This little seen German TV investigative report from September 2014 with eyewitness reports reveals that snipers were firing from "behind" protesters from the Hotel Ukraine which was occupied by the infamous pro-Nazi Right Sector at the time of the Maidan Massacre on February 20th, 2014. The German TV report also features captured sound bytes from an amateur radio user who was monitoring and recording police channels proving that the Berkut police force were discussing opposition snipers on rooftops and in windows firing from the other side of the protesters. This German TV report matches the statements and reporting of BBC reporter Gabriel Gatehouse who filmed and described the location of snipers shooting at his BBC news crew on February 20th, 2014.
Link to full report on Gabriel Gatehouse's BBC reports, which includes 2 BBC videos that prove that snipers were firing on protesters in the Hotel Ukraine which was occupied by the Right Sector at the time of the shootings. A third BBC video at the link also proves that the coup imposed Kiev authorities and the British government ignored the reports of snipers in the Hotel Ukraine in their official investigation into the Maidan snipers. The new government has since removed the trees proving the direction of fire around the location where the majority of protesters were killed.
The BBC’s Ukraine Anomalies – Maidan’s Hotel Ukraine Snipers and the Confusing Reporting of Gabriel Gatehouse - https://clarityofsignal.com/2017/06/13/the-bbcs-ukraine-anomalies-maidans-hotel-ukraine-snipers-and-the-confusing-reporting-of-gabriel-gatehouse/
For the most thorough investigative research conducted on the Maidan snipers massacre, I highly recommend the following link
from Ivan Katchanovski, Ph.D. School of Political Studies University of Ottawa
https://www.academia.edu/8776021/The_Snipers_Massacre_on_the_Maidan_in_Ukraine
Finnish researcher Petri Krohn who operates the "A Closer Look on Syria" website also compiled a huge amount of information related to the Maidan Snipers as well as one of the best Maidan video troves online:
http://acloserlookonsyria.shoutwiki.com/wiki/Maidan_snipers
http://acloserlookonsyria.shoutwiki.com/wiki/Talk:Maidan_snipers
http://acloserlookonsyria.shoutwiki.com/wiki/Talk:Maidan_snipers/Suspects
http://acloserlookonsyria.shoutwiki.com/wiki/Maidan_snipers/Victims
To comprehend fully the Grand Chessboard strategy of Zbigniew Brzezinski, please check out the following links:
IMI- Analysis – Understanding the Grand Chessboard – Leading German Think Tank
http://www.imi-online.de/2009/01/01/imperial-geopolitics/
IMI-Analyse 2009/013, in: IMI/DFG-VK: Kein Frieden mit der NATO
Imperial Geopolitics: Ukraine, Georgia and the New Cold War between NATO and Russia
von: Martin Hantke | Veröffentlicht am: 1. Januar 2009
Drucken
Hier finden sich ähnliche Artikel
Zbigniew Brzezinski’s book The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives is essential reading for anyone wishing to understand current and future U.S., EU and NATO policy. Over ten years ago the former National Security Advisor gave a graphic description of the imperatives of imperial geopolitics. He argued that the U.S.A.’s position of supremacy should be preserved under all circumstances. To this end NATO, acting as a “bridgehead” of the U.S.A., should expand into Eurasia and take control of geostrategically important regions so as to prevent Russia’s resurgence as a powerful political force.
Brzezinski had in mind two countries or regions in particular: “Ukraine, a new and important space on the Eurasian chessboard is a geopolitical pivot because its very existence as an independent country helps to transform Russia. Without Ukraine, Russia ceases to be a Eurasian empire. Russia without Ukraine can still strive for imperial status, but it would then become a predominantly Asian imperial state, more likely to be drawn into debilitating conflicts with aroused Central Asians, who would then be supported by their fellow Islamic states to the south.” “However, if Moscow regains control over Ukraine, with its 52 million people and major resources as well as access to the Black Sea, Russia automatically again regains the wherewithal to become a powerful imperial state, spanning Europe and Asia.”1 Brzezinski argued further that there was an imperative need to gain control of the southern Caucasus, i.e. Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia, on Russia’s southern flank. The past master of U.S. geopolitics set out the aim and purpose of NATO policy with impressive clarity: “The United States and the NATO countries – while sparing Russia’s self-esteem to the extent possible, but nevertheless firmly and consistently – are destroying the geopolitical foundations which could, at least in theory, allow Russia to hope to acquire the status as the number two power in world politics that belonged to the Soviet Union.
In the years that followed, these words were systematically put into political practice with NATO taking its eastward expansion right up to Moscow’s borders. Furthermore, active Western support for the “colourful revolutions” in Georgia (2003) and Ukraine (2004) led to the sitting pro-Russian or neutral governments and presidents being ousted by pro-Western candidates.3 Russia regarded NATO’s policy as crossing the “red line”. As the war between Russia and Georgia in the summer of 2008 showed, Russia is no longer prepared to stand idly by in the face of further attempts at expansion. Nevertheless, the Western military alliance is doggedly pursuing its escalation policy, in which Ukraine and Georgia are now being offered NATO membership as a means of safeguarding the “successes” that have been scored. U.S. President Barack Obama is also in favour of these two countries joining NATO.4 The announcement that Michael McFaul, a hardliner on policy towards Moscow, is to be appointed senior director for Russian affairs at the National Security Council gives little cause for hope that Washington under its new president will abandon its aggressive, anti-Russian policy. This amounts to tacit acceptance that the New Cold War between NATO and Russia, invoked so frequently of late, will become a self-fulfilling prophecy.
