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 NATO would no longer be a defensive alliance against Russia - that is obsolete.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
๐บ๐ธโ๏ธ๐ฐ Ever wonder who pays for Congressional trips abroad?
This week, a House GOP delegation is heading to Israel. But here's what many don't realize: they aren't paying for their own trips.
There's a charity tied to AIPAC called the American Israel Education Foundation Inc, and according to its own IRS 990 forms, its top priority is funding Congressional trips to Israel.
It brings in $70 million a year.
(EIN: 52-1623781)
I'm not anti-Israel, but I am being skeptical of any foreign-sponsored travel for U.S. officials. Should outside groups be paying for our lawmakersโ overseas trips? Especially if these groups are operating in another country's interests?
Here's an example of an ethics form for a sponsored trip.
Evidently, House ethics rules do permit you to meet with foreign government officials over the course of a sponsored trip.
Again.
I am not against Israel. I hate Hamas. I just don't think politicians should be involved in ANY sponsored trips that involve state business.
๐บ๐ธ๐ฐ Ever wonder why European cities accepted so many refugees?
Today, I'm over my jet lag and processing the documents I scanned this week. Already it's pretty shocking.
The refugee influx into Europe began as a U.S. taxpayer-funded subsidy. The U.S. government literally paid European cities to take them in, using Soros-backed operations like ARC (American Refugee Committee) as the middlemen.
Yes, ARC, co-founded with money from the Soros Humanitarian Fund, was running programs directly for the U.S. government.
It goes even deeper and darker than that. Stay tuned.
ARC handled all the logistical needs for IOM including deciding refugee placements and schedules, at least at one point.
Even today, there are plenty of financial incentives for European cities to take refugees. The following is a UN-backed initiative (translation: US-backed):
๐จ BREAKING: JEFFREY EPSTEIN ONCE CLAIMED TO WORK FOR THE CIA
Been doing research with @lamps_apple all evening ... and, yeah, Epstein did claim to work for the CIA in a 2001 Evening Standard article.
@lamps_apple Further update: Epstein was renting property from the State Department - property that was formerly an Iranian government building seized by the U.S. after the Iran hostage crisis.
(Give @lamps_apple a follow - this is a joint research effort)
@lamps_apple . @MikeBenzCyber has more info here, we're just collecting it from various sources:
โ๏ธ WHY ARE WE NOT CHARGING THE PEOPLE WHO RUN THE CARAVANS?
One of the untalked about side effects of mass migration is its death toll.
The map represents migrant related deaths found around the El Paso area for the years 2022-2024 alone. Most due to environmental exposure.
Serious question: Pueblo Sin Fronteras regularly schedules caravans to Tijuana (where these deaths occurred). Why are we not prosecuting these people? Most of the people in charge of Pueblo Sin Fronteras are Americans.
Founder: Roberto Corona, a "Mexican-American immigrant."
๐งต THREAD: Honduras as a case study for mass migraton
I poked around into the Honduras story a bit more thanks to prodding from a subscriber. The subscriber insisted that there had to be beneficiaries or the "closed loop" where destabilization -> displacement -> resettlement would not have gone on so long unnoticed.
And, yes, the history of Honduras is very much interesting and educational... and I'm going to try my best to share what I've collected below๐
This Congressional report is worth reading in its full for a history (albeit buried under some euphemisms and omissions), but I'll excerpt the important parts here.
As we will see, the seeds of the mass migration crisis was planted very early on. But the actual migration did not begin in earnest until 2014. President Trump tried aggressively to cut down foreign assistance in his tenure, but was only partially successful, stymied by Congress.