New Evidence Exposes The Maidan Massacre False Flag.

New Evidence Further Exposes The False Flag That Triggered Untold Destruction In Ukraine.

Pictured Above: Memorial for the victims of the “Maidan Massacre” in 2014.

As I have reported extensively on previously, the United States helped overthrow Ukraine’s democratically elected government led by Viktor Yanukovych in 2014 and installed a puppet government.

The CIA cutouts NED and USAID funneled hundreds of thousands of dollars to civil society organizations in late 2013 that organized protests against Yanukovych.

The president of the NED (National Endowment for Democracy), a cutout of the CIA’s foreign meddling arm, Carl Gershman, boasted in the Washington Post about funding the overthrow of governments in countries surrounding Russia, hoping it would eventually lead to the overthrow of Putin.

Gershman wrote, “Ukraine is the biggest prize”.

Once the U.S.-funded protests were underway, there was a violent far-right element that joined in, composed of members of a previously fringe far-right political party called “Svoboda” and a fringe far-right paramilitary group called “Right Sector”.

The violent elements eventually led to Viktor Yanukovych fleeing from office under threats of violence.

The United States continued to support the far-right elements of the protest to fulfill their regime change goal.

The U.S. Senators Chris Murphy and John McCain even went to Ukraine and stood alongside Oleh Tyahnybok, the leader of the far-right Svoboda party, as he called for regime change.

Murphy went on C-Span after the coup was over and boasted that the United States had “members of the Senate” and “members of the State Department” who joined protestors in Ukraine’s Maidan square and that “the United States, has in part been what has helped lead to this change in regime”.

The coup paved the way for far-right groups that were previously relegated to the fringe margins of Ukrainian politics to enter the mainstream and take up top political posts.

Along with this, the United States installed Arseniy Yatseniuk as the temporary interim leader of Ukraine, because he supported the neo-liberal IMF reforms that Yanukovych had previously rejected.

At the time, the official justification from both the far-right protesters and the United States for backing this coup was a massacre that took place on February 20th of 2014 that killed 48 protests in Ukraine’s Maidan square, which they at the time blamed on Yanukovych’s police forces.

Subsequently, however, a substantial body of evidence, including forensic analysis and witness testimony, has proven that this massacre was actually a false-flag carried out by the “Right Sector,” which was then falsely blamed on Yanukovych.

Now, a Declassified Ukrainian court verdict from March of this year has proven that on February 19, 2014, just one day before the Maidan massacre, Far-Right elements of the Maidan uprising indeed fired at fellow protestors, which they falsely blamed on Yanukovych’s forces.

In this article, I will go over this new bombshell, along with the previous evidence proving the Maidan Massacre was a false flag.

Verdict and Video Proves False Flag.

On February 19th of 2014, Maidan protesters were shot outside of an SBU building located in Khmelnytsky, Ukraine, killing one woman and injuring several people.

At the time, two Ukrainian SBU officers loyal to Yanukovych were charged with firing the shots from the second floor of the SBU building.

A new declassified court document however, shows that a Ukrainian court acquitted the two SBU officers of this charge.

The ruling shows that the two officers, named as “person 21” and “person 22” were “acquitted” of this charge against them.

Pictured Above: The Verdict of The Declassified Ukrainian Court Document, Copied onto a Google Document by me and translated using Google Translate.

The court document found that this shooting was actually committed by far-right Maidan protesters.

As the Ukrainian Canadian political scientist from the University of Ottawa, Ivan Katchanovski noted “The verdict cites various eyewitnesses who testified that several Maidan activists broke into veranda (extension) of SBU building, that gunshots at Maidan activists came from this veranda when it was occupied by ‘radical’ Maidan activists & that accused SBU officers did not make these gunshots.”

This verdict is backed up by clear video evidence, showing extremist elements of Maidan breaking into the SBU building, followed by shots clearly coming from the first floor, which they were occupying.

Pictured Above: Far Right, Maidan protestors breaking into the SBU building.

Pictured Above: Clear Bullet Holes showing that the bullets were fired from the first floor of the SBU building, occupied by far-right Maidan protesters.

The court verdict found that one of the accused SBU officers, “person 22” was “on the second floor” of the building during the shooting, meaning he could not have been responsible.

The verdict found that “ from the place where PERSON_22 was on the 2nd floor, it was not possible to fire shots at the lower part of the door of the central entrance of the office covered by an anti-vandal roller shutter.”

The court verdict also found that “the conclusions of the pre-trial investigation body about the guilt of PERSON_21 and PERSON_22” were “based mainly on assumptions not confirmed properly by admissible, reliable and sufficient evidence”. …

This verdict proves that the far-right Maidan protesters had the intention of committing a false flag against other Maidan protesters and that Ukraine’s “investigation body” subsequently wanted to blame the false flag on Yanukovych’s forces.

