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 NATO would no longer be a defensive alliance against Russia - that is obsolete.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
๐งต THREAD: CAIR accused of abusing federal funds in report
A few days ago, Network Contagion Research Institute (NCRI) put out a damning report on Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR); specifically, the California branch. I took the time to independently verify their claims -- and can affirm they are quite damning.
CAIR, if you remember, is a Muslim Brotherhood front and was recently declared a terrorist organization by Governor Abbott.
As always, patience as I pull together the thread.
The report opens with a startling claim - that CAIR-CA has abused millions of dollars.
Here's a prior thread where CAIR got exposed as being tied to Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas:
Let me repeat. A literal revolutionary Communist who went to Cuba attempted to bring the "Revolution" back to the United States, then her group deleted their website right before Charlie's assassination.
That's how you know the Dignity Index will never be used against the left.
๐งต๐จ THREAD: How Mormon Women for Ethical Government fits into a State Departmentโbacked effort to remake America ๐จ
Every Utahn needs to read this and be aware of the coup that's happening within their borders.
Recently, Mormon Women for Ethical Government (MWEG) secured a court victory and a safe Democratic seat in a new map through a judge's ruling.
The Utah legislature must impeach the judge -- not only because of their activism, but also to send a message: Utah will not permit outside backed NGOs to infiltrate and succeed in their plan to turn America into a democracy.
That's right. Mormon Women for Ethical Government is not who they seem to be. They are part of an "interfaith" ecosystem to infiltrate Utah and LDS and transform America from the bottom up.
I have the receipts.
As always, patience as I pull together the thread. ๐
The short version is: The group coordinating everything is the Inter-Movement Impact Project under the Thriving Together US framework, funded by and executed by ex-USAID employees. Their goal: carry out One Common Purpose through NED director Rachel Kleinfeld's paper, and transform America into a true democracy from the bottom up by changing primary laws, creating "fair" anti-gerrymandering, forcing equitable representation, expanding the House, putting limits on the SCOTUS, countering disinformation, and much more.
A silly prayer request. We have only one pet, a cat. He loves our children and has been a wonderful family pet, very gentle and tolerant. Heโs only 3 years old and is in the animal hospital for a blocked bladder. Itโs been 48 hours and heโs still having a fever and not out of the woods.
He loves the kids so much.
Update: he got released tonight. Heโs very tired and is going to be treated delicately for a week. But heโs home.
๐งต๐จ MAJOR BREAKING: International actors are involved in the State Department led color revolution ๐จ๐จ
This is not speculation; itโs straight from a recorded call.
Ex-USAID employees describe how, before January 20, they moved internal groups off government systems and into encrypted Signal chats, then quickly linked with foreign partners and NGOs after the inauguration. This attempt at creating a color revolution isn't new news; this part was already reported in NOTUS earlier this year.
But what's not reported is the international aspect. One participant explicitly frames it as "a global anti-authoritarian movement," connecting U.S. officials with "colleagues from around the world who have dealt with this directly."
They reference coordination with Johns Hopkins, "international democracy and conflict mitigation spaces," and efforts to mobilize across borders against what they perceive as domestic authoritarianism.
At what point does this become treason?
As always, patience as I pull together this thread.
๐
Note at the end of the video, the "we" in reference to organizing the February 5th protests - that was organized by Soros-backed groups 50501 and Indivisible. This is the first solid link I've found connecting the No Kings movement, State Department, and Soros together.
Ro Tucci herself goes onto talk about bringing in international actors to assist with the color revolution. Their role is going to be "mobilizing around corruption" ... what does that mean?
I encourage you to watch this video to the end to understand just what a massive effort this is. This is the master plan being laid out -- reinventing US governance from the bottom up.
The man speaking in this video, Stephen Heintz, is the architect and is the president of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund. He is also part of the New Pluralists, who @SKDoubleDub33 and @iamlisalogan exposed as being directly linked to the color revolution involved ex-USAID employees.
Here's their website - they are in full alignment with supranational socialism. What they don't mention is the many technocratic institutions involved (Rockefeller, Ford) and the early involvement of Soros.