The handwriting of the intelligence againces is on the wall in such cases.
For example, snipergate during EuroMaydan in Ukraine can be studied as a classic example. During the color revolution the
intencirty of anger and pthe level of particialtion of population occurs, roughly speaking, on the parabola with it rays down.
First, quck eslacation and more and more mass participation, then the intermediate peak and subsequent the decline of
interest. The political forces behind the color revolution should feel the moment when the down slope became evident. And
prepare in advance a provocation for the development of the second stage fo the conflict -- an armed uprising. In this
case the tried and true method used by intellignce againces si a human sacrifice -- flase flag operation which is called "goverment
snipers on the rooftops"
Here is how it was used in Ukraine during Euromaidan. Actually there were two separate stages of this escalation
The first victims were unknown students beaten by the police. Maidan in fact began to turn into a routine, into a Hyde Park
for a huge number of idiots. Stagnated. Western leaders gradually ceased to visit there. No one knows if at least one student was
punched in the face or if there were students there at all. But when you control most of the information space, it doesn't really
matter. Maidan perked up, the schedule went up sharply. The first taboos were removed. Namely - now it was possible not to obey
the power openly, to seize office buildings and residences, warehouses with the weapon and with impunity to beat the opponents
and militia.
However Yanukovych survived and tried to maneuver. Technologists felt stagnation and acted already much more quickly, than in
the first case.
The second was "goverment snipers onthe rooftops" or as is known in EuroMaydan history the "heavenly hundred". Currently
nodody knows who were the snipers (the rumors are that they were from Georgia; one gave an interview several years later)
and if they are still alive.
Thus shoting removed the taboo on the used of arms and at this point Yanukovich folded. Sacrificed "lambs" were buring under the
new banners and people vowed to "take revenge".
"Berkut" was called off by this coward Yanukovich who bearely managed to ewscape hismelf from being shot. After that we saw
pogroms, there were armed units, the train of friendship to the Eastern Ukrain financed by the oligarchs such as Poroshenko and
Kolomysky. The civik the war began, Russia strated helping separatists and well know event foolowed.
The next taboo "deliverate murder of civilians" was removed in Odessa. It is possible that Western color revolution
technologists themselves did not plan this. In any case, they crerated preconditions of which the most importantly is IMPUNITY
of far right gangs. Taboo removed. Now you can shoot guns at the homes of civilians.
The schedule of escalation of the conflict again sharply went up. After Odessa the first armed legionaries from Russia and other
countries arrived, far right "battalions" financied by oligarchs such as Kilomopyky emerged. I. e. all conditiones were
created for the full-fledged war civil war and compelte fleeseing of Ukrain using the canon of "disaster capitalism". Standard of
living started dropted shrapy, hyp[erinflation emerged. So Ukeiane was thrown in khaos simila rto the khaos after the dissolution of
the USSR with all the similar consequences.
At this point another false flag was staged (or a tragic mistake used for launching of propaganda false flag) -- MH17 shooting
took place. Which removed almost all of the remaining taboos. Putin became the second reincarnation of Hitler (conditioning of
international community went at full speed), Eastern Ukrainian militias - terrorists, and Russians within hysterical and prepared
Ukrainian discourse - Undermensch, with whom can be do as anywhere.
This is one of the last stages of dehumanization of residents of Ukraine. And it was very successful. Well, the main profit for
the Western technologist was not Ukraine itself by geopolitical defeat of Russia as well as a perfect opportunity to unleash
sanction (aka an economic war) against Russia and a turn of world public opinion against Russia and Russians.
Interestingly, while the new Ukrainian
coalition denies that it deployed snipers, it is now accusing someone else – Russia – of deploying the
snipers as a false flag event to create chaos.
[This assertion appears to be part of new Western media consensus] AP
reports today:
One of the biggest mysteries hanging over the protest mayhem that drove Ukraine’s president from
power: Who was behind the snipers who sowed death and terror in Kiev?
That riddle has become the latest flashpoint of feuding over
Ukraine — with the nation’s fledgling government and the Kremlin giving starkly different
interpretations of events that could either undermine or bolster the legitimacy of the new rulers.
Ukrainian authorities are investigating the Feb. 18-20
bloodbath, and they have shifted their focus from ousted President Viktor Yanukovych’s government
to Vladimir Putin’s Russia — pursuing the theory that the Kremlin was intent on sowing mayhem as a
pretext for military incursion. Russia suggests that the snipers were organized by opposition
leaders trying to whip up local and international outrage against the government.
The government’s new health minister — a doctor who
helped oversee medical treatment for casualties during the protests — told The Associated Press
that the similarity of bullet wounds suffered by opposition victims and police indicates the
shooters were trying to stoke tensions on both sides and spark even greater violence, with the goal
of toppling Yanukovych.
“I think it wasn’t just a part of the old regime that
(plotted the provocation), but it was also the work of Russian special forces who served and
maintained the ideology of the (old) regime,” Health Minister Oleh Musiy said.
***
On Tuesday, Interior Minister Arsen Avakov signaled that
investigators may be turning their attention away from Ukrainian responsibility.
“I can say only one thing: the key factor in this
uprising, that spilled blood in Kiev and that turned the country upside down and shocked it, was
a third force,” Avakov was quoted as saying by Interfax. “And this force was not Ukrainian.”
***
Musiy, who spent more than two months organizing medical
units on Maidan, said that on Feb. 20 roughly 40 civilians and protesters were brought with fatal
bullet wounds to the makeshift hospital set up near the square. But he said medics also treated
three police officers whose wounds were identical.
Forensic evidence, in particular the similarity of the
bullet wounds, led him and others to conclude that snipers were targeting both sides of the
standoff at Maidan — and that the shootings were intended to generate a wave of revulsion
so strong that it would topple Yanukovych and also justify a Russian invasion.
Since Russia supported Yanukovych, it makes no sense that the people who ordered the sniper attacks
would want to topple Yanukovych and launch a Russian
invasion. Specifically, they would either want to
overthrow the Russia-friendly Yanukovych or
launch a Russian invasion to support a Russia-friendly Ukrainian government.
In any event, AP continues:
Russia has used the uncertainty surrounding the bloodshed to
discredit Ukraine’s current government. During a news conference Tuesday, Putin addressed the issue
in response to a reporter’s question, suggesting that the snipers in fact “may have been
provocateurs from opposition parties.”
***
A former top security official with Ukraine’s main security
agency, the SBU, waded into the confusion, in an interview published Thursday with the respected
newspaper Dzerkalo Tizhnya. Hennady Moskal, who was deputy head of the agency, told the newspaper
that snipers from the Interior Ministry and SBU were responsible for the shootings, not foreign
agents.
“In addition to this, snipers received orders to
shoot not only protesters, but also police forces. This was all done in order to escalate the
conflict, in order to justify the police operation to clear Maidan,” he was quoted as
saying.
In other words, everyone agrees that the snipers were
false
flag terrorists sewing chaos and confusion … they only disagree about who the responsible
party is.
"The contempt for the lives of the soldiers and for France herself has come to
the point of calling people raw material and cannon fodder."
François-René de Chateaubriand, De Bonaparte et des Bourbons
"The whole purpose of propaganda is to make the obvious seem obscure, or offensive."
Stefan Molyneux
False flag (or black flag) describes covert military or paramilitary operations designed to
deceive in such a way that the operations appear as though they are being carried out by entities,
groups or nations other than those who actually planned and executed them.
The deep state is term used in Turkey which alleged to be a group of influential
anti-democratic coalitions within the political system, composed of high-level elements within
the intelligence services (domestic and foreign), military, security, judiciary, and mafia. The
notion of deep state is similar to that of a "state within the state". For those who
believe in its existence, the political agenda of the deep state involves an allegiance to nationalism,
corporatism, and state interests.
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.
"... Andrew Bacevich needs to study more deeply about Syrian history and politics, since his description of Syrian president Bashar Assad as a brutal dictator fits as a description of Bashar's father Hafez Assad but is inaccurate in relation to Bashar Assad, who seems to have a rather gentle personality and is actually one of the more benign leaders in the Middle East. ..."
"... Under that new constitution, in 2014 he ran in a free election observed by international observers against two other politicians and was reelected president. He has promised that if he loses the next election he will step down. ..."
"... Nevertheless Assad has been systematically demonized by the governments and MSM of the US, UK, and France, as well as by Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar. Demonization is a technique that is often used to prepare the way for regime change, and it is not based on objective analysis. ..."
"... Similar tactics were used in Ukraine in February 2014 by ultranationalist Right Sector sharpshooters, who were seen shooting Maidan demonstrators. The deaths of the demonstrators were then blamed on the police. ..."
"... "'From the start the protest movements were not purely peaceful. From the start I saw armed demonstrators marching along in the protests, who began to shoot at the police first. Very often the violence of the security forces has been a reaction to the brutal violence of the armed rebels.' ..."
"... opposition is armed and frequently employs brutality and violence, only in order then to blame the government. ..."
"... For an objective overview of the context of the events of 2011 in Syria that led to the international war against the elected Syrian government, see Stephen Gowans, "The Revolutionary Distemper in Syria That Wasn't." ..."
"... Also see Gowans' well-researched 2016 book 'Washington's Long War on Syria.' The US has been demonizing and trying to overthrow the Syrian government for several decades now, above all because it is the only remaining semi-socialist nation in the Middle East and has single-payer national health insurance, support for the elderly, and free college education for all. Assad is no saint, but he is one of the more democratic and forward-looking leaders in the Middle East today. ..."
Andrew Bacevich needs to study more deeply about Syrian history and politics, since his description of Syrian president
Bashar Assad as a brutal dictator fits as a description of Bashar's father Hafez Assad but is inaccurate in relation to Bashar
Assad, who seems to have a rather gentle personality and is actually one of the more benign leaders in the Middle East.
Bashar Assad had planned to be a doctor, and he studied medicine for two years in the UK before being ordered to return to
Syria by his father after his elder brother died in an accident. Although there were some excesses by the police in 2011, Bashar
Assad quickly relaxed some old security laws and pushed for a new democratic constitution, which was promulgated in 2012.
Under that new constitution, in 2014 he ran in a free election observed by international observers against two other politicians
and was reelected president. He has promised that if he loses the next election he will step down.
Nevertheless Assad has been systematically demonized by the governments and MSM of the US, UK, and France, as well as by
Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar. Demonization is a technique that is often used to prepare the way for regime change, and it is
not based on objective analysis. Although Assad is often called a butcher who gasses his own people, experts such as Theodore
Postol of MIT and others have shown that not a single allegation of gassing by the Syrian government under Assad has ever been
proven. In addition, many of the excesses by the Syrian police against demonstrators in 2011 seem to have been initiated by armed
members of the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda in Syria, who quickly infiltrated the demonstrations.
There have even been allegations that jihadi sharpshooters on rooftops shot demonstrators in false-flag attacks.
Similar tactics were used in Ukraine in February 2014 by ultranationalist Right Sector sharpshooters, who were seen shooting
Maidan demonstrators. The deaths of the demonstrators were then blamed on the police. In the case of Syria:
"Syrian-based Father Frans van der Lugt was the Dutch priest murdered by a gunman in Homs . His involvement in reconciliation
and peace activities never stopped him from lobbing criticisms at both sides in this conflict. But in the first year of the crisis,
he penned some remarkable observations about the violence – this one in January 2012:
"'From the start the protest movements were not purely peaceful. From the start I saw armed demonstrators marching along
in the protests, who began to shoot at the police first. Very often the violence of the security forces has been a reaction to
the brutal violence of the armed rebels.'
"In September 2011 he wrote: 'From the start there has been the problem of the armed groups, which are also part of the opposition
The opposition of the street is much stronger than any other opposition. And this opposition is armed and frequently employs
brutality and violence, only in order then to blame the government. '"
For an objective overview of the context of the events of 2011 in Syria that led to the international war against the elected
Syrian government, see Stephen Gowans, "The Revolutionary Distemper in Syria That Wasn't."
