It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Kiev snipers hired by Maidan leaders - leaked EU's Ashton phone tape

page: 4
32
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 6 2014 @ 10:36 AM
link   
The weapon being used by 'Government Snipers' in this video:

www.ibtimes.co.uk...

Is clearly not an AR-15.

I'd imagine both sides had their own snipers.....Civilian AR pattern semi-auto rifles are readily available in Europe.




posted on Mar, 6 2014 @ 10:46 AM
link   
Talk about a chess match. Even with a taped phone conversation, you have to wonder if one was lying, knowing it was getting taped.

I think it's true, though. Seems like our M.O., especially after the Syria thing.



posted on Mar, 6 2014 @ 10:59 AM
link   
reply to post by squarehead666
 


This video about events take place on Thursday February 20. We have two days of shooting, Tuesday and Thursday, on first day 15 people die, half of them are policemen.

I belive the Berkut was not armed on Tuesday. Two days later the "freedom fighters" started to attack the police (as you can see on the footage, they are going ahead, what they think after previous fight where died 15-20 persons), and we have some radio conversation recordings from Janukovich's snipers on rooftops (logical step on Thursday, if policemen die), and the interesting is that the intercepted conversation tells about the goverment snipers recognise other snipers and ask each other if there anyone else on roofs?



The goverment snipers are looking for armed rioters with weapons. Is it OK shoot an attacking rioters, who have guns pointing policemen and already killed some of them?
edit on 6-3-2014 by maghun because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2014 @ 11:27 AM
link   
Intersting video: BBC reports shots from the upper floors of the Hotel Ukraine, where the journos have been, plus the makeshift hospital of the protesters:



Yesterday i also saw a video shot from the said hotel, and you see that the bullets come from the same angle as the video, so there have been snipers in the hotel. I really doubt they have been police/military.

Unfortunately i cant find the vid anymore, will post if i find it again.



posted on Mar, 6 2014 @ 11:32 AM
link   
Here we go, video clearly showing protesters facing police, while being shot at from the back.
The side where the shots come from is from hotel ukraine which was in oppositons hand.




Not saying the government snipers didnt shoot, but there is a definetly a second party shooting at protesters.



posted on Mar, 6 2014 @ 12:23 PM
link   
An RT article states that in Feb. the rioters stole over a thousand makarov pistols, light machine guns, SNIPER RIFLES, and 18,000 rounds of ammo of different calibres...So they HAD the capability,



posted on Mar, 6 2014 @ 12:25 PM
link   

svetlana84
Here we go, video clearly showing protesters facing police, while being shot at from the back.
The side where the shots come from is from hotel ukraine which was in oppositons hand.




Not saying the government snipers didnt shoot, but there is a definetly a second party shooting at protesters.


BBC TV had a crew there that shows someone firing from the hotel, second to last floor, fifth window in from the left i think he said..maybe someone got trigger happy.



posted on Mar, 6 2014 @ 01:29 PM
link   


Maybe this video helps?
Rainbows
Jane



posted on Mar, 6 2014 @ 01:38 PM
link   

angelchemuel


Maybe this video helps?
Rainbows
Jane


One thing that may or may not be connected...

The shooters you see in the video, if i remember correctly, all wore yellow arm bands.

These guys have yellow name tags on their uniforms. An unusual trait.
edit on PM4Thu20141972 by andy1972 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2014 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by andy1972
 


That is a pretty loose connection...a connection none the less, but a very very very loose one. Doesn't really prove much at all.



posted on Mar, 6 2014 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Echtelion
Ok so yeah the Estonian government (a EU member, shall I say) has denied the sniper(s) was from the fascist opposition, yet they did not deny Paet's claim that it was not Yanukovitch's forces.


Again people really need to read what is in front of them and then comment.

The Estonian foreign ministry did NOT state the sniper was from / works for the opposition. What they did state was the minister was relaying what was told during their visit, which included discussion on the status of who the snipers were working for.

The Estonians are taking exception to the fact that the relay of that information is being portrayed as Estonia confirming what they were told.

There is a huge difference.

