retaliation in Gaza, and “Bibi” Netanyahu, a right-wing prime minister, is being installed in Jerusalem. This record is stuck. Obama wants to hear a new tune.

Democratic Israel will always have a firm friend in the United States. But some in the administration share the fundamental insight of Ariel Sharon, a former Israeli prime minister and super-hawk: there will soon be many more Palestinians than Israelis because of a higher birthrate. Rather than dilute the Zionist nature of the state it is sensible to disengage from the occupied territories.

A group of hard-nosed foreign policy realists in Washington last autumn produced a “bipartisan statement on US Middle East peacemaking” that was handed to Obama by his senior economic adviser Paul Volcker, a signatory. The wise men called for an “intense American mediation in pursuit of a two-state solution . . . a more pragmatic approach to Hamas” and American command of a multinational force to keep the peace between Israel and Palestine. George Mitchell, Obama’s Middle East envoy (who acted as an honest broker in Northern Ireland), and General Jim Jones, his national security adviser, are said to be highly sympathetic.

Obama is taking out insurance if his policy fails. His overtures to the Russians – I give up my anti-ballistic missiles in eastern Europe if you back me at the UN security council – could result in harsh new sanctions on Iran’s tottering economy should he be played for a sucker: Iran may spin out talks to buy time to get its bomb. He also knows that the presidency of a naive pre-decessor, Jimmy Carter, was incinerated by playing with Persian fire. But as long as Washington’s optimism is tempered by an understanding that the Middle East is the dustbin of many an American initiative, it’s worth a try.

The president’s problem is that Jerusalem is working to a more urgent timetable. As Gilad sees it, the Iranian bomb is “an existential threat” and the point of no return is coming fast. If he is prepared to go to such lengths to save one captured soldier, what will he not do to safeguard his nation? Obama must reassure Israel if he is to hold the ring.

Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times, or place your advertisement.

Times Online Services: Dating | Jobs | Property Search | Used Cars | Holidays | Births, Marriages, Deaths | Subscriptions

News International associated websites: Globrix Property Search | Property Finder | Milkround

Copyright 2009 Times Newspapers Ltd.

This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.; March 29, 2009 at 9:06 AM
Anonymous said...: Canada Free Press - Printer Friendly Page
© V2.0 - CJ Website Design
www.cj-design.com
________________________________________
Advertising, Bill O'Reilly, Fox News
Podesta’s Center for American Progress Spinoff Becomes A Media Critic
Matthew Vadum Bio

Email Article

By Matthew Vadum Sunday, March 29, 2009
An affiliate of the George Soros-funded think tank and pressure group, Center for American Progress (CAP), has emulated the sleazy Media Matters for America by becoming a media critic.
Claiming to be outraged at the aggressive news-gathering techniques of Bill O’Reilly’s team, the Center for American Progress Action Fund, a 501(c)(4) lobbying organization that grew out of CAP, rejoiced Friday after getting UPS to stop advertising on “The O’Reilly Factor.” The Fund released this statement on its Think Progress website:
In response to our Stop Supporting The O’Reilly Harassment Machine campaign, UPS told us yesterday that it was investigating whether to continue supporting O’Reilly’s show. “We are sensitive to the type of television programming where our messages and presence are associated and continually review choices to affect future decisions,” spokeswoman Susan Rosenberg told us.
Today UPS announced it will stop advertising on O’Reilly’s show. Here is the statement UPS emailed out just moments ago:
Thank you for sending an e-mail expressing concern about UPS advertising during the Bill O’Reilly show on FOX News. We do consider such comments as we review ad placement decisions which involve a variety of news, entertainment and sports programming. At this time, we have no plans to continue advertising during this show. [emphasis in thinkprogress.org post]
I regret I missed this anti-Bill O’Reilly campaign until it struck gold. The campaign also claims to have elicited responses from Capital One, AT&T, and Ford.
I’ve never been a fan of ambush-style interviews but sometimes in the news-gathering process the approach is justified as a last resort. Surely nothing the O’Reilly team has done is any worse than anything done by myriad leftist commentators such as Michael Moore and journalists such as Geraldo Rivera and the team at “60 Minutes.”
The whole campaign by the CAP Action Fund seems like a cheap publicity stunt that has the added benefit of hurting the revenues of a prominent right-leaning TV commentator perhaps with the ultimate goal of removing him from the airwaves.
Incidentally, both CAP and Media Matters are funded by Soros’s Democracy Alliance, a billionaire’s club that is funding a drive to turn America into a European-style socialist country.
CAP is a well-funded machine that has aspirations of becoming a “Heritage Foundation” of the left. It has an approximately $25 million annual budget and took in $64,681,960 in donations from 2003 through 2006, according to its tax returns.
The CAP Action Fund, 501(c)(4), may be legally separate from CAP, a 501(c)(3), but both have roughly the same goals: pushing liberal, Big Government
policies.
CAP funds the CAP Action Fund directly. It gave $1,796,235 in ‚Äúgrants‚Äù to the CAP Action Fund in 2007 alone, according to the CAP 2007 tax return.

(0) Reader Feedback | Subscribe
Matthew Vadum Most recent columns
Source: Capital Research Center
Matthew Vadum is Editor of Organization Trends and Foundation Watch, two monthly newsletters published by Capital Research Center, a Washington D.C.-based think tank that focuses on the politics of philanthropy. He has appeared on “The Daily Show with Jon Stewart,” “CBS Evening News with Katie Couric,” “The O’Reilly Factor,” “America’s Nightly Scoreboard,” “The G. Gordon Liddy Show,” “The Michael Reagan Show,” “Janet Parshall’s America,” “The Lars Larson Show,” “The Greg Knapp Experience,” “Politics of Money,” and has been published in the Washington Times, Boston Herald, Las Vegas Review Journal, American Spectator, Human Events.
Matthew can be reached at: mvadum@capitalresearch.org
________________________________________

Printed from: http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/9727; March 29, 2009 at 10:51 AM

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)