“Shadow Western” Operatives Implicated in Maidan Shooting Documentary
To understand the current regime change efforts in Ukraine, one need look no further than efforts to topple the Assad government in Syria.
As part of the “Arab Spring” strategy of “regime change”, the “force multiplier” of social media combined with Western Media Assets (Jewish controlled press organs) was used to bring a mass of protestors out on the street.
Under increasing violent mass protests which sought concessions from the central government in Damascus, the central government in Damascus caved in and gave some concessions: mainly, the lifting of the state of emergency, granting general amnesties and recognizing the right to peaceful protest.
This occurred on or around April 22, 2011.
What was not being spoken about, either by the Syrian government and especially in Western media assets, was the ongoing campaign of executing members of Syria’s security forces.
Throughout Syria, beginning on April 10, 2011 and extending through the end of April, a total of 87 soldiers were killed my murky assailants. The geography of the targeted killings was varied: Moadamiyah, Idlib, Harasta, al-Masmiyah (near Suweida), Talkalakh and the suburbs of Damascus all registered cases of killed soldiers.
April 10 was also the day when we learned of the first massacre of Syrian soldiers – in Banyas, Tartous – when nine troops were ambushed and gunned down on a passing bus. The BBC, Al Jazeera and the Guardian all initially quoted witnesses claiming the dead soldiers were “defectors” shot by the Syrian army for refusing to fire on civilians.
We should view the statements by the Guardian, BBC, and Al Jazeera regarding these soldiers being shot by the Syrian army for refusing to fire on civilians as malicious propaganda intended to paint an emotional scene of “Assad the butcher” – such statements were not a mistake of omission by these outlets, but rather as made as complicit, and hence criminal, propagandists in an ever expanding, calculated, “information war”.
On April 23, for instance, 7 soldiers were killed in a town called Nawa, near Dara’a, and then on Easter Sunday, April 25, the Syrian Army moved into Dara’a and suffered an additional 19 soldiers killed.
None of these figures include an equally ruthless campaign aimed at local police officers.
In spite of all this known targeted assassination campaign, complicit Western media assets continued to sell the line that “Assad was killing his own people” and that “Assad should respect the rights of the peaceful demonstrators seeking genuine democratic expression in Syria.”
None of what the Guardian, BBC, or Al Jazeera stated could be further from the truth.
The truth was, foreign manipulation was working to radicalize the demonstrations to provoke a civil war. There was nothing peaceful about what the “demonstrators” were doing.
As reported in Bricpost.com
Perhaps most notably, whereas the rebellion is typically held to have been sparked by the violent repression of peaceful protests, according to Father Frans, the “protest movement” contained an armed and violent element “from the start” and the violent opposition quickly gained the ascendancy over the peaceful opposition.
Thus, in a letter published in January 2012 on the Dutch-Flemish Mediawerkgroep Syrië website, Father Frans wrote:
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 the same letter, Father Frans insisted that what was occurring in Syria could not be described as a “popular uprising,” since the majority of Syrians do not support the opposition and “certainly not” its armed component.
Already in September 2011, Father Frans had made similar observations in a guest post on a Belgian blog, going so far as to accuse armed opposition groups of blaming the regime for their own acts of violence.
Having noted the splintering of the opposition among Islamists, “liberals and democrats”, communists and so on, Father Frans continued:
Moreover, 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. Many representatives of the government [regeringsmensen – Father Frans might also be referring to supporters of the government] have been tortured and shot dead by them.
“Personally,” Father Frans concluded, “I expect little good to come from the opposition, which, moreover, has been instigated and paid by foreign interests.”
“Regime Change in Kiev – The Syrian Template”
Just we saw in Syria, there was clearly foreign interference in Ukraine’s internal political process. This has all been admitted to by non other than Victoria Nuland, the Jewish PNAC (regime change) operative for Eurasian affairs within the United States State Department as well as US Ambassador Pyatt.
Nuland’s brag of investing over US$5 billion in Ukrainian internal political infrastructures, combined with a rather damning admission by Nuland that she was plotting the over throw of the Yanukovich government in Kiev are well known.
However, U.S. involvement in the co-opting of Ukrainian democracy goes all the way back to before the engineered meltdown of the Soviet Union.
George Soros, the winner of the Canadian International Council (CIC) Globalist of the Year Award, stated in June, 2014 in an interview with Fareed Zakaria,
“First on Ukraine, one of the things that many people recognized about you was that you during the revolutions of 1989 funded a lot of dissident activities, civil society groups in eastern Europe and Poland, the Czech Republic. Are you doing similar things in Ukraine?” Zakaria asked Soros.
“Well, I set up a foundation in Ukraine before Ukraine became independent of Russia. And the foundation has been functioning ever since and played an important part in events now,” Soros responded.
Make no mistakes. The United States has been integrally involved in seeking to influence and control “Ukrainian democracy” for quite some time.
Protests in Kiev Turn to Violence
Unlike the Syrian regime change adventure, the violent over throw of the Yanukovych government was played out in real time on television, cable, and social media forums. All of these assets should be viewed as being controlled by “CIA” or other instruments of the United States shadow government.
Protests were brought en masse into the streets. Violence, or the threat thereof, was never far from the surface and was an issue the Kiev government had to take into consideration.
None of this was going to change the dynamics on the ground, however. Something was needed to generate the necessary emotional appeal to push the regime change “over the ledge” and let the ball start rolling.
As in Syria, we saw in the protests increasing violence even as the police and security forces received orders from high up that forbade any weapons or use of force against the protestors.
Just as in Syria, which had granted concession in the form of a removal of a “state of emergency”, the central government under Yanukovych agreed grant concessions to the protesters that resulted in the signing of an early transfer of power agreement on February 21, 2014.
As reported in the Independent, (UK)
President Viktor Yanukovych also agreed to a national unity government and to make constitutional changes that would reduce the powers of the president.
The President and three opposition leaders Vitali Klitschko, Arseniy Yatsenyuk and Oleh Tyahnibok signed the deal in the Ukrainian president’s office Friday.
The deal was also signed by two European Union foreign ministers who helped broker it in tortuous negotiations that lasted more than 30 hours.
“This agreement is not the end of the process. It’s the beginning of the process,” German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier said after the signing.
German Foreign Minister could not have been more accurate: the Agreement really was the beginning of the process, for just as what happened in Syria, shadow “gunmen”, or “snipers”, opened fire on protestors and largely unarmed security forces in what would be a successful bloody overthrow of the Kiev government.
On February 20, 2014, unknown gunmen had already killed some 70 plus protesters and police officers. The Agreement was a fait accompli.
The Ukraine as it was known before the violent overthrow was already no more. It was just a matter of time for the consequences and reactions to play themselves out.
This award winning documentary peers into the mystery of the Maidan Shootings.
Information about this documentary:
Country: USA | Ukraine
Release Date:Italy,4 October 2014 (Siena Film Festival) (premiere)
Director: John Beck Hofmann
Maidan Massacre is an investigative documentary into the shootings which occurred on February 20th, 2014, when nearly 50 people were gunned down on the streets of Kiev’s Independence square. The massacre was the result of a massive three month long protest against the former Government of Viktor Yanukovich and his decision to reject a trade deal with the EU. Although no thorough investigation had been conducted, the blame was immediately placed on the officers who served under Yanukovich. This program investigates the scene of the crime, interviewing those who were there when the shootings occurred, and seeks to answer the questions as to who really was shooting that day on Kiev’s Independence square – a place known to the people of Ukraine, as Maidan.