The Second False Flag

The next day, February 20th of 2014, when 48 protestors were killed in Maidan Square, a substantial body of evidence compiled by the aforementioned Ivan Katchanovski proves that far-right Maidan protesters again fired at fellow protestors, which was later falsely blamed on Yanukovych by authorities.

Ivan Katchanovski has compiled a 57-minute-long video consisting of over 100 Witness Testimonies from the time of the Massacre, who all said that there were pro-Maidan snipers located at nearby buildings.

In an academic study published by Ivan Katchanovski, who carefully reviewed the footage of the trial on this massacre, he found that the majority of witnesses and survivors testified that the shots came from buildings occupied by far-right militants. As he wrote:

51 out of 72 wounded Maidan protesters, with whose shooting on February 20 Berkut policemen are charged and whose testimonies were revealed, testified at the trial and the investigation that they had been shot by snipers from Maidan-controlled buildings or areas, had themselves witnessed snipers there, or had been told by other Maidan protesters about such snipers. 31 of these wounded protesters testified at the trial and/or the investigation that they had been shot from the Hotel Ukraina, the Bank Arkada, and Zhovtnevyi Palace, the buildings on Muzeinyi Lane and Horodetskyi Street, or other Maidan-controlled buildings or areas. At least 33 wounded protesters testified that they had either witnessed snipers there and/or were told about snipers in these Maidan-controlled locations, mostly in the Hotel Ukraina, by other protesters.

Katchanovski noted, “The absolute majority of the wounded protesters stated at the trial and investigation that they were shot from the Hotel Ukraina or witnessed snipers there”.

The forensic evidence showcased at the trial also matches up with this testimony.

As Katchanovski has documented:

The findings of forensic medical examinations done by government experts for the prosecution were first made public during the Maidan massacre trial, and revealed that the absolute majority of protesters were shot from the side or back, and from top to bottom. Most videos and photos, however, show that the absolute majority of those killed and wounded had the Berkut police (Yanukovych’s police forces) in front of them and at ground level, whereas the Maidan-controlled buildings were generally behind them and on the left and right side.

Forensic medical examinations indicate that 40 out of the 48 killed protesters were shot from a high angle. At least 36 of them were killed at a time when the Berkut policemen were filmed on the ground.

He also documented that “48 out of 51 wounded protesters had steep entry wounds, consistent with the theory that they were shot by snipers in Maidan-controlled buildings, or on the roofs of these buildings.”

Ballistic examinations also found that the protestors were shot with bullets consistent with weapons carried by Far-Right Maidan protestors.

As Katchanovski noted, “The forensic ballistic examinations presented at the trial found that 19 protesters were killed on February 20 by bullets which match the calibers not only of AKM Kalashnikov assault rifles, but also of hunting versions of Kalashnikovs, and other weapons, Videos showed protesters with hunting firearms in the Hotel Ukraina during the massacre”.

The ballistic examinations also found that the bullets found at the scene of the massacre did not match those of Yanukovych’s Berkut police force.

As Katchanovski documented, “A forensic ballistic examination conducted by government experts with use of an automatic computer-based IBIS-TAIS system, found that the bullets extracted from killed protesters, trees, and the Hotel Ukraina rooms did not match police database for Kalashnikov assault rifles of members of the entire Kyiv Berkut regiment, including the special Berkut unit deployed”.

Even the official trial verdict found that “at least 10 of the 48 Maidan activists killed, and 115 of the 172 wounded, were shot not by Berkut or other law enforcement personnel firing from government-controlled areas but by Maidan snipers operating in Maidan-controlled locations.”

The trial verdict also “confirms the absence of evidence for any order by Yanukovych or his government to massacre the Maidan protesters”.

While the verdict did debunk the official narrative, it was still a cover-up of the actual evidence presented at the trial.

The trial verdict charged the Bekut police “for the murders of 31 of 48 Maidan protesters killed, and the attempted murders of another 44 of 80” which Katchanovski has noted was “based on a single, fabricated forensic examination” which contradicted “the results of some 40 earlier forensic bullet examinations” presented at the trial.

Katchanovski has noted that the official conviction “was based on a bullet fragment that had appeared on the scene without any trace of corresponding pieces from the same bullet—a sign of evidence tampering.”

The trial took this single piece of fabricated evidence to “prove” that a Berkut police officer was responsible for the shooting of a single protester, which they then used to blame the Bekut police for the killing of 31 protestors and injuring of 44 “because these protesters were killed in the same group and in approximately the same time and place” despite the fact that “the trial verdict convicting the officers admitted that people in the same groups of protesters had been killed and wounded, at about the same time and place, not by law enforcement but by ‘unknown persons’ located in the Hotel Ukraina and other Maidan-controlled buildings and areas”.