Also see Gowans' well-researched 2016 book 'Washington's Long War on Syria.' The US has been demonizing and trying to overthrow
the Syrian government for several decades now, above all because it is the only remaining semi-socialist nation in the Middle
East and has single-payer national health insurance, support for the elderly, and free college education for all. Assad is no
saint, but he is one of the more democratic and forward-looking leaders in the Middle East today.
"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 .
"... So the Ukrainian government is admitting that their previous narrative is false – and that the ultra-rghtist Svoboda and Right Sector, who were the military arm of the Maidan protesters, provoked the incident that led to Yanukovich's overthrow. ..."
"... are opposed to the Minsk agreement, brokered by the EU, which makes concessions to the east Ukrainians. ..."
The truth is often ignored, at first, and when that becomes impossible, truth-tellers are often punished. As two incidents starkly
reveal, this is certainly the case when it comes to the civil war in Ukraine and Washington's unfolding cold war with Russia.
The first illustration of our truth-telling principle occurred after the "Maidan revolution" had already captured the imagination
of the Western media, which was busy promulgating the official view as given expression by US government officials. According to
this narrative, the "protesters" were heroes, the government of "Russian-backed' Viktor Yanukovich was a coven of devils, and the
catalyzing incident that led to Yanukovich's ouster, the
shooting of protesters in the
Maidan, was the work of the Berkut, the Ukrainian government's militarized police.
There's just one problem with this story: it isn't true. A
leaked phone call between Estonian Foreign Minister Urmas
Paet and European Union High Representative for Foreign Affairs Catherine Ashton, revealed that the protesters were shot by their
own leaders – the radical nationalists who had military control of the Maiden.
... ... ...
Ashton's main concern seemed to be that this would get out and discredit the new government "from the very beginning."
Oh, but not to worry: it didn't get out, at least not in the United States. There were oblique mentions of the recording in the
mainstream media, but only weeks afterward and then without any specifics: two months after the fact, the Los Angeles Timesreferred to it in
the vaguest terms, only to dismiss it as a "conspiracy theory." The New York Times didn't cover it: neither did the War
Street Journal, Time magazine, or any of the other usual suspects. The Daily Beast, typically, served as a mouthpiece
for the official Washington-Kiev account,
citing Dr. Bogomolets as claiming her conversation with Paet was a "misunderstanding." Yet Paet didn't cite her as his sole source:
he said "all the evidence." No doubt the Estonians have their own sources in the country, and it's improbable the Foreign
Minister would have made such an assertion based on a single person's testimony.
In any case, the story was pretty much buried here in the US, with the exception of
this space and a few other
alternative news sources.
But in Europe, it was a different story: the German public television station ARD carried
a report which threw the identity of the Maidan shooters
into serious question. And more recently the BBC produced a documentary, "The
Untold Story of the Maidan Massacre," in which eyewitnesses assert that the Berkut were fired on from positions controlled by
the ultra-nationalist Svoboda Party, which, along with the neo-Nazi "Right Sector" organization, ran Maidan security.
Still, the story was ignored in the US, but that may not be possible much longer, and the reason springs from an unlikely source:
the current Ukrainian government of President Petro Poroshenko.
Last week Ukrainian police
raided the homes
of Svoboda Party leadersOleksandr Sych, who served
as Deputy Prime Minister in the post-Maidan government, and
Ole Pankevich,
whose 2013 appearance at a neo-Nazi memorial event provoked the ire of the World Jewish Congress. The Ukrainian prosecutor's office
confirmed that the raid was conducted as part of an investigation into the Maidan shootings:
"The court warrant for the raid on the apartment of Pankevich, a former MP and the ex-head of Lviv regional council, explicitly
referred to a BBC documentary on the subject, according to a copy of the warrant In the documentary, journalist Gabriel Gatehouse
spoke to an opposition nationalist rifleman who had acknowledged having fired on riot police in the morning of February 20."
"[A]lso refers to video footage that showed a rifleman firing out of the Hotel Ukraina, situated on Maidan. The room from
which he fired was occupied at the time by Pankevich, according to the court warrant.
"Police also raided the apartment of Sich, vice-prime minister in the immediate post-Maidan government in 2014, also in
connection with shots fired from the same hotel, where he was also staying on February 20.
"An assistant to Ukraine's prosecutor general, Vladislav Kutsenko, confirmed to the Ukrainian TV channel 112 that searches
of the Svoboda leaders' apartments were linked to an investigation of the February 20 events."
So the Ukrainian government is admitting that their previous narrative is false – and that the ultra-rghtist Svoboda and Right
Sector, who were the military arm of the Maidan protesters, provoked the incident that led to Yanukovich's overthrow.
Why this stunning turnaround?
Both Svoboda and Right Sector have declared war on the Poroshenko regime and are calling for a "national
revolution" – one that would install them in power. The ultra-nationalists are opposed to the Minsk agreement, brokered by
the EU, which makes concessions to the east Ukrainians.
The far right is accusing Poroshenko of "betraying the revolution." They scoff at the ceasefire as a "sellout" because they want
the civil war to continue: and as Poroshenko makes draconian cuts in the government budget in order to mollify Ukraine's creditors,
and to ensure the flow of Western funding, the rightists are gaining ground politically. And they are getting increasingly violent,
staging a riot in front of the parliament building in
which three officers were
killed by
a grenade hurled at policemen: 130 cops were injured. The rightists were protesting the decision by the parliament to grant
the eastern rebels some small degree of autonomy. This incident followed a
series of
shoot-outs with the armed rightist gang known as Right
Sector, which played a key role
in the Maidan protest movement.
That the Poroshenko government, which had previously stonewalled any serious effort to investigate the shooting deaths that sent
Yanukovich packing, is playing this card now is an indication of the regime's desperation in the face of a challenge from the ultra-right.
For to upend the official narrative – one that is fully supported by their Western sponsors, and their amen corner in the media –
is to subvert the very foundations of the post-Maidan order. If the truth comes out, the ultra-nationalists may be finished – but
so may the government that exposes their murderous role.
"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.
Here's why my news organization decided to shed some light on a dark moment in Ukraine's revolution.
He Killed for the Maidan
My television station had a murderer on air last week - a self-confessed one. Ivan Bubenchik was
calm and collected, his demeanor was open, and he spoke confidently of his actions on February 20,
2014, like he had known exactly what he was doing. After all, he was on the good side of the Euromaidan
revolution, which was raging in Ukraine at the time, and which eventually swept a corrupt president
out of power.
In telling Bubenchik's story, we were breaking a taboo - it was the police, the popular narrative
goes, that were the murderers. The protesters were heroes. But Bubenchik's words were chilling. "To
create a word of mouth effect, you have to shoot two or three [police] commanders," he said to the
camera. "I only picked two. And after that, there was no need to kill anyone else, so I aimed at
the legs."
Bubenchik said he was trying to scare the police away - they had started to dominate the Maidan
Nezalezhnosti, Kiev's central Independence Square, where the anti-government protesters had been
camped for months. His tactic worked perfectly. His first sniper shot killed an officer, his second
wounded another. The rest of the riot police scattered and ran up the hill away from the square.
This was two days before the end of the revolution. President Viktor Yanukovych had not yet fled
to Russia, fearing betrayal of his faithful friends in the government. But the revolution was already
in its final - and deadly - stage. 39 people had already been killed. Most were protesters killed
by the police or by hired thugs. Some 2,000 more people had been wounded - again, mostly protesters,
but also a handful of policemen.
One of the buildings on the square, the Trade Union House, which had served as headquarters of
the revolution since it began, had burned down. This was a great loss for the protesters because
it stranded them in the bitter winter cold without shelter and without their crowd-sourced food and
medicine. But they were determined to stay in the streets and drive President Yanukovych's corrupt
regime out. Much of the country was behind them.
Most oppositional activities - such as rallies, setting up tents, and even traveling in a convoy
of five cars - had been banned by a frightened rubber-stamp parliament loyal to the president. Protesters
had been murdered en masse, the opposition camp lacked leadership, and there was no feasible political
solution in sight. Terror and desperation reigned in Kiev, the country's battered capital.
This is when Bubenchik, a middle-aged man from western Ukraine who worked as a sports coach for
kids, took destiny into his hands.
Two years later, my media company, Hromadske TV, has just told his story for the first time. We
are a small but bold multimedia outlet that set up by a group of journalists in 2013 right before
the revolution began. It was an attempt to plant the seed of real public broadcasting in a media
landscape dominated by oligarchs and government channels. Hromadske's journalists aimed at nothing
less than setting up an outlet that would eventually become the gold standard of Ukrainian broadcasting.
And that means reporting both sides of a story, no matter how unpleasant.
Our story on Bubenchik, the self-proclaimed Maidan sniper, is very much in line with that mission.
It was part of a film we aired on February 18, both on our own online platform and on a national
TV channel, which depicted how his decision to shoot two police officers affected the course of events
on that day. The day - February 20, 2014 - was so dramatic that we called the film Zlam - "The Breaking
Point."
Later on that same day, four police officers died from gunshot wounds. But the death toll among
the protesters was much higher - a total of 48 were brutally murdered. This was the single highest
daily death toll not just during the revolution, but since Ukraine gained its independence in 1991.
Two years later, there are 22 policemen being tried for these crimes. Five are currently in detention,
others are still wanted. But Bubenchik, who says he also killed, is free. He had talked openly about
his deed before. But the story had never been picked up by the media, and there had never been a
full-scale investigation. The State Security Service either did not believe his story, or chose to
ignore his confession - in Ukraine, it's not politically correct to judge the victors.
The accepted narrative is that the protesters were the good guys, while the government troops
were murderers. There's no doubt that the protesters really were heroes. They risked their lives,
their families and their well-being to stand up against a crooked political elite. Because of them
the word "hero" started to make real sense for us in Ukraine - it became personified.
But real life is not black and white. Sometimes heroes can act in evil ways, and Bubenchik's story
is a case in point. It complicates an already painful episode in the recent history of a country
that is still bleeding because of an ongoing war with Russia in the east, the annexation of Crimea,
a divided population and endless political infighting.
That's why it took courage to report this story. For our journalists, Anastasiya Stanko and Angelina
Kariakina, it was a massive ethical challenge. Many of their sources, who had themselves been protesters,
kept saying that Ukraine was not ready for the truth. They said the Russian propaganda machine would
kick in and spin Bubenchuk's story for its own purposes - and sure enough, it did, running headlines
like "Kiev government encourages murder" and "The blood of Heavenly Hundred is on the hands of the
protesters." The Heavenly Hundred is a reference to all the protesters who were murdered during the
revolution.
"This episode about the shootings on February 20 [2014] was emotionally the most difficult one,"
says Anastasiya Stanko, co-author of the story. "Most of all, we wanted to try to approach it without
emotions, as much as possible, and only concentrate on facts."
Incidentally, Bubenchik, our protagonist, believes that he did nothing wrong. "It's important
for me that people understand that it's not an alcoholic or drug addict talking. I understood what
I was doing," he says in the film. "I do not see any crime in my actions."
Bubenchik thinks what he did was justified by the circumstances of that day. The journalists who
reported the story also say that context is key. "It's impossible to separate this day from all three
months of protests - and that was very important to show," says Angelina Kariakina, the other creator
of the film. "The first episode of violence on the Maidan was against a peaceful, mostly student
protest in November. The first murders took place in January. In many ways the 20th of February was
the culmination of those protests," she says.
Despite all these dilemmas, we chose to report the story. Perhaps we're naive, because we believe
in equal rules and justice for all. Or maybe we're setting a new standard for our country's media,
which, as in any free country, should be able to report unpopular truths.
A week after our film aired, the prosecutors finally acted. On February 25, investigators searched
Bubenchik's home in Lviv, as mandated by court order. A real investigation into what he did might
finally be starting.
