TRANSITION OBAMA AND SOROS
WERE PLAYERS TO DESTABILIZE RUSSIA
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.