American Terrorist Brian Christopher Boyenger in Ukraine

American Ex-Paratrooper Joins 

Georgian Legion Fighting in Ukraine

KIEV – An American former paratrooper has joined the Ukrainian army’s Georgian National Legion and will take part in active combat missions in the country’s war torn Donbass Region, the group’s commander Mamuka Mamulashvili announced at a press conference Wednesday.

Brian Christopher Boyenger, a retired officer and former sniper from the US Army’s elite 101st Airborne Division, is the first US citizen to formally join the Ukrainian military in an official combat role since hostilities broke out against Russian forces and their separatist proxies in April 2014.

“This is the first incident, that I know of, when a US citizen will be involved in the fighting and represent one of the Ukrainian battalions as a member of the Georgian Legion. We expect more American volunteers to join us. The first group will consist of 10 people and they will take a direct part in the fighting in east Ukraine. They previously served as instructors, but now they will take part in the hostilities,” Mamulashvili said.

Boyenger, a native of South Carolina whose active military service spanned four years from 2006-2010, said he made the decision to join the current conflict out of solidarity with Ukraine, which he cited as a key US ally.

Prior to officially joining the legion, Boyenger spent five months in 2015 as a volunteer instructor for the Ukrainian army, teaching Kiev’s underfunded military essential combat skills.

Boyenger is, in fact, not the first US citizen to take an active combat role in the war. Mark Paslawsky, a 55 year-old West Point graduate and former investment banker from Manhattan, was killed in fighting during the Battle of Ilovaisk in August 2014 while serving as a volunteer in Ukraine’s Donbass Battalion.

Formed shortly after war broke out in Ukraine’s mainly Russian-speaking east, the Georgian National Legion is a unit mainly made up of battle hardened former combat veterans from Georgia’s three post-Soviet wars with Moscow.

Five Georgian citizens have already been killed in the fighting which has claimed up to 10,000 lives over the last 20 months.

Georgia’s Hardened Veteran

Mamulashvili, a broad shouldered man with a commanding presence and cool demeanor, is a four-time veteran of the region’s savage post-Soviet wars. At the tender age of 14, he volunteered to fight in the brutal separatist war raging in Georgia’s Abkhazia region.

Regular Russian military units and mercenaries from the North Caucasus helped Abkhaz rebel forces rout Georgia’s fledging national army in 1992-1993. Mamulashvili was wounded in the fighting and later taken prisoner. He spent three months in a Russian prisoner of war camp, where he endured daily bouts of torture.

“It was a hard and evil war,” he said. “It was the kind of fighting that made you question humanity and why we were in such a terrible mess,” he said in 2015.

Within a year of being released, Mamulashvili was once again locked in combat against Moscow as a volunteer in the gruesome 1994-1996 First Chechen War.

Upon returning from Chechnya, Mamulashvili completed his education in Paris and later served as a senior military advisor to former Georgian president and current governor of Ukraine’s Odessa Region, Mikheil Saakashvili.

He fought again in Tbilisi’s 2008 five-day war against Russia after hostilities broke out over Georgia’s other Moscow-backed breakaway region South Ossetia.

Shortly after Russia invaded and illegally annexed Ukraine’s Crimea Peninsula in March 2014, Mamulashvili and his group of volunteers – many of who were drawn from Georgia’s national mixed-martial arts team – decided to join the fight on Kiev’s side.

The battalion’s members say they see an all-to-familiar scenario in Russia’s policy towards Ukraine. Moscow manipulates a territorial dispute, encourages separatism in the region and carries out a hybrid war against the federal authorities, branding them neo-fascists or anti-Russian.

After two decades of war against his erstwhile enemy, Mamulashvili says he no longer goes into battle with hatred towards Russia or its authoritarian president Vladimir Putin, but with a dedication for being on the right side of history and a love of Ukraine.

