Let’s call this an alternative take on the Russian/Ukraine “crisis” to the Mainstream Media spoon fed version. I have said little on the events for the simple reason I had not yet acquired enough information to adequately do so. Well, that has changed, and what is happening is nothing like you’re being told. So hold on reader, here we go… IMF Director Christine Lagarde has been working very hard behind the scenes coordinating the current conflict between Ukraine and Russia. Longtime readers of this blog are already familiar with the name Christine Lagarde and her position as head of the International Monetary Fund. So keep that knowledge handy as we now navigate the increasingly tumultuous dynamics taking place between Russian President Vladimir Putin, and seemingly, the rest of the “civilized” world. This will be an abridged version, hopefully to provide both swifter “up to speed” understanding, and the all important ability to then share that understanding with others. This is the all important battle - truth vs. manipulation. Reality vs. force-fed perception. First, regarding Ukraine. What happened there was rule by mob – a legitimate, (though corrupt) government was overthrown. Millions living in Ukraine consider themselves Russian, and not members of the Big Government European Union. Crimea is a region where this population within Ukraine is at its most concentrated, and those people were, rightfully so, fearing for their well-being following the overthrow of a government that won the most recent election by nearly a million votes over the party that has now seized power. The current interim Ukraine Prime Minister is Arseniy Yatsenyuk. who ran for the position in 2009-2010 against former Ukraine leader Viktor Yanukovych. Yanukovych represents the pro-Russian contingent within Ukraine, which won a majority of votes in the last election, while Yatsenyuk represents the “embrace the global government” position, which overthrew Yatsenyuk. Here is where we get into more detail reader, so please pay attention. A few years ago, Yatsenyuk publicly embraced what is called Front for Changes public initiative. This was a loosely cobbled together shared political interest organization in Ukraine that never held more than 11% public approval. (And yet now, runs the post-coup government.) Front for Change morphed into a newly named party in 2012 called the Fatherland Party or also called the All-Ukrainian Union. 2012 was the same year Fatherland positioned itself as the greatest power within the Ukraine Parliament – readying itself for the recent 2014 coup. Yatsenyuk is not the head of the Fatherland Party though – that title goes to this man, Olexander Turchynov, former head of the Ukraine domestic security service [SBU]. Fatherland has placed Yanukovych as its “public” face, while it is Turchynov who controls the real power behind the scenes as Interim President of Ukraine, but more importantly, as Deputy Leader of the Fatherland party, which controls the Ukraine parliament. Now we go into the rabbit hole just a bit more. In 2005, Turchynov, now the post-coup leader of Ukraine, was, as stated, head of the Ukraine domestic security service. 2005 is the very year, (no coincidence) a very important document was created and then disseminated within the Ukraine government titled, National Security and Defence. (that’s how they spell defense over there) It is a very comprehensive document that at its core, pushes for progressive tax policies, open borders, and essentially, full participation within the European Union. It was widely distributed to most, if not all, government, business, and social justice leaders in Ukraine. It is in fact, the document that outlines in detail, the very foundation for the recent Ukrainian coup that just took place. I am going to repeat that for emphasis here: It is in fact, the document that outlines in detail, the very foundation for the recent Ukrainian coup that just took place. On the first page of this document, nearly hidden away from view, is a brief thank you to the sponsor(s) who made the study possible. It reads as follows: This publication was made possible through support provided by the International Renaissance Foundation and the Open Society Institute (Budapest) LINK (COPY THIS LINK BEFORE IT DISAPPEARS!) The man who funds both the International Renaissance Foundation and the Open Society Institute, is, as many readers already know, this guy: George Soros. Now read this very recent quote from Mr. Soros himself, regarding the International Monetary Fund and Ukraine: Now, after the Ukrainian people’s commitment to closer ties with Europe fueled a successful popular insurrection, the EU, along with the International Monetary Fund, is putting together a multibillion-dollar rescue package to save the country from financial collapse.” LINK That quote was from an article written by Soros and then published on February 27th. Now look at a quote from an article involving Christine Lagarde and her IMF that came out the very same day: “The IMF managing director, Christine Lagarde, said they were discussing how to help Ukraine with its international partners after Ukraine’s new finance minister, Oleksandr Shlapak, requested they send a mission.” LINK Both the IMF, and George Soros, signaling they will be propping up the post-coup government of Ukraine, and did so on the very same day. Now guess what takes place just two weeks later following what was basically, a Soros-Lagarde shared announcement of post-coup Ukraine financial support? Here’s a little photo op for you: President Barack Obama meets with post-coup Ukraine Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk, or to put it another way, Soros and Lagarde tell Barack Obama to jump, and he happily replies, “how high?” What this meeting did was signal legitimization of a government that came to power via a bloody and violent mob – a mob both motivated and funded by George Soros and the IMF. A government that utilizes political tag lines so familiar to us in the United States following our own 2008 election/coup. Phrases like “open borders”, “social justice”, and “fair share”. Regarding two world leaders, one is a product of, and thus a staunch advocate for, the Soros agenda, while the other is now actively fighting against it. One appears to love his nation, (however flawed that love might be) while the other stated from the outset the need to “fundamentally change” his country from within. And while neither is a saint, one is certainly a sinner. You can decide for yourself, who is who…
Posted on: Sun, 23 Mar 2014 20:51:59 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015