[Editor’s note: The migrant caravan heading north trough Central America and Mexico to the US border is not what it seems, rather than a spontaneous migration of impoverished, desperate people, it is an entirely manufactured event financed and organised by the deep state of Zionists and Neocons that placed Trump in power.
The reason for creating this migrant movement is simple – it affords Trump the opportunity to play the tough guy who will defend America from foreigners, that is why Trump is sending the US military to the border, where they will make a song and dance of stopping the migrants and protecting the US border.
Stage managed fake bullshit, all of it, all to bolster the fortunes of a flagging, illegitimate president ahead of the midterm elections.
The Zionists have a long track record of blaming their enemies for crimes the Zionists themselves commit, and one of their most bitter enemies is George Soros, a man who has been the victim of more Zionist black propaganda than any other. So when we see stooges like Alex Jones blaming Soros for the migrant caravan, it is just further confirmation that it is really the Zionist–Neocon cabal that is responsible. Ian]
If you see anyone suggest that it’s ‘only a theory’ that Soros conspires to erode borders, flood nations with migrants, or that he’s not colluding to shape international policy; here’s evidence.
As an example of journalists whitewashing his involvement:
To the surprise of no one, Infowars’ Alex Jones also got in on the conspiracy theory, saying the caravan was an example of how Soros and others are trying to open up “large migration routes from the third-world into the first-world as part of a neo-colonialism system.”
Leaks from Soros’ ‘Open Society Foundation – International Migration Initiative (IMI)’ confirmed the theory wholesale. These are just some of the more relevant parts from one document in a massive leak:
Since its inception in 2010, IMI has gradually built portfolios around migration corridors, starting with Asia/Middle East and Central America/Mexico before adding Russia/Central Asia in mid-2013. Simultaneously, IMI made a small number of grants for projects or to organizations with a global reach. Those early “global” grants were awarded to well-established, leading organizations that cover multiple geographies and a range of thematic issues relevant to IMI’s overarching mission.
Our premise for engaging in work related to governance was that, in addition to mitigating the negative effects of enforcement, we should also be supporting actors in the field proactively seeking to change the policies, rules, and regulations that govern migration.
As our aspirations have evolved, our targets have shifted from harm reduction to more proactive solutions-based policy influencing. However, our programmatic ambitions have been tempered by the nature of our small and relatively new program. IMI has had to be selective and opportunistic, particularly at the global level, in supporting leaders in the field to push thinking on migration and better coordinate advocacy and reform efforts. We have supported initiatives, organizations, and networks whose work ties directly to our aims in the corridors.
Our grants to three organizations aimed, collectively, to fill critical knowledge gaps and facilitate dialogue (MPI), provide practical recommendations for reforming global migration governance (Columbia Global Policy Initiative), and build the capacity and networks of policymakers (Central European University’s School of Public Policy).
The Columbia Global Policy Initiative (CGPI), which hosts the secretariat for Peter Sutherland, the UN Secretary General’s Special Representative on International Migration, has been able to take advantage of momentum created by the current crisis to shape conversations about rethinking migration governance. IMI provided project support for the drafting of The Sutherland Report, which aims to set the stage for institutional reforms to global migration governance, and to break new ground on protections for migrants outside the asylum system. When we made the CGPI grant, even we were somewhat skeptical about the appetite for reform of the institutions that govern elements of migration at the international level, and the pace at which it might proceed. Nonetheless, we recognized the importance of starting this discussion, and the political capital Sutherland could leverage to bring high-level attention to the issue. This gamble has arguably paid off: as the September UN and President Obama’s summits on migrants and refugees have taken shape, Sutherland’s team has effectively drawn on work and thinking it had already done to influence the scope and deliverables of these two meetings. IMI’s access to the Sutherland team’s discussions has allowed us to keep civil society partners up-to-date on the latest developments, in order to inform advocacy and campaigning strategies prior to the events and to plan follow up actions.
So they’re actively trying to beef up migrant entitlements at the levels of the UN policy-makers and Obama’s administration, while curating corridors and supporting the groups that travel through them. It’s not a theory.
The truth is just the truth – it’s not inherently anti-Semitic or a call to violence. Claims to the contrary by ‘journalists’, who instead mock it in an attempt to bury it, are really quite disgusting.