Anarchy by design: ‘Anti-Trump’ flash mobs, Hollywood, and the Wall Street war chest

Another article written just after the election.

From 21st Century Wire

by Shawn Helton
November 17, 2016

It’s a novel scene, even for America: President Elect Donald Trump is facing an unprecedented wave of organized opposition prior to moving into the White House. While the Democratic Party are hoping to leverage these street action into votes in 2017 and 2018, the real strategy here seems to be about forging deeper narratives and creating a collective feeling of ‘disenfranchisement’ among liberal millennial. It may appear like a grassroots uprising, but upon closer inspection, there big money and big players behind it all.

Within 24 hours of the dramatic conclusion to 2016 presidential election on November 8th, highly organized flash mobs directed in part by the Democratic Party’s leading ‘community organizing’ digital platform, MoveOn.org (funded by Wall Street billionaire and top Clinton donor George Soros) spread rapidly throughout several cities across America including Oakland, Los Angeles, New York and Portland. While vitriolic anti-Trump dissent consumed some urban parts of the country, mainstream media outlets, as well as a column of Hollywood celebrities and entertainers added to the disillusionment as they took to the airwaves and social media to express their shock and emotional fears that a Trump presidency would be “the end of the world,” for some anyway.

Readers would not be amiss in questioning the true nature of the heavily coordinated color revolution-style MoveOn marches across America, as they reveal a much deeper social engineering agenda at play – one that enlists a likely coalition comprised of corporate media outlets, Silicon Valley, along with Hollywood – together peddling a highly reactionary, if not incendiary political message.

Make no mistake: this is a well-financed and concerted attempt to further divide America – along new cultural lines of identity – a division which will eventually benefit the same elite establishment which both the popular left and the popular right believe they are currently railing against.

Let’s review the impetus behind the anti-Trump protests, before discussing the unusual nature of an outright rejection of the democratic process by organized oprotesters – quietly nudged by Hollywood and media operatives…

MOVE ON: A Manufactured March On America 

For nearly a week, street protests have been promoted by the same mainstream news networks that had predicted a Hillary Clinton landslide only eight days ago.

Networks like CNN, MSNBC, the New York Times and the Washington Post are still reluctant to report how within hours of the election result, the Soros-tied NGO MoveOn.org issued a press release calling for nationwide protests. This was followed by petitions to “Abolish the Electoral College.”

In my first report discussing this potentially explosive situation unfolding across America, it was shown how “MoveOn members had created more than 200 gatherings nationwide, with the number continuing to grow…”  What this demonstrates more than anything is how the amalgamation of virtual community-based flash mobs and professional political agitators have been fostered by various Democratic party NGO’s since the early 2000’s – not only through MoveOn.org, but also through Democratic Party affiliated foundations like Answer Coalition.

In addition to Soros’s billions being poured into a near endless web of political front organization and “change agent” NGOs, other Wall Street financial institutions have backed their favorites, like Goldman Sachs and others, sponsoring the Hillary Clinton campaign and maintaining strong stakes the Clinton Foundation as well as ties to Clinton family in general. In 2015, the Washington Post reported that “Hillary Rodham Clinton and former president Bill Clinton earned in excess of $25 million for delivering 104 speeches since the beginning of 2014, a huge infusion to their net worth as she was readying for a presidential bid.”

Here we see an example of the financial nexus formed between powerful players like Soros, Wall Street’s Goldman Sachs – and America’s ‘progressive’ leftwing political establishment. Clearly, there is a high level agenda at work here, and you only need to follow the money to see who are the chief beneficiaries.

SEE ALSO: PARTNERS IN CRIME: Goldman Sachs, The Clintons & Wall Street

Some of the most notable uprisings in America include the designer social justice campaigns – all of whom have George Soros money behind them through a vast network of foundations and social front groups – like ‘The Occupy Movement‘ (aka OWS) in 2011, as well as Soros funded protests in Ferguson, Missouri in 2014, and the Black Lives Matter (BLM) street action group this past year. Each of these have a common thread – they have all  evolved into some form of violent social unrest often steered by paid provocateurs. Media outlets generally do not like to cover this side of the events because it simply doesn’t fit the favored “Left vs Right’ narrative the media loves so much. Hence, most members of the public – especially the protesters themselves – have little or no idea what is driving street violence and the ‘crisis’ narrative.

