#Maidan Killings-A Look Back

The intercepted telephone call between then Eastonian Foreign Minister Urmas Paet and European Union High Commissioner Catherine Ashton has been confirmed as authentic.
The information revealed within the taped conversation has been the source of much speculation as well as a feverish campaign by the western media to ignore and or dismiss as “Russian propaganda.”
An article which appeared on the Guardians website 5 March 2014 set the tone for how the west would handle the “damage control” issue.

Ukraine crisis: bugged call reveals conspiracy theory about Kiev snipers

Estonian foreign minister Urmas Paet tells EU’s Cathy Ashton about claim that provocateurs were behind Maidan killings

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/05/ukraine-bugged-call-catherine-ashton-urmas-paet

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.

It is interesting to note:
During the 11 minute conversation Ashton revealed to Paet that she knew Olga and in fact had suggested that she would make a good minister of health for the new government. And yet the article in the Guardian suggests that the author did not confirm her identity neither made any attempt to do so.
The narrative that placed the Maidan killings upon the Berkut must not be challenged by  any information whatever or whoever the source. Just two weeks after the murders at Maidan the Guardian apparently squelched any attempt of an investigation that did not lead to its self ordained truths. Perhaps dismissing the “mysterious” doctor with an incomplete identity served the purpose of a larger agenda: that of protecting the interests of the state. Clearly British tabloids such as the Guardian were not in the business of finding truth but rather protecting the carefully crafted narrative hatched by Nuland and her ilk. To suggest that after only a scant two weeks and before any investigation that somehow the Guardian was in possesion of definitive proof of who the perpetrators were is ludicrous. (These same self appointed experts didnt even know who Dr. Bogomolets was.) 
This same pattern of malfeasance and incompetence was to be used again concerning MH17, Nemtsov etc. Lets have a closer look at Dr. Bogomolets

.

Olga Bogomolets was born in March 22, 1966 in Kiev, in a family of doctors. She comes from old Lithuanian-Rus gentry (Pomian coat of arms), whose origin goes back to the 15th century.
In 1989, she graduated from Kyiv Medical Institute (now the Bogomolets National Medical University, Kyiv). In 1993-1994, studied in Pennsylvania Medical University (Pennsylvania, US) and the Bernard Ackerman’s Institute of dermatopathology (Philadelphia, US).
After the return from US, she had started off her own Clinic of Laser Medicine, now known as the Dr. Bogomolets’ Institute of Dermatology and Cosmetology. Since 2003 till nowadays – the chief doctor of the Institute of Dermatology and Cosmetology. From December 2004 to October 2005 Olga Bogomolets was the personal physician of the President of Ukraine.
Olga Bogomolets is the organizer of the annual nationwide charitable campaign “Day of melanoma”.
She is the author of more than 70 research works on dermatology and owner of 9 patents for inventions in this branch of medicine. Bogomolets is the member of the American Academy of Dermatology and European Academy of Dermatology and Venerology, the member of New York Academy of Sciences.
She ran for president in Ukraine’s 2014 presidential elections. She received support from the Socialist Party of Ukraine.
On 1 September 2014 Bogomolets was appointed as adviser to President Petro Poroshenko.[3]
In the 2014 Ukrainian parliamentary election Bogomolets was elected into parliament after being in the top 10 of the electoral list of Petro Poroshenko Bloc.[4][5]

So it seems that the “mysterious” doctor who the Guardian apparently had to rely upon “Russian media” to identify is in fact as Ashton pointed out a suitable candidate for a ministerial position.

en.wikipedia.org/?curid=37124276

Comments made by Dr. Bogomolets concerning what she had purportedly told Paet reported by the Telegraph:

“Myself I saw only protesters. I do not know the type of wounds suffered by military people,” she told The Telegraph. “I have no access to those people.”
“No one who just sees the wounds when treating the victims can make a determination about the type of weapons. 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.”