By Nicholas Waller

26 February 2016 22:14

Media Lens: Noam Chomsky

Noam Chomsky And The BBC: A Brief Comparison

• 
• 

IN ALERTS 2017

POST 10 OCTOBER 2017

LAST UPDATED ON 10 OCTOBER 2017

BY EDITOR

A recent interview with 88-year-old Noam Chomsky once again demonstrates just how insightful he is in providing rational analysis of Western power and the suffering it generates. By contrast, anyone relying on BBC News receives a power-friendly view of the world, systematically distorted in a way that allows the state and private interests to pursue business as usual.

In what follows, we present examples of Chomsky's clarity on several important topics and contrast them with the distortions and silences from BBC News. These examples are not intended to be fully comprehensive, with lots of detailed background. But they are highly illustrative of the propaganda nature of what the BBC broadcasts every day.

First, consider North Korea which has carried out missile tests that have 'demonstrated its growing power and expertise, stoking tensions with the US', as the BBC puts it. A helpful graphic shows much of the northern hemisphere within range of these missiles. In particular, the west coast of the United States is portrayed as under real threat from the 'hermit' state's nuclear missiles: a scaremongering scenario that BBC News has promoted in line with the propaganda requirements of the White House, the Pentagon and the arms industry. Video clips on the BBC News website have titles such as 'N Korea announces nuclear test', 'S Korea drill response to N Korea missile', 'We're used to hearing about being bombed' and 'I don't know when I might be killed'.

In a forthcoming book of interviews with journalist David Barsamian, 'Global Discontents: Conversations on the Rising Threats to Democracy', Chomsky acknowledges that North Korea has a 'growing arsenal of nuclear weapons and missiles' which does indeed 'pose a threat to the region and, in the longer term, to countries beyond.' But then he provides vital context for this arsenal of weapons:

'its function is to be a deterrent, one that the North Korean regime is unlikely to abandon as long as it remains under threat of destruction.'

Yes, threat of destruction; something that is very real in the historical memory of the people:

'North Koreans remember well that their country was literally flattened by U.S. bombing, and many may recall how U.S. forces bombed major dams when there were no other targets left. There were gleeful reports in American military publications about the exciting spectacle of a huge flood of water wiping out the rice crops on which "the Asian" depends for survival.'

Today, as Chomsky notes, we are instructed that 'the great challenge faced by the world' is how to compel North Korea to freeze its nuclear and missile programmes. 'Perhaps we should resort to more sanctions, cyberwar, intimidation [...] perhaps even to direct attack on North Korea'.

He then continues:

'But there is another option, one that seems to be ignored: we could simply accept North Korea's offer to do what we are demanding. China and North Korea have already proposedthat North Korea freeze its nuclear and missile programs. The proposal, though, was rejected at once by Washington, just as it had been two years earlier, because it includes a quid pro quo: it calls on the United States to halt its threatening military exercises on North Korea's borders, including simulated nuclear-bombing attacks by B-52s.'

Wait. What was that? There is another option? An article in The Diplomat, which describes itself as 'the premier international current-affairs magazine for the Asia-Pacific region', outlines the proposal; namely that:

'Pyongyang declare a moratorium on both nuclear and missile tests, in exchange for the United States and South Korea halting their large-scale joint military exercises.'

China has given this proposal the succinct name of 'dual suspensions'.

Chomsky explains further:

'The offer to freeze North Korea's nuclear and missile programs in return for an end to highly provocative actions on North Korea's border could be the basis for more far-reaching negotiations, which could radically reduce the nuclear threat and perhaps even bring the North Korea crisis to an end. Contrary to much inflamed commentary, there are good reasons to think such negotiations might succeed.'

He continues:

'Yet even though the North Korean programs are constantly described as perhaps the greatest threat we face, the Chinese-North Korean proposal is unacceptable to Washington, and is rejected by U.S. commentators with impressive unanimity. This is another entry in the shameful and depressing record of near-reflexive preference for force when peaceful options may well be available.'

