manages to register continuing distress (surprisingly hard to do on the page)

Odessa Khatyn. A year later
Colonel Cassad, May 2 2015


One year has passed from the Odessa Khatyn. That day the morning rattled the second assault of Slavyansk, junta troops started moving toward the city, from the Karachun flew flares and rattled the small battle, the city fell down a militia helicopter. The fighting continued all day, their scale has increased, this has not seen since the war began. But by evening, military reports suddenly wedged Odessa, where he started to get scary, surreal footage of the burned alive and tortured to death people who have opened a new page in the civil war in Ukraine. Despite the fact that by May 2 2014 the victims of this war were many, the murders, the largest since the killings in Kiev, was out of general number, not only the number of victims, but also a new level of cruelty, which even then seemed something impossible. Now, when we’ve seen enough of those killed by the Nazis of women and children, destroyed cities and the terrible traces of fighting, the shrillness of the Odessa tragedy a few dim. We are used to where you cannot get used.

But then, May 2 2014 Odessa caused widespread shock the public conscience, which the war on Ukraine was divided into before and after the Odessa Khatyn. For many, Odessa has become a point of no return, after which to talk about a unified Ukraine federalization, reconciliation and coexistence was impossible. It was after the Odessa Khatyn, the term fascism as applied to the Kiev junta has found the inner content, as people finally saw the familiar only from the books the face of fascism came to power and engaged in open terror. Event 2 Odessa purposefully prepared and was not something accidental. On the background of the war in the Donbass, the junta was very important to pacify Odessa, where he continued in the open and there was even a local analogue of the constant “Maidan” near the house of trade Unions. By that time it was smashed open resistance in Kharkov and Zaporozhye, which was choking the forces brought gangs “self-defense Maidan”, who took the side of the junta militia and foreign mercenaries. Odessa were next on the list. It was supposed to be followed Mariupol.

The main objective of the junta was as hard to suppress overt resistance in Odessa and in fact to establish its authority in the city, which until that moment had not been fully effective due to the fluctuations of local officials and police. Since its forces, the junta was not enough, in addition to loyal junta police officers in the city were imported football ultras and the militants of the “self”. Among the famous training providers the incident of the bloody events were Kolomoisky and Parubiy. The local police chief Fuchedzhi and the local Governor (later replaced by protege Kolomoisky Mace), know about what should happen in advance and cleared the area. The police and a number of municipal services knowing that the city will clash and blood will be shed, in fact, being resolved to imported fighters could easily make his case. Later, responsibility for the Odessa Khatyn was trying to put the blame on people like Fuchedzhi that were just complicit, but not the organizers of the massacre occurred and are gotten rid of (Fuchedzhi fled in Transnistria), when the need for them has disappeared.

As subsequent events showed, the forces were very unequal. Local antimaidan (despite internal contradictions) has exceeded the number of local righties and Bandera, but at the expense of brought in reinforcements from Central Ukraine, the enemy gained an advantage, and which have used. During armed clashes in the city, which happened almost at the connivance of the police, especially in its leadership, the advantage of the enemy in numbers, organization quickly began to take its toll and by the evening of may 2, clashes began to develop in adverse antimaidan direction. Under the pressure of superior enemy forces, some activists began to retreat to the camp near the trade Union house, which actually happened Odessa Khatyn. Some people vaguely knew what was happening, something bad, and immediately left the camp, which was the purpose of advancing Bandera. But not everyone left, some people stayed behind to protect the camp or in any case to find shelter in the House of trade Unions, believing that it still fights the times of the buttings of antimaidan, and not a civil war, where enemies kill you. Forces by this time were clearly unequal, so camp near the trade Union House was burned in a matter of minutes, which is good training system shows exactly this scenario. Then began the most terrible. People who tried to escape the building, there was already waiting on the upper floors because of what the shelter has turned into a trap. In already torched the building, began to break the Nazis and kill fleeing people, those who tried to jump out of Windows, were beaten and killed on the street without hesitating of television cameras captured the events. Screams kill people echoed over the square. It occurred in the country, which boasted that it is “European”.

All this occurred against the background of the inaction of the police and firefighters who appeared on the scene exactly when the fear has passed. It was around this time the network got the first eerie footage of what happened inside the House of trade Unions, severely burned bodies of people who took a terrible death, traces of blood on the walls and those smeared fingerprints on the glass which has become a symbol of the Odessa Khatyn. Those who saw it, could not believe that this is happening. It seemed to many that the allegations of fascism in Ukraine is a myth, propaganda phantom. But the scales fell from my eyes. On the background of the incident, even repulsed the assault of Slavyansk somewhat faded. Burned people alive, strangled the woman and the triumph of the mad blood Bandera posing for a picture with corpses and happily reporting on TV that “it’s done” in the background cheering biomass. Of course, any government investigation of mass murder can not speak, as the investigation actually did those who organized murder. Europe in the framework of the traditional double standards these murders is also ignored. In Ukraine it was announced that “people burned themselves.” Later on the same logic will be shelling cities of Donbass “terrorists are shelling themselves.” Undisguised cynicism has become the norm, “crispy Colorados” became an occasion for jokes “new Europeans” who rode happily around the fire, which burned their country. What began as protests against the refusal of signing a meaningless piece of paper, all resulted in the mass murder of their own citizens, the country was plunged into collective madness twisted the world of fascism.

For me the incident was not in itself a surprise, for me, the genesis of the situation became apparent shortly before the coup, but with the way it happened, accept that it was impossible and for me personally, Odessa Khatyn was another very strong argument in favour of the fact that the current regime in Kiev will have to be replaced because it will be even worse. And actually not feeling cheated, then it was even worse, although it would seem too much. I then wrote that on May 2 in Odessa burned in the first place not the citizens of Odessa, as Ukraine itself under the joyful laughter of the inhumans. So in fact occurred. After Odessa, despite a year of negotiations and ceasefires, three have already fallen off from Ukraine the field and don’t think to go back and burned people in Odessa turned thousands of coffins from Donbass, where among the dead “defenders of a United Ukraine” we just saw a terrible scorched bodies that looked like payback for Odessa. But the main perpetrators are still in power and for them the retribution has not yet come.

Odessa itself was intimidated and now actually lives in the regime of internal occupation. Repeated arrests interspersed with forays underground, continued in the past year. Those who thought that if then we can sit back and what is happening does not concern them, began to catch up with the harsh reality – the standard of living began to fall, with Donbass stretched string of coffins, ataskaita started coming agenda, where they were prepared for the role of cannon fodder, their friends and acquaintances could arrest on suspicion of disloyalty. Trying to be outside of politics, people have reaped the full fruits of this “apolitical.” Trying to escape from war, people completely fully “enjoyed” its effects, even though it was in their power to prevent her active citizenship. The atomization of society and consumer consciousness in the end created a sufficient ground for fascism triumphed and was able to proceed to open terror. People just do not understand that the costs of the protests in the spring of 2014 will be much less than the price that Ukraine will pay for your stay junta in power. This price is already tens of thousands of lives. And as shown last year this price will be terrible. Awareness of this will come sooner or later but victims of the Ukrainian tragedy it has not come back, not back already and the lives of those who laid down their lives in the crucible of the Odessa Khatyn.

Maybe I would arouse in you hatred. But this is not what we need right now. We need a clear understanding of the crime of fascism and how to fight it. We must understand that these murders are only the gestures of a thug, a dangerous bandit: fascism. And to subdue the bandit is only one way: soundly beating him. – Hemingway


Artem Grishanov – 2 may.

Died in Odessa on may 2.

A Commemoration meeting in Yekaterinburg

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

all futile cos obama’s veto

Rubio: Nuclear Deal Will Result in Iran Bombing Pindosi Cities
Kurt Nimmo, Infowars, May 1 2015

Florida Senator Marco Rubio has followed up Senator Tom Cotton’s Iran baiting with a warning: the current deal with Iran on its nuclear program will result in war. Rubio said the current deal will prompt Israel to attack Iran. He told the National Review Institute Ideas Summit:

I would argue that a bad deal almost guarantees war, because Israel is not going to abide by any deal that they believe puts them and their existence in danger.