Continue reading

Advertisements

‘Stop Operation Soros’ movement begins in Macedonia

From RT

January 19, 2017

A new initiative, Stop Operation Soros (SOS), dedicated to countering the influence of American billionaire activist George Soros, has been launched in Macedonia.

In a press conference on Tuesday, the founders of the group called on all “free-minded citizens,” regardless of ethnicity or religion, to join them in the “fight against one-mindedness in the civil sector, which is devised and led by George Soros,” the Vecer newspaper reported. The movement says it will first focus on uncovering ‘subversive’ activities by Soros-funded NGOs.

According to Nikola Srbov, a columnist for pro-government news portal Kurir and co-founder of SOS, Soros-funded NGOs have monopolized civil society in Macedonia and used their position to suppress dissenting views.

“We’ve witnessed the takeover of the entire civil sector and its abuse and instrumentalization to meet the goals of one political party. That is unacceptable and goes beyond the principles of civic organizing,” Srbov said at the press conference.

“The Open Society Foundation, operating under the Soros umbrella, used its funding and personnel to support violent processes in Macedonia. It has monopolized the civil society sector, pushing outside any organization which disagrees with the Soros ideology,” he stated.

Another co-founder, Cvetin Cilimanov, editor-in-chief of the state-run MIA news agency, accused Soros’s Open Society Foundations of undermining Macedonian sovereignty by working not only with the opposition center-left SDSM party, but also with outside interests. By cooperating with foreign embassies and organizations such as USAID, Cilimanov believes Soros-backed groups have interfered in the political process of Macedonia.

“This is unacceptable and has largely contributed to a feeling in the public that the traditional relations of partnership Macedonia enjoyed with some countries are being undermined,” Cilimanov told journalists.

A third founder of the initiative and editor-in-chief of the Republika news portal, Nenad Mircevski, declared that the group would work towards the “de-Soros-ization” of Macedonia, echoing a speech made by former prime minister and leader of the ruling VMRO-DPMNE party Nikola Gruevski in December. In the speech, Gruevski accused foreign powers and Soros-backed organizations of meddling in Macedonian politics.

Opposition figures have expressed concern at the rhetoric used by Gruevski, fearing the start of a crackdown on dissent and advocacy groups.

The Open Society Foundation (OSF) was set up by Hungarian-born Soros between the mid-1980s to early 1990s with the stated aim of helping former Eastern bloc countries transition from communism. However, aside from its support for progressive causes such as drug policy reform, the OSF has also been involved in political activities and Soros publically supported the violent overthrow of the legitimately-elected government in Ukraine during the ‘Euromaidan’ revolution. This has earned him the ire of Russian authorities, which in 2015 banned Soros and his foundations as a threat to national security.

Soros and his foundations have come under scrutiny elsewhere as well. In an interview with the internet portal 888.hu in December, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban said that 2017 would bring about “the extrusion of George Soros and the forces symbolized by him.” Orban has accused Soros of undermining European borders and values by helping facilitate the flow of refugees and asylum seekers from the Middle East and elsewhere. During a Reddit AMA (Ask Me Anything), WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange also blasted the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project, funded by Soros, for focusing “exclusively on negative stories about Russia and former Soviet states.”

https://www.rt.com/news/374241-stop-operation-soros-movement-macedonia/

Jonathan Mowat: “A New Gladio in Action”

Originally published in 2005
Posted on Color Revolutions and Geopolitics, April 20, 2011

Orange Revolution, conceived by ex-air force officer Jack Duvall and producer/director Steve York, received mixed reviews ….the revolution itself was disgorged by the population, and so was the film they made.  “I found that most impassioned youth were asleep by the second reel,” complained one insider.  These bureaucrats, known as coup “shaman” to their prodigy, have little artistic “street cred” …”HO Hum,” yawned one observer. “They sucked all the fun out of it, I mean hell, I met my girlfriend on the big day…my friends and I got drunk and had a real  happy ending ….this film obviously sucks by comparison.”
A New Gladio in Action: Ukrainian Postmodern Coup Completes Testing of New Template
By Jonathan Mowat
Published in Online Journal

Images and captions added by Color Revolutions and Geopolitics

“Gene Sharp started out the seminar by saying ‘Strategic nonviolent struggle is all about political power.’ And I thought, ‘Boy is this guy speaking my language,’ that is what armed struggle is about.”—Col. Robert Helvey

WASHINGTON, March 19, 2005—The U.S. government and allied forces’ year-end installation of Victor Yushchenko as president of Ukraine have completed the field-testing of the “Postmodern Coup.” Employing and fine-tuning the same sophisticated techniques used in Serbia in 2000 and Georgia in 2003 (and unsuccessfully in Belarus in 2001), it is widely expected that the United States will attempt to apply the same methods throughout the former Soviet Union.

“We have to confront those forces that are committed to reproduce a Georgian or Ukrainian scenario,” Kyrgyz President Askar Akayev stated on December 26, the day of the coup, “we’ll not allow the import of Rose [Georgian] and Orange [Ukrainian] revolutions in our country.” One day later, the Kazakh government launched a criminal case against the Soros Foundation for tax evasion, one of the coups’ financiers. And last spring, Uzbek President Islam Karimov accused Soros of overseeing the revolution in Georgia, and condemning his efforts to “fool and brainwash” young intelligentsia in his own country, banned the group. The same networks are also increasingly active in South America, Africa, and Asia. Top targets include Venezuela, Mozambique, and Iran, among others.

The method employed is usefully described by The Guardian’s Ian Traynor in a November 26, 2004, article entitled “US campaign behind the turmoil in Kiev,” during the first phase of the coup.

With their websites and stickers, their pranks and slogans aimed at banishing widespread fear of a corrupt regime, the democracy guerrillas of the Ukrainian Pora youth movement have already notched up a famous victory—whatever the outcome of the dangerous stand-off in Kiev.

[T]he campaign is an American creation, a sophisticated and brilliantly conceived exercise in western branding and mass marketing that, in four countries in four years, has been used to try to salvage rigged elections and topple unsavory regimes.

Funded and organized by the US government, deploying US consultancies, pollsters, diplomats, the two big American parties and US non-government organizations, the campaign was first used in Europe in Belgrade in 2000 to beat Slobodan Milosevic at the ballot box.

Richard Miles [pictured left], the US ambassador in Belgrade, played a key role. And by last year, as US ambassador in Tbilisi, he repeated the trick in Georgia, coaching Mikhail Saakashvili in how to bring down Eduard Shevardnadze. Ten months after the success in Belgrade, the US ambassador in Minsk, Michael Kozak, a veteran of similar operations in central America, notably in Nicaragua, organized a near identical campaign to try to defeat the Belarus hardman, Alexander Lukashenko.

The operation – engineering democracy through the ballot box and civil disobedience – is now so slick that the methods have matured into a template for winning other people’s elections

Tiananmen Square, Beijing, 1989

Much of the coup apparatus is the same that was used in the overthrow of President Fernando Marcos of the Philippines in 1986, the Tiananmen Square destabilization in 1989, and Vaclav Havel’s “Velvet revolution” in Czechoslovakia in 1989. As in these early operations, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), and its primary arms, the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs (NDI) and International Republican Institute (IRI), played a central role. The NED was established by the Reagan Administration in 1983, to do overtly what the CIA had done covertly, in the words of one its legislative drafters, Allen Weinstein. The Cold War propaganda and operations center, Freedom House, now chaired by former CIA director James Woolsey, has also been involved, as were billionaire George Soros’ foundations, whose donations always dovetail those of the NED.

Iconic photo documenting Czechoslovakia’s “Velvet Revolution” in 1989

What is new about the template bears on the use of the Internet (in particular chat rooms, instant messaging, and blogs) and cell phones (including text-messaging), to rapidly steer angry and suggestible “Generation X” youth into and out of mass demonstrations and the like—a capability that only emerged in the mid-1990s. “With the crushing ubiquity of cell phones, satellite phones, PCs, modems and the Internet,” Laura Rosen emphasized in Salon Magazine on February 3, 2001,”the information age is shifting the advantage from authoritarian leaders to civic groups.” She might have mentioned the video games that helped create the deranged mindset of these “civic groups.” The repeatedly emphasized role played by so-called “Discoshaman” and his girlfriend “Tulipgirl,” in assisting the “Orange Revolution” through their aptly named blog, “Le Sabot Post-Modern,” is indicative of the technical and sociological components involved.

Peter Ackerman

A Civilian Revolution in Military Affairs

The emphasis on the use of new communication technologies to rapidly deploy small groups, suggests what we are seeing is civilian application of Secretary Donald Rumsfeld’s “Revolution in Military Affairs” doctrine, which depends on highly mobile small group deployments “enabled” by “real time” intelligence and communications. Squads of soldiers taking over city blocks with the aid of “intelligence helmet” video screens that give them an instantaneous overview of their environment, constitute the military side. Bands of youth converging on targeted intersections in constant dialogue on cell phones constitute the doctrine’s civilian application.

This parallel should not be surprising since the US military and National Security Agency subsidized the development of the Internet, cellular phones, and software platforms. From their inception, these technologies were studied and experimented with in order to find the optimal use in a new kind of warfare. The “revolution” in warfare that such new instruments permit has been pushed to the extreme by several specialists in psychological warfare. Although these military utopians have been working in high places (for example the RAND Corporation) for a very long time, to a large extent they only took over some of the most important command structures of the US military apparatus with the victory of the neoconservatives in the Pentagon of Donald Rumsfeld. Continue reading

Is George Soros paying the salaries of Ukraine’s three new ministers?

In November, George Soros wanted the EU and the IMF to pump $20 billion to defend Ukraine.
http://www.cicero.de/presse/george-soros-fordert-20-milliarden-fuer-die-ukraine

In January, he said he wanted $50 billion.
money.cnn.com/2015/01/08/news/sorosukraine-europe-50billion/

He’s invested in Ukraine. He wants his work to succeed. Here’s an example.

From Red Pill Times, December 8, 2014

Sorostan. Is the Soros backed Renaissance Foundation paying the salaries of Ukraine’s three new government ministers?

George Soros has firmly sunk his hooks, or claws, into the rump roast that is becoming Ukraine. His Renaissance Foundation is responsible for head hunting, hiring, and apparently paying the salaries of the three new non-Ukrainian government ministers. Sorostan is born.

Possibly the world’s most evil man now has three employees nicely positioned in Ukraine’s government. And Ukrainian citizens thought their Oligarchs were crooks…they ain’t seen nothing yet.

First, a little about the Renaissance Foundation, via Wikipedia:

The International Renaissance Foundation (IRF) (Ukrainian: Міжнародний фонд “Відродження”) is a Ukrainian NGO founded by George Soros.

It was founded in April 1990. IRF is an integral part of the Open Society Foundations which incorporates national and regional foundations in more than thirty countries around the world, primarily in Central and Eastern Europe, as well as the former Soviet Union. These foundations share a common goal of supporting educational, social and legal initiatives that promote the development and establishment of an open society.

IRF is the Ukraine’s one of the largest charity organization. Its main objective is to provide financial and operational assistance to the development of an open and democratic society in Ukraine by supporting key civic initiatives in this area.

Over the period from 1990 to 2010 the International Renaissance Foundation supported numerous Ukrainian non-governmental organizations, community groups, academic and cultural institutions, publishing houses etc. in the amount of over $100 million.

From the Open Society Foundations website:

The International Renaissance Foundation’s mission is to foster an open, participatory, pluralist society based on democratic values in Ukraine. Our projects and grantmaking are guided by the principle that real change can only come if people’s rights and dignity are secured. This belief informs our pursuit of two interlinked goals: ensuring access to justice for all and empowering civil society to be a primary source of positive change in Ukraine.

The foundation works with leading Ukrainian nongovernmental groups to engage them in developing a shared public policy agenda for the country, catalyze initiatives that address corruption, and prevent backsliding from democratic reforms. Our efforts to reduce corruption in higher education have resulted in the institutionalization of anticorruption mechanisms in university admissions testing. We also support projects and groups that advance the rights of vulnerable populations, improve public health, and confront discrimination.

Read between the lines and you will understand the the Renaissance Foundation is all about regime change, in order to help make Mr. Soros and his banker clan even more rich and powerful.

