The Ukranian Sniper Conspiracy Theory Explained

So now we have more pot stirring in the Ukraine re the phone call between Cathy Ashton and Estonia's foreign minister, Urmas Paet.

http://www.channel4.com/news/ukraine-catherine-ashton-phone-shoot-maidan-bugged-leaked

This makes sense.

Both sides in this conflict, the EU & Putin both have a motive to try and discredit the nationalists in the Ukraine.

Hence why that recording was leaked by the Russian security forces and why it specifically featured a conversation between two representatives of the EU smearing the Nationalists by insinuating that the protestors hired people to shoot themselves.

I have no doubt that a wide range of window lickers will give some credence to these words.

But the facts are clear - that we have a wide range of video evidence that shows conclusively that the police were shooting at the protestors both with sniper rifles and AK47's.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/10651980/Ukraine-crisis-snipers-filmed-shooting-at-protesters-in-Kiev.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/10651980/Ukraine-crisis-snipers-filmed-shooting-at-protesters-in-Kiev.html

Note also the direction of fire - clearly coming from police lines ;

http://www.ibtimes.com/ukraine-euromaidan-watch-protesters-duck-cover-get-shot-kiev-video-1556881

Note also in this footage - you can hear both sniper rifle fire and the sound of AK47's on automatic fire firing at the protestors - and also the rate of fire re the bullets hitting the ground and protesors is clearly not a sniper rifle firing. For that sheer volume of bullets only an automatic or semi-autmoatic rifle would do that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQhuD4F1yJ0

Listen to the rounds coming in towards the protestors.

Note the comments of a 'hail of bullets' coming towards the protestors.

Sniper rifles do not create 'hails of fire'.

Note that the BBC crew recording the fire from the sniper in the hotel heard only a few shots from one window in one building.

Thats not a hail of bullets.

All the footage clearly shows police officers firing AK47's at the protestors and that was the primary volume of fire.

Does that negate the possibility that some of the protestors were shot by accident or design by others around the square ? Of course not - but the video evidence, eye witness testimony and facts all show conclusively that the firing was primarily from the police and that firing killed most, if not all of the protestors.

Thats clearly not sniper rifle fire we hear in the footage above - that is clearly machine gun fire from an AK47. Hence that came from the police, not the protestors.

and here we have footage of the police firing AK47's at the protestors ;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lgraA2ubsk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iICzRf8m21w

Does that mean a more sinister explanation cannot be also true. Of course not.

I suggest that the truth is a lot more less interesting than the conspiracy theories.

Keep it simple says Occams Razor.

Cui Bono ?

Who benefits ?

Lets say that the Russian government led by a man who served 16 years as a senior high ranking KGB officer ordered snipers to target both the protestors and the police.

The reason for this is smimple - it then provides a pretext for the army to be sent in to protect both the police and the protestors.

If the police could not break the demonstrations, which they couldnt after weeks of harsh violence and brutality, then the only other option would be to send in the army.

That such a plan existed has already been documented, the toppled Ukranian government were about to launch a massive army led offensive to smash the demonstrations.

The pretext for this, as discovered in the documents that were tried to be destroyed by the former prime minister of the Ukraine and discovered in bags thrown into the lake of his huge estate by people who saw pages of the documents floating on the water and retrieved them, was to plant a series of bombs in Kiev and blame The Right Sector. The army would then sweep in a smash the protestors.

But the primary flaw in the 'the protestors shot themselves' conspiracy theory peddled by the EU is this - it pre-supposes that ;

1) The protestors would win the struggle against the government

2) that the shootings would not justify yet more government repression of the protestors.

One thing is clear to all real Nationalists.

The more violence you use the state, the more powerful the state becomes.

Violence only feeds the monster.

The use of terrorist violence throughout history has been used by governments as a pretext to impose ever more draconian laws to repress free speech, movement, protests and political parties.

No serious revolutionary would use violence against a government.

The Video Camera Is Our AK47.

Far better for the revolutionaries TO BE FILMED BEING THE VICTIMS OF STATE REPRESSION than using violence against the state.

In a case such as we saw in the Ukraine, the violence of the protestors was at all times DEFENSIVE not offensive.

They were attacked by the police and defended themselves. Therefore that provided no pretext for an army intervention.

Nor does the idea make any sense that by shooting POLICE OFFICERS, WHICH WHAT IS THE TAPE STATES THE ALLEGED SNIPER / SNIPERS DID that this would benefit the protestors - as this would merely generate support and sympathy FOR THE POLICE, not the protestors.

If the protestors really wanted to kill their own people to generate support from the masses, then they would not have shot a single police officer.

To shoot or kill just one police officer is an invitation for the whole power of the state to come crashing down on your heads. It also generates only sympathy for the police and the government.

In the news media we read that the previous toppled Ukranian government said that 27 police officers had been shot during the protests.

Yet no evidence exists to prove this 'fact' and no video evidence exists of any film footage of any protestors shooting at the police.

If police were officers were shot, then such a situation only benefited one side - THE GOVERNMENT.

Putin in his press conferences said that the previous Ukranian prime minister 'did not stick to the plan'.

Now we can see what the plan was.

As a final note re false flags attacks and the Russian government, remember the Russian apartment bombings of 1999

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_apartment_bombings

The Russian apartment bombings were a series of explosions that hit four apartment blocks in the Russian cities of Buynaksk, Moscow, and Volgodonsk in September 1999, killing 293 people and injuring 651. The explosions occurred in Buynaksk on 4 September, Moscow on 9 and 13 September, and Volgodonsk on 16 September. Several other bombs were defused in Moscow at the time.[1]

A similar bomb was found and defused in the Russian city of Ryazan on 22 September 1999. Two days later Federal Security Service (FSS) Director Nikolai Patrushev announced that the Ryazan incident had been a training exercise.[2] This led some, such as Alexander Litvinenko and Anna Politkovskaya, to speculate that the apartment bombings had been carried out by the Russian secret service FSB (formerly KGB).

This is what happened to Litvinenko, a former FSB officer ;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Litvinenko

and to Politkovskaya

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_Politkovskaya

Now where have we heard of governments holding 'training exercises' on days and in locations when terrorist attacks happened such as ;

1) 911

2) 7/7

3) The Boston Bombings

Read these to find out if the FSB would kill people to provide a pretext for the Russian government ;

http://www.darkpolitricks.com/fsb-apartment-bombing-false-flag-attack/

This video explains it all ;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9cRoXgawVA

Dark forces at work.

And they all want to try and undermine the Ukranian Nationalists so they can control the Ukraine.

Watch the video. And see who had just come to power in Russia after serving 16 years as a senior KGB officer.

Putin.