So, there is a reasonable proposal from China and North Korea that could form the basis for negotiations leading to a peaceful resolution of the crisis – but it has been dismissed by Washington and US commentators. To what extent has it been covered by BBC News? Consider a report by Seoul-based BBC correspondent Stephen Evans when US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson threatened North Korea with military action. Like Obama, Trump has ruled out negotiation with North Korea. The 'situation remains the same', said Evans in the section of the BBC News report grandly titled 'Analysis':

'North Korea shows no hint of being willing to renounce nuclear weapons, whatever economic blows it receives and whatever China might think.'

If a BBC News reporter presents an 'analysis' that does not mention an important proposal that could bring about peace, and which the US has outright dismissed, what does that say about BBC bias?

This is not a one-off. Washington-based BBC correspondent Barbara Plett-Usher noted dutifully that Tillerson had urged an 'international response' to North Korea's nuclear and missile tests, without once mentioning the China-North Korea proposal.

Last month, BBC's China editor Carrie Gracie also offered her 'Analysis':

'China has insisted time and again that it will never accept North Korea as a nuclear weapons state, and it can't avoid the obvious and urgent question: how does China intend to stop it?'

There was nothing about the proposal that China has made, with North Korea, to address the stalemate. Likewise, earlier in the year, Gracie had said in another BBC News report:

'So in Beijing today, Mr Tillerson kept it diplomatic. There was no public repetition of President Trump's complaint that China is not doing enough to prevent North Korea's nuclear and missile programmes.'

The BBC News reporter was thus uncritically presenting Washington's 'complaint' about China without pointing out that its rational proposal had been summarily dismissed by the US. This is not journalism; it is power-friendly propaganda.

Iran: The Doctrinal View Versus Reality

BBC News has been reporting in the past few days that Trump 'is planning to abandon the Iran nuclear deal shortly'. The BBC website dutifully provides articles with titles like 'Iran nuclear deal: Key details'and 'What will happen to the Iran nuclear deal?' But you will struggle in vain to find the necessary context and vital facts that Chomsky provides:

'Iran has long been regarded by U.S. leaders, and by U.S. media commentary, as extraordinarily dangerous, perhaps the most dangerous country on the planet. This goes back to well before Trump. In the doctrinal system, Iran is a dual menace: it is the leading supporter of terrorism, and its nuclear programs pose an existential threat to Israel, if not the whole world. It is so dangerous that Obama had to install an advanced air defense system near the Russian border to protect Europe from Iranian nuclear weapons -- which don't exist, and which, in any case, Iranian leaders would use only if possessed by a desire to be instantly incinerated in return.'

As Chomsky says, that's the view according to 'the doctrinal system' espoused by Washington and allies, along with their cheerleaders in the 'mainstream' media and academia. But what about the reality?

'In the real world, Iranian support for terrorism translates to support for Hezbollah, whose major crime is that it is the sole deterrent to yet another destructive Israeli invasion of Lebanon, and for Hamas, which won a free election in the Gaza Strip -- a crime that instantly elicited harsh sanctions and led the U.S. government to prepare a military coup. Both organizations, it is true, can be charged with terrorist acts, though not anywhere near the amount of terrorism that stems from Saudi Arabia's involvement in the formation and actions of jihadi networks.'

Chomsky then points to:

'the unmentionable fact that any concern about Iranian weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) could be alleviated by the simple means of heeding Iran's call to establish a WMD-free zone in the Middle East. Such a zone is strongly supported by the Arab states and most of the rest of the world and is blocked primarily by the United States, which wishes to protect Israel's WMD capabilities.'

For BBC diplomatic correspondent Jonathan Marcus, this call by Iran for a WMD-free zone in the Middle East has seemingly never happened. Sounds familiar? As with the China-North Korea proposal discussed above, the Iranian proposal for a WMD-free zone in the Middle East appears not to exist for the BBC. Instead, his 'analysis' is littered with propaganda nuggets like:

'Washington's most pressing problem with Iran is its regional behaviour.'