Rubio, who recently announced a bid for the presidency, said Iran will “exploit any loophole in a deal that it can find” and use the arrangement to attack the West. He told conservative scholars and donors attending the summit:

We’ll blow up a bomb in one of their cities. We’ll blow up their embassies in Latin America. We’ll kill Pindosis. We’re going to punish them — a stronger Iran.

Earlier this week Tom Cotton tweeted a challenge to Iran’s foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif. Cotton said he wants to debate “Iran’s record of tyranny, treachery and terror.” Zarif tweeted in reply on Thursday:

Serious diplomacy, not macho personal smear, is what we need.

He congratulated the Arkansas senator on the birth of a new son. On Apr 9, Cotton said he favors a military strike on Iran. Cotton told USA Today:

The Pindosi military has amazing capabilities.

Cotton, who participated in the occupation of Iraq as an Army platoon leader, said an attack on Iran might resemble Operation Desert Fox, the Dec 15-22, 1998 bombing raid on Iraq by Clinton 42. Numbers vary, but it is estimated between 600 and 2,000 civilians were killed during Clinton 42’s raid.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

we have to expect the pindosis to go full steam ahead with a japanese fascist revival, now

Media in Japan under growing pressure to toe the line
Julian Ryall, Deutsche Welle, Apt 30 2015

Shigeaki Koga was on the fast-track to important roles at MITI (the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry) when he deliberately stepped out of line. Fiercely critical of the government’s handling of the aftermath of the nuclear disaster in Mar 2011 at Fukushima, the final straw came when he was sidelined for making radical proposals to reform personnel policies in the ministry. Disgusted, he resigned and became a commentator on news programs. But the administration of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe still had him in its sights. In February, in an exchange on live television with the anchor of the Hodo Station program on TV Asahi, Koga insisted that he was being forced out of the company because of pressure on the broadcaster from the government. Officials have waved away Koga’s claims as fanciful and they deny the government is making any effort to muzzle the media. But Koga, and an increasing number of members of the media, disagree. And the evidence is piling up, they say, pointing to the ruling Liberal Democratic Party’s Research Commission on Info-Communications Strategy summoning officials from two broadcasters, NHK and TV Asahi, for a dressing down on their news coverage. Chie Matsumoto, a freelance journalist who was previously a correspondent for Asahi Shimbun, told DW:

For a lot of people, the appointment of Katsuto Momii as chairman of NHK was a major turning point for the media here. In his very first press conference, Momii said that NHK was not going to report anything that went against the government’s position.

Hand-picked by Abe to head Japan’s national broadcaster in Jan 2014, Momii is similar to the prime minister in his political attitudes and made no attempt to hide them. That effectively makes the broadcaster a mouthpiece of the government and destroys the notion of a free and fair media, critics say. Koga agrees, and says the pressure on the media is becoming more brazen. He said:

I believe very strongly that Japan has a fairly high degree of freedom of expression and freedom of the press. Having said that, I am concerned about what might happen in the future and it is even possible that a dictatorship, or something approaching a dictatorship, could emerge in Japan in the future.

Koga fears that the first step on that road is for the government to cultivate close working relationships with the media, which they have assiduously done since Abe was elected in Dec 2012. And increasingly, the media is becoming complicit, he said:

On the one hand, they can apply pressure, which could be in the form of a threat to take away a broadcaster’s license, and on the other they can offer rewards if a media company is cooperative. One thing I have seen in recent months that causes me great anxiety is top executives at very large media companies coming very close on a personal basis to members of the government. They seem to be cozying up to the people in power. Some of these executives now have close ties with members of the government and feel very proud of themselves. They feel as if they are at the heart of power. This will inevitably influence the way in which their reporters and producers cover the key issues of the day, encouraging them to pull their punches on stories that could upset the government. Unfortunately, we are not seeing the media fight back. We are basically seeing the media trying to accommodate the pressures and the system of rewards that are being directed their way. And a public that lacks information is not equipped to make informed decisions when elections come around. The government cannot apply direct pressure to the public, but if the public is not given access to a great deal of information by the media, which is exercising self-restraint, then eventually the information that the public does receive will be the information that is convenient for the people that are in power. Without even knowing it, the people are going to be brainwashed. And that is when the shadow of a dictator will again hang over Japan.

