The Kiev Sniper Probe: Coup Leaders Behind February 20 Maidan Sniper Killings of Civilians and Police

In-depth Report:

After using the murky sniper massacre of February 20 to depose and demonize elected Ukrainian President, Viktor Yanukovych, the Kiev Cabal continues to investigate the shootings, and just how Yanukovych destroyed himself with them.

RT reported on a fascinating and little-noted May 13 press conference announcing the preliminary results of parliament’s official investigation. This was called by the probe’s chairman, Gennady Moskal, an MP with Yulia Tymoshenko’s Fatherland party. The findings Moskal announced are remarkable in several ways. [1]

In early March, 12 officers of the Interior Ministry’s special “Berkut” police force – a supposed “black unit” of it – had already been arrested over the massacre, with reports their denials had triggered lie detectors. But now Moskal reveals, as RT reports:

“[F]orensic evidence suggests their innocence. …  the bullets that killed people in Kiev … didn’t match any of the firearms issued to Berkut’s special unit, which, unlike the majority of riot police, was allowed to carry lethal weapons.”

If this latest update is true, all the photos of Berkut men with the yellow armbands brandishing assault weapons are proven irrelevant to the crimes they were taken as proof of. The arrests, various death threats and abuses against them and even their families, and the complete dissolution of the Berkut in March, would have been grossly unjustified.

More interesting yet, as RT reports:

 “[Moskal] alleged that the shooters were agents of the Ukrainian Security Service (SBU) acting from the ranks of the protesters, but admitted that genuine protesters could have been the culprits.”

Isn’t this what Moscow and the “conspiracy theorists” have been proposing from day one?

Not quite. While he acknowledges as possible the more straightforward explanation – that it was the insurgents themselves – he clearly favors the undercover “conspiracy theory” version of why the lines of fire keep pointing to where the “protesters” were.

Moskal has for a while argued that shady government forces planned to hit police as well as innocents, to provoke a wider confrontation and justify a planned final crackdown. Even before the investigation started, he had received from “patriotically-minded workers from the Interior Ministry and SBU” supposed orders to launch a sniper massacre just like that which unfolded. These documents were originally posted on his Facebook page on February 24, to pressure the new authorities (and the planners, whose phone numbers were not redacted). Are-posting (in Ukrainian), with operational graphics, is available here. The anti-Putin Interpreter Mag cites that description as saying the plans:

 “…prove that the snipers on Institutska Street were soldiers from the special operations divisions of the interior troops which are headed by Col. Asavalyuk, and soldiers from the Omega division of internal troops. 

However authentic or relevant these papers ever were, the details of the plan seem to have changed with the evidence. For a March 8 AP report, he again blamed SBU and Interior forces, but the latter are now sidelined.

More interestingly, where and how Moskal’s SBU villains operated is different ten weeks later. The original February telling emphasized the use of elevated snipers on rooftops – presumably ones the government had secured. The Telegraph described Moskal’s documents as showing “a plan … with help from the Russian Armed Forces’ Main Intelligence Directorate” to, “(surround) Independence Square with rooftop snipers whose mission would have been to wipe out the anti-government EuroMaidan protesters.” A Reuters report similarly describes “a plan to surround Independence Square – the cradle of the uprising – with snipers and open fire on the protesters below.” 

 The map included with Moskal’s posting shows the push to clear the Maidan was to be from the October Palace side, north to the center of the square. But as events unfolded, insurgent snipers fired down on the police and Berkut instead, chasing them out of the general area to the south; the palace was overrun at about 12:25 PM (see this video at 5:16 and 12:40)


and then Berkut even ran away from the next post south, under more gunfire (see this video).

Minutes later, by 12:45, the massacre snipers opened fire across that field, cutting down the first wave of south-pushing, unarmed, sacrificial lambs. Any gunmen “surrounding Independence Square”would have their view of this area totally blocked by the insurgent-held and sniper-infested Hotel Ukraine.

Now with more evidence reviewed – bullets, lines of fire – and with time to carefully compare how much deniability is plausible, they’ve decided on secret SBU agents embedded in the ranks of the Maidanistas. Why wasn’t this undercover aspect mentioned when the secret orders were revealed in February? Was this more secret yet, or was it improvised on the spot as the insurgents changed the playing field?

What about the rooftops part of the plan? Were the “SBU” snipers planted on rebel-controlled ones? They had to be on someone’s roof, or in an upper window, for most of the shots to work.

By “SBU agents” in the crowd, does Moskal mean then-agents, or people who are agents now? RT notes that he had already accused both the SBU and the Interior Ministry of stalling the probe, fearing scandal “if the real perpetrators were exposed.” Does that suggest the latter, that SBU hired the false-flag assassins to keep doing dirty work like that? Or simply that they have some reason to cover up the crimes of their sacked and demonized predecessors?

In a telling sign of confidence in this revised, interim version, Moskal told reporters, essentially, that this crime will remain murky and unsolved for decades. RT cites him as saying “this will be yet another case, like the assassination of US President John F. Kennedy, which is still being investigated today.”

Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page

Become a Member of Global Research

Articles by: Adam Larson

Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article. The Centre of Research on Globalization grants permission to cross-post Global Research articles on community internet sites as long the source and copyright are acknowledged together with a hyperlink to the original Global Research article. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: [email protected] contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: [email protected]