It is left to Chomsky once again to provide an accurate representation of reality:

'Since the doctrinal system falls apart on inspection, we are left with the task of finding the true reasons for U.S. animus toward Iran. Possibilities readily come to mind. The United States and Israel cannot tolerate an independent force in a region that they take to be theirs by right. An Iran with a nuclear deterrent is unacceptable to rogue states that want to rampage however they wish throughout the Middle East.'

Remember that Marcus has a supposed BBC commitment towards 'impartiality'.This allegedly includes the commitment to consider 'the broad perspective...ensuring the existence of a range of views is appropriately reflected.' These BBC News editorial standards are, of course, regularly breached every day of the year.

The BBC correspondent then goes on to provide a list of 'flashpoints between Washington and Tehran', as though the two countries were sparring partners, rather than a global power attempting to assert control over a country that is trying to maintain its independence. Tellingly, there is no room in the BBC's list of 'flashpoints' for the violent US removal of the democratically elected Iranian government in 1953. As Chomsky notes of the 1979 revolution that removed the Shah of Iran:

'Iran cannot be forgiven for overthrowing the dictator installed by Washington in a military coup in 1953, a coup that destroyed Iran's parliamentary regime and its unconscionable belief that Iran might have some claim on its own natural resources.'

Spotlight On The Showman While The Planet Burns

In his interview, Chomsky points out something that is difficult, if not impossible, to find on the BBC about what is happening under Trump:

'out of the spotlight, the most savage fringe of the Republican Party is carefully advancing policies designed to enrich their true constituency: the Constituency of private power and wealth, "the masters of mankind," to borrow Adam Smith's phrase.'

These policies include legislation that attacks workers' rights, consumer protection, rural communities, health programmes and 'much-needed constraints on the predatory financial system that grew during the neoliberal period.'

As well as pulling out of the Paris climate agreement, the Republican Party 'wrecking ball' is:

'intent on maximizing the use of fossil fuels, including the most dangerous; dismantling regulations; and sharply cutting back on research and development of alternative energy sources, which will soon be necessary for decent survival.'

As Chomsky notes, some of 'the most dangerous developments under Trump trace back to Obama initiatives.' He gives an example:

'A very important study in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, published in March 2017, reveals that the Obama nuclear weapons modernization program has increased "the overall killing power of existing US ballistic missile forces by a factor of roughly three -- and it creates exactly what one would expect to see, if a nuclear-armed state were planning to have the capacity to fight and win a nuclear war by disarming enemies with a surprise first strike." As the analysts point out, this new capacity undermines the strategic stability on which human survival depends.'

Chomsky observes that this 'has barely been reported'. Certainly, we have been unable to find any mention of it anywhere on the BBC News website. Chomsky adds that:

'the chilling record of near disaster and reckless behavior of leaders in past years only shows how fragile our survival is. Now this program is being carried forward under Trump. These developments, along with the threat of environmental disaster, cast a dark shadow over everything else -- and are barely discussed, while attention is claimed by the performances of the showman at center stage.'

This is an apt description of BBC News coverage, even as the world plunges towards possible terminal disaster for humanity.

DC

http://www.medialens.org/index.php/alerts/alert-archive/2017/857-noam-chomsky-and-the-bbc-a-brief-comparison.html

India scraps missile deal with Israel

India scraps “flagship” missile deal with Israel

Ali Abunimah Rights and Accountability 22 November 2017

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu welcomed his Indian counterpart on an “historic” visit in July, but despite the fanfare major arms deals did not materialize as expected. (via Facebook)

Palestinians are welcoming India’s decision to scrap a $500-million deal to buy anti-tank missiles from the Israeli weapons firm Rafael.

Jamal Juma’, coordinator of the Palestinian Stop the Wall Campaign, called the move “a huge blow to the Israeli weapons industry.”