Apparently encouraged by the degree of influence it now has over the domestic press, the Abe administration is apparently attempting to exert similar pressure over foreign reporters. Carsten Germis, the Tokyo correspondent for Germany’s Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, arrived in Japan in Jan 2010 and claims that the current administration refuses to speak with the foreign media because they ask awkward questions about nuclear energy, the risks associated with Abe’s economic reforms, revision of the constitution and depopulation. In an article for the magazine of the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of Japan, Germis said his editor in Germany received a visit from the Japanese consul general to Frankfurt, who “passed on objections from Tokyo” after the paper ran one of his stories about Abe’s attempts to revise Japan’s history. The consul general also accused Germis of accepting money from China for writing the story and frequently submitting pro-Chinese propaganda. Germis is furious at the allegation, as is the paper. To further elevate their anger, the Japanese Foreign Ministry has claimed that the meeting between the counsel general and the editor of the paper never took place.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

as for me, i just offer a figure based on simple arithmetical extrapolation from what vanunu told us

According to Vanunu, Dimona has been making 30 kg/yr of plutonium since 1965, and they use 4 kg per warhead. Given those two facts, they should have about 375 warheads now – RB

WaPo Columnist Cherry-Picks Estimates on Israel Nukes
Alison Weir, Counterpunch, May 1 2015

WaPo “Fact Checker” columnist Glenn Kessler chastizes Iran’s Foreign Minister for saying that Israel has 400 nuclear weapons. Specifically, Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said:

It’s laughable that Netanyahu has become everybody’s non-proliferation guru. He is sitting on 400 nuclear warheads, nuclear warheads that have been acquired in violation of the NPT.

In an otherwise valuable article, Kessler uses omission to make the claim of 400 nuclear weapons sound unwarranted, concluding:

… his figure is more than double the median for the most recent estimate, and five times higher than another credible estimate. Zarif could make his political point without inflating the numbers. He earns Two Pinocchios.

However, it appears that perhaps the Pinocchios should actually go to Kessler himself for omitting reports on the subject that didn’t fit his own views, thus skewing the numbers. For instance, A 2009 study by CSIS stated that an Israeli “stockpile of up to 300-400 weapons is possible.” A report by Col. Warren Farr from the USAF Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies stated that in 1997 Israel had “400 deliverable thermonuclear and nuclear weapons.” An Israeli analyst wrote in 2012 that Israel has 100-400 nuclear warheads. In a 2012 Time Magazine interview, former Jimmy Carter placed the number at “around 300” nuclear weapons. The Israel Country Study Guide, Volume 1 Strategic Information and Developments, states:

Israel nuclear might is commonly estimated as moving between 200 to 400 nuclear warheads.

The British CND reports on its website:

Israel is thought to have between 100 and 400 nuclear weapons.

And Middle East expert Juan Cole wrote in 2012:

Israel is thought to have 400 atom bombs.

I could go on and on. Given this expanded context, Zarif’s claim no longer looks as outlandish as Kessler makes it out to be. In fact, many others say the same thing. Two Pinocchios for Glenn Kessler.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

interesting look back at the airport

Donetsk. New airport terminal.
Andrey Filatov, YouTube, Apr 28 2015

Today with the commander of division Sparta, I arrived at the new terminal of Donetsk airport, or rather what’s left of it. A huge number of stories came out about the events that took place here. The probability is that I will reiterate what you already know, but I’m curious to see the scene of the events and understand what the militia and the Ukrainian military faced within these walls. The airport was built recently and, like any modern building, is a reinforced concrete monolith with numerous internal partitions. The main load-bearing structure of reinforced concrete columns bears the load of the building. To some extent, that building looks like the majority of Syrian buildings. The vast majority of the buildings in Syria are built on the same principle. The destruction of the building speaks for itself about what tense battles occurred here. The interior walls on the second floor are almost gone. Previously, there were many offices and storerooms of the airport. Now, there is only supporting columns and piles of debris from the former overlaps. It is possible that here in the rubble lie the remains of the bodies of Ukrainian soldiers.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

drivel about peacekeepers (this being a typical jewish-type red herring)