It would be like a person who just came back from Dallas Texas talking to a person on the phone about the Kennedy assassination. The person who visited tells his friend over the phone that people are talking about the possibility of a second gunman on the grassy knoll, while relaying who the possible suspects are.

It does not mean there is a second shooter nor does it mean the people who are possible suspects are in fact guilty. What Russia / RT did was take that phone conversation and report it as if the person on the phone is confirming there was a second gunman and insinuating the people he mentioned were in fact guilty.

In reality, that is not what is going on or being said.
edit on 6-3-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2014 @ 04:45 PM
link   

saidative
Talk about a chess match. Even with a taped phone conversation, you have to wonder if one was lying, knowing it was getting taped.

I think it's true, though. Seems like our M.O., especially after the Syria thing.


Ironically enough the Russian move would allow Saudi Arabia to invade Syria in an effort to protect the religious majority (the people) that is being oppressed by the religious minority (the government) - right?



posted on Mar, 6 2014 @ 04:53 PM
link   

Sparkymedic
reply to post by andy1972
 


That is a pretty loose connection...a connection none the less, but a very very very loose one. Doesn't really prove much at all.


Not to mention the reports that came out about what would happen to Ukrainian military in Crimea. The "opposition to Keiv" stated if they had to shoot, they would shoot the Ukrainians in the legs..


By Tuesday, the situation remained tense, and the base was still surrounded. But the base commander moved in and out, and troops outside weren't stopping anyone.

But not every scene was so calm. Video showed more than 100 unarmed Ukrainian troops trying Tuesday morning to return to Belbek air base north of Sevastopol, only to have Russian forces fire warning shots over their heads.

A Russian voice tells the Ukrainians he has orders to shoot them in the legs if they advance. The Ukrainian commander reports they have no weapons, and the Russians are in control. After some negotiations, 15 Ukrainian troops are let in.


Could one assume the Snipers in Kiev were Russian because they shot people in the legs?



posted on Mar, 6 2014 @ 06:17 PM
link   

Xcathdra


Ironically enough the Russian move would allow Saudi Arabia to invade Syria in an effort to protect the religious majority (the people) that is being oppressed by the religious minority (the government) - right?


except for that pesky agreement that allows russia to station troops in the crimea. up to 25000 of them

does saudi arabia have that agreement with syria??



posted on Mar, 6 2014 @ 06:31 PM
link   

Xcathdra

saidative
Talk about a chess match. Even with a taped phone conversation, you have to wonder if one was lying, knowing it was getting taped.

I think it's true, though. Seems like our M.O., especially after the Syria thing.


Ironically enough the Russian move would allow Saudi Arabia to invade Syria in an effort to protect the religious majority (the people) that is being oppressed by the religious minority (the government) - right?


No. Because Russia has now secured its only remaining direct port to the Mediterranean, along with an expanded Navy (most of the Ukrainian fleet apparently).

Furthermore, define "allow"... What may be interpreted by an adversary as provocation doesn't mean allowance.



posted on Mar, 6 2014 @ 06:36 PM
link   

andy1972

angelchemuel


Maybe this video helps?
Rainbows
Jane


One thing that may or may not be connected...

The shooters you see in the video, if i remember correctly, all wore yellow arm bands.

These guys have yellow name tags on their uniforms. An unusual trait.
edit on PM4Thu20141972 by andy1972 because: (no reason given)


You referring to THESE yellow armbands?

If so, they aren't so unusual within the context of a massive presence of neonazis among the crowds.

And frankly, those Pravy Sektor guys don't look like they've got a problem shooting more left-wing or liberal protesters, Ukrianian or not. They're paramilitaries. They've been beating leftists in Maidan already.

As in the videos posted up there, it's rather too convenient that the shots came from that hotel located on the protesters side, not on the police side.

But hey... it could be just anyone! Can be also some Blackwater/Xe... or a freelance hitman... Hotels are also usually easy places to sneak in.


edit on 6/3/14 by Echtelion because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2014 @ 07:02 PM
link   

Echtelion

Xcathdra

saidative
Talk about a chess match. Even with a taped phone conversation, you have to wonder if one was lying, knowing it was getting taped.

