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: 6
32
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 8 2014 @ 11:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Ok let me help you out...
This is directly from the official website of the Constitution of Ukraine, in regards to the President:



Article 108.
The President of Ukraine shall exercise his powers until the assumption of office by the newly elected President of Ukraine. The authority of the President of Ukraine shall be subject to an early termination in cases of:
1) resignation;
2) inability to exercise presidential authority for health reasons;
3) removal from office by the procedure of impeachment;
4) his/her death.


So there was no impeachment process, and still none on the record yet. In any case, the toppling of the President shoudl have occured as result of the impeachment process, not BEFORE. And the president was neither proven unable (due to health-related issues) to exercise his functions.

You are very disappointing in your trolling, xcathdra.

You keep coming up with shallow, baseless claims, up against members who, like me, actually DO the effort of backing up their claims.

The event of Feb. 22 in Kiev was a putsch.
edit on 8/3/14 by Echtelion because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 8 2014 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 



Eyes Wide Shut. It is written in english:



Article 111. The President of Ukraine may be removed from the office by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine in compliance with a procedure of impeachment if he commits treason or other crime.

The issue of the removal of the President of Ukraine from the office in compliance with a procedure of impeachment shall be initiated by the majority of the constitutional membership of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.

The Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine shall establish a special ad hoc investigating commission, composed of special prosecutor and special investigators to conduct an investigation.

The conclusions and proposals of the ad hoc investigating commission shall be considered at the meeting of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.

On the ground of evidence, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine shall, by at least two-thirds of its constitutional membership, adopt a decision to bring charges against the President of Ukraine.

The decision on the removal of the President of Ukraine from the office in compliance with the procedure of impeachment shall be adopted by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine by at least three-quarters of its constitutional membership upon a review of the case by the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, and receipt of its opinion on the observance of the constitutional procedure of investigation and consideration of the case of impeachment, and upon a receipt of the opinion of the Supreme Court of Ukraine to the effect that the acts, of which the President of Ukraine is accused, contain elements of treason or other crime.



If you listen carefully to the leaked conversation, the foreign minister told the baroness that they (new illegitimate government) do not want any investigation! So where is the EVIDENCE? That is why the Majdan fighters now have the "understanding", not "conjecture" that the people who hire the snipers now sitting in Rada.



posted on Mar, 8 2014 @ 07:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Echtelion
 


Echtelion, thanks for the link!

About the putsch.

February 2. Leaked phone call from Nuland: ‘# the EU’

February 21. Yanukovych, through the mediation of the Foreign Ministers of three European countries – Poland, Germany and France – and in the presence of the Russian Human Rights Commissioner Vladimir Lukin signed an agreement with the opposition.

If the agreement have been kept for a few days, it would be now a legitimate ukrainian government in place.

Maybe this agreement without USA means '# the USA'

The answer from USA:

February 22. The rioters broke the agreement and take over the Rada.

February 26: Leaked phone call from Ashton (...yes, we shot the people, but now back to work and let's sign all papers, Australia is waiting...)



Update: 03-06-14 … The story has of course gone viral. The elitist at the EU have just declined comment, as have the US politicians and the new Ukraine government. They are betting that in a week the dummies won’t remember any of this as their attention span does not last that long. That is the contempt they have for us. So I think it is time for us to get the phone numbers of the EU offices here in the US and say hello to them and let them know what we think of their EU attitude. Bottom line? Both the US and EU Intelligence agencies know exactly who did these murders, so that makes them guilty of withholding the information. But they have immunity…and that is the issue that we are going to have to get onto the table to have any chance of fighting back…the blanket immunity they give themselves. It really is a national security threat to all the rest of us… Jim W. Dean, VT.


Kiev shootings a psyops provocation

I wonder when and about what will tell the next leak...



posted on Mar, 8 2014 @ 07:55 PM
link   
Page 1 of 2

reply to post by Echtelion
 


Let me return the favor - All points made below with regards to the situation comes from Russian News Sources.
Voice of Russia


A presidential impeachment bill was introduced in Ukrainian parliament on Friday evening. The bill was published on parliament’s website, but no details were provided. Soon after the bill's introduction, President Viktor Yanukovich left for Kharkov to attend a summit of south-eastern regions, according to media reports.

