TRANSITION OBAMA AND SOROS
WERE PLAYERS TO DESTABILIZE RUSSIA
033117
US
President Barack Obama and George Soros of course was a very prominent player in efforts
to do the same thing to destabilize Russia and other countries with
these 'color revolutions',” revealed
the United States’ involvement in the Ukrainian crisis from its outset and
admitted that the United States “had brokered a deal to transition power in
Ukraine.” George
Soros, the man who opened his checkbook in 2008 and 2012 for Barack Obama’s
presidential campaign and is estimated to have poured millions of dollars into
Obama’s coffers, made his hundreds of billions of dollars primarily from the
same type of international currency manipulation that landed the five banks
into trouble. Had Attorney General Loretta Lynch sought indictments against
banking executives, any defense lawyer worth his or her salt would have brought
up the fact that Soros, Obama’s «money bags», had evaded prosecution for the
very same crimes for decades. The cries of uneven application of the law would
have been shouted from defense tables at U.S. court houses around the United
States.
Soros’s currency
manipulation scheming saw its heyday during the Asian financial crisis of the
late 1990s. It was during a time when Soros’s friend, Bill Clinton, occupied
the White House. Although Soros’s currency exchange scams rocked stock
exchanges around the Pacific Rim, there was no attempt by Clinton’s Justice
Department to indict Soros, an emigre from Hungary, to justice. One of the
worst-hit countries from Soros’s currency manipulation was Malaysia, which saw
its ringgit plummet in value. Malaysian
Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamed thundered that Soros was part of an
international Jewish bankers’ conspiracy to attack the Malaysian economy. Mohamed said, «We
do not want to say that this is a plot by the Jews, but in reality it is a Jew
who triggered the currency plunge, and coincidentally Soros is a Jew.» Mohamed
was condemned for «anti-Semitic» remarks but he was not the only leader to
charge Soros with the very same currency speculation that recently landed the
«Big 6» banks into criminal trouble. Soros’s short-selling the Thai baht
resulted in the government
of Prime Minister Chavalit Yongchaiyudh calling Soros an «economic war
criminal.»
In 1992, Soros
dumped £10 billion based on insider information that the pound would be
devalued after Britain’s withdrawal from the European Exchange Rate Mechanism.
Soros became known as «the Man who broke the Bank of England.» Soros’s attack
on pound sterling caused the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Norman Lamont, to
borrow £15 billion with an overall cost to Her Majesty’s Treasury of £3.4
billion. A few years earlier, in 1988, Soros was convicted of insider trading
by the French Bourse regulatory authority. Soros had enough insider information
that it enabled him to buy sizable chunks of the shares of four major French
companies: Société Générale, Indo-Suez Bank, Paribas, and the Compagnie
Générale d'Électricité. Soros’s conviction on insider trading was upheld by the
European Court of Human Rights in 2006 and the multi-billionaire’s appeal of
its earlier decision was rejected in 2011.
Soros’s influence
not only extends over the Justice Department’s decision not to prosecute
individual bankers for currency manipulation but also Obama’s foreign policy. Soros’s Open Society
Institute and Foundation, as well as his generous gift, some would say bribe,
of $100 million to Human Rights Watch and his sponsorship, along with the U.S. Agency
for International Development (USAID)-funded National Endowment for Democracy
(NED), of a number of Eastern and Central European front organizations has
given the global hedge fund tycoon an inordinate amount of influence over U.S.
foreign policy. Soros’s fingerprints on manipulation of political parties,
media organizations and web sites, «civil society» groups, and governments,
sometimes accomplished in league with Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, the
operations of which Soros inherited from the Central Intelligence Agency, can
be seen in «color revolutions» from Georgia and Ukraine to Macedonia and
Serbia.
Soros has
supported the independence of Kosovo, the U.S. and NATO protectorate that
recently launched terrorist attacks on neighboring Macedonia from its soil.
Kosovo and its U.S. military base at Camp Bondsteel serve as logistics points
for the allegedly banned Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA), of which Kosovo Foreign
Minister Hashim Thaci was once the chief, to attempt to stir up ethnic
Albanians who are working with the Soros-funded opposition to overthrow the
government of Prime Minister Nikola Gruevski.