“It is also a major setback for Israel’s propaganda hubris that its technology is indispensable for India’s development and modernization,” Juma’, also affiliated with the Palestinian Boycott Divestment and Sanctions National Committee (BNC), added. “As many Indians are recognizing, Israel is marketing military and agricultural technologies in India and trying to cement Indian dependence on Israel.”

Signs of trouble

Israeli media had hailed the planned weapons purchase “as a flagship deal that cemented the budding Israeli-Indian security relationship.”

It appeared to be on course as recently as August when Rafael and India’s Kalyani Group announced a joint venture to open a factory in the southern Indian city of Hyderabad to make the missiles.

On Monday, before it was confirmed by Indian sources, Israeli media expressed consternation at the nixing of a deal that had been years in the works.

Ishai David, a spokesperson for Rafael, told The Jerusalem Post his company had not been informed of any decision by India not to buy the missiles. “This activity will continue as planned,” he insisted.

In retrospect, there were already signs of trouble in July when Hindu nationalist Narendra Modi became the first Indian prime minister to visit Israel.

Though Israel hailed the visit as an historic warming of ties, contrary to expectations no arms deals were signed including the Rafael deal.

What appears to have torpedoed the agreement was the Indian defense ministry’s insistence – overruling other agencies – that the country could develop its own technology and did not need Israel’s.

Israel as India’s model

While hailing the cancellation, Palestinians note that India remains one of Israel’s biggest arms customersand the two countries have other military joint ventures in the works.

As the BNC said, “over the last two decades, Indo-Israeli military relations have continuously increased despite various corruption scandals and technical failures.”

India has also turned to Israel as a model for its brutal repression of resistance to its rule in Kashmir.

Indian government efforts to manipulate the demographics of Kashmir by moving Hindus into the state have even been described as “an Israel-style policy of creating settlements in occupied territory.”

India’s ascendant Hindu nationalist right has also embraced Zionism and made common cause with Israel, an affinity further cemented by shared, virulent Islamophobia.

Far-reaching negative effects

A big part of Modi’s nationalism is his “Make in India” campaign to promote homegrown industry, and that also seems to have hurt the Rafael deal in spite of ideological affinities with Israel.

Scrapping the Rafael purchase could have far-reaching negative effects on economic relations, according to David Keynan, vice-chair of the Federation of Indo-Israeli Chambers of Commerce.

“It is a very noteworthy deal. It will have an impact not only on defense trade, but on all trade,” Keynan told The Times of Israel.

According to Keynan, weapons sales are often a “catalyst” for further trade.

“We hope this is the beginning of the end of Indian complicity in Israel’s egregious violation of international law and Palestinian human rights,” Omar Barghouti, a founder of the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement for Palestinian rights, stated.

But Barghouti warned that as the BDS movement scores more successes in Europe and North America, “Israel has started dragging India into deals fraught with legal and political risks.”

Several Indian firms are bidding for drilling rights in Mediterranean waters claimed by Israel.

And earlier this year, India’s Adventz Group bid for work on Israel’s light rail system which connects settlements in the occupied West Bank in violation of international law.

Solidarity and discontent

There are also signs of discontent with the relationship. Last week lawmakers in India’s Telangana state denounced the state government’s plan to send 1,000 public officials on “training” junkets to Israel, wasting public money that could be used to improve the conditions of local farmers.

Hyderabad, where the Rafael missile factory was to be located, is Telangana’s state capital.

And in October, the All India Kisan Sabha, the largest national organization representing farmers and agricultural workers in India, announced its support for the BDS movement.

