From Paul Niland: The narrative from Russia is that the revolution was a violent overthrow of a democratically elected authority. Yes, they were democratically elected. That did not give them a mandate to steal billions. I wrote at the time that any government who sends gangs of thugs out to beat citizens has lost any legitimacy. Here you see, from 4:00 onwards, just that. Police colluding with, fighting alongside, the so-called titushki on February 18th. It looks like they kill a guy, hes certainly unconscious at the end of this video. For background, on this date Verkhovna Rada (then controlled by the Party of Regions) were supposed to discuss constitutional changes, specifically a return to the 2004 constitution which would have meant a limiting of the powers Yanukovych had incrementally [and largely illegally] awarded himself. This was one of the diplomatically negotiated and agreed steps* that were intended to diffuse tensions. People, protesters, moved towards the Rada that morning when the order of business for parliament that day was published and this item was not scheduled for discussion. As youll see at the beginning of this video people arrived in the adjacent park with flags and so on, but they were not being violent at all. What is then plain to see is that the police and these thugs are working together, some of the thugs (towards the end of this video) are even wearing vests with the Party of Regions logo on them. This is what happened in Kyiv, this is the kind of violence that occurred, and who perpetrated it. * Note. That constitutional change was also part of the deal signed between Yanukovych and the then-opposition, brokered by Radislav Sikorski and 2 other EU Foreign Ministers, on the night of February 21st, the day after the sniper massacre. Sikorski was heard to say that if the deal wasnt signed, Yanukovych would just kill everybody on the Maidan. Realising that he had no options left and that this change to the constitution was an end to his one-man grip on power he fled. My 2¢-worth: Yanukovych fled because he was a coward. Having amassed enormous wealth and packed and removed most of his movable assets during this time, he clearly planned to leave come what may, as whatever deal was cut wasnt going to expand his powers or maintain status quo. But to say that he was physically threatened in any way, as many Russian pundits like to claim [e.g., knife to the throat], is patently absurd. He was a coward, plain and simple: in 2004, when a 17-year-old student tossed a raw egg at him as he was exiting his bus during the campaign, Yanukovych fainted dead away and wet himself.
Posted on: Tue, 09 Dec 2014 08:54:19 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015