The United
States, perhaps representing the interests of Soros and his cabal of «democracy
manipulators», was quiet as Macedonia discovered U.S. passports among the dead
KLA terrorists found after their foray from Kosovo into the Macedonian town of
Kumanovo. The recent attempt to force a revolution in Macedonia was not without
the familiar Soros «theme.» As anti-government protesters teemed through the
central square of Skopje, a female employee of the Soros-financed Helsinki
Committee for Human Rights in Macedonia applied a heavy amount of red lipstick
on herself and then proceeded to plant a kiss on the riot shield of a
policeman. The attempt to stage a Kiev-like «Maidan Revolution» in Skopje
became known as the «Lipstick Revolution» as Soros-financed media transmitted
the photograph of the kiss imprint to web sites and news organizations around
the world. In every case where the Soros organization engages in «democracy
manipulation», the Obama-appointed U.S. ambassadors are willing accomplices.
This was the case in Kiev with Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt – and his boss and
friend Victoria Nuland, the chief of the State Department’s Europe/Eurasia
bureau -- in Skopje with Ambassador Jess Baily, and in a number of other
countries, from Algeria to Zimbabwe and Mongolia to Moldova.
Soros is a
supporter of U.S. and European Union economic sanctions on Russia. However,
Soros is also a keen manipulator of economic crises and he has taken advantage
of artificial crisis brought about by Western sanctions against Russia to make
money on investments designed to bypass Russian gas pipeline projects, such as
the Turkish Stream project that is to bring gas from Russia to Turkey, Greece,
Macedonia, Serbia, and Hungary. Soros’s financial support for the «Lipstick
revolutionaries» in Macedonia is a clear attempt to dislodge that country from
the Turkish Stream deal. Meanwhile, Soros and his close friend and business
associate, Nathaniel Rothschild, have virtually purchased the nation of
Montenegro, which, along with Croatia, are being dangled as alternate source of
gas from U.S. tankers distributing it from new offshore gas terminals to be
built in the Adriatic Sea. Oil and gas exploration companies, in which Soros
has vested interests, are drilling in pristine Montenegro and Croatian waters.
With Mr. Soros, the so-called defender of freedom, liberty, and the
environment, comes phony staged revolutions, inter-ethnic bloodshed and civil
wars, and the specter of off-shore platforms, fossil fuel marine terminals,
supertankers polluting idyllic maritime regions, from the Adriatic coast to the
Gulf of Mexico and the Alaskan Arctic North to Alberta prairies.
Soros’s
domination of the Obama administration can be seen in Obama’s selections for
not only Cabinet-level positions but, more importantly, in the secondary and
tertiary levels of government where policy is produced. It is at these levels
where Soros’s minions concoct foreign, economic, and defense policies that are
indistinguishable from those of Soros. However, the Justice Department dared
not indict individual bankers for currency manipulation. Had it done so, it
would have also had to indict its true master, Mr. Soros.
US President
Barack Obama’s recent interview with CNN’s Fareed Zakaria reveals the
United States’ involvement in the Ukrainian crisis from its outset
and that the country worked directly with Ukrainian right-wing fascist
groups, experts told Sputnik.
interview
with CNN, Obama admitted that the United States “had brokered a deal
to transition power in Ukraine.”
“Obama’s statement is reiterating something that the world public opinion
already knew — the US was involved in the coup of [ex-Ukrainian
President] Viktor Yanukovych from the start. History shows us that the US has
overthrown numerous governments in Latin America, Asia and Africa and
replaced them with leaders that ruled with a fascist ideology that
proved useful for Washington’s geopolitical interests,” independent
researcher and writer Timothy Alexander Guzman told Sputnik.
Yanukovych’s
decision to not sign an association agreement with the European Union
in late 2013 triggered a mass wave of protests across Ukraine,
culminating in the February 2014 coup. Following the transition
of power, Kiev forces launched military operation against those who
refused to recognize the legitimacy of the new government.
Guzman
claimed that during the Ukrainian conflict, Washington and its NATO allies
worked directly with right-wing Ukrainian Fascist groups, including the
neo-Nazi inspired Right Sector militia. International law professor at the
University of Illinois College of Law Francis Boyle shares a similar
opinion, also arguing also that Obama’s approach to Ukraine is no
different to the neoconservative approach of former US national
security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski, or political scientist Samuel
Huntington’s “clash of civilizations” philosophy.
“I
think he [Obama] has made it very clear that he is going to continue
to take a Brzezinski hard-lined approach toward Ukraine and Russia
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense
for Russia and Ukraine, Evelyn Farkas appeared on MSNBC's "Morning
Joe" and was asked about the article. Farkas, who left the Obama
administration in 2015, told Mika Brzezinski that she had encouraged former colleagues
still working in the administration and “people on the Hill” to take part in
the effort to preserve intelligence and intelligence sources:.