Barghouti said: “As Palestinians we ask the Indian people to maintain their proud legacy of commitment to independence, to growing local knowledge and to respecting other people’s struggles for freedom from colonialism and apartheid.”

https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/india-scraps-flagship-missile-deal-israel?utm_source=EI+readers&utm_campaign=a1a0cece04-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_e802a7602d-a1a0cece04-287031681

The Hidden Truth About Ukraine, Kiev Euromaidan Snipers Kill Demonstrators

The Hidden Truth About Ukraine, Kiev Euromaidan Snipers Kill Demonstrators. Italian Documentary Bombshell Evidence

Cheap Dignity of the Ukrainian Revolution

By Oriental Review

Global Research, November 24, 2017

Oriental Review 23 November 2017

Region: Europe

Theme: History, Law and Justice

In-depth Report: UKRAINE REPORT

 10 

  5  2 

 

  19

This report emanates from the mainstream media, Italy’s Canale 5,a TV network owned by Mediaset, a company largely controlled by the family of former Prime Minister S. Berlusconi. 

Canale 5 is the most watched TV channel in Italy. 

Why is this report which reveals the “unspoken truth” regarding the February 2014 Kiev Euromaidan coup d’Etat is not the object of mainstream news coverage? It emanates from the MSM yet it is tagged by the mainstream media as pernicious media disiformation. 

While the independent media (including Global Research) is ensuring its distribution outside Italy, the Western corporate media remains silent on the underlying political causes, perpetrators and consequences of the 2014 Kiev EuroMaidan coup d’Etat. 

Michel Chossudovsky, November 24, 2017

***

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. That is hardly surprising taking into account the bombshell evidence against the real perpetrators and organizers of the 2014 coup d’etat in Kiev, generally known as the “revolution of dignity“.

The documentary features Alexander Revazishvili, Koba Nergadze and Zalogi Kvaratskhelia, Georgian military officers  who were recruited to carry out a “special mission” in Kiev by Mamuka Mamulashvili, a close aid of Mikhail Saakashvili’s former defense minister Bacho Akhalaia. They claim that on Jan 15, 2014 they landed in Kiev equipped with fake documents and were transferred to Maidan. 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.

Map of the Maidan square in Kiev and surrounding buildings

The facts they exposed afterwards, were shocking. Along with other snipers (some of them were Lithuanians) they were put under command of an American military operative Brian Christopher Boyenger (his Facebook page is here). 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 and  later headed the first post-Maidan interim president administration of Ukraine. 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. “When Mamulashvili arrived, I also asked him. Things are getting complicated, we have to start shooting – he replied that we cannot go to presidential elections. “But who to shoot?“ I asked. He replied that who and where it did not matter, you had to shoot somewhere so much to sow chaos.”

“It did not matter if we fired at a tree, barricade, or those who tossed a Molotov, what counted was making panics.”

“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.

The full documentary with English subtitles is available below (in two parts):

[Two days later a Macedonian news agency Infomax organized a 52-minutes long night talk with Koba Nergadze and Zalogi Kvaratskhelia (in Macedonian) in which they provided more details about their backgrounds and mission to Kiev.]

These three men are presenting themselves as repented military officers who were simply “obeying orders” and did not know that they “had to kill people“. A naive attempt for professional death squads operatives, to put it mildly. Meanwhile the fact and time of these confessions and revelations are absolutely synchronized with the ongoing agony of the incumbent regime in Kiev.

Since the very beginning the talking Georgians explicitly claim that the operation was initiated by the former president of Georgia Mikhail Saakashvili. Mamulashvili’s chief Bacho Akhalaia was a very close associate and trusted person of the Georgian leader who lost parliamentary elections in October 2012 following  the prison abuse scandal (the Human Rights Watch dedicated a special report to the “Georgian Abu-Ghraib”, Gldani Prison, same month). At the time when the Georgian sniper trio was hired for dirty job in Kiev, Akhalaia was under criminal trial on charges of abusing the power while heading the penitentiary branch of the Ministry of Justice, illegal detention and tortures of inmates  (in October 2014 he was pleaded guilty by the Tbilisi City Court and sentenced to 7,5 years in prison). One month earlier, in November 2013, Mikhail Saakashvili, facing multiple criminal charges in Georgia,  left the country for the United States, and officially settled at the Tufts University. He and his stooges, having suffered a painful defeat at the homeland, would  hardly initiated a risky and adventurous project in a neighboring country if only they were not forced to do so by their masters to make up for failing to comply with their mission in Georgia.