The Renaissance Foundation was conveniently commissioned by President Poroshenko to head hunt for “qualified” persons willing t0 take part in Ukraine’s new  government.

Via the Kyiv Post:

Lack of public service professionals on the Ukraine labor market has pushed the government to look abroad for qualified applicants who can take positions.

Prague-based Pedersen & Partners and Korn Ferry, global head hunting firms, have found 185 potential employees, many of whom are members of Ukrainian community in Canada, the U.S. and the U.K.

The Renaissance Foundation, a global network of policy consulting centers launched by American billionaire George Soros, has sponsored the headhunting process. It paid as much as $82,200 to two companies involved in finding the capable employees for the government agencies.

As of now, Ukrainian legislation doesn’t allow the foreigners to hold any public offices, which is why those who’ll accept the government’s job offers will have to take Ukraine’s citizenship. Meanwhile, dual citizenship is not allowed.

President Petro Poroshenko during his Nov. 27 speech in parliament offered to allow the foreigners be officially employed in the country’s government. Moreover, he asked the lawmakers to provide him with legal tools to grant Ukrainian citizenship through special decrees.

Meanwhile, Natalie Jaresko, U.S. citizen of Ukrainian descent and chief executive officer of Horizon Capital, a private equity fund with $650 million in assets, is considered to be a candidate for the position of finance minister, according to the Kyiv Post research.

Continue reading

Lustration — a Kiev regime perspective

Lustration is a practice to purge government officials connected to past administrations.

This article is “part of the Kyiv Post’s Reform Watch project, sponsored by the International Renaissance Foundation“ (George Soros’ foundation).

What is civil society? Who is the “popular” support? The first sentence speaks volumes.

Lustration law faces sabotage, legal hurdles
Oct. 23, 2014
by Oleg Sukhov

PHOTO Right Sector activists demanding lustration and exploding a smoke grenade near the Central Elections Commission building on Oct. 2. Lustration has become a key demand of civil society. 

The sight of public officials being thrown into trash cans all over Ukraine has become the visible expression of popular anger with corrupt bureaucrats, with lustration becoming a key demand by civil society.

Supporters of the lustration law, signed by President Petro Poroshenko on Oct. 9, say that the cleansing of government is necessary to root out old corrupt practices and entrench Western values as part of Ukraine’s efforts to become a civilized European country.

But the law is likely to be sabotaged by officials and faces legal obstacles. Lawyers say that it will be hard to enforce it because courts may rule that it contradicts the Constitution and international law.

In September, Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk said that the law would apply to about 1 million officials. Earlier in October he said that the first 39 top officials had been fired.

Yegor Sobolev, head of the non-governmental Lustration Committee, told the Kyiv Post that the passage of the law was a victory of civil society.

The parliament, president and Cabinet didn’t really want this law but society forced them to pass it,” said Sobolev, who is one of the lustration law’s authors and has actively pushed for its passage.

He added, however, that civil society had to make some concessions, for example, by excluding members of parliament from the list of people subject to lustration.

Sobolev urged civil society to be actively involved in the enforcement of the law.

“Without citizens and journalists’ active engagement, control over the implementation of lustration will be sabotaged,” he said.

Continue reading

Ukraine declares resumption of war against Donbass

By  Eric Zuesse
Posted on RINF.com, March 18, 2015

On Wednesday, March 18th, Arseniy Yatsenyuk, the Prime Minister of Ukraine — who was selected for that post by Victoria Nuland of the U.S. State Department on 4 February 2014, 18 days before the U.S. coup that installed him into this office — told his cabinet meeting, “Our goal is to regain control of Donetsk and Lugansk.” Those are the two districts comprising Donbass, the self-proclaimed independent region of Ukraine, which now calls itself “The People’s Republic“ and sometimes “Novorossiya,” and which rejects the coup and its coup-imposed Government.