"... This university investigation concluded that the massacre was a false flag operation, which was rationally planned and executed with the aim to overthrow the government and seize power. ..."
Ivan Katchanovski, professor of political science at the University of Ottawa, conducted a study
on the massacre perpetrated by snipers on the Maidan square of Kiev in February, 2014.
This document, from a presentation to the American Association of Political Sciences in San Francisco
in September 2015, is the first academic study on this event.
It uses rational choice theory and Weber's theory of instrumental rationality to examine the actions
of key players from both the Yanukovich government, specifically various police and security forces,
and opposition, especially of the extreme right and oligarchic elements, during the massacre.
The paper analyzes a large amount of material available from different sources: about 1500 videos
and recordings from the internet and television in different countries (about 150 gigabytes), newsletters
and social media messages from a hundred journalists covering the massacre of Kiev, about 5000 photos,
and nearly 30 gigabytes of radio interceptions of snipers and commanders of the Alfa unit of the
Security Service of Ukraine and Ministry troops of the Interior and finally records of the massacre
trial. This study is also based on field research on the massacre site, witness' reports from both
camps, the commanders of the special units, the statements made by current and former government
officials, approximate estimates of ballistic trajectories, bullets and weapons used and the types
of injuries on both sides. This study establishes a specific timetable for the various events of
the massacre, the shooters locations and the precise timing and location of the death of nearly 50
protesters.
This university investigation concluded that the massacre was a false flag operation, which was
rationally planned and executed with the aim to overthrow the government and seize power.
Ivan Katchanovski teaches at the School of Political Studies at the University of Ottawa. He has
been a visiting scholar at the Davis Center for Russian and Eurasian Studies at Harvard University,
visiting Assistant Professor in the Department of Political Science at the State University of New
York at Potsdam, postdoctoral fellow at the Political Science Department at the University of Toronto
and Kluge Postdoctoral Fellow at the Kluge Center at the Library of Congress.
Maidan snipers, seems Svoboda booked hotel rooms used by armed groups who shot at police
and protesters. Lots of interesting evidence, by a rather brave academic.
Interesting; this is definitely the most comprehensive reference I have seen on the killings,
and thank you for it. I see it points out, also tellingly, that Svoboda members were guarding
the stairways and elevators of the Hotel Ukraina also during the massacre, presumably so no unauthorized
persons could enter and interrupt the action ongoing.
У бывших нардепов Украины от "Свободы" проводятся обыски, их подозревают в убийствах так называемой
Небесной сотни, заявил депутат Киевского областного совета от партии "Свобода" Александр Аронец.
"Обыски у экс-нардепов свободовцев происходят из-за событий на Майдане! Ищут взрывчатку и оружие.
Свободовцев подозревают в убийствах героев Небесной Сотни! Это тотальный реванш регионалов", – заявил
он в Facebook.
Напомним, главная киевская площадь Независимости была занята сторонниками евроинтеграции 21 ноября
2013 года, сразу после заявления правительства Николая Азарова о приостановке подписания соглашения
об ассоциации с ЕС.
В результате событий, которые привели фактически к госперевороту, со стороны евромайдановцев
погибло более 100 человек, которых потом назвали
"Небесной сотней". Больше половины из них были убиты утром 20 февраля на площади Независимости и
улице Институтской.
Неизвестные снайперы в центре Киева вели огонь одновременно и по сторонникам Майдана, и по бойцам
"Беркута".
Генеральная прокуратура Украины сразу и без объяснений назвала подозреваемыми прежние власти во главе
с Виктором Януковичем, однако не раз появлялись свидетельства того, что к стрельбе и убийствам участников
беспорядков причастны представители евромайдана.
Так, в интернете появилась запись разговора
главы МИД Эстонии Урмаса Паэта и главы дипломатии ЕС Кэтрин Эштон, из которого следует, что лидеры
Майдана наняли снайперов, стрелявших в демонстрантов и милиционеров. В беседе Паэт рассказывает,
что все улики, которые ему показывали, свидетельствуют, что и протестующих, и сотрудников правоохранительных
органов убивали одни и те же люди.
Добавим, что также была обнародована
серия обстоятельств и улик, свидетельствующих в пользу версии о причастности организаторов Майдана
к расстрелу собственных активистов в центре Киева.
Кроме того, 2 апреля во время восстановления колоннады киевского стадиона "Динамо" строители
нашли на крыше охотничью картечь. Предположительно,
именно оттуда велась стрельба по демонстрантам. Рядом с дробинами было обнаружено еще несколько предметов,
похожих, судя по видеосъемке,
на дюбели для строительного пистолета.
Все это может пролить свет на обстоятельства убийства первых погибших активистов – напомним, 22 января
именно из охотничьего оружия были застрелены Сергей Нигоян и Михаил Жизневский. Экспертиза показала,
что в Нигояна попала именно картечь на основе сплава свинца.
Также появлялась информация, что стрельба
велась из офиса Андрея Парубия, который был тогда так называемым комендантом Майдана.
Киев же возложил вину за гибель активистов Майдана на бойцов "Беркута". В феврале Генеральная
прокуратура Украины объявила об установлении
всех якобы причастных к этому силовиков. Приказ вести снайперский огонь, по мнению новых украинских
властей, отдавал Янукович, а проводить операцию помогали российские спецслужбы.
В России опровергли причастность к этим событиям
и подвергают сомнению выводы украинских властей.
При этом авторы агентства Reuters, проводившие собственное расследование убийств на Майдане, отмечали,
что только с 18 по 20 февраля почти 200 правоохранителей
получили огнестрельные ранения и 13 были убиты,
однако "никто не был задержан в связи со стрельбой в милиционеров".
На Украине создали почти религиозный культ "Небесной сотни", ставшей одним из главных символов
государства.
Отметим, что противостояние действующих украинских властей и радикальных националистов обострилось.
Так, 31 августа у Рады начались беспорядки
после того как парламентарии в первом чтении приняли
изменения в конституцию в части децентрализации, несмотря на
многотысячный митинг у стен Рады и
заблокированный президиум. Митингующие дважды
предпринимали попытки штурма парламента. Также в силовиков
была брошена граната.
Министр внутренних Украины Арсен Аваков заявил, что митинг у стен Верховной рады
был организован политическими партиями "Свобода",
"Укроп", "Радикальная партия Украины". Глава МВД отметил, что на допрос вызван лидер "Свободы" Олег
Тягнибок, а также члены этой партии Юрий Сиротюк, Игорь Криворучко, Сергей Бойко, Игорь Сабия.
Да ну их... Давно уже не интересен их клоповник в украинской власти.
А вот что думают простые люди - как-то не встречал более-менее подробной информации или статистики.
Но, подозреваю, объективную картину увидеть непросто - все в Украине в какой-то мере запуганы.
"I was shooting downwards at their feet," says a man we will call Sergei, who tells me he took
up position in the Kiev Conservatory, a music academy on the south-west corner of the square.
"Of course, I could have hit them in the arm or anywhere. But I didn't shoot to kill."
Sergei says he had been a regular protester on the Maidan for more than a month, and that his
shots at police on the square and on the roof of an underground shopping mall, caused them to retreat.
There had been shooting two days earlier, on 18 February. The 19th, a Wednesday, had been quieter,
but in the evening, Sergei says, he was put in contact with a man who offered him two guns: one a
12-gauge shotgun, the other a hunting rifle, a Saiga that fired high-velocity rounds.
He chose the latter, he says, and stashed it in the Post Office building, a few yards from the Conservatory.
Both buildings were under the control of the protesters.
Under attack, the police retreated from their position near the front line in the square, falling
back along the street on the north side of Hotel Ukraine.
Protesters then advanced towards the police, where they were shot by retreating security forces
and snipers from surrounding buildings.
More than 50 people were killed, the heaviest death toll of the clashes between protesters and
security forces in the Maidan.
Continue reading the main story
When the shooting started early on the morning of the 20th, Sergei says, he was escorted to the Conservatory,
and spent some 20 minutes before 07:00 firing on police, alongside a second gunman.
His account is partially corroborated by other witnesses. That morning, Andriy Shevchenko, then
an opposition MP and part of the Maidan movement, had received a phone call from the head of the
riot police on the square.
"He calls me and says, 'Andriy, somebody is shooting at my guys.' And he said that the shooting
was from the Conservatory."
Shevchenko contacted the man in charge of security for the protesters, Andriy Parubiy, known as
the Commandant of the Maidan.
"I sent a group of my best men to go through the entire Conservatory building and determine whether
there were any firing positions," Parubiy says.
Meanwhile the MP, Andriy Shevchenko, was getting increasingly panicked phone calls.
"I kept getting calls from the police officer, who said: 'I have three people wounded, I have
five people wounded, I have one person dead.' And at some point he says, 'I am pulling out.' And
he says, 'Andriy I do not know what will be next.' But I clearly felt that something really bad was
about to happen."
Andriy Parubiy, now deputy speaker of the Ukrainian parliament, says his men found no gunmen in
the Conservatory building.
But a photographer who gained access to the Conservatory later in the morning - shortly after
08:00 - took pictures there of men with guns, although he did not see them fire.
Sergei's account also differs from Parubiy's.
"I was just reloading," he told me. "They ran up to me and one put his foot on top of me, and
said, 'They want a word with you, everything is OK, but stop doing what you're doing.'"
Sergei says he is convinced the men who dragged him away were from Parubiy's security unit, though
he didn't recognise their faces. He was escorted out of the Conservatory building, taken out of Kiev
by car, and left to make his own way home.
By that time three policemen had been fatally wounded and the mass killings of protesters had
begun.
Kiev's official investigation has focused on what happened afterwards - after the riot police
began to retreat from the square. In video footage, they are clearly seen firing towards protesters
as they pull back.
Only three people have been arrested, all of them members of a special unit of riot police. And
of these three, only two - the lower-ranking officers - remain in custody. The unit's commanding
officer, Dmitry Sadovnik, was granted bail and has now disappeared.
The three policemen are accused of causing 39 deaths. But at least a further dozen protestors
were killed - and the three policemen who died of their wounds.
Some of the dead were almost certainly shot by snipers, who seemed to be shooting from some of
the taller buildings surrounding the square.
Lawyers for the victims and sources in the general prosecutor's office have told the BBC that
when it comes to investigating deaths that could not have been caused by the riot police, they have
found their efforts blocked by the courts.
"If you think of Yanukovych's time, it was like a Bermuda triangle: the prosecutor's office, the
police and the courts," says Andriy Shevchenko. "Everyone knew that they co-operated, they covered
each other and that was the basis of the massive corruption in the country. Those connections still
exists."
Ukraine's Prosecutor General, Vitaly Yarema, was dismissed this week, amid harsh criticism of
his handling of the investigation.
Meanwhile, conspiracy theories flourish.
"I'm certain that the shootings of the 20th were carried out by snipers who arrived from Russia
and who were controlled by Russia," says Andriy Parubiy, the former Commandant of the Maidan.
"The shooters were aiming to orchestrate a bloodbath on Maidan."
This is a widely-held belief in Ukraine. In Russia, many believe the opposite - that the revolt
on Maidan was a Western conspiracy, a CIA-inspired coup designed to pull Ukraine out of Moscow's
orbit. Neither side offers convincing evidence for its assertion.
The overwhelming majority of the protesters on Maidan were peaceful, unarmed citizens, who braved
months of bitter cold to demand a change to their corrupt government. As far as is known, all the
protesters killed on 20 February were unarmed.
The leaders of the Maidan have always maintained they did their best to keep guns away from the
square.
"We knew that our strength was not to use force, and our weakness would be if we start shooting,"
says Andriy Shevchenko.
Parubiy says it is possible that a handful of protesters with weapons may have come to the Maidan
as part of a spontaneous, unorganised response to violence from the security forces in the days running
up to 20 February.
