“Americans will not support those who seek independence in order to
replace a far-off tyranny with a local despotism. They will not aid those who promote a
suicidal nationalism based upon ethnic hatred.”
George H. W. Bush warning to Ukrainians voiced on August 1, 1991, just four
months before Ukraine declared its independence of Russia
[Jul 24, 2014] This page is closed as new material has nothing to do with color revolution
mechanics (and actually this was true for some some time, but inertia pushed the page belong the
right point)
Due to size the introductory article about EuroMaidan events (aka EuroMaidan101 ) was moved to a separate page.
My thoughts and prayers are with the Ukrainian population, the real victim of this mess.
Harsh times wait them ahead indeed. Iraq and Libya are good examples of what can happen in worst
case.
EuroMaidan was yet another color revolution financed (via US controlled NGO and oligarchs (such
as Poroshenko, Kolomoyski)). At the end of the day they destroyed the country. There is now extremly
cruel and unnecessary civil war in South East. during which a lot people are kileld a lot of propety
blown up and economic damage is tens of billions of dollars, far more the Yanukovich and his thugs
would be be able to speal from Ukranian people during the same period. There was also terrble, nazy
style Odessa Massacre of May 2,
2014which confirms Bush senior warning about the danger of "a suicidal nationalism
based upon ethnic hatred."
The key problem with it is that there’s no endgame for the USA and EU, nor is there any
benefit to “winning” Ukraine for the West. After West installed junta crimes in Odessa and Mariupol,
the insurgency in Ukraine has fuel for years to run, because even if Kiev takes it militarily, that's
only be only temporary: now there is enough hatred in South East toward West Ukraine to fiel
gerulla war, and during guerilla war population became polirised even more. It can well last a generation.
Denying Ukraine to Russia is more harmful than beneficial. It is very harmful for Russian
economics (and suicidal for Ukrainian economics). It's very harmful for Russia as Ukraine of
a part of Russian culture. No matter what Galicia nationalists think (And Galicia was not a part of
Ukraine proper for the most of known history; it's more part of Austria then Ukraine). Ukraine was supposed
to be a bridge, keeping Russia oriented towards Europe instead of Asia. Now this bridge was destroyed by USA
neocons…
It also speaks about the desperation amongst western elites about their current economic decline. The post
2008 train wreck is still in motion and it is hard to see where it completely stops. Wars are about resources
and this includes not only WWI and WWII but EuroMaidan color revolution, which is a war only by
other name.
As cheap energy and raw materials are becoming more scarce western countries start operating
completely outside the framework of international law. In part this is due
to the rise of the “3rd world” (e.g. China, India and many other developing states) which now became
serious competitors to West for energy. This was one of the reasons that so much manufacturing
was off-shored by the West. They saw the writing on the wall. But somehow their plans did not work out
and we are seeing that anti-China vector became more visible in the USA policy.
The only fair solution for the Ukrainian situation might be referendum in the South-East. It
is a rational solution and appears to be fair. But there are no decent players in this game to
conduct it impartially. While I do not agree with painting the West as a conniving devil, it came close.
In any case it is absolutely clear by now -- there are no knights in shining armor in this conflict.
Both West and Russia are neoliberal players, with just different agendas and different level of cultural
attachment to the region. It is also clear that most of the victims are common people of Ukraine as
well as all the countries directly or indirectly involved, who are being manipulated by the mainstream
media into mutual distrust: the first victim in any war is always truth. My heart goes out to the people
of Ukrainian South East who became pawns of the political games of the West and who are now killed by
Kiev regime with impunity.
"Plunderers of the world, when nothing remains on the lands to which they have laid waste
by wanton thievery, they search out across the seas. The wealth of another region excites their
greed; and if it is weak, their lust for power.
Nothing from the rising to the setting of the sun is enough for them. Among all others
only they are compelled to attack the poor as well as the rich. Robbery, rape, and slaughter
they falsely call empire; and where they create a desolate wasteland, they call it peace."
"... Italian investigative journalist Gian Micalessin interviews three snipers who shot the people in Maidan square. They were Georgians sent to Ukraine by security services people aligned with American allied-educated Mikhail Saakashvili. American mercenary Brian Christopher Boyenger ran the sniper operation on location. Expanded translation of the Italian (the video subtitles are abridged) below the video ..."
"... "They explained to us to shoot to create chaos and confusion. We did not have to stop. It did not matter if we fired at a tree, a barricade, or a molotov. The important thing was to sow chaos. " ..."
"... Alexander, admitting he was involved in the shootout from the Conservatory building, claims to have understood very little. "Everyone started shooting two or three shots at a time. We did not have much choice. We were ordered to shoot both the Berkut, the police, and the demonstrators, no matter what. I was totally outraged. It went on for fifteen minutes maybe twenty. I was out of my mind, agitated, under stress, I did not understand anything. Then suddenly, after 15, 20 minutes the shooting ceased and everyone has put down the weapons. " ..."
"... As wounded and dead arrived in the Ukrainian Hotel's reception, the snipers fled from the rooms. And so the victims found themselves next to their assassins. ..."
"... Alexander says he left in a hurry. "Someone was shouting that there were snipers, I knew what they were talking about," he said, "my only thought was to disappear before they knew about me. Otherwise, they had me. At that time, however, I did not realize, but now I understand. I do understand. We've been used. Used and discarded." ..."
Referencing
the piece run here at Fort Russ on 27 October "
Confessions
of Maidan Snipers
" by Darrol, here is the original confessions given to Italian journalist Gian
Micalessin which transcript should closely match the testimony provided in the Belarus' courtroom, noted in
the 27 October piece:
(With English subtitles) Italian investigative journalist Gian Micalessin
interviews three snipers who shot the people in Maidan square. They were Georgians sent to Ukraine by
security services people aligned with American allied-educated Mikhail Saakashvili. American mercenary Brian
Christopher Boyenger ran the sniper operation on location. Expanded translation of the Italian (the video
subtitles are abridged) below the video
What the hell? Who is shooting? Somebody got shot! I can't believe it happened right here! A man standing
right next to me just got shot!
It was at dawn, I heard sounds of gunshots as bullets were flying. Somebody got shot in the head by a
sniper.
We were ordered to shoot at the police and protestors randomly.
Which location were the shots fired [from]? From the Ukraine Hotel?
The shooting was from the Ukraine Hotel.
Kyiv, February 2014. It is three months the Maidan square, in the heart of the capital, has been filled
with protestors; who've been demanding the government and president, Victor Yanukovych, to sign an
association agreement with the European Union.
On February 18th the clashes have become bloody, with about 30 casualties. The worst moment will be in
the morning of February 20th. A group of unknown snipers began firing at protestors and police. In a short
period of time up to 80 dead were counted.
The next day [February 21st, president] Yanukovych leaves the country. On February 22nd the opposition
seizes power.
But who was shooting at the crowd and opposition?
To this very day, the official version from Kiev is the slaughter was conducted by the order of the
Kremlin-backed [Yanukovych] government. This version seemed suspicious to many. The Foreign Minister of
Estonia, Ermas Paet, was the first one to dispute this.
Returning from a trip to Kiev only 5 days after the massacre, [Paet] reported in a phone call to EU
Commissioner for Foreign Affairs Catherine Ashton, revelations from a Ukrainian doctor who examined the
cadavers of Maidan square. The intercepted phone call, published widely by the Russian media, is
disconcerting.
"The most disturbing thing [Paet explains] is that all of the evidence points to the people killed by
snipers, both police and people in the street, were killed by the same snipers."
Speaking with a clearly embarrassed Ashton, the foreign minister cites the testimony of the Ukrainian
doctor:
"She speaks as a doctor, and says it is the same signature, the same kind of bullets. It is really
disturbing that now the new coalition [Paet reaffirms] refuses to investigate what is really going on. There
is a very strong conviction that they're are behind the snipers That it is not Yanukovych, but some of the
new coalition "
After four years from the beginning at November 2013 of Maidan demonstrations, we are able to tell
another truth, completely different from the official story. Our story begins towards the end of summer
2017, in Skopye, the capital of Macedonia. There, after long and complex negotiations, we met with Koba
Nergadze and Kvarateskelia Zalogy, two Georgian participants and witnesses in the tragic shootings and
massacre.
Both Nergadze and Zalogy are linked to former Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili , who started, in
August 2008, a short but bloody war with Russia's Vladimir Putin. Nergadze, as proved by an identification
card he holds, was a member of a security service at President Saakashvili's order. Zalogy is a former
Saakashvili party activist.
"I decided to come to Skopije to tell you everything we know, about what happened and I and my friend
have decided together, we need to shed some light on those facts," Nergadze says.
Nargadze also says Alexander Revazishvilli, [we met] a few months later, a former sniper of the Georgian
army, participated in the Maidan shootout. [We] met in another Eastern European country.
All three of our participants say that they were recruited at the end of 2013 by Mamuka Mamulashvili, a
Saakashvili military advisor who, after the Maidan action, will move to the Donbass, to lead the so-called
Georgian Legion in clashes with ethnic Russian insurgents.
"The first meeting was with Mamulashvili [was] at the office of the National Movement," Zalogy said. "The
Ukrainian uprising in 2013 was similar to the" Pink Revolution "that took place in Georgia years before. We
had to direct and guide it using the same pattern used for the "Pink Revolution"
Alexander's version is no different. "Mamuka first asked me if I was really a trained sniper, Alexander
recalls, [then] he immediately told me he needed me in Kiev to pick some places."
Our informants integrated to various groups of volunteers between November 2013 and January 2014, [after]
receiving passports with false names, and money advances.
"We left on January 15, and on the plane, Zalogy remembers, I received my passport and another [passport]
with my photo but with different name and surname. Then they gave us each a thousand dollars to begin,
promising to give another five thousand more"
Once in Kiev, our three participants begin to understand better why they were recruited. "Our task,
Alexander explains, was to arrange provocations to push the police to charge the crowd. Until the middle of
February, however, there were not many weapons around. The Molotovs, the shields and the sticks were used to
the maximum."
But in mid-February, clashes around Maidan begin to get worse. "About 15 and 16 February," Nergadze
remembers, "the situation has begun to become more serious every day. It was out of control now. And in the
meantime, the first shoots were heard. "With the rising of tensions, new players [would] come into play"
"One day around February 15, remembers Alexander, Mamualashvili personally visited our tent. There was
another guy in his uniform with him. He introduced him and told us he was an instructor, an American
soldier." The US military veteran Brian Christopher Boyenger, is a former officer and sniper for the 101st
Airborne Division. After Maidan, [Boyenger] moves on to the Donbass front, where he will fight in the ranks
of the Georgian Legion alongside Mamulashvili.
"We were always in touch with this Bryan, Nergadze explains, he was a Mamulashvili man. It was he who
gave us the orders. I had to follow all his instructions"
The first suspects in the possession of firearms among the ranks of demonstrators, involve Serghey
Pashinsky, a leader of Maidan Square, who became, after the fall of Yanukovych, chairman of the Kiev
parliament.
On February 18, in a video made that day, a rifle locked in a car was recorded with video taken by a
demonstrator, showing an automatic rifle. A few seconds after, Pashinsky approaches and orders the car be
allowed to go. The next day, weapons were distributed to groups of Georgian and Lithuanian mercenaries
residing in Hotel Ukraine, the hotel overlooking the square used as a headquarters by opposition.
"In those days, Pashinsky and three other people, including Parasyuk, had taken the weapons handbags to
the hotel. They were going to get them into my room," Nergadze says.
Volodymyr Parasyuk is one of the leaders of the Maidan Square protest. After the massacre of
demonstrators, he will become famous for an ultimatum in which he will threaten to use weapons to hunt
President Viktor Yanukovych.
"On February 18, recalls Zalogy, someone took some weapons to my room. In the room with me there were two
Lithuanians, the weapons were unpacked by them."
"In each bag, recalls Nergadze, there were Makarov's pistols, Akm automatics, carbines. And there were
packages of cartridges. When I first saw them I did not understand . When Mamulashvili arrived, I also
asked him. "What's going on," I told him, "what are these weapons? Is everything all right?
"Koba, things are getting complicated, we have to start shooting," he replied, "we can not go to the
pre-election presidential elections " "But who should we shoot? And where? "I asked him." He replied that
where he did not care, we had to shoot somewhere to sow some chaos."
"While Nergadze and Zalogy assisted in arms distribution at the hotel, Alexander Revazishvilli and other
volunteers went to the Conservatory, another building overlooking the square. "It was February 16th
Pashinsky ordered us to collect our belongings and bring them in Other people arrived, they were almost
all masked.
"From their cases I understood they carried weapons . They pulled them out and handed them over to the
various groups. Only Pashinsky was talking "He was giving orders. He asked me where we were supposed to
shoot. " "In the meantime, explained Nergadze, even at the Ukraine hotel, the leaders of the revolt
underlined the purpose of using the weapons.
"They explained to us to shoot to create chaos and confusion. We did not have to stop. It did not matter
if we fired at a tree, a barricade, or a molotov. The important thing was to sow chaos. "
On the 20th, in the morning, the plan came into action. "It was supposed to be dawn," Zalogy remembers,
"when I heard the sound of the shots they were not bursts, they were single strokes came from the next
room. At that same time, the Lithuanians opened the window. One of them fired one shot while the other
closed the window. They have fired three or four times everywhere."
Alexander, admitting he was involved in the shootout from the Conservatory building, claims to have
understood very little. "Everyone started shooting two or three shots at a time. We did not have much
choice. We were ordered to shoot both the Berkut, the police, and the demonstrators, no matter what. I was
totally outraged. It went on for fifteen minutes maybe twenty. I was out of my mind, agitated, under
stress, I did not understand anything. Then suddenly, after 15, 20 minutes the shooting ceased and everyone
has put down the weapons. "
As wounded and dead arrived in the Ukrainian Hotel's reception, the snipers fled from the rooms. And so
the victims found themselves next to their assassins.
"Inside, recalls Nergadze, "there was chaos, you did not understand who was who. People ran back and
forth. Someone was hurt someone was armed. Outside was even worse. There were so many injured in the
streets. And the many dead."
Alexander says he left in a hurry. "Someone was shouting that there were snipers, I knew what they were
talking about," he said, "my only thought was to disappear before they knew about me. Otherwise, they had
me. At that time, however, I did not realize, but now I understand. I do understand. We've been used. Used
and discarded."
On February 18-20 th 2014 there was a major escalation of the violence on Kiev's
Maidan, ending in a massacre on the 20 th and ultimately in the overthrow of
Ukrainian President Viktor Yanuykovych. In the center of a European capitol over one hundred
police and demonstrators had been shot to death and hundreds more wounded. Despite the heavy
casualties suffered by police, Western governments, the opposition-turned government and
Western and Maidan media were the very next day unanimous in reporting that the massacre had
been ordered by President Yanukovych and that the shooting was initiated and carried out
exclusively or nearly so by snipers from the Ukrainian state's police and security organs using
professional sniper rifles. To this day, many in Kiev believe it was more likely that Russian
special forces organized and perhaps even carried out the slaughter. As discussed further
below, the Maidan government's chief of the Security Service of Ukraine, Kiev's equivalent of
the KGB or FSB, falsely declared in March 2015 that Russian President Vladimir Putin's advisor,
Vladislav Surkov, organized and commanded the snipers. The three days of killing peaked on the
20 th and ultimately scuttled an agreement to end the crisis signed on February 21
st by Yanukovich and three opposition party leaders and brokered by Russia and the
foreign ministers of Germany, France and Poland.
Less than two weeks after the massacre and Yanukovich's ensuing removal from power there
emerged an audiotape – likely a Russian or Ukrainian government intercept – of a
telephone conversation between Estonian Foreign Minister Urmas Paet and the EU's Catherine
Ashton in which the former states that his feeling and the sense in Kiev generally was growing
that someone from the new Maidan regime was behind the shooting. Although when pressed by Paet
that there needed to be an investigation Ashton faint-heratedly agreed, neither party made any
effort to push the issue again, no less demand an investigation.
[1] The legitimacy of the new coalition government and subsequent new Maidan regime
depended on the myth surrounding the snipers' massacre that Yanukovich's alleged deployment of
snipers sparked his overthrow and prompted Western governments to ignore the opposition's
violation of an agreement between the regime and opposition that provided a way out of the
crisis. The martyrs of the Maidan revolution know as the 'heavenly hundred', who were allegedly
killed by Yanukovych's forces, became the heroes and symbol of the revolution. Thus, from the
Paet-Ashton phone call forward, not only did Paet and Ashton stop discussing the shooting, but
not a single Western official discussed this issue so pivotal for the fate of Europe, no less
called for an investigation. Quite disturbingly, Ashton and Paet remained silent until the
audiotape was leaked. Nor would any foreign government, with the exception of Russia, or any
international governmental organization demand an investigation or threaten repercussions for
Kiev's failure to do so.
Mounting evidence now shows that not police, as the Ukrainian opposition and Western
governments and media assume, but rather RS and SP fighters were shooting both police and
pro-Maidan demonstrators on those fateful days. Contrary to Western and Kiev's claims, the
gunfire was initiated by Maidan supporters in the early morning hours, and police initially
showed restraint and sought to convince Maidan leaders to find and stop the shooters so they
would not have to respond. The escalation from Molotov cocktails, chains, and massive bricks
was not a distant leap.
Detailed and comprehensive analysis of publicly available evidence conducted by Ottawa
University professor and Ukrainian scholar Ivan Katchanovski demonstrates that the armed
fighting on both February 18 th and 20 th was initated by the
neofascist-dominated Euromaidan 'self-defense' units and that the RS and SP fighters shot,
killed, and wounded both police and EuroMaidan demonstrators. After the first version of
Professor Katchanovski's research was published, his house in Vinnitsa, Ukraine was seized by
the RS- and NSA-led Azov Battalion's fighters on behalf of the Maidan regime.
[2] Independent investigations by numerous organizations and a plethora of video and audio
evidence support Katchanovski's findings: Germany's Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, a BBC
documentary film, a documentary film by Beck-Hoffman, among several others. The following
account is based on their findings and others. These include interviews with several Maidan
shooters, who testify about their involvement in the killing of police.
[3]
Those killed and wounded on 18-20 February 2014 in Kiev were not shot by trained police
'snipers'. For the most part, both police and demonstrators were shot by hunting rifles,
Makarov pistols, and occasionally modified Kalashnikovs. To be sure, some videos show police
aiming but rarely firing rifles with scopes. However, they were doing so long after the RS and
SP fighters began the shooting and are not positioned on building roofs in order to carry out a
clandestine sniping operation. The police are openly deployed on the streets during a retreat
before a violent and advancing crowd, some of whom were deploying firearms as well.
February 18 th , black Tuesday, saw 17 deaths in Kiev. Most were killed in
fighting around the Supreme Rada and Trade Union buildings. The Maidan's 'Self Defense' (MSD)
'self-defense' units or 'hundreds' ( sotniki ) led by the neo-fascist RS attempted to
storm the building of the Verkhovna Rada (for the seond time – the first on January 21
st ) and set the Party of Regions headquarters in Kiev on fire blocking the exits,
killing one worker and seven Berkut and MVD police. In response, the Yanukovich government
authorized plans 'Boomerang' and 'Khvylia' for the the seizure of the Maidan and its
headquarters. An Alfa officer, who led one of the SBU groups that stormed the Trade Union
Building, stated that their main task was to seize the building's 5th floor. The RS occupied
the entire floor, which served as headquarters for both the EuroMaidan, the Maidan Self-Defense
(MSD), which organized and supervised the EuroMaidan's 'sotniki', and RS and housed a cache of
weapons. The fire set by RS fighters in the Trade Union House was allegedly intended to block
the advance of 'spetsnaz' troops and killed at least two Maidan protestors. The Trade Union
House, the Music Conservatory and especially the Hotel Ukraine would wherefrom much of the
gunfire targeting police and demonstrators would come in the next days.
[4]
Katchanovski's groundbreaking research on the February 18 – 20
th violence uncovered two radio intercepts of Internal Troops units and Alfa
commanders and snipers, confirming that the MSD and RS blocked their attempts to seize the
Maidan headquarters and Trade Union building on February 18 by setting the building on fire and
using live ammunition. Also, a radio intercept of Alfa commanders contains their report about
deploying SBU snipers to counter two Maidan "snipers" or spotters located on a
Maidan-controlled building.
[5] The majority of February 18's deaths were reported to be the result of gunfire wounds,
[6] and several policemen were wounded by gunfire on that day, at least one seriously,
according to a police account.
[7] This confirms Omega commander Strelchenko's testimony, which claims that groups of
Maidan protesters used live ammunition as early as February 18 th during the
so-called "peaceful march" and shot several of his policeman in two incidents near 22/7
Institute Street across the street from the Kiev Music Conservatory with hunting rifles and
Makarov pistols.
[8]
Protester Ivan Uduzhov claims someone gave him a Kalashnikov, and he shot at police from
behind protesters during the police attack just prior to police retreat. Uduzhov's description
coincides with events on February 18 th and 20 th and specific 5.45mm
AK-74 and 7.62mm caliber AKM weapons.
[9] An Italian journalist's photograph shows a protester using the cover of demonstrators'
shields to fire a Kalashnikov AK-74 assault rifle at advancing police during the evening of
February 18.
[10] On February 19 th there was a relative lull, but one police report states
that police spotted demonstrators wearing RS symbols in the Music Conservatory that day.
[11]
Shortly after midnight on February 20 th RS leader Dmitro Yarosh announced on his
Facebook page that RS would reject any agreement with the Yanukovych regime and that "the
offensive of the people in revolt will continue."
[12] On that day at least 49 Maidan demonstrators and 3 policemen would be killed by
gunfire, and more than a hundred more demonstrator and police would be wounded. Not only was
the shooting on the 20 th initiated by RS and PS fighters of the MDS, but many of
the casualties among the protesters appear to have been shot from areas controlled by the
EuroMaidan and MDS, in particular neo-fascist RS and SP elements. By 9:00am, before any
civilians were hit by gunfire, three policeman were killed and another 13 wounded. Only a few
police appear to have fired at the perpetrators on the 20 th and did so in
self-defence and retreat after the massacre had reached its peak. The February 20 th
shooting of civilians and police centered on Institutskaya (Institute) Street in the Kiev city
center, in particular from the Music Conservatory and Hotel Ukraine, and began with the
shooting of Internal Troops (VV) of the Internal Affairs Ministry (MVD) and 'Berkut' riot
police in the early morning hours.
[13]
Different sources contain evidence of pro-Maidan shooters or spotters in at least 12
buildings occupied by the Euromaidan opposition or located within the general territory held by
them during the massacre on February 20. This includes the Hotel Ukraine, Zhovtnevyi Palace,
Kinopalats, Bank "Arkada," other buildings on both sides of Instytutska Street, and several
buildings on the Maidan (Independence Square) itself, such as the Music Conservatory, the Trade
Union Hose, and the Main Post Office. The evidence also indicates that in addition to more than
60 Euromaidan protesters, 17 members of special police units were killed and 196 wounded from
the Maidan-controlled buildings by similar types of ammunition and weapons on February 18-20.
[14]
On February 20 th the police had been informed that neo-fascist elements among
the demonstrators had acquired firearms. Nevertheless, for the first hour or so the VV troops
and Berkut used standard crowd control techniques, including three new riot-control vehicles
with water cannons just acquired from Russia, to force the crowd back to the Maidan and off of
Institutka Street. From Institutska the neo-fascists in the crowd had hoped to make it to
Bankovaya (Bank) Street and storm the main government buildings of the president, government
and Supreme Rada as they would succeed in doing the next day. But in the early morning of the
20 th the police had gained their first foothold on Maidan in weeks. Prepared to
clear the square, the VV and Berkut suddenly were forced to retreat when they came under
significant fire from armed protesters. All sources report that around 6:00am and as early as
5:30am gunfire coming from the demonstrators' side, specifically the Conservatory Building and
the Ukraine Hotel's sixth floor, began to hit both demonstrators and police. The Ukraine Hotel,
the Conservatory, and the Trade Union House were all under the Maidan's control. Right Sector
fighters were located in all three buildings and controlled specifically the sixth floor of the
Trade Union House.
[15] One of the EuroMaidan shooters claimed he was firing at police for as long as 20
minutes and saw 10 other Maidan shooters doing the same.
[16] The pro-Maidan Fatherland Party's Rada deputy and former journalist Andriy Shevchenko
told the BBC and other investigators that a police chief in charge of officers on
Institutska– phoned him in desperation saying that his men were under fire from the
Conservatory, casualties were mounting, with 11 initially and within the hour as many as 21
wounded and three already dead, and that soon he would need to return fire if the shooting did
not cease.
[17] This commander was Ukrainian MVD's National Guard 'anti-terrorist' unit Omega
commander Anatoliy Strelchenko, who reported to MSD commander Parubiy at 8:21am that casualties
within his unit had grown to 21 wounded and three killed within a half an hour.
[18] On the same day, pro-Maidan Rada deputy Inna Bogoslovskaya announced from the Rada's
rostrum that there is a video of someone dressed in a Berkut uniform – but not of the
Berkut – shooting from a window in the Ukraine Hotel at both civilians and police in the
early morning.
[19] Other reports, such as the BBC report, also show that the first casualties occurred in
the early morning and were policeman.
[20]
The first casualty among the Maidan protesters came at 9:00am, which was several minutes
before the Berkut arrived on the scene, while the Maidan protesters were firing at water
cannons deployed to disperse the crown from Institutka nonviolently.
[21] Tens of other casualties among the protesters came from shots fired from territory and
buildings under the direct control of EuroMaidan's MSD or 'heavenly hundred' units consisting
of shooters from Right Sector, Svoboda, SNA, and the latter's military unit, the Patriots of
Ukraine throughout the day. Buildings under Maidan's comtrol included: the Hotel Ukraina, the
Zhovtnevyi Palace, the Kinopalats, Muzeinyi Lane, the Arkada Building, and Horodetskoho Street.
The data supporting this include eyewitness accounts, videotapes, exit wound analyses, and
markings on trees and building in the areas where civilians were shot. Eyewitnesses report
seeing snipers shooting from buildings such as the Ukraina Hotel at both police/security forces
and protesters.
[22] One video shows journalists and Maidan supporters, including rank-and-file protesters
as well as leaders on the stage, stating they see sniper "coordinator" or spotter on top of the
Trade Union House during the massacre.
[23]
A comparable number of casualties came from police, Berkut, and Omega units' fire from the
streets, but these came after the initial early morning massacre of police and Berkut and
during the period when snipers were shooting at both sides. No evidence of police, Berkut or
Omega firing from buildings has been produced. Thus, the day of mass casualties from gunfire
was initiated in the early morning by the neo-fascist elements of the Maidan, and the same
elements fired on both police and protesters later in the morning and the early afternoon.
Police fired on Maidan shooters and some unarmed protesters, but in the latter case the
shooting seemed to target the ground in front of demonstrators in order to drive them back as
they advanced on retreating police up Institutka.
[24]
Who Were the Shooters?
By mid-day on the 20 th both sides were firing, but the government forces seemed
to demonstrated some restraint. Thus, there be admissions by the official post-revolutionary
investigation that Maida protesters were killed by firearms not used by the Berkut, MVD
Internal Troops or regular police. The head of the post-Maidan Rada's special parliamentary
commission, Gennadii Moskal, reported that of the 76 protesters killed on February 18-20, at
least 25 were shot with 7.62mm caliber bullets and at least 17 with pellets, while another was
shot with a 9mm bullet from a Makarov pistol. [25] Precisely who initiated fire on the morning of the 20
th also is clear, and it was not the government forces. Small groups of RS and SP
members and fellow travelers from the MSD's heavenly hundreds were the first snipers of
February 20 th .
As noted above, the buildings from which the gunfire emanated – the Trade Union House,
the Music Conservatory, and the Ukraina Hotel – were under the control of Right Sector
and Svoboda groups. Numerous testimony, reports and analyses show that Maidan shooters opened
fire on police as early as 5:30am, wounded at least 14 Berkut police and killed at least 3
before 9:00am and before police returned fire. They were fired on mainly from three buildings:
the Conservatory, Ukraina Hotel, and Trade Union Hall.
[26] Despite RS, SNA and Svoboda fighters being identified in various sources as initiating
and ultimately perpetrating much of the sniper massacre, at the time a group identifiying
itself as the "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" or UPA – apparently named after the World War
Two Nazi-allied Ukrainian organization responsible for mass murders of Jews and Poles –
claimed responsibility for the February 20 th massacre.
[27] This could have been a RS and/or SP subunit.
BBC investigators found a Ukrainian photographer who photographed armed men in the Kiev
Conservatory during the shooting. They also interviewed an ultra-nationalist, called Sergei,
who claims he was part of an armed Maidan unit deployed in the Conservatory and was equipped
with a high-velocity hunting rifle. The Conservatory directly overlooks that part of the Maidan
where the police's water cannon-mounted vehicles had taken up positions. Sergei states that his
unit fired on police in the early morning of February 20 at approximately 7:00am but that they
did not shoot to kill, merely firing at their feet.
[28] According to the German newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung , the
Conservatory riflemen were under the command of 27-year-old Volodymyr Parasyuk, who was the
leader of one of the MSD sotniki units.
