Funneling Ukraine Bailout to Putin, Wall Street

By:  William F. Jasper
05/28/2014
       
Funneling Ukraine Bailout to Putin, Wall Street

For the past several months, the Ukraine-Crimea crisis has simmered as a volatile flashpoint that could erupt into all-out war, with potential for dire global ramifications.

At least that’s how it has been presented to us by President Obama, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, establishment Republicans, and the usual talking heads of the mainstream media. Massive aid, they say, is urgently needed and must be rushed to the new government of Ukraine (which is largely composed of “former” communists and pro-Kremlin oligarchs) to enable them to stand up to Russian bully Vladimir Putin. (See also here and here.)

The U.S. Congress and the International Monetary Fund have responded with alacrity — and with billions of dollars and SDRs (Special Drawing Rights, the IMF’s “currency”). But, as the smoke clears, it turns out that billions of dollars/SDRs fast-tracked to Kiev to help the new regime defy Bully Putin will actually be going to ... (surprise!) Bully Putin.

Yes, as The New American reported in an online article for May 20 entitled “U.S. Taxpayers Funding Putin via IMF Bailout of Ukraine,” much of that “anti-Putin” funding will be used by Ukraine to pay Russia for past, current, and future deliveries of natural gas. And, as to be expected, a considerable portion of the IMF’s more than $17 billion worth of SDRs will go to bail out the Russian, European, and U.S. banks and hedge funds that encouraged the reckless policies of Ukraine’s previous regimes. The details of those bailouts to the Western banking mafias may dribble out over the next few months, but we can rest assured that the MSM mavens will find plenty of Kim Kardashian and Justin Bieber distractions to divert public attention from these “mundane” matters.

Speaking of diversions, one might pause to consider that Putin’s entire opposition to Ukraine’s independence and acceptance of the IMF deal was an enormous charade, the purpose of which was to seal the deal he pretended to oppose. Think about it: American and European taxpayers were not about to support another bank/country bailout scheme (after Greece, Cyprus, Portugal, Iceland, Spain, Ireland, etc.) — unless, of course, it could be dramatically and emotionally packaged. Putin could have nixed the IMF-Ukraine deal, which would have been a lot easier than all of the military showmanship and confrontation — but he didn’t, as The New American pointed out.

Click here to read the entire article.

The JBS Weekly Member Update offers activism tips, new educational tools, upcoming events, and JBS perspective. Every Monday this e-newsletter will keep you informed on current action projects and offer insight into news events you won't hear from the mainstream media.
JBS Facebook JBS Twitter JBS YouTube JBS RSS Feed