Anyway, on the early days of the Ukrainian crisis the vast Soros-financed network in Georgia (Bacho Alakhaia, a bright offspring of the notorious Mengrel criminal clan, was got on Soros money at the Georgia Liberty Institute since his studentship in early 2000s) was activated to conduct special operations in Kiev.

Four years later the situation has drastically changed. A showcase democratic alliance of Poroshenko & Saakashvili was broken into shatters. Saakashvili again proved to a be a psychopath unable to build any stable political relationship (since September 2017 Ukraine is considering extradiction of Saakashvili to the Georgian authorities meeting their request). Meanwhile  on Nov 1 one of the closest aides of Bacho Alakhaia and Saakashvili, former chief of the military police at the Georgian defense ministry, Megis Kardava, wanted to face the same criminal charges in Georgia, was detained with false passport on the Ukrainian border. The Ukrainian security service has already announced that he would be extradited to Tbilisi within 40 days. Several other Georgians from Saakashvili personal protection team were arrested in Ukraine and expelled to their homeland earlier in late October.

All these factors could make the Georgian sniper trio to preventively appear on the Italian TV as “voluntary whistle-blowers exposing the truth” about Euromaidan before they are captured and punished as the scape-goats.

Prudently enough they named a number of iconic personalities of the incumbent regime in Kiev – Andriy Parybiy (currently the Chairman of Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine), Segrey Pashinsky (member of parliament representing pro-government People’s Front) and Vladimir Parasyuk (another charismatic parliament member) – as organizers and coordinators of the massacre on the Maidan square on Feb 20, 2014.

Their claims are confirmed by other evidence. The most comprehensive collection of such facts so far was carried out by Professor of the University of Ottawa Ivan Katchanovsky (he also commented on the Italian documentary last week).

Whatever we feel towards the repented snipers, their public confessions does not exonerate them from responsibility for deliberately killing people. They were not soldiers at the battlefield during the declared war. They could not be ordered by their commanders. They were hired for money to do a dirty job and they were aware that what they were going to do was a dirty job. Their jabbering in attempt to prove the opposite is ridiculous. So this trio, Alexander Revazishvili, Koba Nergadze and Zalogi Kvaratskhelia, as well as those who hired and ordered them – Mamuka Mamulashvili (currently he is the commander of the Geogian Legion in Donbass), Brian Boyenger (he fought on the Ukrainian side in Donbass in 2015-2016) – and other snipers from Georgia, Lithuania and Ukraine have to face trial in Ukraine or any other country whose citizens perished during the Euromaidan. Next should come the turn of the Ukrainian politicians, principal beneficiaries of that massacre – those named (Andriy Parybiy, Segrey Pashinsky and Vladimir Parasyuk) and still unknown to the public.

The “Heavenly Hundred”, perished on Maidan square in 2014

As a matter of fact, this still underreported story totally undermines the legitimacy of Poroshenko’s regime. The crocodile tears of the incumbent rulers of that long-suffering nation over the graves of the victims of “revolution of dignity” since now onwards will every time only emphasise and highlight the former’s role in mass killing of their own supporters. Having paid a puny 1000 USD to every foreign sniper, they came to power to abuse dreams and trust of the millions of citizens of Ukraine. That was the real price of the Ukrainian “dignity” for the masterminds of their national catastrophe.

All images in this article are from Oriental Review.

The original source of this article is Oriental Review

Copyright © Oriental Review, Oriental Review, 2017

---

Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page

Become a Member of Global Research

https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-hidden-truth-about-ukraine-italian-documentary-bombshell-evidence-kiev-euromaidan-snipers-kill-demonstrators/5619684