Everyone Agrees that Ukraine Sniper Attacks Were a False Flag … They Only Argue About WHO Is the Culprit

Who Stood to Gain from a False Flag Operation?

We pointed out Wednesday that the Estonian foreign minister claims that the new Ukrainian coalition deployed snipers to discredit the former government of Ukraine.

We documented Thursday that snipers are a common form of false flag terrorism.

Interestingly, while the new Ukranian coalition denies that it deployed snipers, it is now accusing someone else – Russia – of deploying the snipers as a false flag event to create chaos.

AP reports today:

One of the biggest mysteries hanging over the protest mayhem that drove Ukraine’s president from power: Who was behind the snipers who sowed death and terror in Kiev?

That riddle has become the latest flashpoint of feuding over Ukraine — with the nation’s fledgling government and the Kremlin giving starkly different interpretations of events that could either undermine or bolster the legitimacy of the new rulers.

Ukrainian authorities are investigating the Feb. 18-20 bloodbath, and they have shifted their focus from ousted President Viktor Yanukovych’s government to Vladimir Putin’s Russia — pursuing the theory that the Kremlin was intent on sowing mayhem as a pretext for military incursion. Russia suggests that the snipers were organized by opposition leaders trying to whip up local and international outrage against the government.

The government’s new health minister — a doctor who helped oversee medical treatment for casualties during the protests — told The Associated Press that the similarity of bullet wounds suffered by opposition victims and police indicates the shooters were trying to stoke tensions on both sides and spark even greater violence, with the goal of toppling Yanukovych.

“I think it wasn’t just a part of the old regime that (plotted the provocation), but it was also the work of Russian special forces who served and maintained the ideology of the (old) regime,” Health Minister Oleh Musiy said.


On Tuesday, Interior Minister Arsen Avakov signaled that investigators may be turning their attention away from Ukrainian responsibility.

“I can say only one thing: the key factor in this uprising, that spilled blood in Kiev and that turned the country upside down and shocked it, was a third force,” Avakov was quoted as saying by Interfax. “And this force was not Ukrainian.”


Musiy, who spent more than two months organizing medical units on Maidan, said that on Feb. 20 roughly 40 civilians and protesters were brought with fatal bullet wounds to the makeshift hospital set up near the square. But he said medics also treated three police officers whose wounds were identical.

Forensic evidence, in particular the similarity of the bullet wounds, led him and others to conclude that snipers were targeting both sides of the standoff at Maidan — and that the shootings were intended to generate a wave of revulsion so strong that it would topple Yanukovych and also justify a Russian invasion.

Since Russia supported Yanukovych, it makes no sense that the people who ordered the sniper attacks would want to topple Yanukovych and launch a Russian invasion. Specifically, they would either want to overthrow the Russia-friendly Yanukovych or launch a Russian invasion to support a Russia-friendly Ukrainian government.

In any event, AP continues:

Russia has used the uncertainty surrounding the bloodshed to discredit Ukraine’s current government. During a news conference Tuesday, Putin addressed the issue in response to a reporter’s question, suggesting that the snipers in fact “may have been provocateurs from opposition parties.”


A former top security official with Ukraine’s main security agency, the SBU, waded into the confusion, in an interview published Thursday with the respected newspaper Dzerkalo Tizhnya. Hennady Moskal, who was deputy head of the agency, told the newspaper that snipers from the Interior Ministry and SBU were responsible for the shootings, not foreign agents.

“In addition to this, snipers received orders to shoot not only protesters, but also police forces. This was all done in order to escalate the conflict, in order to justify the police operation to clear Maidan,” he was quoted as saying.

In other words, everyone agrees that the snipers were false flag terrorists sewing chaos and confusion … they only disagree about who the responsible party is.

This entry was posted in Politics / World News. Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Everyone Agrees that Ukraine Sniper Attacks Were a False Flag … They Only Argue About WHO Is the Culprit

  1. mmckinl says:

    The presstitutes of the MSM have to cover for the new illegal regime in the Ukraine and this is their only possible alternative … Thanks to previous pieces on false flag sniper shootings we can easily link the Ukrainian shootings with others in the near past … Syria, Venezuela, Egypt and more….

    The Momentum for “Regime Change”: Snipers Are Commonly Used as “False Flag” Terrorists

    And on each occasion the snipers were used it was against an adversary of US policy … This is no coincidence … Along with sniper attacks physical violence was also employed by “unknown” assailants pretending to be protesters.

  2. Bill Pahnelas says:

    given the massive investment the US and its european lackeys have made in nurturing the upheaval in ukraine, it seems that the most interested party in this imbroglio — the US itself — seems to be spared scrutiny as a potential actor in this sordid piece of work. the US government has proved in so many ways in the past few decades that nothing is off the table when it comes to accomplishing its mission of encircling russia and establishing global hegemony.

  3. jadan says:

    It has been said that the coup leaders who took power through intimidation of arms, under the guise of “democracy”, have prevented any investigation of the incident beyond the superficial examination of wounds mentioned in this article. That is the signature of a false flag operation: the perps suppress efforts at any genuine forensic analysis of the evidence.

  4. RayDuray says:

    I’m not sure this will help to clear up the sniper history. Perhaps it’s just interesting to see that the Canadian press is spinning this a bit differently from that in the U.S.


    I note that as far as a lot of American media, this discussion doesn’t even exist. 🙂

  5. gozounlimited says:

    Nevada is the culprit…..old Harry unemployment extension territory (I know how it feels to be poisoned and starved at the same time) ….. Looks Like Nevada has joined California ….. Welcome….Love You…..ENJOY THE SNOW AND RAIN!….. http://radar.weather.gov/Conus/full_loop.php. Thanks for the Help and The Love…….

  6. Veri1138 says:

    Yanukovich did not need to justify clearing Maidan. He had already agreed to new elections a few months earlier than those required. A truce was announced between Maidan and the government. Then, sniper fire.

    Who benefited? Look at the current rulers in Kiev. Look at their oligarchs.

  7. Rehmat says:

    No mystery there.

    Estonia’s Foreign Minister Urmas Paet who visited Kiev on February 25 told Catherine Ashton, the European Union’s top gun that the anti-government protesters in Kiev were shot on the orders of their leaders. Some earlier reports mentioned Israeli soldiers leading the protests.


  8. Jim G says:

    Congrats, George. We (the alternative press and readers) may have stopped WW III, If his (the “New Ukraine coalition’s) explanation to the European Community, or his own people for that matter, is this lame, Russia do it, to get their guy out? As far as I can tell they were busy doing hospitality at the Olympics. And maybe the EU is getting tired of all the false flags. I don’t like the NSA spying on us, but the people spying on the security state is very interesting.

  9. colinjames71 says:

    Of COURSE it was Russia.

    Yours truly,

    Western MSM, Inc.

  10. Fullblad says:

    who benefits?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *