Today's systems of NGOs isn't accidental - it was laid out in a vision 30 years ago by none other than George Soros.
I joined @MikeBenzCyber on a livestream last night, where he was kind enough to walk us through the basics.
As my bio says, I am just a tool builder. I am not a historian or academic. The information in this thread is common knowledge for many. It wasn't for me.
I want to walk you through an essay which Mike pointed me to- a chilling essay written in 1993 by George Soros, "Toward a New World Order: The Future of NATO"
The essay lays out a new mission for NATO after the cold war. NATO would no longer be a defensive alliance against Russia - that is obsolete. Instead, it would proactively go out and shape other countries into "open societies." "[๐ต๐จ๐ป๐ถ'๐ ๐๐๐] ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ ๐๐๐๐ ๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ ๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐."
Soros re-defined peace and security not as absence of war, but in terms of how many countries are "open societies."
In other words, NATO's new mission: if a country doesn't adopt Western-style capitalism and liberalism, NATO should step in... politically, economically, and eventually, militarily.
๐ง What is an "Open Society?"
The term was coined by philosopher Karl Popper and expanded in this 1993 essay. Soros, of course, would go on to build a coalition of NGOs and interfere in the US Elections under his "Open Society Foundation" banner.
Here are the elements of an "Open Society" in theory:
๐นDemocracy
๐นFree markets
๐นCivil rights
๐นMinority protections
๐นTransparency
๐นA "global" rules-based order
In practice, Open Society means something very different. Let's go through the essay.
Translation:
You're an open society if you accept our interpretation of pluralism and Western values. Otherwise, we'll label you "closed," even if your people elect their leaders or protect cultural traditions. And this gives us pretext to justify military actions on you.
Translation: We pour aid into countries that remake themselves in Soros' image. And no amount of money is too much to accomplish that- because, again, we have redefined "peace" to mean "as many countries follow the Open Society model as possible."
And if aid fails, then military intervention is next.
Take a moment to think about this.
What do you think this means for anyone who is opposed to foreign aid?
They are agents of "closed societies."
They are a threat to national security.
Ergo...
They are a threat to democracy.
This point is perhaps the most ironic one. A "Democracy" according to George Soros is not decided by its own citizens. Instead, NATO's new mission is to impose their own ideology on others and build countries which agree with Soros.
Translation - if bribing a country with endless amount of foreign aid doesn't work to transform them from inside out, then NATO will intervene. And that's exactly what NATO did with Bosnia in 1994.
Translation: NATO's new job is not to defend member states, but to expand its presence eastward and actively shape the internal politics of neighboring states, especially the post-Soviet bloc.
This isn't a theoretical essay. Washington implemented the playbook.
๐๏ธ 1994: Partnership for Peace launched
๐๏ธ 1999: NATO admits Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic
๐๏ธ 2004: Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Bulgaria join
๐๏ธ 2008โ2022: Ukraine, Georgia seek NATO pathway
๐๏ธ 2023: Finland joins NATO, Sweden follows
Why did everyone go along with this model? Simple. Enormous amounts of money was involved. Here's a list who benefited:
๐งโ๐ผ NGO Networks (Open Society Foundations, USAID, NED)
โ More influence, more contracts, more justification for expansion
๐๏ธ Bureaucrats & Diplomats
โ Career advancement via โdemocracy-buildingโ missions
๐ฐ International Donors & Foundations
โ Steer reforms through grant-making power
๐ณ IMF & World Bank
โ Lend to reforming nations in exchange for austerity + influence
๐ข Private Equity & Multinationals
โ Buy up privatized industries on the cheap (telecoms, oil, infrastructure)
๐๏ธ Western-Aligned Politicians
โ Receive aid, praise, and protection... even if theyโre corrupt or undemocratic
๐ Post-Communist Oligarchs
โ Enrich themselves through Western-advised privatization
๐ฐ Journalists & Activists
โ Funded by Western grants, shielded from local accountability
๐งโ๐ซ Professors & Think Tanks
โ Get fellowships, scholarships, media access for pushing "open" values
๐ฑ Big Tech
โ Enter new markets post-liberalization (data access, censorship tools, ad revenue)
๐๏ธ Mainstream Media
โ Shape narratives, control legitimacy labels: โreformerโ vs โstrongmanโ
And if you dare to cut off that money spigot... in other words, if you practice any kind of populist principles or try and assert agency for your own nation:
FINAL NOTE:
Don't confuse George Soros's model of NATO promoting "open societies" with being anti-communist.