The new bill was authored by Nikolay Rudkovskiy, head of the Socialist Party in Ukraine, which is part of the ruling Party of Regions coalition.

Current Ukrainian legislation has an impeachment clause, though it is extremely complex and many argue it is practically impossible to enact.



Ukraine: Yanukovych signs deal on ending crisis, Rada reinstates 2004 Constitution

Ukraine's parliament on Friday voted heavily in favour of returning to the constitution of 2004 under which President Viktor Yanukovich will lose some of his powers. The move also gives lawmakers the right to appoint key ministers. The constitutional change was supported by 386 deputies in the 450-seat Verkhovna Rada.


Reversion back to the 2004 Constitution was voted on and is lawful / in force.

On February 21, 2014 the parliament passed a law that reinstated the December 8, 2004 amendments of the constitution.[16] This was passed under simplified procedure without any decision of the relevant committee and was passed in the first and the second reading in one voting by 386 deputies.[16] The law was approved by 140 MPs of the Party of Regions (President Viktor Yanukovich Party), 89 MPs of Batkivshchyna, 40 MPs of UDAR, 32 of the Communist Party, and 50 independent lawmakers.[16]


2004 Constitution of Ukraine - Articles 108 thru 112


Article 108

The President of Ukraine exercises his or her powers until the assumption of office by the newly elected President of Ukraine.

The powers of the President of Ukraine terminate prior to the expiration of term in cases of:
1.resignation
2.inability to exercise his or her powers for reasons of health;
3.removal from office by the procedure of impeachment;
4.death.




Article 109

The resignation of the President of Ukraine enters into force from the moment he or she personally announces the statement of resignation at a meeting of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.



Article 110

The inability of the President of Ukraine to exercise his or her powers for reasons of health shall be determined at a meeting of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine and confirmed by a decision adopted by the majority of its constitutional composition on the basis of a petition of the Supreme Court of Ukraine – on the appeal of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, and a medical opinion.




Article 111[edit]

The President of Ukraine may be removed from office by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine by the procedure of impeachment, in the event that he or she commits state treason or other crime.

The issue of the removal of the President of Ukraine from office by the procedure of impeachment is initiated by the majority of the constitutional composition of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.

To conduct the investigation, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine establishes a special temporary investigatory commission whose composition includes a special Prosecutor and special investigators.

The conclusions and proposals of the temporary investigatory commission are considered at a meeting of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.

For cause, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, by no less than two-thirds of its constitutional composition, adopts a decision on the accusation of the President of Ukraine.

The decision on the removal of the President of Ukraine from office by the procedure of impeachment is adopted by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine by no less than three-quarters of its constitutional composition, after the review of the case by the Constitutional Court of Ukraine and the receipt of its opinion on the observance of the constitutional procedure of investigation and consideration of the case of impeachment, and the receipt of the opinion of the Supreme Court of Ukraine to the effect that the acts, of which the President of Ukraine is accused, contain elements of state treason or other crime.



Ukraine seeks wanted notice for Yanukovich arrest - Interpol
Ukraine’s prosecutors initiate criminal proceedings against Yanukovych



Ukraine’s Prosecutor General’s Office on Friday initiated criminal proceedings against Ukraine’s ousted President Viktor Yanukovych on charges of seizing state power in 2010, the Office’s press service reports. Prosecutors have classified Yanukovych’s actions as an attempt to change and overthrow constitutional order and seize state power. The Prosecutor General’s Office claims that in 2010 Yanukovych amended Ukraine’s Constitution in an unconstitutional way that allowed him to seize state power. Voice of Russia, TASS




Article 112[edit]

In the event of the pre-term termination of authority of the President of Ukraine in accordance with Articles 108, 109, 110 and 111 of this Constitution, the execution of duties of the President of Ukraine, for the period pending the elections and the assumption of office of the new President of Ukraine, shall be vested in the Chairperson of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. The Chairperson of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, for the period of executing the duties of the President of Ukraine, shall not exercise the powers envisaged by subparagraphs 2, 6-8, 10-13, 22, 24, 25, 27, and 28 of Article 106 of the Constitution of Ukraine.


edit on 8-3-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-3-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-3-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 8 2014 @ 07:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Echtelion
 


Continued - Page 2 of 2
Apparently Russia was not happy with the agreement between the opposition and the former President
Ukraine Agreement Signed By President Viktor Yanukovych And Opposition For Early Election

KIEV, Ukraine (AP) — In a day that could significantly shift Ukraine's political destiny, opposition leaders signed a deal Friday with the country's beleaguered president that calls for early elections, a new constitution and a new unity government.
Russian officials immediately criticized the deal and protesters angry over police violence showed no sign of abandoning their sprawling camp in central Kiev.