[29]
Although Andriy Parubiy was commander MSD hundreds, Parasyuk claims his group did not
coordinate its joining the MSD with Parubiy but rather with the Right Sector, speaking with
representatives of opposition UDAR party leader Klichko.
[30] However, as Katchanovski correctly notes, it is highly unlikely that such a large unit
of armed men could have been moving around on the Maidan without permission from someone in the
EuroMaidan leadership – perhaps Klichko.
[31] Parasyuk, a native of nationalistic Lviv in western Ukraine, states that over the
years he received paramilitary training with a range of nationalist groups there and was a
member of the Congress of Ukrainian Nationalists, one of the many Ukrainian organizations
modeled like RS and SP on the World War II era Nazi-allied OUN.
[32] Parasyuk admitted in a Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung interview that many in
his soten or hundred of some 50 men were armed with hunting rifles and fired on the
police from the Music Conservatory, but supposedly only in response to initial police fire.
[33] After playing this key role in the Maidan revolt, Parasyuk would serve as a company
commander in the Donbass battalion organized with the direct involvement of the Right Sector.
In 2015 he would be elected to the Ukraine's Verkhovna Rada, where he would be involved in
several physical attacks on his fellow parliamentarians. One of Parasyuk's Maidan shooters also
joined this battalion,
[34] the commander of which, Semyon Semenchenko, was by February 2016 under investigation
for illegally holding people, using falsified documents, and other unidentified crimes.
[35]
Parasyuk's role in initiating the shooting on February 20 th is corroborated by
other sources, including RS EuroMaidan members. The aforementioned RS commander Igor Mazur,
once a leader of the OUN successor organization, the Ukrainian Nationalist Army (UNA-UNSO),
which was one of RS's three founding groups of RS, stated that he saw some 50 armed protesters
in Maidan's underground area and shooting at police on the Maidan on that morning.
[36] Another source staying in the Ukraine Hotel overlooking the Maidan and Institutska
told Business News Europe IntelliNews that a Maidan rifleman demanded entry to the
hotel's guest rooms and then fired from the window at about that time.
[37] Katchanovski and Beck-Hoffman cite and include, respectively, video showing RS and/or
SP riflemen firing from the Hotel Ukraina at the same time.
[38]
In an interview given a year after the events, commander of Ukrainian MVD's National Guard
'anti-terrorist' unit 'Omega' Anatoliy Strelchenko confirmed that police and security possessed
prior information that some MSD hundreds were armed. He caims to have witnessed both Maidan
protesters and the police being killed and wounded by shots emanating from the Hotel Ukraina on
February 20 th . Additionally, he stated that shooters and spotters were positioned
in other nearby buildings under the Maidan's control, including but not limited to the Music
Conservatory, the Trade Union House, Zhovtnevyi Palace, Kinopalats, and Muzeiny Lane. At these
and other places Strelchenko and Omega troops came under fire from Maidan protesters with both
hunting rifles and Kalashnikovs.
[39] Strelchenko also testifies that his men were fired on twice on February 21
st – just after midnight and just before noon.
[40] Hours later, they and all other police, MVD, and special forces pulled out of the city
center in accordance with the February 20 th agreement, leaving the government
buildings unprotected to be stormed by the very same RS, SP and other Maidan activists who had
been involved in the shootings.
One Maidan shooter was apparently a member of either the neo-fascist Right Sector or one of
its founding neo-fascist parties, the Social-National Assembly (SNA), and later served in the
notorious Azov Battalion fighting near Mariupol and led by SNA chairman Biletskiy. This shooter
said he was recruited in January for this operation and that on February 19 th at
around 6:00pm he and some 20 others who came forward after someone from the Maidan protest's
podium requested people with shooting skills. They were offered a choice of weapons, including
shotguns and Kalashnikov-based Saiga rifles and told to take up convenient positions. The same
shooter claims he saw about 10 other protesters shooting at police from the Music Conservatory
building in the morning of February 20. Other Maidan protesters who witnessed these events said
that organized groups from western Ukraine's Lviv and Ivano-Frankivsk regions, some with
rifles, came to the Maidan and then moved to the conservatory hours after midnight on February
20 th .
[41] Using medical emergency service reports, a Rada special commission confirmed the time
line, concluding that shooting from Maidan and neighboring streets targeting Berkut and
Internal Troops on February 20 th started at 6:10am.
[42] The BBC investigation includes photos showing Maidan shooters with hunting rifles and
a Kalashnikov rifle inside the Music Conservatory shortly after 8:00am.
[43] Two separate '112 Ukraina' television broadcasts reported that between 8:00am and
9:00am several policeman were shot by Maidan shooters from the Music Conservatory. At the same
time, a video shows a Maidan stage speaker warning demonstrators of shooting coming from behind
the stage, demonstrators pointing to a shooter on a hotel rooftop, and sounds of gunfire.
[44] Numerous other reports cited by Katchanovskii, including an interview with a Swedish
neo-Nazi pro-Maidan protester, report Maidan shooters firing on, killing, and wounding police
before 9am.
[45]
Euromaidan tweeted at 8:21am -- minutes after Omega commander Strelchenko informed
Euromaidan self-defense chief Parubiy about the first Berkut report of Maidan shooters firing
at police -- that a "sniper" was caught at the Music Conservatory, which is consistent with
both BBC and Vesti interviews of the same shooter, who said that he was "captured" by the
Parubiy's personal security unit and driven out of Kiev.
[46] This 'capture' may have been an early attempt to cover up the hundreds' falso flag
'sniper's' massacre, since later, as Katchanovski reports, Parubiy denied his forces ever
captured a sniper.
[47] It is likely that the ultra-nationalist Parubiy was behind the false flag operation
and nationalist revolutionary seizure of power. He would be rewarded under the new Maidan
regime with the post of Chairman of the Defense and Security Council of Ukraine.
Video evidence compiled by Professor Katchanovski leaves no doubt that Parasyuk and at least
one of his groups of RS and SP snipers were firing from the 14 th floor of the Hotel
Ukraina. One video shows, beginning at 2 minute and 37 seconds into the video, the arrival of a
Parasyuk-led group with Parasyuk and Koshulynsky, who is carrying a Glock handgun. At the 2:47
mark, as the armed demonstrators are still entering, journalists attempt to photograph or film
them at which point they are confronted by people who appear to be in charge with screams,
"Don't photograph (them), don't photograph (them)!" [48] Koshulynsky would chair the Verkhovna Rada emergency session in
the late afternoon and evening of that same day during which the parliament condemned the
Yanukovych government for the massacre and issued a resolution ordering government forces to
withdraw from downtown Kiev. A video from Germany's ZDF television Parasyuk can be seen
removing armed comrades from a 14 th floor room of the Hotel Ukraina at 10:22am
commanded the shooters to stop firing and move because "the press should not be drawn into it."
The SP figure and then Verkhovna Rada deputy speaker Ruslan Koshulynsky is also seen in this
video with the same group of armed shooters. The video was removed in early March 2015 from the
German ZDF website but is available on Professor Katchanovski's Facebook page. [49] Another video shows the men inside the Hotel Ukraine room
shooting out the window. [50] A Ruptly video shows another group of Maidan protesters with at
least one gun and an axe breaking into the same 14 th floor hotel room, which had
been occupied by journalists. Just prior to this a Ruptly reporter showed at 10:12am that he
was shot in his bullet-proof vest about half an hour before, and the ZDF correspondent says in
the video: "They captured our room on the 14th floor of the hotel. They fired out of our
window." [51] All of this, as Katchanovski points out, has been covered up or
denied by the Ukrainian government investigation, avoided in both Maidan Ukrainian and Western
media reporting, and ignored by Western governments.
Around the time of the second anniversary of the February massacre, yet another pro-Maidan
sniper, Ivan Bubenchik, emerged to acknowledge that he shot and killed Berkut before any
protesters were shot that day. In a print interview Bubenchik previews his admission in
Vladimir Tikhii's documentary film 'Brantsy' that he shot and killed two Berkut commanders in
the early morning hours of February 20 th on the Maidan. Bubenchik hails from Lviv,
having learned how to shoot in the Soviet army and undergone training at a military
intelligence academy for operations planned for Afghanistan and "other hot points." Claiming
that he was on the Maidan from the "first day," he soon joined the MSD's "Ninth" soten
tasked with guarding the subway exits onto the Maidan, so the SBU could not use them to
infiltrate the square. At some point, the MVD blocked their acces to the government quarters on
Hrushevskii Strret. The Ninth soten delivered a written ultimatum that if by the next
day Ninth's fighters were not allowed to move freely between the Maidan and the Metro, they
would attack the Internal Troops, which they did with Molotov cocktails and stones. [52]
On February 20 th , Bubenchik claims that the Yanukovich regime started the fire
in the Trade Union House -- where his and many other EuroMaidan fighters lived during the
revolt -- prompting the Maidan's next reaction. As noted above, however, pro-Maidan
neo-fascists have revealed that Right Sector started that fires there. Relocating to the
infamous Conservatory where, Bubenchik confirms other testimony that there were pro-Maidan
fighters "with hunting rifles" shooting at the units of special troops seventy meters away." He
moved them away from windows through which they were firing at the secial forces when the
latter allegedly began throwing Molotov cocktails at the building in order to burn down their
"last refuge." Claiming he had been praying for 40, then 20 Kalashnikovs to appear, on the
morning of the February 20 th an unidentified person brought to them a Kalashnikov
and 75 bullets in a tennis racket bag. He emphasizes that those who claim the weapons had been
captured from the pro-Yanukovich titushki on February 18 th are wrong.
Bubenchik fired at police from a window situated behind columns farthest from the Maidan,
targeting likely commanders betrayed by their "gesticulations." He expresses his pride in
shooting the two commanders in the back of the skull and killing them and then shooting an
unspecified number of other Berkut servicemen in the legs with the intent merely to wound.
Bubenchik then moved out of the Conservatory onto the street and continued to fire on police
from behind the shields of other protesters, who were moved "to tears of joy." After the police
began to return fire, Bubenchik ran out of ammunition and was told by "people with status" that
more was on the way. He does not clarify whether it arrived, but concludes by noting that two
of his comrades in the Ninth hundred were killed: Igor Serdyuk and Bogdan Vaida. [53]
Numerous videos, including those used by the BBC and other documentaries cited herein,
demonstrate that by January the Maidan protests were far from peaceful. Total police casualties
from gunfire for February 18-20 were at least 17 killed and 196 wounded, according to one
source.
[54] Another set of figures holds that there were 578 police casualties, including killed,
wounded, and injured; 80 of these were victims of gunshot wounds during these three February
days. Later, almost all accounts settled on the figures of 85 protesters and 18 law enforcement
officials, with hundreds wounded on both sides.
[55] For the entire history of the Maidan protests, the Ukraine MVD's official figures are
20 police killed and approximately 600 wounded in Kiev alone.
[56] Some 100 civilians were killed during the protests and violence. As the Maidan revolt
radicalized, it increasingly came to represent western Ukrainians. It is not accidental that
the residents of the ten westernmost of Ukraine's 26 regions comprise over half of the
'Heavenly Hundred' martyrs -- those 100 people killed on Maidan during the revolutionary wave
of 29 November 2013 – 21 February 2014 (85 of them during February 18-20 -- and nearly
two thirds of those who were citizens of Ukraine. Twenty percent (19 of the 99 victims with
known residences and/or places of birth) were from the nationalist hotbed of Lviv Oblast', the
heart of Galicia.
[57]
Maidan Coverup?
In power, the EuroMaidan regime has stalled in investigating the February snipers' massacre
and appeared to be engaged in an effort to cover up the leading role of pro-Maidan neo-fascist
elements in shooting demonstrators. According to Katchanovski, numerous video and audio tapes
used to charge the Berkut and Omega with all the casualties were edited to delete key pieces of
information included in other sources cited by himslef and others showing that gunfire was
coming from territory and buildings controlled by the EuroMaidan and its neo-fascist elements.
Only the footage showing the Berkut and Omega firing on the streets is advertised by the Maidan
regime, the West, and supportive media.
[58] Two years after the snipers' massacre, the Maidan regime had yet to develop a
believable account of the massacre that could convincingly place the blame solely or even for
the most part on the Yanukovich regime and the Berkut. It is ostensibly investigating the
shootings of protesters and police but in two separate investigations. No charges have been
brought against anyone for shooting police, Berkut, or Omega personnel. When in autumn 2014
then Prosecutor General Oleh Makhnitskiy claimed that many of the protesters were shot with
hunting rifles, as Katchanovski's research suggests, he was soon fired from his post. Later, in
February 2016, leader of the command staff of the MDS, then SBU deputy head in the new Maidan
government, and now Rada deputy from the nationalist People's Front, Andrey Levus tried to lay
the blame for a crucial three-month 'delay' in the investigation on precisely Makhnitskiy,
claiming the SBU had handed over to him a "mass of evidence."
[59]
In autumn 2015 cases were brought against three arrested Berkut police for shooting
protesters, but the charges and any supporting evidence have not been laid out in any detail,
and what has been publicized has contradicted the GPO's indictment or been cast in grave doubt
by grave discrepancies with other available facts such as those presented in this chapter. The
prosecution's investigation only placed the accused in the general area of the shootings and
could not specify particular victims, link bullets and firearms, or identify precise time and
place of shootings.
[60] A Reuters investigation even found major "flaws" in the probe. For example, one
of the accused Berkut policeman is missing a hand and could not have fired the weapon as
prosecutors claim.
[61]
Moreover, the trial's revelations, Maidan regime General Prosecutor Office (GPO) court
appeals, and resulting court decisions began to undermine the Maidan myth and support
Katchanovski's version of events. The Maidan massacre trial revealed results of forensic
ballistic reports which indicate that the majority of the 39 protesters were killed from the
same single 7.62mm AKM, its hunting versions, or other firearms of the same caliber. Forensic
medical reports concerning locations and directions of entry wounds, videos showing the moments
of killings of most of these protesters, and testimonies of Maidan eyewitnesses show that these
protesters were killed from this firearm from the Maidan-controlled Hotel Ukraina and not from
the Berkut positions on the ground. According to Katchanovskii's most recent research based on
the trial revelations, the forensic medical reports made public during the trial confirmed that
the majority of the protesters were killed from very or relatively steep angles from nearby
buildings and Maidan-controlled locations. At least 12 protesters out of 21, whose cases were
examined during the trial, had wounds at significant angles, three protesters were shot from
nearly horizontal positions, while specific directions of the wounds have not been revealed in
the cases of six protesters. The Berkut policemen were positioned at nearly horizontal levels
with the killed protesters. Trial evidence also revealed that even those killed protesters
whose bullet trajectory was at nearly horizontal angles were shot from other such 7.62 caliber
firearms and hunting weapons from Maidan-controlled locations, such as the Bank Arkada and
Muzeinyi Lane buildings. Moreover still, according to Katchanovski, the investigation is
denying its own findings submitted in a report to the Council of Europe. This report stated
that the GPO investigation determined that at least three protesters were killed from the Hotel
Ukraine and at least 10 others were killed from rooftops.