I think it's true, though. Seems like our M.O., especially after the Syria thing.


Ironically enough the Russian move would allow Saudi Arabia to invade Syria in an effort to protect the religious majority (the people) that is being oppressed by the religious minority (the government) - right?


No. Because Russia has now secured its only remaining direct port to the Mediterranean, along with an expanded Navy (most of the Ukrainian fleet apparently).

Furthermore, define "allow"... What may be interpreted by an adversary as provocation doesn't mean allowance.


So its ok to invade a sovereign nation and seize their territory because it gives them access to the black sea / warm water port?
Secondly the naval vessels from Ukraine are still Ukrainian since the Crimea "government" has no authority to do what they did.

Russia opened the door and in the process undermined their position in the ME and former republics by forcing nations towards the EU / West / NATO because of the invasion of Ukraine.

If Russia truly believes that crap its spewing, then why is Chechnya still a part of Russia?



posted on Mar, 6 2014 @ 07:04 PM
link   

okamitengu

Xcathdra


Ironically enough the Russian move would allow Saudi Arabia to invade Syria in an effort to protect the religious majority (the people) that is being oppressed by the religious minority (the government) - right?


except for that pesky agreement that allows russia to station troops in the crimea. up to 25000 of them

does saudi arabia have that agreement with syria??


Station troops - yes.
Use those troops to establish blockades / road blocks / blocking the harbor to prevent Ukrainian naval vessels who refused to commit treason to leave / using Russian aircraft to close down sovereign Ukrainian airspace / surrounding Ukrainian military installations.

The moment Russia involved themselves in that manner, they violated the terms of the treaty. The treaty does not allow them to invade. The treaty allows the solders, as long as they are in the specific bases per the agreement. The 25k soldiers are not bystanders, they are an occupation force.



posted on Mar, 6 2014 @ 08:55 PM
link   

Xcathdra

Echtelion

Xcathdra

saidative
Talk about a chess match. Even with a taped phone conversation, you have to wonder if one was lying, knowing it was getting taped.

I think it's true, though. Seems like our M.O., especially after the Syria thing.


Ironically enough the Russian move would allow Saudi Arabia to invade Syria in an effort to protect the religious majority (the people) that is being oppressed by the religious minority (the government) - right?


No. Because Russia has now secured its only remaining direct port to the Mediterranean, along with an expanded Navy (most of the Ukrainian fleet apparently).

Furthermore, define "allow"... What may be interpreted by an adversary as provocation doesn't mean allowance.


So its ok to invade a sovereign nation and seize their territory because it gives them access to the black sea / warm water port?
Secondly the naval vessels from Ukraine are still Ukrainian since the Crimea "government" has no authority to do what they did.

Russia opened the door and in the process undermined their position in the ME and former republics by forcing nations towards the EU / West / NATO because of the invasion of Ukraine.

If Russia truly believes that crap its spewing, then why is Chechnya still a part of Russia?


For bob's sake, can't you stop parroting CNN and Kerry? There was a putsch in KIev! The Ukrianian government no longer abides by its own democratic laws, and they've even stopped talking about presidential elections to be held. This whole country is forfeit, and taken over by a fascist faction who openly said they want to rid Ukraine of Russians and Jews (Svoboda an Pravy Sektor). That's what they did to the leader of the Communist opposition party, once they took over the parliament...


Will you stop seeing everything one-way (eastwards) and recognize what just happened in this country? There was a COUP. Led by the far right-wing factions, many of whom are violently anti-Russian, antisemites and White supremacists.
edit on 6/3/14 by Echtelion because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2014 @ 08:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Echtelion
 


As opposed to seeing everything from the Russian side?

No really there was not. The Ukrainian government voted to remove the President, which is lawful under Ukrainian law. No matter how many time you try to skew that fact does not make it so.

The actions of the Crimean government are unlawful as under Ukrainian law they cannot ask for outside assistance.
edit on 6-3-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-3-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
32
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join