If anyone still has doubt about the Ukraine government being lawful -
Yanukovych can't recognize Verkhovna Rada’s impeachment

Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych said he considered the Verkhovna Rada’s impeachment a "performance".
"If the incumbent president does not resign under the Constitution, if he is alive (and I’m alive as you see) and if an impeachment is not declared in parliament, he is president," Yanukovich told a news conference.

"Thus, I cannot recognize the impeachment, which was declared by parliament. I consider it a performance. I will never recognize it," the Ukrainian president said.Yanukovych said he did not recognise and had not recognised the laws that the parliament "approved by violence". "I’ve never signed them. So these laws have not been approved," he said.


He even admits the Parliament took a vote to impeach him. He just refuses to accept the fact he was lawfully removed per Ukrainian law.



Yanukovych impeachment[edit]
On 22 February 2014, during the "Maidan revolution", the Verkhovna Rada voted to impeach the honorary chairman of the party Viktor Yanukovych as President of Ukraine.[97] Out of the 38 PoR deputies present, 36 voted in favour of ousting Yanukovich while 2 did not take part in the vote.[98]

In a written statement the next day, the party denounced Yanukovych, stating they "strongly condemn the criminal orders that led to human victims, an empty state treasury, huge debts, shame before the eyes of the Ukrainian people and the entire world."[99]

On 24 February 2014 faction leader Oleksandr Yefremov declared that the party was moving into the opposition.[100] 77 of its MPs had left the faction over the past few days.[100]

On 25 February 2014 Anatoliy Kinakh and 32 other mostly former PoR deputies created the parliamentary faction Economic Development.[58][101]


He was removed from his party and has lost almost all support from Parliament. 36 members of the Regions Party voted for impeachment. 77 members of the party have since resigned and their support among the people dropped to 38%.


Putin caught in a lie -Putin: Deploying military force is last resort, but we reserve right
* - Yanukovych claims he is trying to protect the national / territorial sovereignty of Ukraine, and based on that he has stated he asked for Russian assistance. If he truly believed that then why was Crimea the only region Russia invaded? Why has Russia not invaded the rest of Ukraine?

* - When asked how he (Putin) sees the future of Crimea, and whether the possibility of it joining Russia is under consideration, Putin answered “No.”

* - Putin stressed that the Ukrainian people had a legitimate reason to protest against Yanukovich’s power, considering the overwhelming corruption and other faults of his presidency.

* - But he objected to the illegitimate way his ouster took place, because it undermined the political stability in the country.

“I strictly object to this form [of transition of power] in Ukraine, and anywhere in the post-Soviet space.
This does not help nurture a relationship with their former republics based on the past of the Soviet Union / Russia. If someone is allowed to act this way, then everyone is allowed to. And this means chaos. That’s the worst thing that can happen to a country with an unstable economy and an unestablished political system,” Putin explained.

* - If Putin thinks this - "Asked if he felt for Yanukovich, Putin said “Oh, no. I have absolutely different feelings.” But he declined to publicly explain what those were. He also refrained from commenting on what mistakes he saw in Yanukovich’s actions, explaining that it would not be proper for him to do so.

At the same time Putin does not see any political future for Yanukovich, which he told the ousted Ukrainian president himself. He added that Russia allowed him to come to its territory for humanitarian reasons, because if he remained in Ukraine he could have been summarily executed. "

Then exactly where is he getting his "legitimate action" routine from?
If the purpose of Russia's invasion of Crimea was at the request of Yanukovich, and Putin says he has no political future, then why did he send troops in? Why did he send them only into Crimea.

Putin makes no qualms about his feeling for the Ukrainian government, claiming they are not lawful / legitimate. instead of returning Yanukovich to power and restoring "stability in Ukraine", he invades the Crimea and then annexes it.

Apparently Putin's strategy had little to do with the situation in Ukraine and more about invading Crimea and annexing it.