That Government of Ukraine is run by Yatsenyuk and the people whom he selected. Ukraine also has a President, who is elected by voters in the northwest of Ukraine, where the coup-government is accepted; but, since the coup, the Government has actually been run by Prime Minister Yatsenyuk, who is entirely dependent upon the United States Government and its subordinates (such as the IMF and NATO, in both of which the U.S. has veto-power) in order to obtain the financial and military support necessary to keep him in office

Yatsenyuk announced there: “Adequate financial resources are available,” to retake Donbass. Those “resources” came largely from the IMF, and from the United States, all with loans to the bankrupt Ukrainian Government. So that the investors will be paid the principal plus the extremely high interest on these junk-loans that are backed by their governments, Western taxpayers will ultimately be, basically, donating to Franklin Templeton, and to George Soros, and to the other financiers who are buying the Ukrainian Government bonds that purchase those weapons and military trainers to conquer the residents of Donbass. The Ukrainian Government officially calls these residents ‘Terrorists,’ and the military operation to conquer them they call the ‘Anti Terrorist Operation’ or “ATO” for short. They call their troops who are doing the killing there, “punishers,” which the residents of northwestern Ukraine take to mean punishers of terrorists. The residents in northwestern Ukraine see only television that is broadcast on stations that are owned by Ukrainian, European, and American, oligarchs. For example, one of these stations is Hromadske TV, which was founded with money from the Dutch Government, the U.S. Government, and George Soros’s International Renaissance Foundation. It has, on occasion, presented ‘experts’ who call for exterminating at least 1.5 million of the residents in Donbass. So, this is how the support of the residents in Ukraine’s northwest for the “ATO” is being maintained. The residents in Donbass have also been called “subhumans” by Yatsenyuk himself.

At this cabinet meeting, Yatsenyuk additionally announced that resumption of the war would be rushed: “We need to move the funding for the purchase of new equipment and weapons from the third and fourth quarter to the first and second quarter,” he told his cabinet.

At this same cabinet meeting, the Minister of Defense, Stepan Poltorak, announced that, to date, 100 contracts for military equipment have been signed, and soon there will be 160. He also said: “Just in the last week alone, factories brought in about a thousand pieces of equipment for repair.”

Yatsenyuk told his cabinet that, “We will fight using all methods and techniques for the resumption of peace and regaining control of Donetsk and Luhansk region.” By ‘resumption of peace,’ he meant resumption of control over Donbass. “Peace” is the term he uses to mean control. In other words: until the Yatsenyuk Government wins, there will continue to be war in Donbass, “using all methods and techniques” to achieve his (that is, America’s) victory in subduing the residents there. This subduing means exterminating some, and driving the others out; so that, in either case, they won’t become voters in future Ukrainian elections. The last time that these people voted in a Ukrainian election was 2010, when they voted 90% for Viktor Yanukovych, the man whom Obama overthrew. Without that 90% vote, Yanukovych wouldn’t have been elected. Obama consequently doesn’t want them voting in any future Ukrainian election. That’s the reason why they’re being bombed — to get rid of them.

On March 17th, Ukraine’s parliament, the Rada, voted to declare Donbass to be “temporarily occupied territory,” until the residents there are conquered. The day before that, the figurehead President of Ukraine had presented to the Rada a draft resolution proposing to solve the problem of the resistant Donbass with a resolution he published on his website on March 14th saying that the region has “special status,” and temporary self-government, but this proposal wasn’t the one the Rada passed. The President nonetheless declared that his terminology was somehow law from the moment it had been published on his website.

U.S. President Obama wants the war resumed as quickly as possible, but Angela Merkel and other European leaders have urged that it not be resumed at all. Consequently, there is a split in the Western alliance about this matter. Apparently, Prime Minister Yatsenyuk has determined that he now has enough weapons and loans to be able to resume the war very soon, until final victory.

Obama, evidently, is determined to finish the job that he started with his coup. It was bloody, but the follow-through will need to be far more so. And he has the full support of the U.S. Congress, and of the major think tanks, to continue this until victory. EU nations that don’t like it — well, Obama’s agent controlling Ukraine said famously, on 4 February 2014, “F—k the EU.”

Many European leaders don’t want to be involved in a war against Russia. However, on March 12th, Yatsenyuk said “Ukraine is in a state of war with … the Russian Federation.” That is the service he is providing to Barack Obama, and to the 98%+ of the members of the U.S. Congress who likewise want this war: Ukraine has become the proxy state for America’s war against Russia.

———-

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of  They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity, and of Feudalism, Fascism, Libertarianism and Economics.

 

What’s behind Ukraine’s secret weapons deal with the United Arab Emirates (UAE)?

