In answering such questions, it is often useful to apply the powerful analytic tool of qui bono, who benefitted? President Obama certainly didn’t benefit from the de-stabilization of Ukraine, nor did the Ukrainian people. So qui bono?
Immediately Yanukovich was gone, the World Bank swooped in and loaned the junta 1.385 billion dollars. Now, the World Bank is an instrument of International Financialism (see my article Financialism on 04/09/2014 in the archives). The last director of the World Bank was Robert Zoelick an executive from Goldman Sachs, and before him we had directors such as Lewis Preston (J. P.Morgan), Alden Clausen (Bank of America)and a host of others from the financilist sector. World socialistic international banks own and operate the World Bank for their own profit.
Now financialist George Soros has been grooming Barack Obama for the presidency since Obama’s Chicago men’s bathhouse days. The financialist cabal owns Barack Obama, as they owned Jimmy Carte and Bill Clinton before him.
The Ukrainian "revolution" was a maneuver by financialists to drain some of the fruits of capitalism into the coffers of financialism through interest on loans that Yanukovich had rejected. And the tool they used to effect that maneuver was Barack Obama.
Furguson Missouri is a town in the throes of civil rebellion – a rebellion that is clearly being fueled by someone. But by whom? Qui bono? Who is facing certain impeachment if Harry Reid loses control of the Senate in November?