"I did hear that, after the shootings on 18 February, there were guys who came to Maidan with
hunting rifles. I was told that sometimes they were the relatives or parents of those people who
were killed on the 18th. So I concede that it's possible there were people with hunting rifles on
Maidan. When the snipers began to kill our guys, one after another, I can imagine that those with
the hunting rifles returned fire."
Sergei, again, tells a different story. He says he was recruited as a potential shooter in late-January,
by a man he describes only as a retired military officer. Sergei himself was a former soldier.
"We got chatting, and he took me under his wing. He saw something in me that he liked. Officers
are like psychologists, they can see who is capable. He kept me close."
The former officer dissuaded him from joining any of the more militant groups active on the Maidan.
"'Your time will come,' he said."
Was he being prepared, psychologically, to take up arms?
"Not that we sat down and worked out a plan. But we talked about it privately and he prepared
me for it."
It is not clear who the man who apparently recruited Sergei was, or whether he belonged to any
of the recognised groups active on the Maidan.
And there is much else that we still do not know, such as who fired the first shots on 20 February.
As for conspiracy theories, it is possible that Sergei was manipulated, played like a pawn in
a bigger game. But that is not the way he sees it. He was a simple protester, he says, who took up
arms in self-defence.
"I didn't want to shoot anyone or kill anyone. But that was the situation. I don't feel like some
kind of hero. The opposite: I have trouble sleeping, bad premonitions. I'm trying to control myself.
But I just get nervous all the time. I have nothing to be proud of. It's easy to shoot. Living afterwards,
that's the hard thing. But you have to defend your country."
You can watch a longer video report by Gabriel Gatehouse here and listen to a radio documentary
here.
[Feb 14, 2015] Standupwoman Spiffey 13 Feb 2015 21:02
I'm afraid I agree.
There's also a murkier element to it. That Parabuy is involved is pretty well proven, but we may
never know who (if anyone) was pulling the strings behind him. An American film 'Maidan Massacre'
(now pulled from youtube) had a US expert claiming at least one of the shooters was definitely a
professional sniper, and that does seem convincing from some of the footage. Men like that weren't
Maidan activists - so who were they?
One odd bit of information that never made it into the main western media was the claim by a Georgian
general that four of the snipers were Georgian. That has obviously led to theories of CIA involvement,
but I haven't seen anything that actually proves it.
As you say, we may never know. What matters most is that it wasn't the Berkut (or Yanukovich)
and everything that followed from that does indeed seem to be based on a lie.
BBC staff now decided to play the role of "daughters of an officer" (NSA financed bots in social
networks that assumes this identity and channel State Deportment talking points and trying to discredit
opponents pretending that they write from the place of the event) and all the morning very emotionally
told us that events on Maidan square was not that simple!
Really?
It turns out there are witnesses and facts which suggest that its not now Yanukovich who ordered
those snipers to fire, but it was opposition people who were firing at demonstrators. There are even
widows who claim that their statements about the death of loved ones were rejected first by junta
and then by Fat Pig government.
Oh, Oh, what an affront! The British have always been shameless whores, you know.
It seems that the attempts were made, while sluggish, to disown Fat Pig and his camarilla. Let's
see how things will develop next week, Washington Obcom did not provide final guidelines on this
matter yet.
[Jan 31, 2015] It looks as if the Ukrainian Ministry of Internal Affairs has exonerated the
Berkut for the killings of the Heavenly Hundred
Also from Fort Russ, it looks as if the Ukrainian Ministry of Internal Affairs has
exonerated the Berkut for the killings of the Heavenly Hundred – the young Armenian before
whose simple memorial The Pig knelt in solemn respect only last week was discovered to have been
killed by a shotgun, which the police did not have.
And it further said it did not appear
the police had any of the weapons used to off the rest. Interesting times in Kiev, my friends:
what will happen next?
It looks very much to me as if some of the rats are trying to scramble out from under the
wall they see collapsing on them.
Тайна снайперской винтовки на Майдане уходит корнями к Арсену Авакову (видео)
Эпизод перед расстрелом "Небесной сотни" так и остался необъясненной
тайной Пашинского, но теперь открываются эти секреты.
Почему до сих пор сотрудники МВД и СБУ, спустя год, не нашли людей, которые были в том автомобиле
и вывозили винтовку? По сути – это те же люди, которые ее туда и привезли в правительственный квартал,
напротив Майдана.
Сергею Пашинскому, как и Арсену Авакову вероятно, есть что скрывать...
Ivan Katchanovski, Ph.D. School of Political Studies & Department of Communication University
of Ottawa Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5, Canada [email protected] Paper presented at the Chair of Ukrainian
Studies Seminar at the University of Ottawa, Ottawa, October 1, 2014.
Conclusion
The analysis and the evidence presented in this academic investigation put the Euromaidan and
the conflict in Ukraine into a new perspective. The seemingly irrational mass shooting and killing
of the protesters and the police on February 20 appear to be rational from self-interest based perspectives
of rational choice and Weberian theories of instrumentally-rational action. This includes the following:
the Maidan leaders gaining power as a result of the massacre, President Yanukovych and his other
top government officials fleeing on February 21, 2014 from Kyiv and then from Ukraine, and the retreat
by the police. The same concerns Maidan protesters being sent under deadly fire into positions of
no important value and then being killed wave by wave from unexpected directions. Similarly, snipers
killing unarmed protesters and targeting foreign journalists but not Maidan leaders, the Maidan Self-Defense
and the Right Sector headquarters, the Maidan stage, and pro-Maidan photographs become rational.
While such actions are rational from a rational choice or instrumentally-rational theoretical perspective,
the massacre not only ended many human lives but also undermined democracy, human rights, and the
rule of law in Ukraine.
The massacre of the protesters and the police represented a violent overthrow of the government
in Ukraine and a major human rights crime. This violent overthrow constituted an undemocratic
change of government. It gave start to a large-scale violent conflict that turned into a civil war
in Eastern Ukraine, to a Russian military intervention in support of separatists in Crimea and Donbas,
and to a de-facto break-up of Ukraine. It also escalated an international conflict between the West
and Russia over Ukraine. The evidence indicates that an alliance of elements of the Maidan opposition
and the far right was involved in the mass killing of both protesters and the police, while the involvement
of the special police units in killings of some of the protesters cannot be entirely ruled out based
on publicly available evidence. The new government that came to power largely as a result of the
massacre falsified its investigation, while the Ukrainian media helped to misrepresent the mass killing
of the protesters and the police. The evidence indicates that the far right played a key role in
the violent overthrow of the government in Ukraine.
This academic investigation also brings new important questions that need to be addressed.
A new prize-winning American documentary film has been released which suggests that the snipers
who killed 100 demonstrators on Kiev's central square in January and February of this year may have
been working for pro-western groups seeking to...
The authors of this video consider alliance of Oligarch Poroshenko with far right forces was connected
with his Presidential ambitions. He decided that only West can make him President and serving as cash
cow for the USA will be rewarded. By some estimate he spend hundred million on propelling Maidan violence
making him second most important sponsor of EuroMaidan after the West embassies. Video contains annotated
video famous Poroshenko outburst when he was accused in financing Sniper-gate.
A very interesting interview about "internals of Yanukovich rule and faults of Yanukovich personality
that led to his fall, when the USA decided to play a different, more agreesive, game in Ukraine.
Вячеслав Заневский, бывший гражданин РФ, который с середины 2008 до конца 2012 года в формальном
статусе внештатного советника Президента возглавлял Службу безопасности Виктора Януковича рассказал
в программе "Знак оклику" на ТВі о бывшем шефе.
Главный охранник Януковича рассказал о его привычках, его ближайшем окружении, спецслужбах РФ
и Украины, силовых спецподразделениях СБУ, УГО, МВД и о снайперах на Майдане.
По словам Заневского, сразу после инаугурации Янукович изменился, стал высокомерным и надменным.
"Наверное, самый большой минус я вижу, что человек (Янукович - ред.) стал царем. А разница
между президентом и царем в том, что у царя не может быть все плохо", - заявил бывший главный охранник
Януковича (см. 28 минуту видео).
Он также считает, что стремление Януковича к чрезмерному богатству - это следствие детских
комплексов и тюремного прошлого.
Заневский подтвердил, что Янукович мог применить физическую силу в отношении своих подчиненных.
Из-за этого все панически боялись делать экс-президенту замечания или идти к нему с плохими новостями.
Произведение "Охранник Януковича рассказал о бегстве шефа и снайперов на Майдане" созданное автором
по имени Туровци Владислав, публикуется на условиях лицензии Creative Commons "Attribution" ("Атрибуция")
4.0 Всемирная. Туровци Владислав, публикуется на условиях лицензии Creative Commons "Attribution"
("Атрибуция") 4.0 Всемирная.
Разрешения, выходящие за рамки данной лицензии, могут быть доступны на странице
http://frukti.net/kontakty/ .
DohloFos2
Человек выглядит очень достойным. Чувствуется хорошая профессиональная подготовка в области
умения владеть собой. А так же хорошие аналитические способности.
Возможно в России служил в спецслужбе или даже в разведке. Его бы в президенты Украины, он
бы порядок навел. Мог бы стать на уровне
This video proves that shots were fired on the advancing protest party from the rear and clearly
points out bullet trajectories (from the Hotel Ukraine) as well as impact areas.
https://
You Tube version (also graphic)
The video coincides with the release of a hacked EU minister phone call discussing the subject.
Link to You Tube video of ministerial phone call and the Guardian UK story related to the subject.
https://
Skip to 2 minute mark for start of conversation. (Also a graphic warning as video shows pictures
of individuals suffering)
The Ministers give clear impressions of what they think of the protest leaders saying " All
these guys have a dirty past", "They can't be trusted", "The trust level is absolutely low", "They
send uninvited visitors in the night to beat parliament members" "They beat a parliament member
in the streets". "They can't send a reform package yet due to the level of trust it will end badly".
"They have no partner to partner with". They also discuss the doctor who treated the shooting
victims in the video above saying she believes the same individuals were shooting police and protesters
on both sides. Skip to 8:20 mark in the You Tube video to go straight to this quote. They also
say the new coalition doesn't want to investigate who was doing the shooting.
The theory put forth is these individuals being shot were patsies murdered by their own side
in order to blame Ukrainian authorities and gather the sentiment of the rest of the world to the
protesters side. There is some video out there that shows police sniping in certain areas so of
course they are not blameless either. However, the video above lends credence to the possibility
those individuals were murdered in cold blood by their own side.
One thing of note is that the US media has chosen not to cover any of this subject. Neither
the leaked phone calls or the possibility of the protest leaders murdering their own people for
international support. DU'ers can watch the videos and decide if they think it's all BS. The concerns
the EU ministers have should be taken into account however, when considering the fact the US media
has chosen not to cover that aspect of the crisis. The US and EU are planning to give billions
of dollars of US taxpayer money to these individuals. American have a right to know this info
and our media should be covering it.
The similarities between the Maidan snipers and the snipers in Romania in 89 are striking.
In Bucharest, French snipers were used to give more legitimacy to the incoming new Romanian government.
I wonder who were used on the Maidan.
BTW I don't think real Ukrainians wanted another oligarch in power at all. Half of them stayed
home, the none voted in the east and a few in the south.
I just hope some oligarch would keep their private thugs and armies out of Eastern Hungary,
where they terrorise locals who don't sign up for dodgy deals.
iseethroughyou -> PeterSchmidt, 27 May 2014 11:01am
UNA-UNSO
They were the ones who were wearing the red armbands during the Odessa massacre.
As an aside. The head of the parliamentary enwuiry into the massacre stated that the ammunition
used in the snipers killings was never issued to the Berkut.
There is no forensic evidence linking the victims of mass killings in Kiev on February 20 with
officers from the Berkut police unit, the head of the parliamentary commission investigating the
murders told journalists. http://rt.com/news/158864-kiev-snipers-not-berkut/
Вся документация уничтожена, гильзотека украдена, автоматы украдены
В МВД уничтожили всю документацию и гильзотеку, позволявшие отследить использование оружия и пуль,
которыми расстреливали майдановцев. Об этом рассказал председатель комиссии по расследованию убийств
на Майдане, депутат Геннадий Москаль.