Ukrainian media traditionally masks the facts
Galina Akimova, Truth from Ukraine, May 1 2015

It is widely spreading the news in regard to phone talks of the Normandy Four under the heading “Putin agreed to deployment of peacekeepers in Donbass.” This is just another fake: no one spoke about the peacekeepers; the OSCE is to demilitarize Shyrokino, that is all. The lie was needed to mask another news, concerning Ukraine’s final agreement after long-term obstinate opposition to formation of groups in the issue of peaceful settlement of the Donbass conflict within the framework of the Minsk Agreement. Each group will be headed by a representative of the OSCE: the Security Group by Head of the OSCE Monitoring Group in Ukraine Ertuğrul Apakan, the Political one by former EU representative in the Caucasus conflict settlement Pierre Morel, the Economic one by the ex-Head of the EBRD Thomas Mirow, the Humanitarian Group by the Minsk Talks participant Heidi Tagliavini. With representation so distinguished, Ukraine will find it hard to evade negotiations with the separatists. It will have to cease digging in heels and make direct contact, not in combat but in diplomatic sphere.

Again about Peacekeepers
Colonel Cassad, May 1 2015

Yesterday with the filing of the Ukrainian media spread the “news” that Russia allegedly agreed to the entry of peacekeepers in the Donbass. Today, as usual it turned out that in the Ukrainian media all lied and no one agreed, but the peacekeepers were just discussing. Hysteria was such that the Kremlin often ignoring such a surge, feel the need to refute this pounce through Peskov: link. Once again I quote my post from a month ago on the topic:

  1. Russia will not accept the presence of NATO peacekeepers, as it would mean actually creeping surrender to the transfer of control of the region, the owners of the junta.
  2. Kiev and Pindostan will not agree to the Russian peacemakers or peacekeepers from countries of the CSTO, as it essentially legalizes “Voentorg”.
  3. Since the idea with peacekeepers in contravention of the agreements of Feb 12, in the framework of the current round of “truce” its realization is impossible by virtue of public statements of all parties that they seek to fulfill the Minsk agreements.
  4. Any peacekeepers (except Russian) will mean a gradual transfer of control over the border between LDNR and the Russian Federation to the control of the peacekeepers, and then the junta. That would mean actual delivery of the LDNR to the junta. The border issue, as was clear in the summer of 2014, here is one of the most fundamental, and therefore Pindostan and the junta constantly require Russia to abandon control over its border with the LDNR.

PS. Therefore, the theme of the peacekeepers may indefinitely be exaggerated, as the subject of a speedy handover of the border between the people’s republics and the Russian Federation under the control of the junta, in practice no steps in this direction will occur. Overall, considering who initiated injecting the threads about peacekeepers and who constantly brings up, Eliseev, Ukraine rep to the UN, said:

Some say about the UN, but I, as someone with experience in this organization, insist: it is an illusion to think that the UN will give approval for placement of its forces in Ukraine. Of course, this would be an ideal option, but unfortunately, for obvious reasons, the UNSC today will not give this mandate.

Guess at times who will veto a resolution in the UNSC. Russia, this subject is hardly any favorable, so as before I believe that all this fuss with peacekeeping contingent will remain on the level of information of camouflage.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

kravchuk, lyovochkin, bogoslovskaya, boyko, pizek (raiffeisen) and klitschko – how many of these guys are jewish?

