A case in point: realclearpolitics.com
This site appears to be a source of articles on politics that hopes to help people develop a better understanding on political issues. Half of the time, this seems to be the case, however, there are exceptions.
One large target of crazy conspiracy theories is George Soros.
I have rarely seen anyone so vilified and fictionalized since Hitler (www.snopes.com/?s=george+soros) and there seems to be a very good reason for this. Soros not only has money but has consistently and quietly attempted to contribute towards the empowerment of people through democratic means by giving economic support to a wide variety of social groups. He has been so effective that regional politicians apparently consider him a threat to their consolidation of power and influence, thus we can see an interesting and varied collection of fictionalized conspiracy campaigns against the man that claim he is attempting to create a world government, alla mark of the beast and evil Jews.
See also: (www.snopes.com/politics/business/sorosferguson.asp) - (www.opensocietyfoundations.org/)
Considering this, I use references to such conspiracies as a litmus test regarding authors and sites since it is easy to verify what Soros has done or has not done.
There is one author that writes for a variety of sites, including the "realclearpolitics.com" that clearly goes on record against Soros: Caroline Glick.
First, let's take a look at who Caroline Glick is.
The first thing noticeable about Glick is that she is very much pro-Israel, in fact I would characterize her as being extremely biased in favour of Israel and it's current government under Benjamin Netanyahu. To quote one writer, regarding Glick:
( theatlantic.com/international/archive/ ... ick/8311/ )Glick is representative of a certain strain of mainly-American Jewish thinking: She believes that all criticism of Israel is illegitimate; she believes Jews who disagree with her are traitors to her cause; and she conflates the settlement movement with the entire Zionist project.
Glick was born in America but immigrated to Israel, served in its armed forces and later worked as assistant foreign policy advisor to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Glick returned to the US to earn a Master of Arts in Public Policy from Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government in 2000. (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caroline_Glick).
Glick is then very much connected to the current polices and government that is Netanyahu and expressed unreserved support for the policies, even if that support is indefensible:Glick has been consistently dishonest. In her book The Israeli Solution, she frequently cites Israeli historian Benny Morris in her own favor, but she never recounts that Morris himself admitted that genocidal crimes have been committed by the Israelis from 1948 and beyond!(veteranstoday.com/2016/03/10/the-intellectual-perversity-of-caroline-b-glick-of-the-jerusalem-post/) (huffingtonpost.com/eileen-read/the-jerusalem-post-should_b_601857.html)
So then, why would Glick (and recently Netanyahu's administration) come out against Soros – so much that Glick wrote:
and she makes unsubstantiated claims about everything from immigration in America to unisex bathrooms, alla conspiracy-style rehtoric:Black Lives Matter (BLM), which has received $650,000 from Soros-controlled groups over the past year, is a classic example of these efforts (to subvert Western democracies and make it impossible for governments to maintain order or for societies to retain their unique identities and values). Until recently, the police were universally admired in the US as the domestic equivalent of the military. (editor's note: I laughed here at Glick's obvious fictional narrative and unsubstantiated rhetoric that would make most Americans shake their head in disagreement) . . .
Law enforcement in predominantly African American communities is under assault as inherently racist.
BLM agitation, which has been accused of inspiring the murders of police in several US cities, has brought about two responses from rank and file police. First, they have been demoralized, . . . Second, their willingness to use force in situations that demand the use of force has diminished. . .The demoralization and intimidation of police is very likely to cause a steep increase in violent crimes.
However, Glick finally comes to her real reason for writing about Soros and his incredibly evil conspiracy laden network:Soros’s groups are on the ground enabling illegal immigrants to enter the US and Europe. They (Soros-sponsored groups) have sought to influence US Supreme Court rulings on illegal immigration from Mexico. They have worked with Muslim and other groups to demonize Americans and Europeans who oppose open borders. . . Soros-supported groups, for instance, stand behind the push not only for gay marriage but for unisex public bathrooms. . .
That's right – it was all about Israel from the start.As far as Israel is concerned, Soros-backed groups work to delegitimize every aspect of Israeli society as racist and illegitimate. The Palestinians are focal point of his attacks. He uses them to claim that Israel is a racist state. Soros funds moderate leftist groups, radical leftist groups, Israeli Arab groups and Palestinian groups. In various, complementary ways, these groups tell their target audiences that Israel has no right to defend itself or enforce its laws toward its non-Jewish citizens.
For more background on Netanyahu's war against Soros, consider this quote:
www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.800990while the condemnation of anti-Semitism remained, “in no way was the statement meant to delegitimize criticism of George Soros, who continuously undermines Israel’s democratically elected governments by funding organizations that defame the Jewish state and seek to deny it the right to defend itself.
I have concluded that Glick is a de facto agent provocateur of Netanyahu's administration and policies and will use both fact and fiction to support such, especially at the expense of one George Soros.
The point, which I have gone to great lengths to illustrate is that sometimes sites harbor disinformation as well as worthy pieces of writing and it is up to each reviewer to do their homework to determine if a site is promoting opinion, rumour, gossip or not.
realclearpolitics.com clearly hosts writing that is questionable opinion, bordering on gossip, whose goals are simply to promote political goals instead of fact or discussion.
I've discovered that some sites have linked to the original Glick opinion piece as a means of promoting their own highly questionable agenda, notably the now defunct theafricanspear.com, which a year ago heavily promoted disinformation, libel, gossip, conspiracy theories, etc., including a link to Glick's work.
See also: www.facebook.com/Stop.Goldman/posts/1219928681353177
for a current example of disinformation through facebook that links to theafricanspear.com.