"Сбежал полковник Сергей Кусюк вместе с оружием. Скорее всего, оружие не хранилось там, где должно
было храниться, - в центральном государственном научно-исследовательском институте криминалистических
экспертиз МВД. Я начал обзванивать регионы, и оказалось, что эти гильзотеки хранятся в областях.
А в Киеве исчезли эти контрольные пули (гильзы) и карточки с фотографиями работников, получавших
оружие. Исчезли журналы выдачи оружия, приказы о закреплении оружия за отдельным работником "Беркута"
тоже пропали. Вся документация уничтожена, гильзотека украдена, автоматы украдены", - сказал он.
Ранее Москаль заявлял, что пули от огнестрельного оружия, найденные на месте трагических событий
на Майдане в Киеве 20 февраля, не могли быть выпущены из оружия, находившегося на вооружении "Беркута".
The Commission of Verkhovnaya Rada: It was not the soldiers of "Berkut" who fired at the protesters
in Kiev
At independence Sqare shootings there were four sniper of the structures controlled by the ex-President
of Georgia Mikhail Saakashvili
During the tragic to the events of February in Kiev at the protesters fired not fighters of special
division "Berkut", reads the statement of the temporary investigative Commission of the Verkhovna
Rada on the results of the studies used by the snipers ammunition cartridges and bullets.
According to the head of the Commission Gennady Moskal, firing at the demonstrators could representatives
of the out of control public organizations. Without elaborating on what institutions are, Moskal
said that "the first shot was made on the police", transfers ITAR-TASS.
"Anyone could join the ranks of the protest movement under the guise of struggle against the current
authorities," he said. According to him, it does not exclude the version that could shoot as officers
of the security Service of Ukraine or the Ministry of internal Affairs and their supporters, posing
as activists.
The Commission was established to investigate illegal actions of law enforcement and of individual
officers during the events related to mass actions of social and political protest that took place
in Ukraine from 21 November 2013. No one has claimed responsibility for the deaths of the protesters
and law-enforcers, whose number exceeded 100 people. More than half of them were killed on the morning
of February 20 on Independence square and the street of the Institute.
Recall, who seized power in Kiev accused of shooting at protesters fighters police special forces
Berkut. As they say in Kiev, order sniping gave the President Yanukovych, and to perform the operation
helped the Russian special services. Russia denies involvement in these events and question the conclusions
of the Ukrainian authorities.
In early March, was released taped conversation of the Supreme Commissioner of EU on foreign Affairs,
Catherine Ashton, with foreign Minister of Estonia Urmas Paet. The latter said that the protesters
and police were killed the same snipers, and it would be profitable for the opposition, not to the
authorities.
In early April at the "Dynamo" stadium in Kiev was found shot, similar to the one that murdered
the first victims of the Maidan. In the Arsenal of "Berkut" weapons, firing a shot, was not. The
find became one more argument in favor of the version that the murder on the Maidan are the same
people who organized and the Maidan.
Finally, mass media disseminated a statement of the Georgian officer, former commander of the
battalion "Avaza" Tristan, Tsitelashvili, who said that at the square there were four sniper of the
structures controlled by the ex-President of Georgia Mikhail Saakashvili. Moreover, the curator of
the group, according to the officer, could be Givi Targamadze - Georgian MP, well-known in Russia
as the defendant in the trial about events on Bolotnays".
To add some nuance, because Mr. Hudson unfortunately messed up:
1) Monitor doesn't claim that shots were only from the hotel but that there
also shots fired from the hotel, additionally to government buildings.
2)The doctor they talk to, who they claim was treating victims from both sides, says that the
victims had been hit by the same type of bullets, which Monitor uses to argue that those shots
were probably not fired by police since they wouldn't have shot their own guys. Since he's not
the only one who treated demonstrators, this doesn't allow to draw further conclusions.
There's obvious need to counteract the pro-EU/NATO propaganda. But by overstating claims, TRNN
leaves itself open to justified attacks that undermine the larger issue.
Michael Hudson is a Distinguished Research Professor of Economics at the University of Missouri,
Kansas City. His two newest books are "The Bubble and Beyond" and "Finance Capitalism and its Discontents,"
available on Amazon.
DESVARIEUX: So, Micheal, what are you tracking this week?
HUDSON: The big news is all about the Ukraine. And it's about the events that happened in the
shootings on February 20. Late last week, the German television program ARD Monitor, which
is sort of their version of 60 Minutes here, had an investigative report of the shootings
in Maidan, and what they found out is that contrary to what President Obama is saying, contrary to
what the U.S. authorities are saying, that the shooting was done by the U.S.-backed Svoboda Party
and the protesters themselves, the snipers and the bullets all came from the Hotel Ukrayina, which
was the center of where the protests were going, and the snipers on the hotel were shooting not only
at the demonstrators, but also were shooting at their own--at the police and the demonstrators to
try to create chaos. They've spoken to the doctors, who said that all of the bullets and all of the
wounded people came from the same set of guns. They've talked to reporters who were embedded with
the demonstrators, the anti-Russian forces, and they all say yes. All the witnesses are in agreement:
the shots came from the Hotel Ukrayina. The hotel was completely under the control of the protesters,
and it was the government that did it.
So what happened was that after the coup d'état, what they call the new provisional government put
a member of the Svoboda Party, the right-wing terrorist party, in charge of the investigation. And
the relatives of the victims who were shot are saying that the government is refusing to show them
the autopsies, they're refusing to share the information with their doctors, they're cold-shouldering
them, and that what is happening is a coverup. It's very much like the film Z about the Greek
colonels trying to blame the murder of the leader on the protesters, rather than on themselves. Now,
the real question that the German data has is: why, if all of this is front-page news in Germany,
front-page news in Russia--the Russian TV have been showing their footage, showing the sniping--why
would President Obama directly lie to the American people? This is the equivalent of Bush's weapons
of mass destruction. Why would Obama say the Russians are doing the shooting in the Ukraine that's
justified all of this anti-Russian furor? And why wouldn't he say the people that we have been backing
with $5 billion for the last five or ten years, our own people, are doing the shooting, we are telling
them to doing the shooting, we are behind them, and we're the ones who are the separatists? What
has happened is that the Western Ukraine, the U.S. part, are the separatists trying to break up the
Ukraine, in keeping, pretty much, with what Brzezinski advised in his book some years ago when he
said breaking Ukraine off from Russia would be the equivalent of blocking any Russian potential military
power. Now, the only American who's spoken up against this was, last Friday, very quickly, President
Carter.
And Jimmy Carter said in an interview with Salon he's very worried. He says, quote, "The
rest of the world, almost unanimously, looks at America as the No. 1 warmonger. That we revert to
armed conflict almost at the drop of a hat--and quite often it's not only desired by the leaders
of our country, but it's also supported by the people of America."Now, the next day in The Financial
Times they did an interview with Singapore's prime minister, Lee. And the prime minister, Lee,
said, I think you--to the Financial Times interviewer, "I think you should have thought of
that before encouraging the demonstrators on the Maidan." I think some people--meaning the U.S.--didn't
think through all the consequences. Can you take responsibility for the consequences? And when it
comes to grief, will you be there? You can't be there, since you have so many other interests to
protect. So what foreign leaders are saying: look what American's doing. This is what it did in the
Hungarian Revolution in 1956, and again with the Czechs in 1968. It encourages foreign groups to
fight against the Russians, promises support, and then it just leaves them hanging. The Ukrainians
in the East are--the Russian-speakers, are very worried, because the separatists in the West, the
American-backed separatists, have already begun to cut off water to Crimea, saying, well, you're
not going to get the water, we're going to starve you out. They've already come and gone into Eastern
Ukraine.
They've closed down the Russian-speaking TV stations, saying, if you're trying to defend against
the IMF and the eurozone austerity plan that we have, if you're disagreeing with austerity, if you're
disagreeing for our removing the gas subsidy and making you--razing your rights, we're accusing you
of separatism. They've begun to arrest protesters against austerity. They've sent in assassination
squads to begin killing the people who are protesting the Western-backed austerity plans for the
Ukrainians. Now, already in today's news you have Ukrainians in Western Ukraine saying, wait a minute,
our jobs, to the extent that we're working for factories and industry--we make real cars for Russia,
we make inputs to Russian armaments for the airplanes, for the other things--our market is in Russia.
We've tried to sell to Germany. We're not able to sell to Germany.
Andrew Jack in today's Financial Times has an article on that, that there's already very
low living standards in the Eastern Ukraine. Their only hope is to keep employment. Their only means
of employment is to sell to Russia. And now they're being forced into a condition to say, look, either
you separate, or we'll separate and leave you. Putin has continually said he has no desire at all
for Russia to take part of the Eastern Ukraine. And the reason is quite simple. It's been simple
for the last 20 years. Ukraine is not really very self-supporting. It's a burden to whoever takes
it. Russia doesn't want the burden of supporting the Ukraine. So Putin has asked for a meeting with
the Europeans and the Americans to talk about a federal Ukraine, sort of a loose federation where
each region will have its own autonomy and all the three regions will agree not to have atom bombs
right on their border. What President Obama said over the weekend was, we will only have a meeting
if you surrender, Russia, to us, if you agree not to charge Ukraine for gas, if you agree to give
them gas for nothing at all, without getting paid for gas month after month. You have to promise
to keep giving all of Ukraine gas. You have to give them the money so they can buy our arms to fight
against you. And the president has just--Obama, has just sent naval vessels with atomic weapons into
the Black Sea, threatening Putin to wipe out Russia in 20 minutes. He's threatening World War III.
Europeans are scared stiff about this because they know that they'll be the first recipients of a
Russian retaliation. Why is America rattling this? It's as if Obama is channeling Dick Cheney.
Why is he not telling the American people, look, we've backed opponents to Russia and I'm afraid
they've got out of hand, we're really very sorry that they've been shooting innocent civilians, we're
sorry they're sorry acting illegally, we're sorry they're kleptocrats, we're sorry they have closed
all other Russian-speaking TV stations, we're sorry that they're--you know, this is bad behavior,
this is not democracy, what we want to back is democracy? But he's not saying that. He's saying,
not only are we backing the right-wingers, but we told Putin that there's no--don't even bother coming
to a meeting with us unless you give Ukraine gas for nothing. Well, Putin gave a speech in Russia
saying that Russia is the only country that actually gives to the Ukraine, that is actually giving
them gas. He says that the West has been encouraging him, egging them on, but hasn't been giving
given them any money at all. Now Germany's worried--and that's why it was the German television station
that did this investigative report--Germany's worried because it gets its gas over a pipeline that
runs through the Ukraine. And the Ukrainians' Svoboda Party, the party in charge of investigating
the Maidan massacre, is saying, we're going to blow up the pipelines to Russia, because what we want
to do is prevent Russia from getting the foreign exchange by selling its gas that it would use to
build up its military power.So someone in the neocon administration here in America has said, look,
if we can just stop Russia from getting export payments for its gas, it won't have enough money for
militarization and we'll win the Cold War.
This is the coup de grace, as Brzezinski wrote in his book before. And this is crazy. The Russians
say, well, it's true that Ukraine is making a lot of our arms, that we're importing it from them,
but we can replicate the factories here. It'll cost us a little more money, but we have unemployment
in Russia. We're going to have to actually build up our own industry. And we're obviously thinking
very quickly of how much we can export to China, Iran. They're immediately making a rapprochement
with Iran. They're now questioning whether they're going to let the Americans withdraw from Afghanistan
through Russia by saying, wait a minute, if you just moved naval vessels with atomic weapons right
into the Black Sea, threatening, you know, to bomb us, we're not going to let your army come into
Russia from Afghanistan, because you may just keep on coming. This is crazy. This is what the whole
world is talking about, and there's a total news blackout here. Now, normally there's only a news
blackout like that if there's something very serious going on. I can see Obama is worried about how
is he going to go down in history coming off like George Bush with his weapons of mass destruction
line, but we may not have more, in a couple of days, of history left if he continues along this path.