Soros didn't oppose the Soviet Union because it was communist.
He opposed it because it was nationalist. It resisted foreign influence and maintained centralized control over its own ideology and borders.
His vision of an "open society" blends left-wing radicalism (identity politics, anti-tradition, anti-sovereignty) with globalist structures (NGOs, Western institutions, and transnational finance).
The more you read his writings, the clearer it becomes that "Open Society" is a circular label for regimes that accept Soros-style politics.
Anyone who resists this framework is cast as an enemy of "democracy." And if you're MAGA, that means you.
โข โข โข
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Everyone has their opinion on the Iran war or Israel. Maybe that opinion is enough to deter them from supporting Trump. I may not agree with it, but I understand where it comes from and it's a free country.
But when that turns into allying with Communists - that's when I have to speak up.
Institutional left-wing populism IS Communism. I'm not using it as a slur as in everyone to the left is a Communist. I mean it literally.
I'm talking about PSL, CODEPINK, Singham groups. The movements on the left that are anti-globalist are overwhelmingly Marxist.
๐จ๐งต BREAKING: Former DHS Chief Miles Taylor's prank site collected death threats against the President and 4,000+ people's personal data. Then exposed them through all an open API. ๐จ
Two days ago, I showed you how Miles Taylor's GTFO ICE site exposed 17,000+ people's data on an open API. That site halted sign-ups and is still "under construction."
But Taylor's organization DEFIANCE[.]org didn't just build one leaky site. They built two. On the same server.
UndoTrump[.]org โ launched April 1, 2026 as an "April Fools' joke" โ collects names, emails, and political messages from people signing up for fictional "Removal Parties" at government buildings. The White House Ballroom. The Kennedy Center. The DOJ. Battleships.
4,000+ signup records. 3,300+ unique people. Same vulnerability. Same API. Same zero authentication.
And this one has death threats against a sitting President in the database.
The man who was deputy chief of staff for the department that houses the Secret Service couldn't secure a sign-up form. Again.
As always, patience as I pull together the thread. ๐
Here's a video of Miles himself soliciting PII in sign-ups. He implies he's not saving the user data... but he did.
Same server. Same IP address. 34.111.179.208. Google Cloud Platform. Same React 19 frontend. Same Express.js backend. Same registrar. Domains registered 13 days apart.
This wasn't two mistakes. This was one codebase deployed twice. Name.com
๐งต๐จ BREAKING: Miles Taylor: "Anonymous," former DHS Chief of Staff, Google security executive launched a website called GTFO ICE that collects your full name, email, phone number, and zip code to join an anti-ICE "rapid response network." And publishes the user infromation via a public API. ๐จ
17,662 people have signed up.
The sign-up data is exposed on a public REST API. No true authentication. No rate limiting. Full records: names, emails, phone numbers, zip codes, timestamps.
The man who ran the third-largest federal department (250,000 employees, $60 billion budget) who oversaw election security architecture and led counterterrorism operations, then served as Google's Head of National Security Policy...
...can't secure a sign-up form. But he does milk hundreds of thousands of NGO dollars on these credentials. While freeloading off his fame as the person who wrote the infamous NYT article "I Am Part of the Resistance Inside the Trump Administration."
And despite me pinging @MilesTaylorUSA about this 12 hours ago, the REST API is still wide open and exposed as of now. Everything has been turned over to FBI, HSI, ICE, and more agencies.
As always, patience as I pull together the thread. ๐
Taylor's security clearance was suspended by presidential memorandum in April 2025. Trump called his conduct "treasonous." Five months later, Taylor launched DEFIANCE dot org. Five months after that... GTFO ICE.
GTFO ICE is a coalition of three orgs:
1. DEFIANCE dot org : Miles Taylor + Xander Schultz 2. Save America Movement : Steve Schmidt (yes, of the Lincoln Project) 3. Project Salt Box
๐งต THREAD: You've heard the phrase "OUR DEMOCRACY" a million times. But what exactly is "OUR DEMOCRACY"? ๐ค
When they say "democracy," they don't mean a republic. They don't mean consent of the governed. They don't mean your right to choose your own leaders.