From Global Research, February 25, 2015
By Eric Zuesse

U.S. President Barack Obama apparently is going ahead with his plan for NATO missiles to be placed in Ukraine aimed against Moscow, but found a way to do it that won’t violate the warnings by Russia’s President Vladimir Putin against Washington’s directly supplying those arms to Ukraine (such as is demanded of Obama by congressional Republicans, and even by a few hawkish Democrats — all passionate supporters of Hillary Clinton). Obama’s subordinate (or dependent local leader), the President of Ukraine, Petro Poroshenko, is now arranging to receive those weapons via a less direct channel; and this arrangement couldn’t happen if the U.S. White House were opposed to it. The idea might even have originated inside the White House.

On Tuesday, 24 February 2015, in Abu Dhabi, the capital of United Arab Emirates, Poroshenko placed the finishing touches on the purchase of Western, mainly U.S., weapons, via the UAE, from Western firms such as, perhaps, Lockheed, GE, Krupp, Euromissile, etc., which will be paid for by Western taxpayers, via IMF ‘loans’ to Ukraine, which money comes from taxpayer contributions to the IMF, but which ‘loans’ can never be paid back to the IMF — they’ll inevitably default, because these ‘loans’ are at the very end of the long line of creditors of Ukraine, which is a bankrupt country, having been looted for decades (and especially during the past year) by its aristocrats (called “oligarchs”), who have already spirited tens if not hundreds of billions of dollars off to Western tax-haven countries, so that only Ukraine’s public (who received little if any benefit from those debts of the Ukrainian Government) will pay even the pennies-on-the-dollars that Ukraine’s bondholders will be receiving (and the recipients will be only the holders of the oldest of Ukraine’s bonds, which won’t be the IMF, EU, or U.S., Ukraine’s post-coup ‘lenders’).

This is called the IMF’s “austerity” program, for looted nations such as Greece and Ukraine, and it holds sacred the thefts by aristocrats, while it transfers all of aristocrats’ losses off onto their respective publics, who (as Ukrainians now will) pay it via their stripped governmental services and hiked taxes; and these poor people then serve aristocrats as virtual slaves (low-wage labor), many of whom thus migrate to wealthier countries, which, in turn, reject the burden of caring for them, thus producing yet more resentments and hatreds against these poor people, regardless of how they behave.

Here is the way this Ukrainian arms deal works:

The deal itself was publicly, but only vaguely, announced on Tuesday, the 24th, along with “what Poroshenko described as a ‘very important negotiation about the facilitation of the United Arab Emirates investment in the Ukraine.’ He declined to provide specifics of the deal.” The reason why Arabic royals (in this case the Al Nahyan family that controls Abu Dhabi) are naturals for this — the logical persons to serve as the middle-men to sell Western-made weapons to Russia’s new (since the time of Obama’s February 2014 Ukrainian coup) enemy, Ukraine — is that the U.S. aristocracy has, for at least 70 years, been allied with Sunni aristocracies, against, originally, the Soviet Union, and then Russia. Russia had been the chief supplier of oil and gas to the other Soviet republics; it was and is the local oil-and-gas giant. Whereas Russia’s aristocrats bonded instead with Shia Iran (which alliance was interrupted during 1953-79 by the CIA’s coup there and then the Shah’s ultimate overthrow and then the restoration of Iran’s alliance with Russia), the American aristocrats had bonded with Sunni Saudi Arabia, and with other Arab royals, in UAE, Qatar, Bahrain, etc. So, with the exception of Armand Hammer’s Occidental Petreoleum, which bonded with Libya’s pro-Soviet Sunni anti-imperialist and anti-Western Muammar Gaddafi, Western oil companies generally allied with the Saud family, who had allied with the most intensely Sunni clergy of all, who were the followers of Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab, who had personally agreed in 1744, with Muhammad bin Saud, that the Sauds and Wahhabs would jointly control the Kingdom and ultimately the world — Wahhabs controlling the laws, and Sauds controlling the military.

In short: America’s aristocracy bonded with Sunni aristocrats, and Russia’s aristocracy bonded with Shia ones. Ukraine has now joined the Sunni alliance, and this is done with Obama’s blessing. Continue reading