Looking at the video footage, Katchanovski found that this single piece of fabricated evidence was provably false, given that the Bekut officer charged was not shooting at the time the protester was shot. As he noted:

Synchronized videos reveal that the single match in this forensic examination—a bullet taken from the body of a wounded Maidan activist linked to the Kalashnikov of a convicted Berkut member—was clearly fabricated, since the convicted policeman was filmed not shooting at the time when this protester (who himself testified that he had been shot from the Hotel Ukraina) was wounded

Pictured above: Synchronized video from Ivan Katchanovski showing that the accused Bekut officer was not shooting at the time the protester was wounded.

This proves that the single piece of evidence implicating the Bekut police is false.

As noted above, the rest of the forensic evidence presented at the trial proves that the massacre was a false flag done by Right Sector and other far-right groups from the “Maidan” controlled buildings, exactly like what happened the day before at the SBU building in Khmelnytsky.

Mainstream Media Cover Up.

The mainstream media, to this day, has never covered the undeniable evidence that the Maidan massacre was a false flag, and will likely ignore the new bombshell that the shooting at the SBU building the previous day was a false flag.

Bellingcat, the CIA’s favorite “open source” investigative outlet, funded by the same NED that funded the Maidan coup in the first place, refused to put out an investigation of the Massacre after starting one.

In 2015, Bellingcat announced that they were working on an investigation into the massacre, which they never put out, almost certainly because the evidence fully refutes the official narrative.

The New York Times magazine went even farther, actively publishing a fabricated report using “a virtual crime scene” (Ie a cartoon) which falsely claimed that the Bekut police and not Right Sector committed the massacre.

The Times called the factual proof of the massacre being a false flag a “disinformation campaign”.

In reality, the New York Times was taking part in a disinformation campaign.

The trial verdict showed that the New York Times’ study, which was paid for by lawyers representing Maidan, was not even presented at the trial because it was “based on a primitive fraud in which the victims’ wound locations, which in fact accorded with the direction of gunfire from Maidan-controlled buildings, were altered to accord instead with Berkut positions on the ground.”

As Ivan Katchanovski noted, “The SITU model, which was produced for the trial by a New York architectural research group by order of the Maidan lawyers at a cost of nearly $100,000, was used to propagate disinformation in articles published in the New York Times and other Western and Ukrainian media.”

Consequences Of The False Flag.

The false flag massacres, in effect, ended up hurting far more people than the direct victims of the massacres.

The false flag was used to justify a coup that brought far-right nationalists to power in Ukraine.

Shortly after the coup, another massacre took place at the Trade Union Building in Odessa, Ukraine, after clashes erupted between far-right forces and ethnic Russian Ukranians

The building was set on fire during these clashes, leading the far-right nationalists to trap the pro-Russia Ukrainians in the burning building, killing 42 people.

An EU court recently found that the new far-right government intentionally let them burn alive, ruling that “The deployment of fire engines to the site of the fire had been deliberately delayed for 40 minutes, and the police had not stepped in to help evacuate people from the building promptly and safely. Therefore, the State had failed to ensure timely rescue measures”.

(Emphasis: mine)

Furthermore, the coup allowed the U.S. to install a puppet that implemented IMF reforms that had devastating effects on Ukraine.

In his recent book, the Ukrainian political scientist Konstantin Bondarenko documented the devastating effects of these post-coup IMF reforms, including:

• Ukraine’s GDP shrinking by approximately 17%”.

• The exchange rate going from “8 hryvnias (Ukrainian dollar) to 1 U.S dollar” in 2013 to “23 hryvnias to the dollar” in 2015

• Inflation rising from 24.9% in 2014 to 43.3% in 2015

• a “significant decline in industrial production during the first two years” after the coup, leading to Ukraine losing “its economic cluster that manufactured goods with high added value (machine engineering)”

• “mining and metallurgical complex, energy (coal production), chemicals, food production”, “sustained significant losses”.

• “an increase in unemployment and the emigration of citizens from Ukraine to neighboring countries—primarily to Poland and Russia.”

• “utility rates increasing by 123%, reaching up to 20% of family income” from the IMF introduced policies

Furthermore, the coup led to hostilities between Ukraine and Russia, sparking the illegal Russian annexation of Crimea, a civil/proxy war in Ukraine’s Donbas region, and eventually, the Russian invasion of Ukraine and subsequent proxy war between the U.S. and Russia using Ukraine.

The fact that all of this death and destruction was sparked by a false flag is something the Western establishment needs to keep covered up.

This new revelation, however, will make it harder than ever to uphold the official narrative of the Maidan coup and the Maidan massacre.

---

Note to readers: The Dissident is a reader-supported outlet. If you liked this article, consider becoming a paid subscriber.