I look for the former president of Ukraine to be taken out of the picture by Russia so as not to upset their plans for Crimea. Russia media did report he was in the hospital from a heart attack. I wonder if he will survive it.
edit on 8-3-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2014 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Oh yes... that "impeachment". Reached through the bypassing of democratic process, since only 36 out of 134 deputees from the Party of Regions voted.. Was there any inquiry or validation of the charges against Yanukovitch?

And one would say "well, they just had to show up!". But the parliament was guarded by Pravy Sektor, and that was the day after an agreement was signed between both opposing parties, that YANUKOVITCH WAS TO STAY IN POWER UNTIL THE MAY ELECTIONS. That is why Yanukovitch, Lavrov and Putin denied the validity of the Feb 22 vote, because it was illegal, a violation of agreement through an attempt to use coertion and fasttrack a vote without (most of) the leading party's say.

So yes, use of force, intimidation, deception, violation of agreement and sudden, unprecented vote by an assembly consisting MOSTLY of Svoboda and Fatherland Party still means a putsch. It has nothing to do with due process. Your reply makes somewhat of an addition, but not much.

Moreover, just because the ruling party has filed a notice to Interpol on Yanukovitch means nothing. It's not within Interpol's mandate to deal with notices related to politics, even less elected State leaders, but only to criminal cases. There's been one or two recent cases of politically-charged notices and Interpol was heavily criticized for carrying them out and the organization was forced to back off. Moreover if Interpol would be stupid enough to go by this notice, they would lose some major participating members, including Russia.
edit on 9/3/14 by Echtelion because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2014 @ 04:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Mission accomplished.

No one talks about the leaked call.

Most of you are native english speakers.

Should I write down the whole conversation which is filled with delicacies of democracy and acquiescence of the PUTCH?

Congratulations, Xcathdra!



posted on Mar, 9 2014 @ 11:52 PM
link   
reply to post by maghun
 


Or you could read the release from Estonia about the incident, ALL OF IT, instead of just the parts you and others are using as propaganda to support a claim that is not supported by the facts.




posted on Mar, 9 2014 @ 11:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Echtelion
 


As I stated, when presented with facts you do anything except take them on.

Interpol is used when it comes to international arrest warrants and the issuance of Red notices. Russian is a member of Interpol as well.

As for their authority, they issue the notice and provide information to the countries who come across him. But thank you for letting me know what they can and cannot do. It was a nice attempt to shift focus to Interpol and away from your inability to support your position, and Putins, when it comes to Ukraine.

I find it funny you invoke the constitution when it suits you yet you toss it when it doesn't.

Let me give you an example - You claim the government in Kiev is invalid and that is based on the Ukrainian constitution.
Yet the same Ukrainian constitution states the Ukrainian federal government is solely responsible when it comes to foreign treaties and the territory of Ukraine.

Something you conveniently ignore when defending the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Playing both sides of the street will eventually result in being hit by traffic from both directions.



posted on Mar, 10 2014 @ 12:01 AM
link   

Xcathdra
reply to post by maghun
 


Or you could read the release from Estonia about the incident, ALL OF IT, instead of just the parts you and others are using as propaganda to support a claim that is not supported by the facts.




As far as a "putsch" goes I find it hilariously hypocritical to invoke that term when you are supporting the coup in Crimea.

As I told the others, you don't get to use the Ukrainian Constitution in one argument while ignoring it when it comes to Crimea.



posted on Mar, 10 2014 @ 09:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 





According to Scott Gordon, a political organization is constitutional to the extent that it "contain[s] institutionalized mechanisms of power control for the protection of the interests and liberties of the citizenry, including those that may be in the minority."[8]


Do you remember the first steps of "new" government according to language usage?

Can you please show me on this picture below, in what phase is the Ukrainian Democracy now?



Some thousand rioters with the new, but very well organized paramilitary Righ Sector and proven USAID money take over the parlament with foreign support. Why isn't the first step of "new government" to ask people to wote about the future? I hope you read in Estonian official standpoint about the democratic advice to hold elections first, because I only hear in leaked phone call talking about "telling the people that they are only activists and not politicians, let them sign contracts and after two month's they can vote about" anything...

The putschists executed the Constitution, but it is valid in case of Crimea?

