Home

A federally-registered independent political party

Follow the CEC on Facebook Follow @cecaustralia on Twitter Follow the CEC on Google +


Follow the CEC on Soundcloud












Soros Sponsored the Genocide Agenda Which Orszag Now Proposes

May 19, 2009 (LPAC)--Led by Budget Director Peter Orszag and chief economic advisor Lawrence Summers, the Obama Administration is demanding trillions of dollars be cut from health care for the elderly, the poor, and the sick, as lives not worth preserving.

Billionaire British imperial agent George Soros, infamous as head of the global narcotics lobby, was a main sponsor and shaper of the recent years' campaign to gain acceptance for the euthanasia agenda now thrust forward by the Administration.

Soros spelled out his genocide campaign in a speech at Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center, on Nov. 30, 1994. He described the "Project on Death in America" which he was about to launch, and which would be based at that hospital/medical school.

In this speech, Soros stated his companion goals of legalizing narcotics, and ending life-saving medical care for the elderly and other useless eaters. He made clear the moral premise of his euthanasia policy, by explaining how he killed his mother. And he stated exactly how he intended to subvert and overthrow the American commitment to saving human lives, by inflitrating his own paid and trained agents throughout the nation's medical education centers.

Terminating Mom

In his 1994 New York speech, Soros said that he offered to help his mother kill herself, but she refused, and when she was unconscious, he withdrew food from her, and she died about a week later.

As he put it, his mother "had joined the Hemlock Society and had at hand a means of doing away with herself. I asked her if she needed my help; I offered it, although I wasn't particularly keen to do it. But I would have helped her because I felt that I owed it to her. At the point of decision, however, she did not want to take her own life."

He continued, "She lost consciousness and lingered for another seven to ten days before dying.... We weren't forced by lack of financial resources to put her into a hospital where medical intervention may well have kept her much longer in a state of limbo between living and dying. Just by giving her food, the process could have been unnecessarily prolonged."

Terminating Medicine

Soros attacked the concept of treating disease and saving lives. If patients die sooner, it will save resources. Families should be able to kill patients, he stressed, even without the patients' consent:

"This emphasis on treating disease, instead of providing care, has altered the practice of medicine. People live longer, surviving four or five illnesses before dying. But the health care bill grows with every illness. Our success has also brought other unintended consequences. We have created a medical culture that is so intent on curing disease and prolonging life that it fails to provide support in that inevitable phase of life -- death. Advances in high technology interventions have contributed to this weakness in our medical system, deluding doctors and patients alike into believing that the inevitable can be delayed almost indefinitely.... We should consider laws that permit next of kin to decide to forgo life sustaining medical interventions even when a patient's wishes are not known. The government may have to help family members financially so that they can take care of dying persons at home by the least expensive means. Aggressive, life-prolonging interventions, which may at times go against the patient's wishes, are much more expensive than proper care for the dying.... [With] physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia ... I cannot but approve. But I must emphasize that I am speaking in my personal capacity and not on behalf of the Board of the Project on Death in America."

How would the Project rapidly spread a culture of death?

Soros laid it out: "The first major program is to establish a number of faculty scholarships. We hope to identify outstanding faculty and clinicians who are committed to the Project's goals and to support them in their work of developing new models for the care of the dying and new approaches to the education of health professionals about the care of dying patients and their families. The scholars ... will become the academic leaders on this issue, the role models, and mentors to future generations of health professionals.... In three years we will have a leader and role model in place in one-fourth of the country's medical schools."

The Soros Project on Death in America (PDIA) immediately took the lead in a partnernship with the Robert Wood Johnson foundation and others to promote euthanasia, assisted suicide, doping in place of curing, etc. As the Project itelf explained, "In 1995 the PDIA joined forces with the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the Nathan Cummings Foundation, the Rockefeller Family Office, and the Commonwealth Fund to form Grantmakers Concerned with Care at the End of Life."

Nine years after the Project's startup, the Boston Globe reported (Nov. 9, 2003) the results: "The Project on Death in America, financed by billionaire George Soros and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, poured more than $200 million over the last decade into end-of-life programs and research."

A typical public policy discussion of this Soros-led enterprise was the March 12, 1996 conference of the "Last Act" organization, in Arlington, Virginia, with three Soros-paid speakers, Kathleen Foley, Michelle Ervin, and Barbara Koenig. The meeting was designed around strategy proposals by the founder of the Hastings Center, Daniel Callahan, including this gem:

"Establish working relationships with educators in secondary school systems, particularly those who teach family life or health, aimed at making the vocabulary of death and dying more natural." The example used was the Soros-funded "Grief at School Program."

We note that today, Peter Orszag and his entourage are intimately attached to the same Hastings Center for euthansia action.

Did Dope Dollars Foot the Bill?

The narcotics reference in the Soros 1994 speech raises the question: Has the Soros death agenda been financed by proceeds from drug trafficking?

He stated that "our actions have unintended consequences. Nowhere are they more glaring than in the war on drugs. By treating drug abuse as a crime we have created crime, corruption and violence which are much more destructive than drug abuse by itself."

This November 1994 speech, kicking off the euthanasia campaign, came only three months after a $70-$80 million personal investment by Soros had completed the half-billion-dollar takeover by Soros and his henchmen, the Gilinski family, of the Banco de Colombia and the Eagle National Bank of Miami. These two, the Columbian parent and the U.S. subsidiary, were identified by the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration as two of the world's main conduits for dope money laundering. The chairman of the Soros Banco de Colombia, Jaime Gilinski, has been nailed in qualified Russian and Canadian counterterror reports for using billions in cocaine revenue to buy up Russian resort properties, trading cocaine for automatic weapons and surface-to-air missiles that went to narcoterrorists inside Colombia.

Thus, in his 1994 New York address, Soros coldly propounded the two halves of the genocide agenda: euthansia, and the doping of the population to accept its own death.


Citizens Electoral Council © 2016
Best viewed at 1024x768.
Please provide technical feedback to webadmin@cecaust.com.au
All electoral content is authorised by National Secretary, Craig Isherwood, 595 Sydney Rd, Coburg VIC 3058.