[62] Nevertheless, on 26 January 2016, the GPO re-charged the Berkut commander and two
Berkut members with killing not 39 but 48 out of 49 protesters as well as terrorism. The sole
exception is apparently a Georgian protester exact circumstances and location of whose death
could still not be confirmed.
[63]
Despite claims by some Maidan Ukraine officials that the Russians were behind and/or carried
out the February 2014 shootings, Maidan Ukraine's legal system has begun to investigate RS
fighters' involvement in the killing at least some of the Berkut police and MBD Internal Troops
by January 2016 and at least demonstrator. This was was reflected in several Kiev court
decisions, which also suggested that the GPO was beginning to investigate RS as possible
suspects in the killings. Rulings by Kiev's Pechersk district court in November and December
2015 appeared in Ukraine's online database of court decisions and were publicized on Facebook
and elsewhere by Professor Katchanovski and the present author, but they were reported by the
Ukrainian or Western governments and media. The decisions state that the investigation had
determined that two wounded attackers of a separatist checkpoint near Sloviansk in Donbas at
2:00am on April 20, 2014 used the same weapons used to kill two MVD troopers and wound three
policemen on Maidan on 18 February 2014. [64] Two members of the RS's 'Viking' unit were being investigated by
the GPO by the end of summer 2015 for the February 2014 killings of the police on the Maidan,
following a public admission by one of this neo-Nazis. [65] Moreover, Kiev's Pecherskiy District Court decision shows that
the GPO was then investigating at least one other member of the ultra-nationalist UNA-UNSO, one
of the founding groups of the Right Sector, for murdering a protester by cutting his throat on
February 18, 2014. [66] In February 2016 the Pecherskiy court had added 12 other RS
members to the investigation of the Maidan shootings tied through weapons used near Sloviansk
on 20 April 2014.
[67]
The Ukrainian authorities have tried to tie the Maidan snipers' massacre to Putin. In
February 2015, SBU chief Nalyvaichenko claimed that the SBU had evidence, which it has never
produced, showing that Russian President Putin's advisor Vladislav Surkov organized and
commanded the snipers massacre from an SBU base. By April a Rada deputy from President Petro
Poroshenko's party (the Petro Poroshenko Bloc or PPB) revealed that Surkov arrived at 8:00pm on
the evening of the 20 th , when the shooting was already over. Nalyvaichenko then
toned down his story. Testifying at a hearing of the Anti-Corruption Committee in mid-April
2015, he was much more circumscribed in his claims about Surkov. He stated that Surkov was only
in Kiev on February 20-21 and was reportedly seen in the company of then SBU chief Oleksandr
Yakimenko and visited the presidential administration. Nalyvaichenko made no mention of Surkov
coordinating the snipers' attacks at the hearings and he was soon fired.
[68]
Only on 29 April 2015, a year and two months after the event, did prosecutors put out a
public call for citizens to turn in any bullet shells they might have taken from Maidan during
or after the snipers' massacre.
[69] In May the Maidan-majority Rada's Anti-Corruption Committee, largely controlled by
Poroshenko's PPB assessed the investigation into the massacre of protesters as unsatisfactory,
finding "sabotage and negligence," and warned that if within two months progress is not made
then it would seek the removal of the leaders of the General Prosecutors Office, MVD, and SBU.
[70]
The GPO has gradually and only slightly moved in the direction of Katchanovski's version of
Maidan massacre as an RS/SP-led false flag operation under the cover of the EuroMaidan
'self-defense' forces. Maidan Ukraine's first two GPs were Svoboda and Fatherland members,
respectively, and they never mentioned that shots were fired from areas controlled by
EuroMaidan such as the Hotel Ukraine. Its third GP appointed a new chief of the investigation,
who has acknowledged that some maidan demosntrators were wounded by shots fired from the Hotel
Ukraine.
[71] By October 2015, Ukraine's new General Prosecutor Viktor Shokin acknowledged that
there was no evidence of the Kremlin's involvement in the Maidan shootings.
[72] On October 15 th Shokin had the offices and homes of three SP deputies
searched as part of the investigation into the shootings, and these deputies were being
summoned for questioning 'as witnesses.'
[73] However, Shokin's move seems to have been a weapon deployed in the overall struggle
power between the neo-fascist and oligarchic wings dominating post-Maidan Ukraine's polity. The
day before, the SP and RS for the first time since Maidan held a joint march in Kiev ostensibly
in order to honor World War II's OUN and UPA, but the slogans condemned President Poroshenko
and called for a national revolution against what they regard as an oligarchic regime.
[74] Thus, the investigation continued to bog down, and no one was fired as Poroshenko
threatened. This suggests that there may be serious split over what direction the investigation
should take between the more moderate Poroshenko and his PPB, on the one hand, and the
ultra-nationalists of Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk's National Front, the Yulia Timoshenko's
Fatherland Party, RS, and SNA, among others, on the other hand. In lieu of international
pressure for an objective investigation, only a final showdown between the two wings of the
Maidan regime won decisively by Poroshenko might lead to an objective investigation and
prosecution of both the neo-fascist and Yanukovich regime perpetrators of the crimes committed
by the 'snipers' of Maidan's February revolution.
Western international organizations have accused the Maidan authorities of poor progress in
investigating, delaying, obstructing or covering up the events of February 20 th .
For example, the Council of Europe's (CE) International Advisory Group concluded that "serious
investigative deficiencies have undermined the authorities' ability to establish the
circumstances of the Maidan-related crimes and to identify those responsible." It regards the
investigation to be hindered by numerous "failures," "obstructiveness" (in particular on the
part of the MVD), a lack of will, too few investigators, and a lack of investigatory
independence and transparency. The CE panel also cited efforts by prosecutors and the MVD to
help Berkut officers avoid prosecution or at least interrogation.
[75] In its annual report for 2015, Amnesty International concluded: "Little progress was
made in investigating violations and abuses related to the 2013-14 pro-European demonstration
in the capital Kyiv ('Euromaydan') and in bringing the perpetrators to justice."
[76] Citing "political motives" on Kiev's part, Interpol refused to accept Kiev's request
for warrants on 23 Berkut officers, whom Kiev alleges killed 39 protesters in the Maidan
shootings.
[77] In June 2014, SP member and the Maidan government's then acting GP Makhnitskiy claimed
the GPO had given audiotapes to the FBI for enhancement in connection with the investigation,
but more than 20 months later the FBI has neither confirmed receiving the tapes nor released
results of their investigation.
[78] But neither Washington, Brussels, Berlin, London nor Paris have ever demanded an
objective investigation, mentioning the issue only when questioned by journalists, usually
those from Russia.
... ... ...
onno says:
March 15, 2016 at 4:21 am It's one large conspiracy against president Yanukovich and
Ukrainian people who were left in a dream that UA would become part of the EU – which
was NEVER the case. The USA and EU were represented in UA from 1991 and never undertook ANY
investments in modernizing UA industries to meet western standards like DIN standards. As a
result UA industry remained in a sub-Soviet standard not accepted by the west. All western
money was used to modernize government offices and other State buildings. The main reason
that corruption developed at the highest levels in government. However, today's corruption
under Poroshenko is worse than under Kuchma and Yushchenko/Timoshenko.
The main objective of Washington is to destroy Ukraine in the hope that people will become
desperate and will turn their hate/violence against their fellow country men – like
under Bandera in WW II – in the hope Russia will attack UA so USA/NATO have a reason to
start WW III.
korki says:
April 17, 2016 at 11:47 am Meet Andriy Parubiy, the Neo-Nazi Leader Turned Speaker of
Ukraine's Parliament
Philip Owen says:
July 29, 2016 at 3:19 pm The BBC had a piece at the time where one of their reporters
was with a team of 4 policemen sheltered behind a wall, trying to identify and shoot the
snipers. Their main concern like good policemen everywhere seemed to be the safety of ALL
the public present.
The Prosecutor General Office of Ukraine reportedly plans to arrest two prominent recent
members of the parliament and far right activists on charges of their involvement in the
Maidan massacre.
The Ukrainian media reports citing anonymous sources in the Prosecutor General Office of
Ukraine that they plan to charge Volodymyr Parasiuk with the massacre of the Berkut policemen
on February 20, 2014, and Tetiana Chornovol with a deadly arson of the Party of Regions
office that resulted in killing of a computer admin there on February 18, 2014.
My studies concerning the Maidan massacre and the far right in Ukraine found that the
Parasiuk-led company of Maidan snipers was involved in the Maidan massacre and that Chornovol
and far right Maidan activists were involved in this deadly arson attack that involved the
far right.
Both of them were hailed by the Ukrainian and even some Western media and politicians as
Maidan and national heroes, while their involvement in the Maidan massacre and the far right
background were deliberately ignored or denied. Parasiuk was affiliated with the far right
Congress of Ukrainian Nationalists and Svoboda before the Maidan and was a company commander
in the Right Sector-led Dnipro paramilitary battalion after the Maidan. Chornovol was an
activist of the far right UNA-UNSO before the Maidan and in the Fatherland/Peoples Front
during and after the Maidan. The Ukrainian media reports that Parasiuk has already
disappeared.
"... On Tuesday, the sixth anniversary of the beginning of the shootings on Kiev's Maidan was celebrated not only in Kiev, but also in Simferopol, the memory of three Crimeans – Dmitry Vlasenko, Vitaly Goncharov and Andrey Fedyukin, the first Berkut fighters who died on Maidan. We will remind that at the peak of the confrontation between law enforcement officers and maydanovites in February 2014, seven "berkutovites" were killed and about three hundred were injured. ..."
"... On the same day, which in Ukraine is still called by inertia the anniversary of the "revolution of dignity", deposed President Viktor Yanukovych addressed his compatriots, and in fact-to the current President Vladimir Zelensky. For some, the protests were a "revolution", but for the majority of the people they turned into a terrible tragedy, Yanukovych said and stressed: "After the 2019 presidential election, the people of Ukraine removed Poroshenko from power, giving President Zelensky and his team a chance to unite Ukraine." ..."
"... The document of the Prosecutor General's office of Ukraine in 2017 became public, which step by step indicates how and from what weapons the Maidan militants first began then – or rather 8 am on February 20 – to shoot the Berkut fighters who were standing in the cordon. A scan of the materials collected by the group of the head of the Department of special investigations of the Prosecutor General's office, Sergei Gorbatyuk, was published by the publication "Country". ..."
"... The document contains a full list of 34 Maidan activists involved in the shootings on February 20, 2014 in the center of Kiev. It turns out that in the fall of 2017, they were preparing to present a "suspicion". The 34 activists listed are members of the centurion Parasyuk group, mostly natives of the Lviv region. Vladimir Parasyuk, recall, took an active part in Euromaidan, later fought in the Donbass and made a political career in the Verkhovna Rada. On February 21, 2014, it was Parasyuk who appeared on the rostrum of the Maidan and announced the refusal of the protesters to fulfill the agreements concluded by the opposition leaders and Yanukovych. ..."
"... The person who actually started the "revolution", as it turns out, was a clear criminal. As noted in the publication "Country", just a month later, in March 2014, Yuskevich was caught in a robbery in his native Lviv region – and the weapon of the crime was the same gun "Chifsan". For this robbery, he received 7 years and is still in prison. So you don't have to look for it, if anything. It can be assumed that the main motive that prompted Yuskevich to participate in the shooting was the hatred of many criminals for the police. But it is significant that the published documents were put under the cloth. Bring Yuskevich suspected in the shooting of "Berkut" was blocked at the level of the head of the Department of special investigations of the Prosecutor General Sergei Gorbatyuk – it is possible that by order from above. ..."
"... "In the investigation of the death of the" heavenly hundred" held after the Maidan, falsification was carried out from the first days, "Yuriy Sivokonenko, a witness and participant in the tragic events, a veteran of the" Berkut " from Donetsk, said in a comment to the newspaper VZGLYAD. "Completely ignored the fact that the soldiers of the special forces "Berkut" and the internal troops of Ukraine did not have weapons until the morning of February 20, 2014, - said the source. – Four years later, we just started looking for trees on the battlefield, calculating bullet paths, although these trees have long been cut down. This in itself shows the scale of the fraud." ..."
"... The fact that firearms and ammunition could get to the Maidan, most likely, with the knowledge and consent of the future head of the presidential administration Sergei Pashinsky and the future speaker of the Verkhovna Rada Andrey Parubiy, still knew in 2014, said Sivokonenko. "This has been discussed many times. Pashinsky was even detained while trying to remove a sniper rifle from the Maidan in the trunk of his car in 2014. He, like Parubiy, has the most direct and direct relation to the blood on the Maidan," the veteran of "Berkut" stressed. ..."
"... Back in 2016, the Lviv radical Ivan Bubenchik admitted in a conversation with a journalist in the shooting of "berkutovtsev". But the nationalist protection provided him with immunity from prosecution. ..."
"... That is, fragments of the truth were already known before, but now they are for the first time formed into one clear picture. ..."
"... "These facts became known thanks to the active civil position of the former Minister of justice of Ukraine Elena Lukash and Deputy Andrey Portnov. They made this information public at their own risk, " sivokonenko recalled. However, now the official document of the Prosecutor General's office has been made public, and secondly, the full list of alleged shooters. ..."
"... "This is a key issue, in fact. Were the shooters acting on their own initiative or following a specific order? -the editor-in-chief of the online publication noted on Facebook "Страна.иа" Igor Guzhva. – How did they end up at the Conservatory?" Under what circumstances did Parasyuk appear on the podium the next day, February 21, and say that the Maidan will not fulfill the agreements reached with Yanukovych?". ..."
"... "I assume that the government team is trying to reduce pressure from radical groups, trying to reduce the level of exploitation of the Maidan theme, which is resorted to by supporters of Poroshenko and various right – wing groups," suggested political analyst Ruslan Bortnik. ..."
Kiev released documents of the Prosecutor General's office, which describes how in February 2014, the militants on the Maidan
first opened fire on the "Berkut". The names of the murderers and even the brands of weapons are named. Of course, such important
documents are unlikely to get into the press without the sanction of the current leadership of the country. Now there is only one
question: if the perpetrators of the Maidan massacre are named, will its customers be disclosed?
On Tuesday, the sixth anniversary of the beginning of the shootings on Kiev's Maidan was celebrated not only in Kiev, but also
in Simferopol, the memory of three Crimeans – Dmitry Vlasenko, Vitaly Goncharov and Andrey Fedyukin, the first Berkut fighters who
died on Maidan. We will remind that at the peak of the confrontation between law enforcement officers and maydanovites in February
2014, seven "berkutovites" were killed and about three hundred were injured.
On the same day, which in Ukraine is still called by inertia the anniversary of the "revolution of dignity", deposed President
Viktor Yanukovych addressed his compatriots, and in fact-to the current President Vladimir Zelensky. For some, the protests were
a "revolution", but for the majority of the people they turned into a terrible tragedy, Yanukovych said and stressed: "After the
2019 presidential election, the people of Ukraine removed Poroshenko from power, giving President Zelensky and his team a chance
to unite Ukraine."
There was no response to Yanukovych's appeal, and it would be difficult to expect. But it seems that in recent time the myth of
the Maidan, on which was based the Ukrainian government in the years 2014-2019, began to rapidly deteriorate. First of all, the legend
of the "heavenly hundred"came down the other day. As already noted by the newspaper VZGLYAD, among the designated "heroes" were found:
people killed in drunken fights, suicides, as well as those who were killed directly by the "maydanovites" themselves. On the sixth
anniversary of the beginning of the massacre on Institutskaya street, the mythology of the "revolution of dignity" was dealt a second
blow.
The document of the Prosecutor General's office of Ukraine in 2017 became public, which step by step indicates how and from what
weapons the Maidan militants first began then – or rather 8 am on February 20 – to shoot the Berkut fighters who were standing in
the cordon. A scan of the materials collected by the group of the head of the Department of special investigations of the Prosecutor
General's office, Sergei Gorbatyuk, was published by the publication "Country".
The document contains a full list of 34 Maidan activists involved in the shootings on February 20, 2014 in the center of Kiev.
It turns out that in the fall of 2017, they were preparing to present a "suspicion". The 34 activists listed are members of the centurion
Parasyuk group, mostly natives of the Lviv region. Vladimir Parasyuk, recall, took an active part in Euromaidan, later fought in
the Donbass and made a political career in the Verkhovna Rada. On February 21, 2014, it was Parasyuk who appeared on the rostrum
of the Maidan and announced the refusal of the protesters to fulfill the agreements concluded by the opposition leaders and Yanukovych.
It is specified that some of the suspects from the list were questioned and even gave confessions. It is reported that the gang
was organized in the first half of February 2014, stocked up on hunting rifles and arrived in the center of Kiev. Specific details
of the beginning of the massacre are given: the first fire was opened by a certain Nazar Yuskevich – from the barricade he fired
at least ten shots at a line of internal troops from a hunting rifle "Chifsan 555", after which the shooting was supported by his
ten accomplices not named in the document.
VZGLYAD-The signal for the overthrow of Yanukovych was the shot of a criminal
The person who actually started the "revolution", as it turns out, was a clear criminal. As noted in the publication "Country",
just a month later, in March 2014, Yuskevich was caught in a robbery in his native Lviv region – and the weapon of the crime was
the same gun "Chifsan". For this robbery, he received 7 years and is still in prison. So you don't have to look for it, if anything.
It can be assumed that the main motive that prompted Yuskevich to participate in the shooting was the hatred of many criminals for
the police. But it is significant that the published documents were put under the cloth. Bring Yuskevich suspected in the shooting
of "Berkut" was blocked at the level of the head of the Department of special investigations of the Prosecutor General Sergei Gorbatyuk
– it is possible that by order from above.
As explained in the publication of "Country", the documents of the Gorbatyuk group as a whole were not given a go, since they
contradicted the official version adopted under Poroshenko: berkutovtsy opened fire on the protesters, on the orders of Yanukovych,
to break the spirit of the Maidan defenders.
"It is clear why under Poroshenko the information was put under the cloth – it would have been necessary to initiate appropriate
criminal cases, prosecute a lot of Maidan activists, and even people's deputies," Ukrainian political analyst Ruslan Bortnik told
the VZGLYAD newspaper.
"In the investigation of the death of the" heavenly hundred" held after the Maidan, falsification was carried out from the first
days, "Yuriy Sivokonenko, a witness and participant in the tragic events, a veteran of the" Berkut " from Donetsk, said in a comment
to the newspaper VZGLYAD. "Completely ignored the fact that the soldiers of the special forces "Berkut" and the internal troops of
Ukraine did not have weapons until the morning of February 20, 2014, - said the source. – Four years later, we just started looking
for trees on the battlefield, calculating bullet paths, although these trees have long been cut down. This in itself shows the scale
of the fraud."
The fact that firearms and ammunition could get to the Maidan, most likely, with the knowledge and consent of the future head
of the presidential administration Sergei Pashinsky and the future speaker of the Verkhovna Rada Andrey Parubiy, still knew in 2014,
said Sivokonenko. "This has been discussed many times. Pashinsky was even detained while trying to remove a sniper rifle from the
Maidan in the trunk of his car in 2014. He, like Parubiy, has the most direct and direct relation to the blood on the Maidan," the
veteran of "Berkut" stressed.
Moreover, at least 6 out of 34 surnames from the list of Gorbatyuk were known earlier. Back in 2016, the Lviv radical Ivan Bubenchik
admitted in a conversation with a journalist in the shooting of "berkutovtsev". But the nationalist protection provided him with
immunity from prosecution. Another shooter – Dmitry Lipovoy, under interrogation by investigators (the video was published last year
by media expert Anatoly Shari), he admitted to handing the tambourine And the father of the future Deputy Zinoviy Parasyuk a saiga
carbine for shooting at security forces.
That is, fragments of the truth were already known before, but now they are for the first time formed into one clear picture.
"These facts became known thanks to the active civil position of the former Minister of justice of Ukraine Elena Lukash and Deputy
Andrey Portnov. They made this information public at their own risk, " sivokonenko recalled. However, now the official document of
the Prosecutor General's office has been made public, and secondly, the full list of alleged shooters.
However, the question remains open – whether Parasyuk's hundred (or Yuskevich's group-Bubenchik-Linden) acted independently or
executed the order. In the draft suspicion that was presented to Yuskevich, investigators of the Prosecutor General's office say
that the leaders of the Maidan did not want a war with Yanukovych, and the Parasyuk group simply "misunderstood" the goals of the
protest.
"This is a key issue, in fact. Were the shooters acting on their own initiative or following a specific order? -the editor-in-chief
of the online publication noted on Facebook "Страна.иа" Igor Guzhva. – How did they end up at the Conservatory?" Under what circumstances
did Parasyuk appear on the podium the next day, February 21, and say that the Maidan will not fulfill the agreements reached with
Yanukovych?".
But whatever it was, "sources in the Prosecutor General's office" did their job – and the sensational document has now become
public. Experts suspect that the publication was sanctioned by President Vladimir Zelensky.
"I assume that the government team is trying to reduce pressure from radical groups, trying to reduce the level of exploitation
of the Maidan theme, which is resorted to by supporters of Poroshenko and various right – wing groups," suggested political analyst
Ruslan Bortnik.
"The accuracy of information may raise questions. But in any case, these materials should become an element of the investigation
of the events on the Maidan, which continues today in Ukraine, " the expert added. And in any case, Bortnik believes, " Moscow's
version is growing, according to which the Maidan was an illegal change of power, a coup that led to events in the Crimea and Donbas."
Supporters of Petro Poroshenko admitted on Tuesday that the publication of documents of the Prosecutor General's office was for
them a" retaliatory blow " of the anti-Maidan.
"All these lists are an obvious provocation aimed at aggravating the conflict on the anniversary of the tragic events. The whole
country saw who killed people on Maidan and who was killed. There are video frames!,- the head of the Kiev center for applied political
research "Penta" Vladimir Fesenko told the newspaper VZGLYAD. – And these materials, authored by the then Deputy head of the administration
of President Yanukovych – are an attempt by the anti-Maidan to strike back and present their version. This is an attempt to absolve
yourself of responsibility for the evil, for the blood that was spilled then. Most Ukrainians remember who the killers were."
Fesenko hopes that the majority of Ukrainians will be able to keep on the side of the "revolution of Dignity". This will be easy
to do. Most Ukrainian TV channels ignored the publication of documents of the Prosecutor General's office.
The pro-Trump TV news channel One America News Network has produced a 50 minute
documentary on Ukrainegate hoax. Half of it is however dedicated to the Maidan sniper
massacre of February 2014.
In the documentary, Caputo exposes the cover-up that led to the impeachment of President
Donald Trump and mass murder. The Democrats' crusade to kick our duly elected president out
of office didn't start with a phone call. It began with Ukrainian corruption, election
meddling and a bloody coup that cleared a path for Hunter Biden to get rich.
Tune in this weekend, Saturday and Sunday at 10PM EST / 7PM PST – only on One
America News!
The above page only contains a four minute introduction :
OAN's Jack Posobiec sat down with Michael Caputo to discuss his new special, "One America
News Investigates – The Ukraine Hoax: Impeachment, Biden Cash, Mass Murder."
I have not been able to find the original English language version online. I only found a
version dubbed in Russian via Colonel Cassad.
Note, that the video is age restricted by YouTube, meaning that you can only view it if
you have registered and logged into your Google account. Commenting on the video is disabled,
as is saving it to a playlist or downloading it through some easy to use online service.
The reason for this censorship cannot be "community guidelines". The FCC places far
stringent restrictions on what can be broadcast on television during prime time on Saturday
evenings.
"The Kyiv Court of Appeal on Dec. 28 released from custody five former police officers of
the now disbanded Berkut unit who had been charged with the alleged murder of protesters
during the 2013-2014 EuroMaidan Revolution."
"... on the eve of the court hearing Prosecutor General Ruslan Riaboshapka replaced [the
prosecutors] with new prosecutors ...]"
"The new prosecutors supported the suspects' lawyers, who claimed that there is no risk of
the suspects fleeing. Later, the new prosecutors also presented a letter from Riaboshapka
saying that the suspects should be released because they are part of the prisoner exchange
with Russia."
"Moreover, the Berkut officers are not considered prisoners of war."
"A law enforcement source who could not be named due to ongoing legal proceedings told the
Kyiv Post that the Ukrainian authorities intend to have a trial in absentia for the accused
Berkut officers if they go to Russia as part of the anticipated prisoner exchange."
A research paper by University of Ottawa academic Ivan Katchanovski on the Maiden massacre.
He seems to be having a hard time getting the results into the MSM. No shit Sherlock. Can't
have anything out there to confront the UkoNazi line of thinking. I ran across this on the
Bryan MacDonald twitter feed for those interested.
Off topic...but of interest to many here at MoA....The snipers that executed the Maidan
massacre in Kiev have come forward and have made sworn testimony///
63
https://sputniknews.com/europe/201802151061669056-georgian-snipers-maidan-evidence
"Adding a new twist to the story about the 2014 Maidan shootings, a Sputnik correspondent has
met with the purported snipers. The agency has obtained the records of interrogation of Koba
Nergadze and Aleksandre Revazishvili. Both Georgian nationals, they are ready to testify in a
Ukrainian court."
It was a matter of time when the participants in the Maidan Massacre would surface the coup
d'état didn't stop the carnage of Ukrainians nor corruption of people in power. The
witness accounts were described in the hours as the events unfolded. Only the faces were not
known ...
Maidan Massacre Bombshell: #Georgian snipers reportedly confess to massacring along
with Lithuanian snipers both #Police and #maidan protesters in #Ukraine in Italian
#documentary just broadcast by most popular
#Italian #TV channel [h/t Ivan Katchanovski]
US Staged
a Coup in Ukraine - Here's Why and How Chris Kanthan Sott.net
Fri, 17 Aug 2018 20:42 UTC
Save What's the official narrative about the events in late 2013 and early 2014 in Kiev,
Ukraine? There was a spontaneous and peaceful Euromaidan "revolution" by freedom-loving people,
who forced the corrupt Ukrainian President to flee the country, right? Not so simple. There are
many intriguing facts about geopolitics, 70 years of U.S. meddling in Ukraine, and covert
regime-change operations that need to added to the mix.
US Meddling
First, objectively speaking, it's curious that a US Senator (John McCain) and the US
Assistant Secretary of State (Victoria Nuland) repeatedly attended political protests in
another country. Oh, Nuland is also the wife of a prominent warmongering Neocon, Robert Kagan;
and she's also the one who famously said , "F*ck the EU" while discussing the
future of Ukraine.
In the picture below, McCain is standing on the stage next to Oleh Tyahnybok, the leader of
the far-right group called Svoboda, which uses a not-so-subtle logo that combines "N" and "Z."
Get it?
Save Imagine if Russian or Chinese officials were performing similar stunts at anti-US
rallies in Mexico!
Victoria Nuland also admitted during a speech in 2014 that the US had spent $5 BILLION since
the 1990s to spread "democracy" in Ukraine. (Here's the link to a 1-min video of her speech).
Soros, NED, McFaul
Many people roll their eyes when they hear "George Soros" and think of conspiracy theories.
But Soros' own group - IRF or International Renaissance Foundation - admits in its 2015 annual
report that it spent more than $180 MILLION in Ukraine since 1990.
Save NED or National Endowment for Democracy is a US taxpayer-funded group that specializes
in ... ahem ... regime change. It's chief, Carl Gershman,
wrote in a Washington Post op-ed in 2013 (just before the protests) that "Ukraine is the
biggest prize."
Michael McFaul - US Ambassador to Russia, 2012-2014 - wrote an op-ed in the
WaPo in 2004 where he asked, "Did Americans meddle in the internal affairs of Ukraine?" Then he
answered it, "Yes."
Why did McFaul write the article? Because in 2004 , Soros and other NGOs fomented
the 'Orange Revolution' in Ukraine. Basically, the election was won by a pro-Russia guy, so
Soros and co. helped to organize protests and demand a new election. Then, a month later, the
pro-US guy won the new election with 52% of the votes. Democracy, America-style.
BTW, that guy - Yanukovych - who lost the election in 2004 ... ran again in 2010 and won
fair and square.
History Rhymes
If you go back in history, you will see that the CIA
worked with Neo-Nazis(!) and ultra-nationalists in Ukraine for decades, starting right
after World War II. Declassified CIA documents
describe Project Aerodynamic in the 1950s and '60s that recruited Ukrainian nationalists -
including Nazis and war criminals such as Mykola Lebed who was
accused of killing tens of thousands of Poles and Jews - to work against the USSR.
Save So, now hopefully you can clearly see the pattern and that Ukraine is really of
special importance to the US. But why? Well, have you heard of Brzezinski, the geopolitical
expert who influenced US foreign policy for 40 years? He came up with the idea of Mujahideen in
Afghanistan to fight the USSR, created Al Qaeda, and then repeated the same strategy of using
Islamic terrorists in the Balkans, the Caucasus, Libya and Syria.