And please think twice before you argue again that any "Parlament" surrounded by rioters in masks with Molotov's and firearms constitute a legal impeachment.



posted on Mar, 10 2014 @ 02:12 PM
link   
reply to post by khimbar
 


I have stumbled across this footage. To me, it clearly shows a man get hit in the leg (obviously from behind) at about 0:28. THIS FOOTAGE IS VERY GRAPHIC. Watch this ONLY if you need more proof that protesters were being shot from behind them. Otherwise, save your psyche and brush over it. Disturbing to say the least.




posted on Mar, 10 2014 @ 02:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Sparkymedic
 


How are you coming to that conclusion and as for obvious, its not.

One other question for anyone.

Why is it impossible to think that a government sniper could not make their way behind the protestors?
edit on 10-3-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2014 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Why would they do that? Any logical reason to sneak around the protesters just to snipe them when they could snipe from where they are, why risk getting caught in the middle of the protesters sniping at them? Must have a death wish, Doesn't make sense.
edit on 10-3-2014 by sosobad because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2014 @ 02:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


I didn't say who was shooting from behind, just that they were being shot from behind. Please do go about explaining another theory of where that bullet came from that hit the man basically in his ass. Clearly it could have been one of the two sides, or contractors. Who the hell knows?!? Obviously investigations need to be done, which aren't being done. I call SHENANIGANS! Both side are at fault on MANY levels.



posted on Mar, 10 2014 @ 04:56 PM
link   

sosobad
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Why would they do that? Any logical reason to sneak around the protesters just to snipe them when they could snipe from where they are, why risk getting caught in the middle of the protesters sniping at them? Must have a death wish, Doesn't make sense.
edit on 10-3-2014 by sosobad because: (no reason given)


For the same reason the military, when engaged in conflict, will look for ways to penetrate enemy lines in order to gain access to the rear areas, which are generally not well defended.

It also allows the element of surprise.



posted on Mar, 10 2014 @ 05:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Your excuses are starting to get pathetic now, it really shows that you do have some kind of agenda when the evidence points to the obvious and you jump to the ludicrous.



posted on Mar, 10 2014 @ 05:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Sparkymedic
 




Colourful language

Ashton sounds taken aback by his remarks: "I think we do want to investigate. I mean I didn't know. I didn't pick that up. Gosh."


Kiev was occupied by democracy, the result 100+ death (Somebody saw official statements in last two weeks about the casualties?).

Crimea was "invaded" by Russia, no casualties. There were two victims of one local tatar - local russian clash (one heart attack, the other crushed in the crowd),after that the inhabitants of the Russian military base start "wandering" on the peninsula and some warning shots were fired, some ships were "wrecked", some ukrainian officers "switched".



Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on Saturday called for an OSCE investigation into who was behind the deaths of dozens of people in Kiev during February in attacks by snipers, saying the truth could no longer be "covered up".


The OSCE (Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe) try to enter Crimea multiple times to investigate the "invasion", but not interested in the "democratic murder" of one hundred in Kiev. Interesting indeed...

Russia wants probe into Kiev sniper 'cover-up'



posted on Mar, 10 2014 @ 06:17 PM
link   

sosobad
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Your excuses are starting to get pathetic now, it really shows that you do have some kind of agenda when the evidence points to the obvious and you jump to the ludicrous.


And when you cant attack the facts you attack the poster.

Accusing me of having an agenda when you are running one yourself is laughable.



posted on Mar, 10 2014 @ 06:29 PM
link   

Danbones
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


if there are idf there
it is no accident..
just like the sectarian violence they are creating in iraq

paying agent provocateurs is standard practice
thats where the several billion dollars the us spent

brothers...phhhhhfffft
this is just an oligarch's welcome to palistein


Yeah. I was thinking last night. Palestine needs a referendum.

Except...who will count the votes.

You are spot on with the analogy.

You see fertile soil, unfracked plates and unspoiled water, in a temperate climate, with oceanside, and no technofascist R and D.
We see a fat tanker of gas, with another chance for a zionist police state.

What took them so long?

If you take care of the seed, you take care of the political contenders.
Let them know they aren't welcome here.

This is possibly why kings even exist, in history. A goalie to guard the gates against the democratic sieges of deception

because, guess who always holds the bullhorn?

Can you believe they tried to disarm the US?

It's like watching a cycle of predictable doom.

# 200


edit on 10-3-2014 by TheWhiteKnight because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
32
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join