“I was a doctor helping to save people on the square. There were 15 people killed on the first day by snipers. They were shot directly to the heart, brain and arteries. There were more than 40 the next day, 12 of them died in my arms.”

“Our nation has to ask the question who were the killers, who asked them to come to Ukraine?

We need good answers on the basis of expertise.
I think you can only say something like this on the basis of fact.”

“Its not correct and its not good to do this. It should be based on fact.”

“They told me they have begun a criminal process and if they say that I believe them.”

“The police have not given me any information on it.”

Her biography and career do not suggest anti-west sentiments in fact quite the opposite.

She was the personal physician to the “Orange Revolution”-installed President Viktor Yushchenko and she received an award from the CIA- and George Soros-funded Radio Liberty. Moreover, Bogomolets urged her medical students to take part in the Euromaidan protests in Kiev.
http://www.voltairenet.org/article182601.html

Whether she (Dr. Bogomolets) said the things that Urmas Paet claimed she said or he was disturbed by knowledge gained from other sources and used her name to convey that to Ashton is unknown. Even in her statements after the release of the “bugged call”  which in effect deny Paets recollection of conversations between them (Paet and Bogomolets) she asks one very important question: “Who were the killers, who asked them to come to Ukraine?”

Various Tweets concerning Dr. Bogomolets  attempts to ensure an honest investigation of the Maidan killings takes place.

2April 14 @EuromaidanPR
Olga #Bogomolets collects testimonies of witnesses on 18-20Feb mass murders, says Prosecutor’s Gen work is ineffective. @sosmaydan

I can prove that snipers were working and killing protesters on #Maidan because of the nature of the wounds – Dr Olga Bogomolets. #Ukraine @uacrisis 27 March 2014

We need an independent expert group to investigate what happened at #Maidan; UKR ppl are tired of not getting the truth – Dr Olga Bogomolets @uacrisis 27 March 2014

“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

The Guardian article cut short in its transcript his complete statement:

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.”
“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.

Ashton: “I think we do want to investigate. I mean, I didn’t pick that up, that’s interesting. Gosh.”

Paet: “It already discreditates  this new coalition.”

Ashton defends the opposition members of the Ukrainian Rada, the parliament, against “doctors” and she said of the protest leaders, “I mean this is what they’ve got to be careful of, as well, but they need to demand great change but they’ve got to let the Rada function. If the Rada doesn’t function then you’ll have complete chaos. So, if you thought being an activist and a doctor is very, very important but you’re not a politician and somehow they’ve got to come to a kind of accommodation for the next few weeks.”

Ashton made clear she wanted an investigation which the Guardian sees no need for because anything which shows other than the narrative is only a “conspiracy theory.”

From an interview: The Tablet Magazine

You and several other Ukrainian organizations have demanded an investigation of those events, the sustained sniper fire into the crowd, but as of now has there been any result?

On the 20th of February I was one of the coordinators of the Maidan’s medical service. We had more than a thousand volunteers working around the clock, and all of those people risked both their lives and their health because they could have been hit with a bullet at any given moment. Immediately after the 20th I called for an independent investigation, by experts, on the logistics of the question of who the shooters were and what sort of weapons they were firing with. People died on both sides of the barricades by the way.

You were there that day treating the wounded. People died in your arms?

Yes.  On the 18th, when the Berkut beat the peaceful demonstrators indiscriminately we had 1,500 wounded, and of those 400 were heavily wounded and 12 killed.  On the 20th when they opened fired we had 1,300 wounded and 46 killed, if I remember correctly. Over the course of three hours at the Hotel Ukraina, we had 13 wounded people die in the makeshift operating hall, one after the other. The sorts of wounds that had been inflicted by professional snipers, to the heart, to the head and to the carotid artery in the neck were untreatable. Dozens of people were shot directly through the eye.