Questioning Firtash in Vienna. Transcript
Ekaterina Terekhova,, Apr 30 2015

Today in Vienna, Austria, held court on the extradition of the owner of the assets of energy, chemical and titanium industries in Central and Eastern Europe of Dmytro Firtash. The FBI is conducting an investigation against Dmitry Firtash since 2006. It comes to possible bribes to Indian officials for a permit for the extraction of titanium in Andhra Pradesh. According to the agreement with the Indian state-owned company, the company Firtash pledged to invest in the development of deposits of up to $20m and build a mining and processing plant. The annual income from the sale of ore, as indicated in the materials of the criminal case in Pindostan, was projected at $500m. According to Pindosis, the deal was made possible by bribing the Prime Minister of Andhra Pradesh, Rajasekhara Reddy. In 2014 the party of Reddy, who died in 2009, lost the election to the Parliament of the state. In the autumn of last year, the new state government terminated an agreement with the company Firtash.

Q: With regard to suspicion, had there been something you have been charged regarding bribes?
A: To give a bribe, it is necessary to have some benefit from this, and we any benefits not received. Benefited the state.
Q: A bribe, even if it does not lead to the desired result.
A: But we have not slapped.
Q: I have no record of the interrogation of witnesses, but supposedly there are two witnesses who claim it.
A: We know that all these witnesses were allegedly arrested in Pindostan and all of them were left. They were threatened. They told the witness: you are now in the hands of good guys, we need this fish, you must give the correct readings.
Q: I’ve heard it all from your lawyers. In 2006 started the gas crisis, what is your relationship with him?
A: This year was the end of the contract “Naftogaz” to “Gazprom”. Then Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko was. Gazprom suspended gas supplies, but then suffered also the company “RosUkrEnergo”, because we delivered gas to Europe. It was necessary to find a solution, there was an understanding that the Ukrainian and the Russian side does not come to a consensus. And then we have offered Ukraine a price that had put her in, I signed the contract and began to supply fuel. For me at that time it was business. If we see the statement on Jan 4, Condoleezza Rice, where she says that this is a geopolitical issue, and it was for me, the first signal that this will onvolbe Pindostan.
Q: What problem was on the Pindosi side, with this your business?
A: Pindostan believed that the gas is geopolitics that I represent the interests of Russia, and they wanted to keep me out of this business.
Q: If you know this business, they’d make a deal with someone else.
A: Because I don’t represent the interests of Tymoshenko. Pindostan was not satisfied with this situation.
Q: What is the problem between you and Tymoshenko?
A: We have a different vision of the situation in the country. My understanding is that Ukraine should be independent, it needs to have equally good relations with both the EU and Russia. Otherwise, we will fail. As for Tymoshenko was important Premiership and presidency. Here are our differences. When Tymoshenko became Prime Minister, they are with the Pindosi government has set a clear goal: to remove me from the market. And Tymoshenko have achieved this, in Jan 2009 RosUkrEnergo out of the Ukrainian market. But it is important to consider that our gas cost was $195/mcm, and when the contract was signed Tymoshenko, the gas price for Ukraine has soared to $450. Here’s to you and geopolitics. In 2009, the Pindosi government supported Tymoshenko, and I supported the presidential candidate Yanukovych.
Q: How you supported him?
A: Pindostan regarded Yanukovych as a Pro-Russian candidate, and this is further worsened my relations with Washington. Then I had a conversation with Tymoshenko, she said, “Go on, stay with Yanukovych and we’ll take care of all the process.”
Q: You were a politician?
A: No, but to my opinion to be heard. Moreover, we have a media group, which includes nine channels, I have the largest TV business.
Q: I repeat the question: how are you supported Yanukovych?
A: I travelled around the country, I personally campaigned people, communicated with the trade unions on the subject of support for Yanukovych.
Q: Did you finance it?