It's like the Tom Lehrer song, so long, mommy, I'm off to drop the bomby, I'll be home when the war
is over, a couple of hours from now. That's the kind of danger that we're in. And it's as if the
Americans said, well, it's all about freedom fighters trying to defend themselves against the Russian
bear, where it's really a case of America trying to goad Russia into acting intemperately. So the
question is: where are we going to go from here?
Michael Hudson: A German TV investigation disproves the West's claim that Yanukovych was responsible
for killing of dozens of Ukrainian protestors
Michael Hudson: A German TV investigation disproves the West's claim that Yanukovych was responsible
for killing of dozens of Ukrainian protestors, making this President Obama's WMD moment
That's very interesting. Hudson is a little wobbly on the notion of a single USN warship carrying
"atomic weapons" menacing the whole of Russia and frightening Europe out of its wits, but otherwise
it sounds quite compelling and the economic component is just as we have been saying here for
a long time; that the EU Association agreement was a terrible deal for Ukraine and would do absolutely
nothing to arrest its poverty – would instead accustom it to living off of IMF loans while its
resources were looted, and would close it off from its Russian markets or else flood Russia's
markets with cheap EU goods and the goods the EU would not buy from Ukraine.
This is an "alternative" news site; I hope the story develops some legs in the popular press
and they do not just try to bury it, and truly it would benefit from some independent analysis
because this story – it was all the opposition – also sounds too pat and it seemed clear from
earlier video that the shots were coming from more than one direction although the Hotel Ukraine
(under the control of Maidanites) was definitely one of them. I was surprised to see Singapore's
leadership come out with the position that instability is helpful to the west's achievement of
its goals.
A Georgian General named Tristan Tsitelashvili claims that 4 Georgian snipers were the ones who
shot dead the Maidan activists on 20 February
A Gruzian General named
Tristan Tsitelashvili
claims that 4 Gruzian snipers were the ones who shot dead the Maidan activists on 20 February,
thus sparking the revolution that brought the Banderites to power in Kiev.
Tsitelashvili is
a General in Gruzian armed forces, a veteran of Abkhazian war, and he claims he knows the identity
of the 4 snipers. He says they were dispatched to Kiev by Saakashvili.
He also says these 4 Gruzians didn't even bother hiding themselves, and in fact they appeared
on the stage many times and orated to the Maidanuts.
Seven weeks after the fatal Kiev shootings which led to the overthrow of President Viktor
Yanukovich's government, evidence is building up that casts serious doubt upon the official version
of events. According to WDR "Monitor", it is unlikely that the shooting of demonstrators was undertaken
exclusively by the Yanukovich government side.
At a press conference a week ago, the Attorney General's Office and the new transitional government
categorically stated what had happened, subsequently stating that twelve members of the now-defunct
special unit "Berkut" were considered to be the chief suspects.
Investigators doubt the prosecution version
A high-ranking member of the Ukrainian government teams that are involved in the investigation,
has placed the Prosecutor General's statement in doubt. "My findings do not agree with that which
the prosecutor stated at the press conference", Monitor has been told by the investigator, who
wishes to remain anonymous.
The ARD programme also has a recording of the radio traffic between the snipers who were acting
for former President Yanukovich's side and who apparently were stationed on the morning of February
20 on different roofs in the centre of Kiev. This conversation was recorded by a Ukrainian amateur
radio operator and Monitor has managed to get hold of it. There can be heard what sounds like
a sniper asking his colleagues over the radio: "Who just shot then, because our people are not
shooting at the unarmed?" A short time later another says: "Someone has just shot him, but we
didn't do it" and then adds: "Are there some more snipers? Who are they??"
Also shots from the Hotel Ukraina
On videos it can also be appreciated that the oppositionists shot on Institutskaya Street were
shot at not only from the direction of the government buildings, but also from the Hotel Ukraina,
which was behind of them. In an interview with Monitor, which has been confirmed by a witness
who had been present on the day between the hotel and the government buildings and who can be
made out on several videos: "We were shot at from the front and from the rear from about the eighth
or ninth floor of the Hotel Ukraina. These were definitely professionals".
The hotel where numerous media representatives were housed, was securely held on that day by
the opposition. On the morning of the 20th of February they had set up entry control to the building:
into the hotel went only those who had a room key or who could identify themselves.
Lawyers have received no information
The lawyers representing those wounded have raised serious allegations against the Ukrainian
Prosecutor General's Office. The results of the investigation have almost been completely held
back from them. "We have not been told what type of weapon was used; we have not been given access
to expert opinion; we have received no information concerning any plans of action that are to
be taken. We have none of the legal documents that the contending parties have drawn up either.
We just cannot tell you what actually happened according to the point of view of the State Prosecution.
"One of the lawyers has even compared this with how things were done in the Soviet Union and under
Yanukovich: "The State Prosecution Office has not correctly carried out due procedure: they are
protecting their own people and are biased, just like before".
February 20th was the bloodiest day of unrest around Independence Square in Kiev. According
to official figures, more than 30 people died that day on Institutskaya Street.
This is the first evidence I have seen that Yanukovych actually did have snipers – probably not
categorized that way officially, more likely something like "expert marksmen" – deployed on rooftops.
Now that it is mentioned, it stands to reason that he would, and if he did not think of it himself
it would have been recommended to him by his paramilitary commanders. However, this is significant
because it (a) contributes strongly to the believability of the claim that government snipers
deliberately shot unarmed demonstrators, and (b) an effort to capitaize on it would almost certainly
have to have been planned by someone who was briefed on or otherwise knew of the government's
deployment of such professionals. In short, someone who knew of an opportunity which would not
have been known to the public at large did know of it and seized it.
It seems quite apparent
that government forces had been given strict instructions not to fire on anyone who was not armed.
And I believe the claims of people being shot at night or that snipers were "shooting to blind
people" can be discounted; firelight is notoriously difficult to shoot by, and the latter claim
was advanced only for simpletons.
[Apr 13, 2014] Junta has cut down trees on Instituskoy Street to make the determination of the direction
of line of fire more difficult
But really, why "specially traine snipers from Berkut" did killed the leaders "evroMaidana" and
shot rank-and-file protesters. Killing leaders is what snipers are for.
Russia has some information about Ukrainian far-right movement Right Sector involved in the shooting
of snipers in the Ukrainian capital of Kiev, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said in an interview
with Sunday Time programme anchored by Irada Zeinalova on Channel One on Sunday. Pettiness of foreign
sponsors of new authorities in Kiev is astonishing, he added.
"We have some information about it. We shared our concerns and suspicions. I cannot affirm
with absolute determination, but there is a good deal of facts that point to this. Certainly,
it is needed to recheck them. I hope that an investigation which current Ukrainian leaders announced
will be finalised and will not be swept under carpet," Lavrov noted.
18 февраля 2014 года, приблизительно в 13:20, на улице Институтской противостояние между
участниками акций неповиновия и правоохранителями было в разгаре. Через полчаса их начнут теснить
на Кловский спуск, но в 13:20 бойцы спецподразделий стояли сткой против стки активистов. Между людьми
и щитами сотрудников МВД была мертвая зона, куда никто из протестующих не заходил ввиду того, что
со стороны милиции момтально начинали стрелять.
Вдруг всеобщее внимание привлек человек, идущий в сторону правоохранителей. Человек делал движия
левой ладонью, как будто приветствовал силовиков или говорил… "я свой"?
Одет мужчина был так же, как множество рядовых "майдановцев" в те дни – маска, каска
(приметная, белая), бронежилет.
Человек подошел к припаркованному автомобилю, сел в него, отъехал. Многие из стоящих протестующих
растерялись, не веря собствным глазам. Со стороны милиции не прозвучало ни единого выстрела, хотя
неизвестный даже не снял маску.
HONDA CIVIC синего цвета поехала прямо на людей, те расступились. Машина проскочила бы сквозь
толпу, если бы не один из мужчин, который начал кричать: "Остановите его, кто это вообще такой?!".
Авто остановили. Водитель вышел, по требованию показал докумты. Ему приказали снять маску. Сначала
он возражал: "Не могу, если мты мя узнают, мне конец".
Под напором протестующих человек лицо открыл. Лицо неизвестного засняли несколько присутствующих,
в том числе журналисты.
Люди захотели осмотреть машину, водитель начал нервничать. Открыли багажник, обнаружили винтовку
с глушителем.
Не успели собравшиеся осознать увидное, как перед ними появился народный депутат Сергей
Пашинский с группой поддержки. Как утверждают, он буквально примчался на место обнаружия винтовки
с улицы Шелковичной.
Не говоря ни слова, не коммтируя мрачную находку, Пашинский знаками приказал сопровождавшим его
людям и водителю машины сесть в авто. После чего просто уехал.
Ни крики людей "эй, куда вы его везете?!", ни протесты присутствовавших на месте журналистов
(на фото – оператор "5 канала") на народного избранника не произвели впечатлия.
Машина умчалась вниз по Шелковичной.
Перед вами единствный сюжет, попавший на ТВ. По неизвестным причинам, остальные каналы видео не
показали, и новости о том, что из эпицтра событий, оттуда, где неизвестные снайперы уже убивали людей
(и убьют до конца противостояния еще немало), увезли винтовку, не сообщили. Но к этому мы еще вернемся.
Кем был этот неизвестный? Что за ружье лежало у него в багажнике? Почему Пашинский увез
его, не объяснив своих действий?
Интернет взорвался вопросами. По запросу "Пашинский ружье" поисковик Google выдает семьдесят тысяч
результатов.
А что же нынешний глава АП? Ничего. Ни разу не объяснил он случившегося. Создается впечатлие,
что Сергей Владимирович мечтает лишь об одном – чтобы обществность забыла, а тема "замялась".
С учетом повышного внимания к его персоне, вызванной "мутными" многомиллионными схемами, Пашинскому
упоминание о винтовке, что называется, "не в тему".
BBC World News is now running a loaded Panorama documentary on Ukraine & Crimea right now.
They dealt early on with the snipers from Hotel Ukraina and aired an unverified recording of what
they claim is Berkut telling snipers to take position on the top floor of the hotel and simply
haven't questioned its veracity. It doesn't really get any better with the BBC guy going to Crimea
and the base commander confronting the masked troops (clearly because he has made the calculation
that he will not be shot dead live on tv).
It's not that I think that all journalists are fç"'àng stupid, ignorant bastards, editors have
a serious responsibility here and are known to butcher good reporting, but what happened to presenting
a properly balanced analysis of the situation without leading the viewer or listener with smoke
and mirrors, and letting them make their own up mind, FFS? Those fuezing twats who want to 'tell
the story' in an emotional and attached way serve nothing but their own egos inthat they think
they are doing something. Leaving a mark on the world. Making a difference. How fuceing deluded
is that when any normal person knows that foreign policy is simply straightforward amoral interest
led state policy and totally controlled by the political class who are never effected by any reporting
unless it can be selectively taken advantage of and coinciding with the state policy. Big media
and journalism mostly deserves to die, but they don't give a sh*t. It's a career, innit? /rant
Fortunately, I know the other 99% of rest of us are normal.
kirill, March 15, 2014 at 3:29 pm
So, some recording is produced to reconcile the contradiction, eh? Hotel Ukraina was occupied
by Right Sector during the sniper attack. Even one of the BBC reporters on the team that shot
the video saw what one of the shooters from the window was wearing. And it wasn't a Berkut uniform
but the standard Right Sector improvised military-wannabe garb.