Save Brzezinski explained in his 1997 book , The Grand Chessboard, that
"Ukraine is a geopolitical pivot. Without Ukraine, Russia ceases to be a Eurasian empire." He
also said that Ukraine must be brought into NATO by 2010.
Protests and Violence
In 2013, Soros, NED and other NGO's riled up some ordinary people in Kyiv. (BTW, outside
Kiev, there were no protests. In many parts of Ukraine, people are very pro-Russia and were
happy with President Yanukovych).
Then Neo-Nazi thugs acted as
provocateurs and attacked the police with metal bars, chains, fire-bombs, guns and
grenades.
Save
Save The Ukrainian government's links to Neo-Nazis are never openly admitted in the US, but
this is the reason why Congress
refused to pass a bill that banned funding of Neo-Nazi groups! For fun reading on the
far-right extremists in Ukraine, do some research on "Svoboda", "Stepan Bandera" and "Azov
Battalion."
False Flag Sniper Attack
In a secretly recorded phone call in 2014, Estonia's foreign minister revealed three
shocking facts about the Maidan murders:
The same sniper bullets killed both cops and protesters
The investigators strongly believed that the new coalition government - installed by the
US - was behind the snipers
The new government refused to look into the matter.
(Here's the link
to an excerpt from the phone call).
A couple of years later, in an Italian
documentary called "The Hidden Truth About Ukraine," some men from the Republic of Georgia
came forward and admitted that they were used as snipers in Kiev. As I describe in detail in my
book , similar false
flag sniper attacks were also used in Libya and Syria to foment regime change.
In summary, to advance misguided geopolitical goals, US/EU officials engineered protests and
chaos, and drove a democratically elected president out of the country. Then, without an
election, new oligarchs - a billionaire and an IMF guy - were handpicked by the West to become
the President and the Prime Minister of Ukraine! Democracy in action!
Conclusion
That's the basic truth about the coup in Ukraine, and it hasn't benefited anyone other than
the warmongers. Ukraine is split in two and stuck in a frozen civil war; its debt-to-GDP ratio
has doubled since the US-backed coup; pensions, social services and minimum wages ($140 a
month) have been slashed and the people are still ruled by corrupt oligarchs. The US regime
change ops also ignited a chain reaction of needless hostility, hysterical Russophobia and
crippling sanctions. The EU has lost more than $100 billion in trade with Russia in the last
four years; and the US has pushed Russia deep into China's orbit. Just like the neocon
adventures in Iraq and Syria, the meddling in Ukraine will go down as another disastrous and
reckless chapter in the sordid history of US foreign policy.
But to not only ignore the February 2014 coup in Ukraine that initiated recent hostilities between the U.S. and Russia, but to
also put the blame on the latter's "aggressive behavior," is at best laughable and at worst dishonest. In February of 2014 the democratically
elected government of Ukraine was overthrown in a coup orchestrated by the United States government, an event Chait and his peers
do their best to forget
. Russia's subsequent annexation of the Crimean Peninsula (containing the Russian naval base at Sevastopol) was a wholly reactive
measure. To say the recent estrangement was triggered by anything else than western aggressive behavior is factually inaccurate.
But to not only ignore the February 2014 coup in Ukraine that initiated recent hostilities between the U.S. and Russia,
but to also put the blame on the latter's "aggressive behavior," is at best laughable and at worst dishonest.
You lost me at that point. There was no coup in 2014. That's simply a Putinist lie. Yanukovich ran when he was going to be
brought to book for the murders he ordered on the Maidan. He was interviewed last year and was completely evasive when it came
to questions about the killings he ordered. He's now a fugitive from justice and was righteously removed from office when he ran
for asylum in Russia.
It's long past time for idiots like yourself to get the facts and quit parroting Putin's lies.
I left the Democratic Party yesterday, because I cannot support the first American President who ever installed anywhere in
the world a nazi regime -- it has never happened before, not even under a Republican President; and, until Obama, I had always
assumed that if it ever would happen, it could come only under a Republican President, never under any Democratic one. But I was
wrong -- mortifyingly wrong -- because Barack Obama did this in Ukraine (see here and here for the evidence); he is the first-ever
U.S. President to install a nazi regime anywhere, and so I wrote to my Representative seeking Obama's impeachment by the Democrats
in Congress; and, yesterday, that person, a Democratic member of the U.S. House of Representatives, told me that, notwithstanding
Barack Obama's having unquestionably done this, this Democratic Representative will not introduce on the floor of the U.S. House
(which is the only place where a bill of impeachment can be introduced) a bill of impeachment against this -- what is the appropriate
term for such a person, if not a -- nazi U.S. President. (That's nazi as an ideology, racist fascist, not as a party designation,
which is merely a party's name.) Simply because Obama calls himself a 'Democrat,' that Representative in the House will not introduce
a bill to impeach him. There was no argument on the facts; the facts weren't at issue here at all; it's just that Obama calls
himself a 'Democrat.' That's all ..
Ukraine's Pres. Poroshenko Says Overthrow of Yanukovych Was a Coup
.. The Italian newspaper Il Giornale, and Italian Mediaset Matrix TV, Chanel 5, issued, on November 15th, confessions by a
few of the snipers who on 20 February 2014 fired down into the crowd of "Maidan" demonstrators and police, in order "to sow chaos,"
as they say that they had been instructed to do.
The Georgian mercenary Alexander Revazishvilli said: "Everyone started shooting two or three shots at a time. It went on for
fifteen, twenty minutes. We had no choice. We were ordered to shoot both on the police and the demonstrators, without any difference."
This account is entirely consistent with the leaked phone-conversation on 26 February 2014 in which Urmas Paet, the investigator
whom the EU had assigned to determine whom to blame for the snipers and their massive bloodshed during the overthrow, informed
the EU's Foreign Affairs chief, Catherine Ashton, that the anti-Yanukovych, pro-U.S. and pro-EU side, were to blame, and that
Paet had just been informed of this by Petro Poroshenko (who shortly thereafter became elected as Ukraine's figurehead President).
Paet said: ..
Abe May 20, 2018 at 1:34 pm "Washington has shifted from tacit acceptance to an openly
complicit policy in Israeli annexation of Palestinian territory, an annexation which has been
going on for seven decades since the inception of the Israeli state in 1948. The now de facto
American approval of the annexation of all Jerusalem marked by the opening of the US embassy is
the culmination of 70 years of Israeli expansion and occupation.
"Meanwhile, Putin's unveiling this week of the bridge linking southern Russian mainland to
the Crimea Peninsula is a timely reminder of the brazen hypocrisy of American and European
states.
"Since Crimea voted in a referendum in March 2014 to rejoin its historic homeland of Russia,
Washington and its allies have continually complained about Moscow's alleged 'annexation' of
the Black Sea peninsula.
"Never mind that the Crimean people were prompted to hold their accession referendum
following a bloody coup in Ukraine against an elected government by CIA-backed Neo-Nazis in
February 2014. The people of Crimea voted in a peacefully constituted referendum to secede from
Ukraine to join Russia, which it was historically a part of until 1954 when the Soviet Union
arbitrarily assigned Crimea to the jurisdiction of the Soviet Republic of Ukraine.
"For the past four years, Western governments, their corporate news media and think-tanks,
as well as the US-led NATO military alliance, have mounted an intense anti-Russian campaign of
economic sanctions, denigration and offensive posturing all on the back of dubious claims that
Russia 'annexed' Crimea.
"Relations between the US and the European Union towards Russia have descended into the
freezer of a new and potentially catastrophic Cold War, supposedly motivated by the principle
that Moscow had violated international law and changed borders by force. Russia's alleged
'annexation' of Crimea is cited as a sign of Moscow threatening Europe with expansionist
aggression. Putin has been vilified as a 'new Hitler' or 'new Stalin' depending on your
historical illiteracy.
"This Western distortion about the events that occurred in Ukraine during 2014, and
subsequently, can be easily disputed with hard facts as a blatant falsification to conceal what
was actually illegal interference by Washington and its European allies in the sovereign
affairs of the Ukraine. In short, Western interference was about regime change; with the
objective of destabilizing Moscow and projecting NATO force on Russia's borders.
:That is one way of challenging the Western narrative about Ukraine and Crimea. Through
weighing up factual events, such as the CIA-backed false-flag sniper shootings of dozens of
protesters in Kiev in February 2014. Or the ongoing Western-backed military offensive by Kiev's
Neo-Nazi forces against the breakaway republics of Donbas in Eastern Ukraine.
"Another way is to ascertain the integrity of supposed Western legal principle about the
general practice of annexation of territory.
"From listening to the incessant public consternation expressed by Western governments and
media about Russia's alleged annexation of Crimea, one might think that the putative
expropriation of territory is a most grievous violation of international law. Oh how
chivalrous, one might think, are Washington and the Europeans in their defense of territorial
sovereignty, judging by their seeming righteous repudiation of 'annexation'.
"However, this week's grotesque opening of the US embassy in Jerusalem accompanied by the
massacre of protesting unarmed Palestinians shows that Western professed concerns about
'annexation' are nothing but a diabolical sham. In seven decades of expanding illegal
occupation of Palestinian territory by the Israelis, Washington and the Europeans have enacted
no opposition.
"But when it comes to Crimea, even though their case is not valid, the Western powers never
stop hand-wringing about Russia's 'annexation' as if it was the biggest crime in modern
history.
"Worse than hypocrisy, the US and European Union have been silently complicit in allowing
Israel to continue annexing more and more Palestinian territory despite the stark violation of
international law. Periodic massacres and whole populations held under brutal military siege in
the Gaza Strip and West Bank have never registered any effective opposition from Western
powers."
UKRAINE. An American survey shows that the mood in Ukraine is bad and expecting worse
. Well, that's one post-Maidan Ukraine expectation that will be fulfilled. Nadia Savchenko, a former Ukrainian
hero, has been arrested inUkraine on
terrorism charges. She dares to suggest that the massacre was a false flag . (Read Ivan
Katchanovski's paper : "This academic
investigation concludes that the massacre was a false flag operation, which was rationally
planned and carried out with a goal of the overthrow of the government and seizure of power. It
found various evidence of the involvement of an alliance of the far right organizations,
specifically the Right Sector and Svoboda, and oligarchic parties, such as Fatherland.
Concealed shooters and spotters were located in at least 20 Maidan-controlled buildings or
areas". Here are
confessions by some of the snipers that your local news outlet has been too busy to tell
you about.)
"... "We were told to ensure order so that there were no drunks, to maintain discipline and identify rabble-rousers sent in by the authorities," the officer recounted. ..."
Snipers Koba Nergadze and Alexander Revazishvili, who now fear for their lives, are even ready to confirm their stunning account
below in a Ukrainian court.
A
protestor points a gun during clashes with riot police in the centre of Kiev on January 22, 2014.
It was the shot unheard around the world – everyone knows the Ukraine Crisis began after the 2014 Maidan Coup, but few in the
West know Russia didn't invade Ukraine, fewer still know of the mysterious snipers who rained down death from above those fateful
days in Kiev.
The corporate media was quick to follow standard stenographers union protocol in line with modern western journalistic standards
– so they of course
immediately blamed Russia
without any evidence. They claim Russian trained snipers were supporting the Ukrainian president by
firing on protesters.
Those who actually in Kiev, and not only Russian media, but
independent foreign media
report a key fact: yes, the snipers fired on protesters, but also on security forces. Snipers were
attacking both sides, adding fuel to the raging fires of bloody revolution that laid Kiev – the Mother of Russian Cities – again
to ruin.
Now,
thanks to Sputnik
, we have finally identified the snipers, they were Georgian, and their accounts will shock you:
It is necessary to create chaos on the Maidan, using weapons against any targets, protesters and police – no difference"
Said one of the ringleaders
According to Sputnik,
snipers Koba Nergadze and Alexander Revazishvili,
who now fear for their lives,
are even ready to confirm their stunning account below in a Ukrainian court
:
Sputnik has obtained copies of an official testimony that they gave
to lawyers Alexander Goroshinsky and Stefan
Reshko
and also copies of air tickets confirming the arrival of Nergadze and Revazishvili to Kiev during the Maidan
events
.
To get really understand how we got here, we must go back to the beginning of sniper fire on Maidan, which is where the Sputnik
report begins:
On February 20, 2014, unknown snipers shot at people gathered on Kiev's central Maidan square killing 49 protesters and four
police officers. Local opposition leaders, as well as US and EU representatives, were quick to point a finger at the "regime of
Viktor Yanukovych
." Still, an official investigation failed
to produce any results with the culprits still at large.
A Sputnik correspondent has met with the purported snipers, all of them from Georgia. They insist that they were taking orders
from Maidan leaders. Moreover, they had direct orders to fire at police officers AND protesters in order to enrage the crowd and
provoke a political crisis.
from
left to right: General Tristan Tsitelashvili, Alexander Revazishvili and Koba Nergadze
According to Sputnik, General
Tristan Tsitelashvili
, erstwhile commander of the Georgian Army's elite Avaza unit,
was the first to expose the fact it was Georgian snipers were firing onto Maidan Square. The General lead troops during the August
2008 hostilities in Abkhazia, until he became a personal enemy of Mikhail Saakashvili, who tried to blame him for his own failures.
Saakashvili
trying to eat his tie? Seriously, we couldn't make this up if we tried
While many people have reasonable complaints against the former Georgian President, General Tsitelashvili's issue is far more
personal. His home was raided by Saakashvili's forces who arrested the General, and critically injured his little son. Since 2008,
the two had been sworn enemies, but Tsitelashvili can hardly be considered a friend of Russia, considering he fought for Georgia.
This makes his incredible account all the more credible. Sputnik's report continues with a quote from the General:
I knew already in 2014 about people from Georgia who were present on Maidan square with specific orders to shoot. Some of them
served under my command in the Georgian army. Some are still in Ukraine, fighting, others returned to Georgia. They took their
time to speak out because they were afraid to. They are still afraid because they can simply be eliminated as unwanted witnesses!
One of those snipers who "knew too much" was Koba Nergadze, a carrier Georgian special forces operator. Sputnik spoke with him
as well:
"We were fighting smugglers. The region was divided into zones controlled by Georgian and Ossetian businessmen. Conflicts occasionally
flared up, including real firefights with the Ossetian military. Our brigade suffered 11 or 12 people killed, I can't say for
sure. Overall, the Georgian army lost 45 people," Nergadze said.
After his 2006 departure from the regular army after, he joined the Georgen DEFMIN's Security Service, with the help of a peculiar
friend.
