I was going to go through blog after blog where a mention was possible and show screenshots of "no post found with the term Soros".
I took the blog Assorted Retorts first, and I actually found one.
Here is the post and the relevant passage:
Are Dinos Feeling Squished in the Bible?
This post - before I quote the passage - actually is a comment on a video, so 13:14 is a time signature in it and the next words in citation marks are a quote from it, giving context for my comment. The full context for those not seeing the video is, the speaker Viced Rhino claims Creationists do not make any discoveries. It is then qualified to "interesting enough to make headlines" and here is where I bump in:
13:14 "interesting enough to make headlines"
You don't know which interests own the mainstream media, right?
Soros is one of them, and he's behind next year's new Irish referendum which he hopes will bring abortion to Ireland.
Do you think HE would like such a thing to be known?
Or the four years since I started doing the research debunking geological column, as far as palaeontology is concerned, I have not been easily refuted and after that ignored, I have been NEITHER refuted NOR taken note of by the relevant specialists.
Here is a correspondence with Karoo:
Correspondence of Hans Georg Lundahl : Contacting Karoo about superposition of layers and fossils
That was 2 years ago.
Here, if you read Spanish, is one with Yacoraite:
Correspondencia de Hans Georg Lundahl : Yacoraite
As you can see, it is actually one letter, from me, no answer from the Universidad Nacional de Salta.
So, my point is, Soros is involved in the Irish campaign for abortion and he owns media concerns. I do not think it too likely the media he owns would publish news that even Fox News could consider a bit too controversial. If that is "paranoid," who isn't? Is Soros "paranoid" for not liking The Alex Jones Channel?
The point is, some things are by some persons weighed with two measures. If I think of Soros' media like Soros thinks of The Alex Jones Channel, only one of us is likely to be stamped as paranoid.
Precisely, as I said elsewhere, if Jews have a certain attitude about a swastika, in reference to past history, and I have that as a Christian in reference to future history (see Apocalypse 13:18) to the number six hundred sixty six, only one of us is likely to be stamped as a phobiac. You have a diagnosis called hexakosioihexekontahexaphobia, but, despite the smaller word and easier pronunciation, psychologists have not bothered to involve a diagnosis for swastikophobia.
Well, infortunately, there are some chances psychologists and psychiatrists are more often sectarian Jews than Christians (except Protestants who are close to Seventh Day Adventist in relation to Catholicism) and those who are, are more likely to get away with an abuse of position than Christians would be. If I as a Catholic threw Muslims into Mental Hospital or even damaged them ever so little socially by making a diagnosis, supposing I had been a shrink, on the basis of those Muslims disliking the Crusades and exaggerating the extent of war crimes and exaggerating the extent of recent scandals of sex abuse among Catholic clergy, I would lose the job as a shrink no time, similmarily if I did so to Jews confusing Austrofascism and Francisco Franco with Hitler. And of course, if I were to try it with Protestants like acting an Inquisitor about hersy under the guise of psychiatric totally religiously neutral expertise. But some people do get away with similar things the other way round. Because they are likelier to try? Not necessarily, but rather, there are more things they can get away with ... except perhaps when the Catholics are very up to date ones.
But what I said about Soros is very mild compared to what I have to say about shrinks - with reference to, but little difference in, exact confession. I only considered Soros unlikely to favour a certain type of news which nevertheless I think is very good if it gets out, and I consider other owners of mainstream media, the ones he is part of and some others, have similar "attitude problems" about certain truths.
Now, I showed a research on Soros as one example, but the thing is, you can get to the "search" bar in the blog, in each blog, and type a key word, and every post where a keyword with exact same spelling (if I misspelled "Sorros" for "Soros" it wouldn't show, but I usually don't do that), every such post will come up on the search, on each of the blogs.
If some people have been visiting my blogs very often just searching and searching for material they consider damning or could even use against me in courts, well, why the trouble? There is a search bar on each blog.
Hans Georg Lundahl
Sts Perpetua and Felicitas
PS, it seems Soros is doing some good too, it seems he has shown some support for Palestinians./HGL
PPS, I just tried to find out sth about Soros involvement in media ownership, independently of my cavalier and amateurish half memory of an allegation. Guess what. There is a site dedicated to Media Ownership, it is called a Monitor (of it). The countries they do monitor are: Brazil, Cambodia, Colombia, Ghana, Mongolia, Morocco, Peru, Philippines, Serbia, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine. Not Russia, China or India, and also not South Africa or Ireland. Not Japan, no country of the Commonwealth, and not US. Only smaller and less important countries. Wonder why?/HGL
PPPS, found one possible reason. The site is funded by ... The Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) is headed by the Minister, Dr Gerd Müller, the Parliamentary State Secretaries, Mr Hans-Joachim Fuchtel and Mr Thomas Silberhorn, and the State Secretary, Dr Friedrich Kitschelt. ... In other words, the countries monitored could be such where the Germans are posing money for projects, in foreign aid. That automatically concentrates on poorer countries and excludes some big ones and rich ones./HGL
PPPPS, George Soros, on twitter promoted Michelle Gallo as pronouncing this calumny against those against Gay Marriage : "The concept first gained traction in Europe, where anti-LGBTI activists and politicians in Spain and France, among others, used the term while attempting to limit the rights of women and LGBTI persons." The phrase "attempting to limit" sounds like depriving of rights already there, while it is about opposing non-rights./HGL