Anyway, funny how the west never considers motive when dealing with alleged crimes of governments
who are disloyal. WTF would Yanukovich order a pretext against himself after months of bending
over backward to please the west? A proper crackdown would have been to send in the army to clear
the militants out and not to create martyrs out of them. The western media spew insults the intelligence
so much that it hurts.
Former State Security Head of Ukraine Oleksandr Yakimenko blames Ukraine's
current government for hiring snipers on Feb. 20, when dozens of people were killed and hundreds
more wounded. The victims were mainly EuroMaidan Revolution demonstrations, but some police officers
were also killed. This was the deadliest day during the EuroMaidan Revolution, a three-month uprising
that claimed 100 lives.
Yakimenko also blamed the United States for organizing and financing the revolution by bringing
illegal cash in using diplomatic mail.
The U.S. Embassy in Ukraine dismissed the charges as ludicrous, while another official with the
current government called the accusations "cynical" propaganda with no factual basis.
... ... ...
Yakimenko made these and other accusations in a 10-minute exclusive interview
to Russia's Vesti channel in an undisclosed location.
"The shots sounded from the building of Philharmonics," Yakimenko told Vesti. "This was the building
supervised by (now National Security Council Chief Andriy) Parubiy."
He said the snipers were shooting in the back of the running police, as well as at protesters.
He said there were two groups of "well-dressed" snipers, each composed of 10 people, operating in
the building. Yakimenko said their exit was witnessed by both SBU operatives and protesters themselves.
He said one of the groups of snipers disappeared, but the other one relocated to Hotel Ukraina
and continued to kill the protesters at a slower pace. Yakimenko said at that point representatives
of Svoboda and Right Sector appealed to him to deploy SBU's special unit Alfa to destroy the snipers.
Yakimenko claims that he was ready to do it, but did not get the permission of Parubiy, who supervised
the self-defense forces.
"To get inside EuroMaidan I needed Parubiy's permission because the forces of self-defense would
hit me in the back," Yakimenko said. "But Parubiy did not give me such a permission."
"Not a single weapon could get onto Maidan without Parubiy's permission,"
he said, adding that EuroMaidan protesters used mercenaries from former defense ministry's special
units, as well as foreign mercenaries, including those from former Yugoslavia.
... ... ....
Yankimenko says that Parubiy, as well as a number of other organizers
of EuroMaidan, received direct orders from the U.S. government. Among those people he named former
and current intelligence chiefs Mykola Malomuzh and Viktor Gvozd, former Defense Minister Anatoliy
Hrytsenko and leader of the opposition Petro Poroshenko.
"These are the forces that were doing everything they were told by the leaders and representatives
of the United States," he says. "They, in essence lived in the U.S. embassy. There wasn't a day when
they did not visit the embassy."
... ... ...
SBU chief Valentyn Nalyvaichenko is also accused of playing to the tune
of the Americans. The U.S. Embassy in Ukraine commented on these accusations in just one word: "ludicrous."
All orders were given either by the U.S. or EU ambassador Jan Tombinski, "who in essence is a
Polish citizen."
"The role of Poland cannot be evaluated," Yakimenko said. "It dreams about restoring its old wish,
Rzeczpospolita."
The EU Delegation had no comment about the accusations.
The former SBU chief also talked at length about the financing of EuroMaidan protests, saying
much of it came directly from the U.S., and that some Ukrainian oligarchs, including Poroshenko,
Dmytro Firtash and Viktor Pinchuk.
"From the beginning of Maidan we as a special service noticed a significant increase of diplomatic
cargo to various embassies, western embassies located in Ukraine," says Yakimenko. "It was tens of
times greater than usual diplomatic cargo supplies." He says that right after such shipments crisp,
new U.S. dollar bills were spotted on Maidan.
He said Ukraine's oligarchs were also financing Maidan because they were "hostages of the situation
and had no choice" because most of their assets are located in the west.
The last time a leaked phone call out of Ukraine
was released about a month ago ostensibly by the Russian NSA equivalent, one between US assistant
sec state Victoria Nuland and the US envoy to the Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt, it was revealed that the
real puppet masters behind the Maidan movement, and the true instigators of the Ukraine "revolution"
were none other than the "developed" world superpowers, lead by the US. Also revealed were tensions
between the US and EU strategies on how to overthrow the current government, culminating with the
infamous "Fuck the EU." Needless to say the US, which implicitly confirmed the recording, was angry
at Russia and accused it of using dirty tricks.
That's ironic, because when it comes to "dirty tricks" what is about to be presented,
blows the top off anything Russia may or has done to date.
Earlier today an even more shocking recording
has been "leaked" this time one between the always concerned about human rights EU foreign
affairs chief Catherine Ashton and Estonian foreign minister Urmas Paet, in which it is revealed
on tape that all those photos of horrifying deaths of Ukrainians by snipers during the last days
of the Median stand off, were in fact caused not by Snipers controlled by Yanukovich, but
that the snipers shot at both protesters and police in Kiev were allegedly hired by Maidan leaders!
Here is the key exchange, just after 8 minutes into the conversation :
Paet: "All the evidence shows that people who were killed by snipers from both
sides, policemen and people from the streets, that they were the same snipers killing people from
both sides. ... Some photos that showed it is the same handwriting, the same type of bullets, and
it is really disturbing that now the new coalition they don't want to investigate what exactly happened.
So there is now stronger and stronger understanding that behind the snipers, it was not Yanukovych,
but it was somebody from the new coalition."
Ashton: "I think we do want to investigate. I mean, I didn't pick that up, that's
interesting. Gosh."
Paet: "It already discreditates (sic) this new coalition."
So first US orchestrates the Kiev overthrow, and now the new "leaders" of Ukraine are allegedly
found to have fired against their own people - the same provocation they subsequently
used to run Yanukovich out of the country and install a pro-Western puppet government. Of
course, said pro-Western coalition has not been discreditated (sic) because Ms. Ashton has
sternly refused to investigate, knowing quite well how horribly this would reflect on the new Ukraine
"leadership" - a government which shot its own people to fabricate the pretext under which it rose
to power.
Is it any wonder then that Russia has responded the way it has?
As for at least one of the affected parties, Estonia, it has just confirmed the authenticity of
the recording, and the ministry of foreign affairs has organized a press conference to answer media
questions today at 5 pm. From the Valisministeerium:
No. 84-E Foreign Minister Urmas Paet and EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton uploaded
to the Internet today, a phone call is authentic.
Paet and Ashton conversation took place on 26 February, following Estonia's Foreign Minister's
visit to Ukraine, and immediately after the end of the street violence.
Foreign Minister Paet communicate what he had said about the meetings held in Kiev last day
and expressed concern about the situation.
"It is extremely regrettable that such an interception is occurring at all""said
Paet., Including its call for today's photos are not random," he added.
Yes, it is truly regrettable that the people know the truth.
Putin has pushed the idea that the sniper shootings were ordered by opposition leaders, while
Kremlin officials have pointed to a recording of a leaked phone call between Estonia's foreign minister
and the European Union's foreign policy chief as evidence to back up that version.
This much is known: Snipers firing powerful rifles from rooftops and windows shot scores of people
in the heart of Kiev. Some victims were opposition protesters, but many were civilian bystanders
clearly not involved in the clashes. Among the dead were medics, as well as police officers. A majority
of the more than 100 people who died in the violence were shot by snipers; hundreds were also injured
by the gunfire and other street fighting.
... ... ....
Russia has used the uncertainty surrounding the bloodshed to discredit Ukraine's current government.
During a news conference Tuesday, Putin addressed the issue in response to a reporter's question,
suggesting that the snipers in fact "may have been provocateurs from opposition parties."
That theory gained currency a day later when a recording of a Feb. 26 private phone call between
Estonian Foreign
Minister Urmas Paet and European Union foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton was leaked and broadcast
by the Russian government-controlled TV network, Russia Today. In the call, Paet said he had heard
from protesters during a visit to Kiev that opponents of Yanukovych were behind the sniper attacks.
Paet said another physician who treated victims, Dr. Olha Bogomolets, told him that both police
and protesters were killed by the same bullets - and "there is now stronger and stronger understanding
that behind snipers it was not Yanukovych, but it was somebody from the new (government) coalition."
On Wednesday Paet confirmed the recording was authentic, and told reporters in
Tallinn that
he was merely repeating what Bogomolets had told him. He said he had no way of verifying the claims,
though he called Bogomolets "clearly a person with authority."
Bogomolets couldn't be immediately reached by the AP for comment. She did not answer repeated
calls to her cellphone or respond to text messages.
In an interview earlier this week with a correspondent from British newspaper The Telegraph, Bogomolets
said she didn't know if police and protesters were killed by the same bullets, and called for a thorough
investigation.
"No one who just sees the wounds when treating the victims can make a determination about the
type of weapons," she was quoted as saying. "I hope international experts and Ukrainian investigators
will make a determination of what type of weapons, who was involved in the killings and how it was
done. I have no data to prove anything."
On Thursday, Russia's U.N. envoy said he discussed the leaked phone call during a closed-door
meeting of the U.N. Security Council.
If the call represents the truth, Ambassador Vitaly Churkin told reporters, "it is hard to
imagine how such a parliament ... can be regarded as a legitimate parliament that can pass legitimate
decisions on the future of Ukraine."
A former top security official with Ukraine's main security agency, the SBU, waded into the confusion,
in an interview published Thursday with the respected newspaper Dzerkalo Tizhnya. Hennady Moskal,
who was deputy head of the agency, told the newspaper that snipers from the Interior Ministry and
SBU were responsible for the shootings, not foreign agents.
"In addition to this, snipers received orders to shoot not only protesters, but also police forces.
This was all done in order to escalate the conflict, in order to justify the police operation to
clear Maidan," he was quoted as saying.
Estonian Foreign Minister Urmas Paet confirmed it. On February 25 , he and EU foreign policy Catherine
Ashton spoke.
They were monitored. They didn't know it at the time. Their discussion was leaked.
Paet talked to Ashton after returning from Kiev, he said. "At the time, (he) was already in Estonia,"
he added.
On Wednesday, he held a press conference. He issued a
statement saying
Euromaidan killings demand an independent investigation.
Estonia's Foreign Ministry confirmed the leaked phone call's authenticity.
"We reject the claim that Paet was giving an assessment of the opposition's involvement in the
violence," it stressed.
It's impossible reinterpreting what he meant.
He only commented on what he heard in Kiev. He spilled the beans. Intentionally or not, he confirmed
what's been independently believed all along.
Ukraine's legitimate President Viktor Yanukovych was wrongfully blamed. He had nothing to do with
Euromaidan killings.
The operation was a classic false flag. It was staged to blame him. It's now exposed.
Cui bono matters most. Yanukovych's involvement had everything to lose and nothing to gain.
Catherine Ashton's spokesperson, Maja Kocijancic, was silent. "(W)e don't comment on leaked phone
conversations," she said.
Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) officials loyal to Yanukovych reportedly hacked phones used
by Paet and Ashton. They uploaded what they heard online.
Paet was heard saying "there is now stronger and stronger understanding that behind the snipers,
it was not Yanukovich, but it was somebody from the new coalition."
"All the evidence shows" they were shooting at people from both sides. They targeted police and
protesters. Yanukovych was wrongfully blamed.
Ashton was nonplussed. She was tongue-tied. She was caught red-handed. She's part of the dirty
scheme to oust him.
She reacted saying: "Well, yeah...that's, that's terrible. I think we do want to investigate."
"I mean, I didn't pick that up. That's interesting. Gosh." Expect all-out efforts to bury the
story. Whether it's possible remains to be seen.
Paet spoke to Kiev doctor Olga Bogomolets. She's a Bogomolets National Medical University professor.
It's named after her great-grandfather Oleksandr. He founded and served as its Institute of Dermatology
and Cosmetology chief.
She said snipers shot protesters and police. Paet called Dr. Bogomolets' evidence "quite disturbing."
She showed him photos. They revealed "the same handwriting, the same type of bullets, and it's
really disturbing that now the new coalition, that they don't want to investigate what exactly happened,"
said Paet.
