US Supreme Court hands a defeat to Soros

Sun Aug 16 21:15:09 PDT 2020

On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 12:08:33AM -0300, Punk-BatSoup-Stasi 2.0 wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Soros is globalist, and willing to destroy nations to affect his agenda, e.g. Ukraine.
> 
> 
> 	soros is a jew-US nazi. Ukraine was one of the latest targets of the pentagon. Oops. The jew soros is an agent of the pentagon. Who would have though that...
> 
> 	also, as a jew-pentagon-US nazi, soros is the best friend of trump and accomplices
> 
> 
> > 
> > The "pound me too" #metoo was indeed a farce, at least after it died, yet it was a powerful and effective tool for a time period, causing many to suffer/ lose their jobs etc, unjustly.
> 
> 	hollywood is a key pentagon propaganda outlet, and the WHORES who want to 'work' there know it. So it's a double farce. WHORES whining because they are treated according to their nature, and pretending to have any 'moral high ground' when they actually are pentagon...whores.
> 
> 
> > One thing Soros is strongly opposed to is the USA's "anti sex-trafficking" laws.
> 
> 	bullshit

Ahah!  Finally a little blunt honesty in your position.  Well done and excuse my condescension - previously it appeared that you had completely misread the quote which you quoted, now rather than appearing to misread that quote, you are challenging it.

Challenging a quote is an obviously more constructive approach to responding to that quote as though you have misread that quote, which is what you did.  A simple ACK can go a long way to more constructive communication and for the hope to actually achieve the outcomes you profess to want.

Your change from initially saying "Soros is a feminazi, anti-sex cunt. Exactly like you" to now saying that "Soros does NOT oppose the USA's "anti sex-trafficking" laws", is now not what we can label as "a shift of ground", since now you are consistent in your position, which is more useful to constructive communication.

Now that we got _that_ confusion cleaned up, we may usefully continue:

You appear to me to be one LAZY ARSED N.GGER, Juan :)  Let me explain: I originally posted a 'tube vid AND an article link to OAN, the One America News network, and I quoted FROM THAT video:

   "Open Society Foundations opposed US federal prostitution and sex trafficking laws"

Those double quote chars at both the start and end of that quote, should have been the give away that this was a quote from the previously linked article.

In the face of this quote from OAN, and in the face of the mixup of what was quoted/ written and clarified since then, you turn around with your pithy "bullshit" non-reply.

How lazy is that!

You failed to do even a cursory Yandex search to see if there was any substance to OAN's quote, and instead take the "bold" (actually bloody lazy) approach of "total dismissal" of OAN's quote, as though that settles it.  Which of course does not settle the issue, nor did you add anything to the substance of the discussion except to highlight what a lazy arsed muffa you just were.

So I had the assumption in the OP that OAN are NOT such lazy arsed muffas and that they value their reputation AND their funding (adverts, sponsorship or whatever they get) sufficiently high enough that they would fact check such an amazing claim made in these highly turbulent times against such a polarising and controversial figure as George Soros!  In the face of the fake news media including CNN, NYT, MSNBC, ABC, etc etc, it is perhaps unwise to make such assumptions, cest la vie.

Since you laid down the gauntlet ("bullshit") thus implicitly asking me to provide verification beyond "it's a quote from OAN", and we've come this far, and I'm feeling an extraordinarily massive bout of humility, I shall do the immense task of a quick Yoogle search for us all:

 https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=soros+opposition+to+usa+%22sex+trafficking%22+laws

   https://khn.org/morning-breakout/dr00032746/
   Open Society Institute Files Lawsuit Against USAID Challenging Policy Requiring Pledge Against Commercial Sex Work
   The Open Society Institute, which was founded by billionaire financier George Soros, on Friday filed a lawsuit against USAID over a U.S. policy requiring that recipients of federal HIV/AIDS service grants pledge to oppose commercial sex work, the Wall Street Journal reports (Harwood, Wall Street Journal, 9/23). The Bush administration in June notified U.S. organizations providing HIV/AIDS-related services in other countries that they must sign a pledge opposing commercial sex work and sex trafficking to be considered for federal funding. ...

   https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322192478_Decriminalization_of_Prostitution_The_Soros_Effect
   Decriminalization of Prostitution: The Soros Effect

   https://www.theepochtimes.com/soros-charity-should-have-to-oppose-prostitution-to-receive-us-grants-supreme-court-told_3339879.html
   Soros Charity Should Have to Oppose Prostitution to Receive US Grants, Supreme Court Told
   The Trump administration urged the Supreme Court May 5 to leave in place a legal provision that requires foreign organizations receiving U.S. government grants to oppose prostitution and sex trafficking.
   https://www.theepochtimes.com/t-supreme-court
   Oral arguments were heard by the high court telephonically for the second time in history in the case cited as USAID v. Alliance for Open Society International Inc. (AOSI). Chief Justice John Roberts announced at the outset of the hearing that Justice Elena Kagan recused herself and wouldn’t be participating.
   ... “Criminalization of sex work compromises sex workers’ health and safety by driving sex work underground,” the OSF website states.
   https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/explainers/understanding-sex-work-open-society
   ... Congress imposed a funding condition that requires recipients of grants under the statute “to have a policy opposing prostitution and sex trafficking, which Congress found are coercive practices that spread HIV/AIDS and degrade women and girls.”