http://tabletmag.com/scroll/174058/maidans-mother-teresa-talks-ukraines-future

The investigation of the “snipers’ massacre” by the Prosecutor General Office in Ukraine and by other government agencies, such as the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Security Service of Ukraine, concluded that commanders and members of a special Berkut company killed 39 out of the 49 protesters who died on February 20. The investigators announced that this was done primarily with AKM assault rifles and hunting ammunition used in their pump rifles, even thought it would have been irrational to use such ammunition because it was unfamiliar and less powerful and precise than their standard Kalashnikov rifles of 7.62mm caliber. At least 25 protesters were killed with 7.62mm caliber bullets, including 16 from AKMS. In addition, at least 17 protesters were killed with pellets; one by a 9mm bullet from a Makarov gun; and six by other ammunition, such as hunting bullets, but no information about which ammunition killed which protesters was revealed. While the Maidan activists and the Ukrainian media initially claimed that government snipers from the Alfa unit of SBU massacred many protesters, the investigation produced no evidence that they had shot protesters. In the beginning of April 2013, the Prosecutor General Office issued a statement that a Simonov “sniper rifle” was used in the Hotel Ukraina to shoot protesters, even though the Simonov rifle is not a sniper rifle but a semiautomatic carbine that uses the same caliber bullets as the AKM; the Simonov was generally removed from military and police service in Ukraine and was available as a hunting rifle. However, during the first press conference presenting the investigation’s results in April 2014 the Prosecutor General, from the far-right Svoboda party, did not mention that the Simonov carbine was used and that any “snipers” were in this hotel. The same was done in November 2014 at the subsequent press conference by the Prosecutor General Office when it was headed by a Fatherland member.
A new head of the investigation, reported the same findings concerning the Berkut involvement but admitted that there might have been unknown non-governmental snipers who shot some protesters from the Hotel Ukraina.Specifically, the official investigation concluded that Yanukovych and his top officials in the SBU and Ministry of Internal Affairs organized the massacre. However, no such evidence was provided. Interrogations of Yanukovych government officials who did not flee, as well as of police commanders and members, produced no confessions or witness testimonies about such an order or about the involvement of the Berkut and other such formations in the massacre of the protesters.  The Berkut special company’s commander and two members of his unit were arrested and charged with killing 39 protesters, and the court hearing in this case began in January 2015. It appeared irrational that the purported killers would remain in Kyiv and not hide from the prosecution. The lawyers of the two arrested Berkut members stated that the 71-volume investigative file did not specify who the Berkut members killed, and the evidence relied on their presence in the area of the massacre. The investigation established the place of the shooting for only half of these 39 protesters. A pro-Maidan journalist reported that the government investigation failed to the establish circumstances of 9 other protesters’ killing.
On November 19, 2014, the Prosecutor General Office claimed during its press conference devoted to this issue that their extensive investigation produced no evidence of “snipers” at the Hotel Ukraina, Zhovtnevyi Palace and other locations controlled by Maidan. However, no evidence has been made public in support of such findings, with the exception of videos that show them shooting with AKMs. Official results from the ballistic, weapons, and medical examinations and other evidence collected during the government’s investigation of this massacre have not been made public. Crucial evidence, including catalogues of Berkut’s bullets and weapons and those of other police units, as well as some 200 investigative cases of specific victims of the massacre, either disappeared or were destroyed under the post-Yanukovych government.
The Ukrainian government failed to investigate the killing and wounding of policemen on February 20 and on two previous days. Interpol put ex-president Yanukovych on its wanted list for financial charges but specifically rejected the Ukrainian government’s request concerning murder charges for the Maidan “snipers’ massacre.”
While the Ukrainian Parliament asked the International Criminal Court (ICC) to investigate the massacre and other cases of violence during “Euromaidan” following the overthrow of Yanukovych, the Ukrainian Prosecutor General Office reportedly informed the court representatives in the fall of 2014 that Ukraine was not interested in assisting such an investigation.

https://www.academia.edu/8776021/The_Snipers_Massacre_on_the_Maidan_in_Ukraine

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YKwzUTAlgkA

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s