During weeks of protests, nearly 100 people were killed. Another 900 were injured.
US-linked Putschists were responsible. Perhaps CIA elements were involved. The game is as old
as empire. Victims are blamed for perpetrator crimes.
Saddam was accused of having nonexistent WMDs. Gaddafi faced numerous false charges.
Assad repeatedly is blamed for US-supported death squad crimes.
Media scoundrels regurgitate official lies. They're complicit in imperial lawlessness.
So-called British forensic expects wrongfully blamed Yanukovych for putschist-linked sniper killings.
They refused to reveal their identity. They claimed useful evidence obtained for future prosecutions,
they said.
They called what happened politically sensitive. They were part of an elaborate false flag scheme.
Yanukovych was wrongfully blamed.
Paet blamed putschists for cover-up. "They don't want to investigate what exactly happened," he
said.
They want it suppressed. Snipers were neo-Nazi hitmen. Yanukovych maintained his innocence.
He gave no orders to shoot, he stressed. He's wrongfully accused of mass murder. He's blamed for
US-linked putschists' crimes.
This type information should making game-changing headlines. Expect all-out efforts to keep fingers
pointed the wrong way.
Expect little said about Putin's 2014 Nobel Peace Prize nomination. Norwegian Nobel Institute
director Geir Lundestad revealed it.
The International Academy of Spiritual Unity and Cooperation Among Nations of the World (IASUCANW)
nominated him.
He's one of 278 candidates. They include 47 organizations. On Tuesday, Nobel Committee members
met. They added their own proposals.
They focused on recent global turmoil. According to Lundestad:
"Part of the purpose of the committee's first meeting is to take into account recent events, and
committee members try to anticipate what could be the potential developments in political hotspots."
Other 2014 nominees include Pope Francis, Edward Snowden, Bradley (Chelsea) Manning, and Malala
Yousafzai.
She's perhaps the world's most famous teenager. She's called one of the world's 100 most influential
people. In April 2013, Time magazine featured her on its cover.
She was nominated last year. She's a Pakistani blogger/activist for women's rights and education.
In October 2012, she boarded a school bus. Gunmen targeted her. She was shot in the left side
of her forehead.
She was unconscious in critical condition. She survived. She remains threatened.
On October 10, this year's Peace Prize winner will be announced.
Putin and Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov both are worthy. They collaborate for peace.
They go all-out for it. They want conflicts resolved diplomatically. They persevere against long
odds.
They persist tirelessly. They deserve recognition for their efforts.
Last October, IASUCANW President Georgiy Trapeznikov said its nominating "letter was sent to the
Nobel Committee September 16 and it was received September 20."
"Vladimir Putin has proved his adherence to the cause of peace."
"We know very well what peacemaking role our president played in conflict regions, especially
Beslan and South Ossetia."
He's very much involved in resolving Syria's conflict peacefully. He supports unity governance
resolution in Ukraine the same way.
His press secretary Dmitry Pekov said:
"The primary criterion for the president is satisfaction from a job well done." He seeks no special
recognition or awards.
State Duma MP Iosif Kobzon said Putin deserves this year's prize. He's polar opposite Obama.
"Barack Obama is the man who has initiated and approved the United States' aggressive actions
in Iraq and Afghanistan," said Kobzon.
He bears full responsibility for Libya, numerous proxy wars and Ukraine violence.
Nobel Committee members deplore peace. They represent powerful monied interests.
They believe war is peace. It shows in their annual selections.
Past winners included Henry Kissinger, Shimon Peres, Yitzhak Rabin, Menachem Begin, FW de Klerk,
Al Gore, Kofi Annan, and four US warrior presidents.
Announcing Obama's award, Committee members said:
It reflects his "extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between
peoples."
He's "work(ed) for a world without nuclear weapons."
He "created a new climate in international politics."
"Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and
given its people hope for a better future."
Throughout his tenure, he waged war on humanity. He has new targets in mind. He wants unchallenged
global dominance.
He stops at nothing to get it. Putin is polar opposite. He supports peace and stability.
He champions multi-polar world cooperation. He deserves recognition for his efforts. So does Lavrov
for his dedicated collaboration.
Expect malicious Russia bashing to deny them. Warriors win peace prizes. Peacemakers are spurned.
Putin opposes imperial lawlessness. He won't rollover for America. Doing the right thing tarnishes
him.
He's public enemy number one. Being on the right side of history has a price. Waging war on humanity
is rewarded.
A Final Comment: NATO Saber-Rattling
The North Atlantic Council (NAC) is NATO' "principle political decision-making body." On March
4, it met. It did so at Poland's request. It did it under the North Atlantic Treaty's Article 4.
It calls for members to "consult together whenever, in the opinion of any of them, the territorial
integrity, political independence, or security of any" is threatened.
Article 5 considers an armed attack (real or otherwise) against one or more members, an attack
against all. It calls for collective self-defense.
No threat whatever exists. Ukraine isn't a NATO member. Not yet at least.
Its statement said "Russia continues to violate Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity,
and to violate its international commitments."
"These developments present serious implications for the security and stability of the Euro...Atlantic
area."
"Allies stand together in the spirit of strong solidarity in this grave crisis."
"We undertake to pursue and intensify our rigorous and on-going assessment of the implications
of this crisis for Alliance security, in close coordination and consultation."
"We continue to support all constructive efforts for a peaceful solution to the current crisis
in accordance with international law."
"We welcome the ongoing efforts undertaken by the United Nations, the European Union, the OSCE
and the Council of Europe."
"We will continue to consult with Ukraine within the NATO-Ukraine Commission."
"We will engage with Russia in the NATO-Russia Council. We will hold a meeting" Wednesday. What
follows remains to be seen.
Просочившиеся признания о снайперах из разговора - вещь очь важная, но в то же время и довольно очевидная.
Небольшой коммт по поводу текста этого разговора, а так же
поста Соломатина.
1) То
что эти снайперы не были выгодны Януковичу - вполне логично. За три месяца "Майдана" тактика булавочных
уколов со стороны власти полностью показала непродуктивность. Каждый раз его удавалось частично потеснить,
но на следующий дь толпа только разрасталась. Ограничные расстрелы из-за угла могли кого-то испугать,
но в большей степи только разозлить майданную толпу. То есть в окружии Януковича должно было уже
сформироваться понимание что с Майданом нужно примять либо оборонительно-выжидательную тактику ("войну
на истощие") либо жёсткую силовую, полный разгон и зачистку. Анонимные снайперы и несколько десятков
трупов в течии пары дней - самый плохой вариант для власти. Со стороны Януковича более эффективной
тактикой провокаций была бы стрельба в сторону правоохранителей, с существными потерями и озвреием
с их стороны, и затем жёсткая зачистка Майдана.
2) Версия что за этими расстрелами стоит Путин и российские спецслужбы - теоретически такие кульбиты
можно придумать, но это логический эквивалт путешествия из Москвы в Киев через Северный полюс. То
есть такой заранее продуманный план - сначала нужно было максимально разозлить толпу, максимально
дискредитировать действующую власть, добиться её позорного бегства и закреплия в Киеве путчистов,
наимее приемлемых для России, и затем вводить войска в Крым, прикрываясь этой самой бывшей властью,
которую больше не воспринимают серьёзно даже её бывшие сторонники (и которую в самом Крыму не особно
любят)? Самому-то не смешно, Михаил Соломатин?
3) Если есть кто-то кому наиболее выгодны эти снайперы, то это кто-то из путчистов, нынешней времной
власти. Имно как хороший триггер, максимально озлобляющий толпу и дискредитирующий действующую власть,
то что способствует успеху переворота. Соломатин пишет что только путинские спецслужбы могли организовать
этих снайперов, украинской хунте это не по силам по причине общего распиздяйства. Но высокой снайперской
и разведывательной квалификации для этих действий как раз не требовалось - вовсе не надо 100% точности
стрельбы, идеального выдержанного графика и т.д. Для роли этих снайперов вполне достаточно было средней
воной подготовки, и более-мее приличной организации. А главное что требовалось - не попадаться. Для
этой цели более всего подходят фигуранты с хорошей местной осведомлённостью и местными связями, а
не мифические иностранные агты из России. Наиболее действна в этом отношии имно стрельба во все стороны
для максимизации хаоса и озлоблия. Причём преимуществно в толпу, а не в "Беркут" и милицию - просто
потому что со стороны последней более вероятно получить отпор и попасться на этом. Для этого не требовалась,
конечно, широкая осведомлённость со стороны бывшей оппозиции, вполне достаточно узкого круга.
Неудивительно что сразу после бегства Януковича тема сразу как-то отошла на второй план. Казалось
бы, тематика "ужасных злодейств прошлой власти", их быстрое раскрытие и основанная на этом чистка
предыдущей администрации - очь выигрышный фактор легитимизации новой власти, пришедшей в результате
переворота. Но это почему-то перестали раскручивать. Толпе бросили идеологическую кость - "небесная
сотня" и всё такое, но с расследованием как-то совсем не спешат. Неудивительно что майданная толпа
подозревает кто в них на самом деле стрелял - что и признано в разговоре Эштон и Паэта.
Estonian foreign minister Urmas Paet tells EU's Cathy Ashton about claim that provocateurs
were behind Maidan killings
Jump to comments (761)
The conversation featuring EU foreign affairs chief Catherine Ashton was posted on YouTube.
A leaked phone call between the EU foreign affairs chief Catherine Ashton and Estonian foreign
minister Urmas Paet has revealed that the two discussed a conspiracy theory that blamed the killing
of civilian protesters in the Ukrainian capital, Kiev, on the opposition rather than the ousted government.
The 11-minute conversation was posted on YouTube – it is the second time in a month that telephone
calls between western diplomats discussing Ukraine have been bugged.
In the call, Paet said he had been told snipers responsible for killing police and civilians in
Kiev last month were protest movement provocateurs rather than supporters of then-president Viktor
Yanukovych. Ashton responds: "I didn't know … Gosh."
The leak came a day after the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, said the snipers may have been
opposition provocateurs. The Kremlin-funded Russia Today first carried the leaked call online.
The Estonian foreign ministry confirmed the leaked conversation was accurate. It said: "Foreign
minister Paet was giving an overview of what he had heard in Kiev and expressed concern over the
situation on the ground. We reject the claim that Paet was giving an assessment of the opposition's
involvement in the violence." Ashton's office said it did not comment on leaks.
During the conversation, Paet quoted a woman named Olga – who the Russian media identified her
as Olga Bogomolets, a doctor – blaming snipers from the opposition shooting the protesters.
"What was quite disturbing, this same Olga told that, well, all the evidence shows that people
who were killed by snipers from both sides, among policemen and people from the streets, that they
were the same snipers killing people from both sides," Paet said.
"So she also showed me some photos, she said that as medical doctor, she can say it is the same
handwriting, the same type of bullets, and it's really disturbing that now the new coalition, that
they don't want to investigate what exactly happened."
"So there is a stronger and stronger understanding that behind snipers it was not Yanukovych,
it was somebody from the new coalition," Paet says.
Ashton replies: "I think we do want to investigate. I didn't pick that up, that's interesting.
Gosh," Ashton says.
Russia Today, reporting the call, said: "The snipers who shot at protesters and police in Kiev
were allegedly hired by Maidan leaders, according to a leaked phone conversation between the EU foreign
affairs chief Catherine Ashton and Estonian foreign affairs minister, which has emerged online."
Last month, a recording was leaked in which US state department official Victoria Nuland was heard
venting the White House's frustrations at Europe's hesitant policy towards pro-democracy protests.
Speaking to the US ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt, Nuland was heard to say "fuck the EU."
Asked about the emergence of a second embarrassing phonecall, a spokesperson for the US state
department said: "As I said around the last unfortunate case, this is just another example of the
kind of Russian tradecraft that we have concerns about."
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.
) 