   https://humanumreview.com/articles/prostituted-people-are-the-walking-dead-so-why-does-amnesty-international-advocate-for-the-sex-industry
   Prostituted People are the Walking Dead: So Why Does Amnesty International Advocate for the Sex Industry?
   Few public policy issues have been as quickly and as universally acknowledged as the criminal phenomenon of human trafficking. Twenty years ago, there was no international legal definition of the problem. Then in 2000, the United Nations (UN) and the United States (US) adopted, respectively, a comprehensive convention and a landmark law against sexual exploitation, forced labor, and contemporary slavery. Harrowing accounts of abuse reported by faith-based and feminist organizations were the main motivation compelling these new rules in both the UN and the US.
   An insane twist has entered the politics of human trafficking, though: Despite massive education on its harm and criminality, prostitution, which openly commodifies women, is today promoted by organizations such as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and other groups within the United Nations System. The emergence of a lobby to normalize and legalize the buying and selling of human beings—the basic transaction at work in prostitution— demonstrates how the Left’s obsession with sexual libertinism (its ultimate yardstick of personal freedom) rationalizes the denial of human dignity to others, including the poor, homeless, displaced, addicted, coerced, vulnerable majority who comprise the greater part of prostituted people. ...

   https://catwinternational.org/press/catw-ed-responds-to-the-new-york-times-article-on-soros/
   On Oct. 17, The New York Times published “George Soros Transfers Billions to Open Society Foundations.” The article neglected to highlight OSF’s position on full decriminalization of the sex trade. In response, our executive director wrote a letter to the editor that remains unpublished by the newspaper. The full text of the letter follows below.
   https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/17/business/george-soros-open-society-foundations.html
   Dear Editor:
   While George Soros claims to combat “dark forces,” (“George Soros Transfers Billions to Open Society Foundations,” Oct. 17, 2017), his footprint promoting commercial sexual exploitation, including prostitution, is transparent. From Amnesty International to Black Lives Matter, from Colombia to South Africa, Soros heavily funds groups advocating for the decriminalization of the sex trade, including pimping and brothel-owning. Conversely, women’s rights organizations and survivors are pushing to pass laws worldwide that solely decriminalize prostituted individuals and provide them services.

[----THIS position sounds at least superficially rational.----]

   It is illogical for Soros to contend that governments can protect the exploited by decriminalizing their exploiters. Vibrant democracies rest on governments’ political will to uphold all individuals’ dignity and equality. Soros should understand that buying sexual access to women’s bodies is an unfettered exercise of violent power and control exercised by those who have choices over those who have few or none. If Soros succeeds in efforts to shield the multi-billion dollar sex industry, fueled by sex traffickers and sex buyers, generations of the most disenfranchised — overwhelmingly women of color — won’t stand a chance at enjoying their human rights or the promise of democracy.
   Taina Bien-Aimé
   Executive Director

And the following I reflexively closed the browser tab on, since it shows Soros in a good light, before realising that ignoring the positives is biased in a way which would be self-defeating to the truly "conscientious for positive change":

   https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2013/april-web-only/dont-make-george-soros-oppose-prostitution.html
    Don't Make George Soros Oppose Prostitution
   The government's ideology requirement at question in USAID v. Open Society International is dangerous.
   Stanley Carlson-ThiesApril 17, 2013
   George Soros, founder of the Alliance for Open Society, wants to help prostitutes and other sex workers. The thing he won't accept is a government gag order when it comes to free speech and conscience rights. And he shouldn't.
   This is what is at stake in USAID v. Alliance for Open Society, which is slated for oral argument at the U.S. Supreme Court on April 22. The case is complicated, but concerned Christians and religious groups should take note of—and support—Soros' counterintuitive position, even if they disagree with his stance on prostitution. The ramifications for faith-based organizations whose views diverge from the current popular consensus are huge.
   http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/agency-for-international-development-v-alliance-for-open-society-international-inc/
    The messy case involves the Leadership Act of 2003, which provides funding for the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), the federal government's massive, George W. Bush-initiated commitment to fight HIV/AIDS. The Act takes a comprehensive approach, seeking to reduce risky sexual behavior. Accordingly, Congress required organizations seeking funding for HIV prevention services overseas to have a policy "explicitly opposing prostitution and sex trafficking."
    http://www.pepfar.gov/
    http://sblog.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/12-10-Petition.pdf
    Organizations like Soros's Alliance for Open Society long have regarded the requirement to be counterproductive, making it more difficult for them to reach prostitutes, who are both particularly vulnerable and disproportionately likely to spread the disease. They argued that the government overreached by requiring them to affirm a particular commitment (rather than just be silent) and for that commitment to be required for the entire organization and not just for the program of services funded by the government.

> >  - There may actually be real problems which actual humans face, and which Soros profits from, and which the USA's "anti sex-trafficking" laws attempt to handle.
> 
> 
> 	lawl - Have you and Jim Bell already liberated iran and cuba? Don't forget to bring your super quantum super secret ray, your bible, and coca cola!
> 
> 
> > 
> >  - More superficially, to oppose "anti sex-trafficking" laws, at least to do so "with no nuance or specificity", is surely unlikely to gain the needed widespread support for such a proposed change ?
> 
> 
> 	what proposed change

You're the one opposing the USA's "anti sex-trafficking" laws.  However, although I won't hold you to a position completely free of nuance and apparently free of much at all in the way of thought, perhaps the obvious encouragement is "let's lift our game"...