So I became very worried because not
enough was coming out into the open and I knew that there was more. We have
very good intelligence on Russia. So then I had talked to some of my former
colleagues and I knew that they were also trying to help get information to the
Hill. and that there are not going
to be any compromises at all, and effectively he expects President
Putin to throw in a towel, capitulate, whatever, it does not appear
to me there is any ground for negotiations in light of what
President Obama at least said publicly,” he said in an email
to Sputnik.
Boyle
also stated that the United States may already be sending covert offensive
military equipment to Ukraine, despite Washington’s claims that it
provides Kiev only with non-lethal aid. The expert also claimed that
Obama’s ignorance of the Minsk agreements and of Russian President
Vladimir Putin’s proposals to negotiate the conflict peacefully, indicates
that Washington is going to continue with its aggressive policy
in Ukraine.
“How
can Russia tolerate this gang of Nazis in Kyiv [Kiev] setting
up shop right there on the borders of Russia, and being armed,
equipped and supplied by NATO? Of course, Russia cannot tolerate that,”
Boyle concluded, adding that the Unites States itself would not tolerate such
threats close to its borders.
“The very fact that Obama feels he needs to comment on [the] US
direct role in the regime change [in Ukraine] and on Putin’s response
over Crimea in this manner, rather than calling Putin a Hitler
with well thought out expansionist designs, as has become the
norm in the US, speaks for itself: perhaps, the White House is
finally coming to the view that it needs to come to its senses
and negotiate with Moscow,” Vlad Sobell, a professor at New York
University’s Prague campus stated.
US
President Barack Obama, in an interview with CNN’s Fareed Zakaria,
explained that the United States “brokered a deal to transition power
in Ukraine.” The US President said that Russian President Vladimir Putin
made his decision to legally annex Crimea “not because of some grand
strategy, but essentially because he was caught off-balance by the
protests in the Maidan.”
In
late 2013 a decision by Ukraine then-President Viktor Yanukovych
to avoid signing an association agreement with the European Union triggered
mass protests across Ukraine, dubbed Maidan, culminating in the
February coup. Following the coup and a rise in aggressive nationalism
in the country, Crimea seceded by referendum from Ukraine and
rejoined Russia in March 2014.
Pepe
Escobar, a correspondent for Asia Times, Hong Kong, who has closely
followed developments in Ukraine, told Sputnik of his belief that
every independent observer, including himself, “had known from the
beginning those $5 billion, [US Assistant Secretary of State] Victoria
Nuland’s number, over the years unleashed to boost ‘freedom’
in Ukraine one day would come to fruition. ” And Putin was not
‘caught off-balance’,” Escobar added. “Russian intelligence knew in a few
hours that Maidan would be replicated in Crimea, so the Kremlin acted
swiftly,” he stated.
Professor Sobell claims that “Mr. President [Obama] should be aware that
Yanukovych fled [Ukraine] because he had solid reasons to fear
for his life. The hallowed Maidan was not a peaceful democratic regime
change, as it was presented in Western media, but a violent putsch
complete with murderous acts by hired assassins.”
Sobell
states that unnamed EU officials affirm that on February 20 snipers
shot both demonstrators and police dead, in order to provoke chaos.
These crimes, he continued, are not being investigated by Kiev’s
“democratic — Western values” regime or its Western sponsors, as “today it
is ok to install a Nazi-driven regime by these means and then demand
that Western tax- payers support it.”
According
to Escobar, the way the Ukrainian coup will be perceived “all
across the Global South is […] another US regime change operation, using
local patsies.”
Commenting
on the recent increase in hostilities between Kiev and
independence supporters in the southeast of Ukraine, Sobell said the
situation has changed in favor of the Donbas militia.
“Washington knows it and knows that they must either compromise, start
genuine negotiations with Moscow and separatists, or escalate support
for the Nazi regime by supplying it with arms. This would lead
to major escalation of the conflict – at this point we cannot
rule out that Obama will opt of this,” Sobell insisted.
Russia’s
relations with the West deteriorated sharply in 2014,
following Crimea’s reunification with Russia and the start
of the ongoing military conflict in Ukraine. The United States and
its allies accused Moscow of interfering in Ukraine’s internal
affairs and imposed several rounds of economic sanctions, targeting
Russia’s energy, banking, and military sectors, as well as several
high-ranking individuals.
No comments:
Post a Comment