This friend was Mamuka Mamulashvili, the commander of the "Georgian Legion" fighting in eastern Ukraine on Kiev's side. Once again,
as with General Tsitelashvili,
these aren't exactly Russia's friends, which makes their claims against Kiev all the more
unbiased and believable
.
"I first met him while in the army, at the birthday party of my friend Bezho," Koba added. "Officially, we also dealt with
the protection of the rallies held in Tbilisi, to make sure that there would be no clashes between supporters and opponents of
Saakashvili. In fact, we were tasked with suppressing opposition rallies and keeping an eye on the opposition," he admitted.
If necessary, by order of commanders, our service officers beat up opposition leaders. As a rule, we did this while wearing
masks. People called us 'Sonderkommando.' Service members were usually tight-lipped about where they worked and what they did.
Sputnik further explains that:
The agents were divided into "tens." Nergadze was one of the foremen. Other foremen he knew are Georgy Saralidze, Merab Kikabidze
and David Makiashvili. In his interview with Sputnik, Koba mentioned some of the "tariffs." He said that they were paid $1,000
for beating up an opposition MP.
In December 2013, Mamulashvili invited the "foremen" to a meeting and ordered them "to immediately go to Ukraine to help the
protesters." Nergadze's group was allocated $10,000 with an additional $50,000 promised them upon their return.
They used other people's passports to reach their destination. Nergadze had a passport issued in the name of Georgy Karusanidze
(born in 1977).
In Kiev, the group was accommodated on Ushinsky Street and each day, as if to work, they went to Maidan.
"We were told to ensure order so that there were no drunks, to maintain discipline and identify rabble-rousers sent in
by the authorities," the officer recounted.
Nergazde celebrated New Year at Hotel Ukraina, which was already controlled by protesters.
The hotel Ukraiina provides the perfect vantage point for a Sniper, overlooking Maidan square. If a sniper were to fire from the hotel, into the violently rioting crowd, targeting both sides in the middle of the pandemonium,
the fighting would quickly escalate, and the mass panic would help conceal the sniper's identity, position, and very existence.
The
Hotel Ukraine is the large building on the top left
The report continues:
Alexander Revazishvili
is another former Georgian military man, who arrived in Kiev in the midst of unrest. After
serving in the Georgian army, he was an active member of "Free Zone" – an organization of Saakashvili's supporters. In his own
words, he "infiltrated the oppositionists' ranks, inciting fights and engaging in other provocations."
The organization
was led by Koba Khabazi, who introduced Revazishvili to Mamulashvili. He took a great deal of interest in the ex-officer's military
specialization as a sniper.
In mid-February, Revazishvili, Khabazi and four other representatives of the Free Zone
arrived in Kiev on a UIA flight. They were accommodated at Vozduhoflotskaya Street before being moved to the city conservatory,
which was already controlled by the opposition.
"The following day Mamulashvili brought us to Maidan and placed us in a tent set up on the square. Khabazi told us that our task
was to provoke the protesters to attack. Our group, along with the protesters, attacked Berkut with stones and Molotov cocktails.
Some people were bringing rocks; some were lining up Molotov cocktails, while others assaulted Berkut and the police. Revazishvili
said.
"Sergei Pashinsky Was Bringing the Arms"
Protesters
fighting with police during Maidan, unaware snipers were targeting both sides
"On February 14 or 15, the
group commanders – me, Kikabidze, Makiashvili, Saralidze, I do not remember the names of the others – were gathered in a suite on
the third floor of Hotel Ukraina.
Among those present were Parubiy (Andrey Parubiy, right-wing Ukrainian politician, the "commandant of the Maidan" during the period
of unrest in Kiev; since 2016 – Speaker of the Verkhovna Rada), and Pashinsky (Sergei Pashinsky, a notorious Ukrainian politician
and businessman, a People's Deputy of Ukraine. – Ed.). 'We need to help our fraternal people, and soon we will have an assignment.'
He gave no further clarification. By that time I had already seen hunting rifles and pistols, carried by the protesters," "Nergadze
said.
Also taking part in the meeting was a certain Christopher Brian, who was presented as a former American soldier.
In the evening of February 19, Sergey Pashinsky and several unfamiliar guys with big bags returned to the hotel.
They took out SCS carbines, 7.62mm Kalashnikov assault rifles, an SVD rifle and a foreign-made carbine. Pashinsky explained to
us that the weapons would be needed "for self-defense," but when I asked him from whom we were going to defend ourselves, he did
not answer and left the room. Sputnik reports.
The next part of their story really proves what the goal of the snipers was to do. Apparently Mamulashvili mentioned some a "special
task" to the snipers.
"
It is necessary to create chaos on the Maidan, using weapons against any targets, protesters and police – no difference
."
said Mamulashvili
He said that the money for the "business trip" would be paid once the "assignment" had been completed.
Someone asked Mamulashvili in Georgian: "Where's Misha?" He answered: "With Porokh." Then they left. Sometime later, Pashinsky
and several other men brought in a bag with weapons, mostly SCS carbines. Pashinsky himself was holding a Kalashnikov rifle with
an open butt.
Among those present was Vladimir Parasyuk, the leader of one of the Maidan "hundreds," who subsequently commanded the 4th Company
of the Dnepr Battalion and later became a People's Deputy of Ukraine.
Revazishvili went on to say:
Pashinsky asked me to help choose shooting positions. He said that Berkut [police commandos] could storm the Conservatory during
the night and break up the protesters. At night, about 4 or 5 am, I heard gunshots.
I thought they were coming from the October Palace. Pashinsky jumped up, grabbed the walkie-talkie, and started yelling to
cease fire, that it was not the right time. The shooting immediately stopped.
At about 7.30 am (maybe later) Pashinsky ordered everyone to get ready and open fire, taking two or three shots and immediately
change position. The shooting continued for about 10-15 minutes. After that, we were ordered to drop weapons and leave the building.
Then he returned to Maidan. He heard that people were enraged; some believed that it was the Berkut shooting. Others, on the
contrary, thought that it was the protesters who had fired the shots.
"I realized that this might end badly, that I was in a real fix, that people could tear me up right here if they only knew
the truth. I went out to take a walk on Maidan. They I decided that it was time to fly out. I took a taxi to the airport," Revazishvili
concluded.
Early in the morning on February 20, at about 8, I heard the sound of gunshots coming from the conservatory; 3 or 4 minutes
later, Mamulashvili's group opened fire from windows on the third floor of Hotel Ukraina. They were shooting in pairs. After each
shot, they moved to another room and fired again. When it was all over, they told us to get out. That same day Bezho and I flew
to Tbilisi.
The ex-officer of the Georgian army was never paid the money he was promised. Today, he fears revenge from his former "colleagues."
Koba Nergadze and Alexander Revazishvili are ready to confirm their words in a Ukrainian court. Sputnik has obtained copies
of an official testimony that they gave to lawyers Alexander Goroshinsky and Stefan Reshko, who represent the interests of former
members of the Berkut police commando unit. Sputnik also has copies of air tickets confirming the arrival of Nergadze and Revazishvili
to Kiev during the Maidan events.
Those who follow alternative media are well aware of the existence of the snipers and the real story of Maidan, however now we
finally may know who they are, and what they did. Moreover, seeing as Sputnik announced that in addition to their legal accounts,
they can prove they were in Kiev during the Maidan coup. We are one step closer to learning more about how the Coup began, but are
we any closer to an end to the war uncertain. This may have incredible implications in coming days, and if anything new arises, we
will be sure to keep you informed.
"In a dramatic development in the trial in Kiev of several Berkut police officers accused of shooting civilians in the Maidan
demonstrations in February 2014, the defence has produced two Georgians who confirm that the murders were committed by foreign
snipers, at least 50 of them, operating in teams. The two Georgians, Alexander Revazishvili and Koba Nergadze have agreed to testify
[ ]
"This dramatic and explosive evidence was first brought to light by the Italian journalist Gian Micalessin on November 16 in
an article in the Italian journal Il Giornale and is again brought to the world's attention by a lawyer with some courage picking
up on that report and speaking with the witnesses himself. These witnesses stated to Gian Micalessin, even more explosively, that
the American Army was directly involved in the murders.
"The clear objective of the Maidan massacre in Kiev on February 20, 2014 was to sow chaos and reap the fall of the democratically
elected, pro-Russian Yanukovych government. People were slaughtered for no other reason than to destroy a government the NATO
powers, especially the United States and Germany, wanted removed because of its opposition to NATO, the EU, and their hegemonic
drive to open Ukraine and Russia to American and German economic expansion. In other words, it was about money and the making
of money.
"The western media and leaders quickly blamed the Yanukovych government for the killings during the Maidan demonstrations,
but more evidence has become available indicating that the massacre in Kiev of police and civilians – which led to the escalation
of protests, leading to the overthrow of the Yanukovych government – was the work of snipers working on orders of government opponents
and their NATO controllers using the protests as a cover for a coup.
"One of the snipers already admitted to this in February 2015, thereby confirming what had become common knowledge just a few
days after the massacre in Kiev and in a secretly recorded telephone call, the Estonian Foreign Minister Urmas Paet reported to
the EU head of Foreign Policy, Catherine Ashton, in early March 2014, that there was widespread suspicion that "someone from the
new coalition" in the Kiev government may have ordered the sniper murders. In February 2016, Maidan activist Ivan Bubenchik confessed
that in the course of the massacre, he had shot Ukrainian police officers. Bubenchik confirmed this in a film that gained wide
attention.
'Dr. Ivan Katchanovski, at the University of Ottawa, published a devastating paper on the Maidan killings setting out in extensive
detail the conclusive evidence that it was a false flag operation and that members of the present Kiev regime, including Poroshenko
himself were involved in the murders, not the government forces. [ ]
"In the November 16 article in the Italian journal Il Giornale, and repeated on Italian TV Canale 5, journalist Gian Micalessin
revealed that 3 Georgians, all trained army snipers, and with links to Mikheil Saakashvili and Georgian security forces were ordered
to travel to Kiev from Tbilisi during the Maidan events. It is two of these men that are now being called to testify in Kiev."
MAIDAN SNIPERS. One of the founding myths of the "Revolution of Dignity" was the massacre on
the Maidan. Ivan Katchanovski has proved, to anyone with the capacity for objective thought,
that it was a false flag operation; here is his paper ;
here is a summary
.
Two Georgian snipers have come forward to confess; here is a summary
of what they said with links to the original. The story continues to develop and Katchanovski
is following it .
"The interviews with three snipers of Georgian nationality, conducted by the Italian journalist Gian Micalessin and aired as
a breathtaking documentary on Milan-based Canale 5 (Matrix program) last week, still have not paved its way to the international
mainstream media.
The documentary features Alexander Revazishvili, Koba Nergadze and Zalogi Kvaratskhelia, Georgian military officers They claim
that on Jan 15, 2014 they landed in Kiev equipped with fake documents Having received 1000 USD each one and being promised to
be paid 5000 USD after the "job is done", they were tasked to prepare sniper positions inside the buildings of Hotel Ukraine and
Conservatory, dominant over the Maidan Square. Along with other snipers (some of them were Lithuanians) they were put under command
of an American military operative Brian Christopher Boyenger.
The coordinating team also included Mamulashvili and infamous
Segrey Pashinsky, who was detained by protesters on Feb 18, 2017 with a sniper rifle in the boot of his car The weapons came on
stage on February 18 and were distributed to the various Georgian and Lithuanian groups. "There were three or four weapons in
each bag, there were Makarov guns, AKM guns, rifles, and a lot of cartridges." – witnesses Nergadze.
The following day, Mamulashvili and Pashinsky explained to snipers that they should shoot at the square and sow chaos.
"I listened to the screams," recalls Revazishvili. "There were many dead and injured downstairs. My first and only thought was
to leave in a hurry before they caught up with me. Otherwise, they would tear me apart."
Four years later, Revazishvili and his two companions report they have not yet received the promised 5000 USD bills as a payment
and have decided to tell the truth about those who "used and abandoned" them."
Well that was a clear picture of a sausage-making during the US-sponsored regime change in Ukraine. The neo-Nazi in the US-supported
"government" in Kiev came about naturally.
American military operative Brian Christopher Boyenger. The coordinating team also included Mamulashvili and infamous Segrey
Pashinsky, who was detained by protesters on Feb 18, 2017 with a sniper rifle in the boot of his car The weapons came on stage
on February 18 and were distributed to the various Georgian and Lithuanian groups. "There were three or four weapons in each bag,
there were Makarov guns, AKM guns, rifles, and a lot of cartridges." – witnesses Nergadze.
"I listened to the screams," recalls Revazishvili. "There were many dead and injured downstairs. My first and only thought was
to leave in a hurry before they caught up with me. Otherwise, they would tear me apart."
The New York Times Explains Why Kiev Sniper Massacre Was Likely a False Flag Describes Yanukovich as a flabby leader whose
willingness to appease his opponents demoralized his police. Means it's not very believable he would order a massacre, or that the
police would carry it out for him Marko Marjanović
5,071 9
That is if you can call in-depth an article that is full of omissions. Which you can't. So let's just say it was a very LONG article.
We should still be thankful for it, however, because it reminded us of the real Yanukovich.
This was a guy who took it upon himself to negotiate an association treaty with the EU and came within inches of signing it.
In reality Yanukovich was a centrist who approximated the policies of pro-western Ukraine politicians to the point where he had
lost the active support of eastern Ukraine. Moreover during the Maidan standoff he proved himself an indecisive and timid leader.
He
amnestied street-fighting radicals and let them keep control of public spaces in the capital for far longer than would be the
case in any western or eastern country. Moreover he bent backward to appease the opposition.
In late January he offered to take them into a new
national unity government and name a PM from their ranks. It was a sweet deal they would have probably taken, but for fear of
running afoul of
the protest movement themselves.
Despite the rebuke Yanukovich still accepted the resignation of his PM Azarov – a reliable loyalist hated by the opposition.
A little earlier in the month his government passed a
set of laws it believed would give it the
power it needed to deal with the situation, but then just as quickly backed away from them.
This was typical Yanukovich. Hapless, in over his head, and wishing problems would just go away so he wouldn't need to deal with
them.
Ashen-faced after a sleepless night of marathon negotiations, Viktor F. Yanukovych hesitated, shaking his pen above the text
placed before him in the chandeliered hall.
Then, under the unsmiling gaze of European diplomats and his political enemies, the beleaguered Ukrainian president scrawled
his signature, sealing a deal that he believed would keep him in power, at least for a few more months.
The security officers said in interviews that they were alarmed by language in the truce deal that called for an investigation
of the killing of protesters.
They feared that a desperate Mr. Yanukovych was ready to abandon the very people who had protected him, particularly those
in the lower ranks who had borne the brunt of the street battles.
