When Rachel Ehrenfeld learned about the platforms of George Soros

Ehrenfeld, who once wrote about Islamic finance of terrorism, was one of the first people to be aware of the bad platforms advocated by millionaire George Soros in the 1990s, one of which was to get drugs legalized in the USA, if anywhere:

Ehrenfeld first became aware of Soros’s plans in the 1990s due to her research on drug addiction and drug trafficking (Soros’s first foray into American public policy was drug legalization). “I knew that drug legalization would cause a massive increase in the number of drug addicts,” writes Ehrenfeld.

“Moreover, I recalled that enabling easy access to narcotics was mentioned in the ‘Soviet Military Encyclopedia’ as an important weapon during so-called peacetime. It was recommended because when easily accessible, narcotic use spreads like fire, undermining the targeted country’s society, economy, and political integrity,” she continues.

In February 1995, as result of her expertise on drug issues, Ehrenfeld found herself invited to a dinner at Soros’s home in New York City. He posed as open-minded and prepared to debate the drug issue, so she decided to correct him when he praised the Swiss. (Ehrenfeld had just returned from Switzerland, where she met with experts involved in a government-sponsored project to supply addicts with heroin, morphine and free needles—an experiment which proved a disaster.)

“[P]olitely, I interrupted Soros, pointing out he was ill-informed. He seemed stunned that I dared contradict him and forcefully repeated his praise of the Swiss. When I insisted he was wrong, the angry Soros turned around and left the big living room. The other guests, who until then stood around us, listening, moved very fast away from me. The scene reminded me of something Woody Allen would have created,” she writes.

Well those other guests were clearly as much a disgrace as Soros himself was being. But if you think that was bad:

Ehrenfeld recognized that Soros was determined to change America’s drug policy. In a Feb. 7, 1996 Wall Street Journal op-ed, she cautioned that Soros’s “sponsorship unified the movement to legalize drugs and gave it the respectability and credibility it lacked.” She also warned that if Soros went unchallenged, he would alter the political landscape in America. She even visited senators and Republican mega-donors to tell them Soros must be countered. Nobody took action, she said.

Not even Newt Gingrich, who if memory serves, once met with Yasir Arafat? Again, we have an example of how RINOs impeccably managed to lead to a most dire situation via ignorance. And, in case you're wondering, yes, Soros bankrolled Israel's enemies:

Q: Do you agree with comments by people like attorney Alan Dershowitz, who has said that George Soros has done more than anyone to turn Americans against Israel?

A: [Former U.S. Ambassador to Israel] David Friedman also has said that nobody has done more damage to Israel than George Soros. He’s funded the New Israel Fund, the Palestinians, Birzeit University, anti-Israel organizations in Israel. I quote Soros saying tribalism is not for him. So he doesn’t live in Israel. But he did everything in order to destabilize the place.

Q: Soros always cries antisemitism when he’s attacked. What’s the best way to undermine such a defense?

A: When people like Benjamin Netanyahu, David Friedman, Dershowitz and myself keep telling people this is not antisemitism. Unless you say that he’s Jewish and this is why he’s doing it. The religion he was born into has nothing to do with it. Soros says he’s agnostic.

Since the book came out, several Jewish publications have refused to publish either excerpts from the book or review the book. I’ve received hate mail following interviews, many from Jews. It’s worrisome.

The situation she describes is very much like how ultra-Orthodox clans rallied round abusive figures like Nechemya Weberman and Malka Leifer. So the leftists who're bound to be those ostracizing anything to do with her book better not claim they're any better than the Haredi extremists.

Q: Are you worried for Israel given that his son, Alexander, who’s slated to take over, has expressed more interest in Israel and Judaism than his father?

A: Alex is a big supporter of Jewish causes if by Jewish causes you mean anti-Israeli organizations.

It was interesting to see in the Wall Street Journal announcement with Alex Soros in June—I wouldn’t call it an interview, it was more a glorified PR ad—it showed a picture of Alex with his father at his bar mitzvah. I saw that as really a threat: “You criticize what I do, you will be accused of antisemitism.”

Alex has been trying to increase the division between the observant Orthodox and the … secular in Israel. He’s said that Jews in America are still conveying their support to Israel no matter what, and they don’t understand when they are supporting Israel, they are supporting apartheid. Soros, his father, was the first one to support the apartheid conference in South Africa.

Why they are so bent on hating Israel and trying to destabilize the Jewish state is beyond me. They are not the first self-hating Jews. Unfortunately, they have a lot of influence.

That's what makes them such a bad lot. If Soros Sr. was bad, we can only guess just how much Soros Jr. will be, especially now that he's using the antisemitism card just as much. This is practically why I'm furious at Haredi extremists, since they've used similar tactics, and it's only undermined the ability to combat self-haters properly.

It's good Ehrenfeld's shed light on what's wrong with Soros and company. But bad there's so many far-left Jewish Americans who're turning their back on her research.