They mean a system where "institutions" - NGOs, multilaterals, the permanent bureaucracy - advance a set of values they consider settled: equality, social justice, cosmopolitanism, global governance. These values aren't proposals to be voted on. They're treated as moral prerequisites that must be true *before* your vote counts.
Despite what they say, they aren't for checks and balances. Checks and balances limit what government can do to you. This limits what you can do to *them*. The brakes are on accountability, not power. The institutions that set the boundaries of acceptable policy have put themselves beyond the reach of the electorate, and they call that arrangement "democracy."
Trump has been an existential threat to this system since the moment he said "drain the swamp" ... because the swamp IS the system. When he threatened those institutions, he didn't threaten the republic. He threatened their immunity from it.
And they said so. On camera. At their own events. In their own words.
As always, patience as I pull together the thread.๐
Robert Kagan:
"I would say there is an argument for saying give me some smoke filled rooms... they weeded out the Donald Trumps of this world."
Backroom deals instead of primaries. Because primaries are how you got Trump... and the old gatekeepers would have stopped him.
Think Kagan's an outlier? Here's Brookings senior fellow William Galston at the National Endowment for Democracy's (NED) most prestigious annual lecture.
He explains that "liberal democracy" requires "some abridgement of majoritarianism."
Translation: democracy means limiting what the majority can do.
๐งต๐จ THREAD: How the Charlottesville rally and SPLC birthed an entire billion-dollar-plus "democracy" ecosystem ๐จ
11 federal counts. Wire fraud. Money laundering conspiracy. But here's what the SPLC headlines are missing:
โข The indictment describes a paid informant in the leadership chat that PLANNED Unite the Right
โข That informant "helped coordinate transportation" to the rally... at SPLC's direction
โข There is ONE publicly identified organizer whose documented role was transportation coordinator
โข His Discord posts about running over protesters were made 26 DAYS before Heather Heyer was killed by a car
โข The indictment says postings were made "under the supervision of the SPLC"
โข Charlottesville then became the founding event for a billion-dollar political machine
โข SPLC installed itself as that machine's definitional gatekeeper
I report. You draw your own conclusions.
As always, patience as I pull together the thread. ๐
It is NOT confirmed fact that Chesny, who appeared to be encouraging running over protesters, was SPLC's informant.
But the indictment (paragraph 11a) describes informant F-37, and it matches Chesny:
โข Member of the online leadership chat that planned Unite the Right
โข Attended Charlottesville (at SPLC's direction)
โข Made racist postings (under SPLC's supervision)
โข Helped coordinate transportation for attendees
Now here's why this matters beyond the fraud charges.
Charlottesville became the single most consequential founding event in modern American political infrastructure. Every one of these organizations says... in their own words.... that they exist or were transformed because of August 12, 2017.
๐งต THREAD: The true reason Pete Hegseth is being targeted is because he's standing between President Trump and a coup
@PeteHegseth named the institutions... CFR, Brookings, the general class... in 37 seconds in a video by @Liz_Wheeler . Within 72 hours of his nomination, a color revolution planning document cited him as an insider threat.
They didn't go after him because of drinking. They didn't go after him because of women. They went after him because every color revolution manual ever written says the same thing: you cannot topple a government unless the security forces defect. And a loyal Secretary of Defense is the one person who makes sure they don't.
I have the receipts. Their own documents. Their own training sessions. Their own words on camera.
As always, patience as I pull together the thread. ๐
@PeteHegseth @Liz_Wheeler This is not my theory. This is theirs.
Erica Chenoweth and Maria Stephan โ the two most cited scholars in the color revolution field โ studied 323 regime change campaigns. Their finding:
Security force defections make campaigns FORTY-SIX TIMES more likely to succeed.
@PeteHegseth @Liz_Wheeler So what did co-author Maria Stephan do next?
She became Chief Organizer of the Horizons Project. And on July 16, 2025, she trained New Kings participants on video.
"Security forces refused to obey orders to repress protesters."