The Times covers just the last two days of Yanukovich's reign, but it's safe to say police doubt built up gradually. 21st February
was certainly not the first time Yanukovich attempted to appease his enemies at the expense of his police.
During the first half of February Maidan protesters arrested by the police were released and amnestied on Yanukovich orders in
return for protesters vacating occupied government buildings
and lifting some of their barricades.
Indeed, as The Times itself reports, all along police resented Yanukovich for not having been sent in to disperse the protesters
encampments early on, when they believed it would have still been relatively easy.
All in all the NYT shows Yanukovich on the evening of February 21th was a flabby, indecisive leader who did not comprehend the
seriousness of the situation. Left unstated by the NYT is that that was the picture of Yanukovich throughout the standoff.
The idea that on the February 20th this timid and wavering man woke up, rang his police chief and ordered himself a radical escalation
of the standoff in the form of a mass slaughter of protesters is preposterous. It is at odds with everything about Yanukovich's record
during the crisis.
It is also not believable his demoralized police would carry out such an order from him. It was a force thoroughly discouraged
with what it saw as having been held back, undermined and under-supported.
That leaves the possibility police snipers did it on their own as vengeance for the losses suffered on the 18th and the 20th.
However, this is not much more believable either.
The Times piece makes it clear policemen were actually highly conscious of the possibility they would be hung out to dry by Yanukovich
and face judicial charges for their conduct. Going rogue would make that all the more certain.
Also let us be very clear. Nobody on the western and pro-western side ever tried to argue that is how the massacre went down.
The story has always been that Yanukovich himself was responsible.
In writing the report the NYT has its own agenda. It is trying to argue Yanukovich was "not so much overthrown as cast adrift
by his own allies" due to the "panic in government ranks created by Mr. Yanukovych's own efforts to make peace".
We get it. NYT wants us to know Yanukovich toppling was immaculate. It wasn't so much that he fled the capital because he had
good reason to fear for his safety, it is just that his regime simply dissipated into thin air due to his own flabbiness.
However, isn't it the case that leaders who in their "efforts to make peace" go so far as to cause their allies' desertion generally
do not order the mass murder of their enemies?
*Based on reporting by BBC's Daniel Sandford
fighting started that day with a successful protester advance against the parliament in the morning. It was followed by a police
counter-attack later in the day.
Describes Yanukovich as a flabby leader whose
willingness to appease his opponents demoralized his police. Means it's not very believable he would order a massacre, or that the
police would carry it out for him Marko Marjanović
5,071 9
That is if you can call in-depth an article that is full of omissions. Which you can't. So let's just say it was a very LONG article.
We should still be thankful for it, however, because it reminded us of the real Yanukovich.
This was a guy who took it upon himself to negotiate an association treaty with the EU and came within inches of signing it.
In reality Yanukovich was a centrist who approximated the policies of pro-western Ukraine politicians to the point where he had
lost the active support of eastern Ukraine. Moreover during the Maidan standoff he proved himself an indecisive and timid leader.
He
amnestied street-fighting radicals and let them keep control of public spaces in the capital for far longer than would be the
case in any western or eastern country. Moreover he bent backward to appease the opposition.
In late January he offered to take them into a new
national unity government and name a PM from their ranks. It was a sweet deal they would have probably taken, but for fear of
running afoul of
the protest movement themselves.
Despite the rebuke Yanukovich still accepted the resignation of his PM Azarov – a reliable loyalist hated by the opposition.
A little earlier in the month his government passed a
set of laws it believed would give it the
power it needed to deal with the situation, but then just as quickly backed away from them.
This was typical Yanukovich. Hapless, in over his head, and wishing problems would just go away so he wouldn't need to deal with
them.
Ashen-faced after a sleepless night of marathon negotiations, Viktor F. Yanukovych hesitated, shaking his pen above the text
placed before him in the chandeliered hall.
Then, under the unsmiling gaze of European diplomats and his political enemies, the beleaguered Ukrainian president scrawled
his signature, sealing a deal that he believed would keep him in power, at least for a few more months.
The security officers said in interviews that they were alarmed by language in the truce deal that called for an investigation
of the killing of protesters.
They feared that a desperate Mr. Yanukovych was ready to abandon the very people who had protected him, particularly those
in the lower ranks who had borne the brunt of the street battles.
The Times covers just the last two days of Yanukovich's reign, but it's safe to say police doubt built up gradually. 21st February
was certainly not the first time Yanukovich attempted to appease his enemies at the expense of his police.
During the first half of February Maidan protesters arrested by the police were released and amnestied on Yanukovich orders in
return for protesters vacating occupied government buildings
and lifting some of their barricades.
Indeed, as The Times itself reports, all along police resented Yanukovich for not having been sent in to disperse the protesters
encampments early on, when they believed it would have still been relatively easy.
All in all the NYT shows Yanukovich on the evening of February 21th was a flabby, indecisive leader who did not comprehend the
seriousness of the situation. Left unstated by the NYT is that that was the picture of Yanukovich throughout the standoff.
The idea that on the February 20th this timid and wavering man woke up, rang his police chief and ordered himself a radical escalation
of the standoff in the form of a mass slaughter of protesters is preposterous. It is at odds with everything about Yanukovich's record
during the crisis.
It is also not believable his demoralized police would carry out such an order from him. It was a force thoroughly discouraged
with what it saw as having been held back, undermined and under-supported.
That leaves the possibility police snipers did it on their own as vengeance for the losses suffered on the 18th and the 20th.
However, this is not much more believable either.
The Times piece makes it clear policemen were actually highly conscious of the possibility they would be hung out to dry by Yanukovich
and face judicial charges for their conduct. Going rogue would make that all the more certain.
Also let us be very clear. Nobody on the western and pro-western side ever tried to argue that is how the massacre went down.
The story has always been that Yanukovich himself was responsible.
In writing the report the NYT has its own agenda. It is trying to argue Yanukovich was "not so much overthrown as cast adrift
by his own allies" due to the "panic in government ranks created by Mr. Yanukovych's own efforts to make peace".
We get it. NYT wants us to know Yanukovich toppling was immaculate. It wasn't so much that he fled the capital because he had
good reason to fear for his safety, it is just that his regime simply dissipated into thin air due to his own flabbiness.
However, isn't it the case that leaders who in their "efforts to make peace" go so far as to cause their allies' desertion generally
do not order the mass murder of their enemies?
*Based on reporting by BBC's Daniel Sandford
fighting started that day with a successful protester advance against the parliament in the morning. It was followed by a police
counter-attack later in the day.
[Jul 30, 2014] This page is closed as new material has nothing to do with color revolution
mechanics (and actually this was true for some some time, but inertia pushed the page beyond the
right point). The last issue of EuroMaidan chronicles is July
2014. There is also disconnected from previous issues an issue for December 2014
which is actually more about color revolutions in general. Few newer posts can be found at Poroshenko presidency, Russian Ukrainian Gas wars
and Who Shot
down Malaysian flight MH17 ?
Provisional government which Poroshenko inherited resigned after ruling coalition collapsed (Udar
and Svoboda left the coalition). The government of Arseniy Yatsenyuk was created shortly
February 2014 coup d'état. The latter signified the victory of EuroMaidan "color revolution"
supported and financed by the USA and EU. This revolution removed from power President Viktor Yanukovych and
installed pre-selected by Nuland and Co people in power. Those people represented mainly Nationalist part of population of Galicia, Volyn
and Ivano-Frankivsk provinces (partially also Vinnitsa and Dnepropetrovsk provinces).
The Parliament was formed the "ruling coalition" of "Batkivshchyna", ultranationalist "Freedom" and UDAR
parties which represented alliance of Dnepropetrovsk oligarchic clan
with ultranationalists. New, completely dominated by ultranationalists, Parliament started its law
making with the attempt to
suppress Russian language and abolish the adopted under Yanukovich compromise law about usage
of minority languages, but this attempts failed as Turchinov did not signed it into law. They also immediately abolish the law which
prohibited public display of Nazi symbols.
In a month or so they unleashed armed attempt forcefully
suppress the protest of South-East and started to organize ultranationalist militias (aka death
squads) to help to preserve and sustain the power obtained in coup.
Results of their rule now are pretty much evident. It is destruction of the country. Easiness
with which they unleashed the civil war is startling. And as for language if they wanted to be art
of Europe one official language should be English to which probably both Western Ukrainian
nationalist and Eastern Ukraine "confederates" could agree. That does not mean that Eastern Ukraine
is blameless, but still the major factor in unleashing this was were far right forces which came to
power in February and their foreign sponsors. It was probably Odessa massacre which turned the
tide in Donetsk and Lugandk toward armed resistance. But Crime also a factor.
My impression is that far right forces expected the brute force suppression of South East will
bring quick success. And they badly miscalculated. Instead of short-term and bloodless "anti-terrorist" operation, new Ukrainian authorities now got
what now officially called civil war. And this civil war on South East is fought with tremendous cruelty against
civil population using air bombardments, tanks and heavy artillery, and with many civil population
victims (I think over a thousand dead and more then 10K wounded as of Jul 24, 2014, counting victims
on MH17).
Like in Spain civil war volunteers from various European countries joined the battle: Russians, Serbs,
Croats, Ossetians on South-East (confederates) side; Swedes, Poland mercenaries, etc on Kiev (far
right nationalist) side.
On July 23, 2014 Red Cross officially declared the conflict to be a civil war.
That fact that Red Cross decorated this conflict to be a civil war changes the game legally,
since there are two warring
parties on equal legal footing. Both are responsible
for war crimes. for some reason in MSM the view on civil war is like on something like "war light".
In reality this is the most "heavy metal" war, the most cruel, uncompromising and destructive. It's
enough to remember the US civil war which was the first war in which destruction of civilian
infrastructure became a war goal. The is also a war with the highest number of victims among civil
population, children and woman. Compare with Mosgovoy interview
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ZxP-a3FlX1g
Maidan, in which the only valid, rational idea was the protest against oligarchic republic and rule
of oligarchs in Ukraine, completely disintegrated without achieving any progress in this direction.
One oligarchic clan replaced the other. Anyone who thinks Maidan ended crony capitalism and the reign of the oligarchs are delusional. It
was skillfully converted into something like national-socialist revolution in Germany, which brought
to
power alliance of far right nationalists and Dnepropetrovsk oligarchs, who never has chances to get
to power legitimately.
If before the events of February-July supporters of Maidan could claim that
Yanukovich was an old-fashioned thieving tyrant, representative of Donetsk oligarchic clan, who
hinder Ukrainian progress toward democracy and European choice, now would be laughed out of the
court. In comparison of half-a-year of junta rule corrupt Yanukovich regime looks now much
more palatable. If you need to chose between a thief and a murderer, the choice is pretty clear to
everybody. Economic collapse became unmanageable and grivna lost half of its value, making already
poor people completely desperate paupers.
Unlike
NSDAP coming to power in
Germany in 1933 and this period was accompanied with the recovery of German economy (may be due to measures
taken during Weimar republic), hijacking of Maidan protest by Far Right nationalists and February
coup d'état (Orange Revolution II with brown overtones) did not bring the country anything good: the
Ukrainian economy now is in ruins, brutal civil war was unleashed in South-East. Ukraine lost
Crimea.
And far right are incapable to negotiate in principle -- their slogans are "Ukraine uber alles"
and "death to enemies" Due to those difficulties now there are frictions within winner camp: Poroshenko fired Parubiy, who essentially brought him to power, Klitschko tries to remove remnants of protesters from
the Maidan square using brute force, Kolomoisky is at war with Lyashko, Avakov is at war with Kernes
and also might not last long. And civil war unleashed by Turchinov-Yatsenyk junta is simply madness!
Dr. Stephen F. Cohen (Professor Cohen is a well-known specialist in the region, famous for
his "in-depth" understanding of local problems and has many interesting publication Russian Ukraine;
I encourage to read them all. Google is your friend). Some useful links
Keith Darden Associate Professor,
School of International Service American University, Washington, DC. See his courageous article
in Foreign Affairs (generally neocon-dominated publication)
How to Save Ukraine
The Last but not LeastTechnology is dominated by
two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage and those who manage what they do not understand ~Archibald Putt.
Ph.D
FAIR USE NOTICEThis site contains
copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically
authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available
to advance understanding of computer science, IT technology, economic, scientific, and social
issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such
copyrighted material as provided by section 107 of the US Copyright Law according to which
such material can be distributed without profit exclusively for research and educational purposes.
This is a Spartan WHYFF (We Help You For Free)
site written by people for whom English is not a native language. Grammar and spelling errors should
be expected. The site contain some broken links as it develops like a living tree...
You can use PayPal to to buy a cup of coffee for authors
of this site
Disclaimer:
The statements, views and opinions presented on this web page are those of the author (or
referenced source) and are
not endorsed by, nor do they necessarily reflect, the opinions of the Softpanorama society.We do not warrant the correctness
of the information provided or its fitness for any purpose. The site uses AdSense so you need to be aware of Google privacy policy. You you do not want to be
tracked by Google please disable Javascript for this site. This site is perfectly usable without
Javascript.
Save What's the official narrative about the events in late 2013 and early 2014 in Kiev, Ukraine? There was a spontaneous and peaceful Euromaidan "revolution" by freedom-loving people, who forced the corrupt Ukrainian President to flee the country, right? Not so simple. There are many intriguing facts about geopolitics, 70 years of U.S. meddling in Ukraine, and covert regime-change operations that need to added to the mix.
Save Imagine if Russian or Chinese officials were performing similar stunts at anti-US rallies in Mexico!
Save NED or National Endowment for Democracy is a US taxpayer-funded group that specializes in ... ahem ... regime change. It's chief, Carl Gershman, wrote in a Washington Post op-ed in 2013 (just before the protests) that "Ukraine is the biggest prize."
Save So, now hopefully you can clearly see the pattern and that Ukraine is really of special importance to the US. But why? Well, have you heard of Brzezinski, the geopolitical expert who influenced US foreign policy for 40 years? He came up with the idea of Mujahideen in Afghanistan to fight the USSR, created Al Qaeda, and then repeated the same strategy of using Islamic terrorists in the Balkans, the Caucasus, Libya and Syria.
Save Brzezinski explained in his 1997 book , The Grand Chessboard, that "Ukraine is a geopolitical pivot. Without Ukraine, Russia ceases to be a Eurasian empire." He also said that Ukraine must be brought into NATO by 2010.
Save
Save The Ukrainian government's links to Neo-Nazis are never openly admitted in the US, but this is the reason why Congress refused to pass a bill that banned funding of Neo-Nazi groups! For fun reading on the far-right extremists in Ukraine, do some research on "Svoboda", "Stepan Bandera" and "Azov Battalion."