A: No. Then, when Yanukovych won in 2010, we began to light the differences. And in 2012 I became clear that Yanukovych will not have to carry out reforms. And then I realized that the country needs a strong candidate who will run for elections and win them. And in the meanwhile I found a Klitschko. He is very famous person in the country and the world, young, athlete. He has achieved a lot in sports and I was sure that he would be able to achieve this and in politics. And when Klitschko made a political force of his party Blow, I supported him financially. Then, in 2013, the conflict between Russia and Pindostan was already obvious. I realized begins the fight begins the tug of war. Pindostan understands that I have my own position regarding the fate of Ukraine and it does not coincide with their position. In Aug 2013, the serious conflict begins: trading. I am persuaded that it is necessary to make peace, because Russia for us is a huge market. And then the Pindosi government created a case against me and tried to blackmail thus Yanukovych. Then took place the meeting of Yanukovych with Putin. At the same against me pressing charges Pindosis. Comes European Commission to persuade Yanukovych to sign the agreement about the Association. Then Nuland arrives and says: 1. Sign Association with EU. 2. Release Tymoshenko for treatment abroad. 3. Give Kharkiv field to Chevron. And Yanukovich promises to Nuland. And you remember, they finish a meeting with me in an hour drop the charges.
Q: It wasn’t an hour. How do you affect what you did, what did Yanukovych?
A: I was Chairman of the Federation of Employers. I have met with Yanukovych and the Prime Minister. And the Pindosi side knew it.
Q: What you advised Yanukovych, and when Yanukovych has put the choice of Russia or Europe?
A: I didn’t mind that Ukraine signed the Association agreement with Europe, but spoke to the negotiating table sat and Russia. Here, even today, look at this situation: Ukraine has signed the Association Agreement, but it is not working and Ukraine again went to talk with Russia.
Q: Do you think a realistic look at the issue, could be resolved this question, if the talks opened Ukraine, the EU and Russia?
Q: We have industry, we have a deficit budget and a lot of problems. And Europe also suffers from this, and sanctions against Russia are not helping.
A: You advised Yanukovych not to sign the agreement in the form in which it was? as I understand it, you then turned away from Klitschko.
Q: On the one hand, I supported Klitschko and Klitschko engaged, on the other hand, I as Chairman of the Employers did everything that everything worked.
Q: I ask you: how are you supported Yanukovych as the President, or as a businessman?
A: As Chairman, and I was a representative of the Tripartite Council.
Q: In 2013 an agreement was signed with Shell, what is the situation?
A: Yanukovych travels to Vilnius and expands the Association agreement. Begins Maidan, Russia at this time begins to act on its part. That is why Yanukovych and Putin begin to meet frequently. In parallel, Pindostan does not want to miss its chance, and then begins the real struggle for Ukraine.
Q: Your position at the time of the flight of Yanukovych, what were you doing before you behaved?
A: There was a work on the Maidan. I was in Kiev, but when the delegation arrived (foreign Ministers of Germany, France and Poland, Feb 20), I flew to Paris. I was there meeting. At this time, in the Parliament held a vote to deprive Yanukovych of authority, or more precisely, to grant more rights to Parliament. But the opposition was not of the votes in Parliament, and in Paris, I held meetings, including with representatives of the Party of Regions.
Q: Party of Regions, whose party this is?
A: There were different deputies. And then I got a call deputies from Ukraine and said that there is a problem that urgently needs to come. Near me were friends, they began to persuade me not to fly, that it was dangerous, that Yanukovych will I go to jail. But I arrived at 3 or 4 pm and went out of the city. There Tigipko, other MPs from the Party of Regions, and Tigipko told me what happened that day when I was out in the country. What the opposition is weak, they don’t know what they want, they are not collected. And dangerous, now that the European Foreign Ministers can go. And then I called Klitschko, said acne, gather Yatsenyuk and Tyahnybok’s freedom, it is impossible that the foreign Ministers left. Klitschko said: good. Then came to me tonight and we talked in detail. I then dialed Klyuyev said that I need to organize a meeting of foreign Ministers of the three countries, opposition and Tigipko.
Q: Can you answer more succinctly, it doesn’t matter, I want to know how strong was your influence?
A: In fact, we have developed a plan, wrote a paper for signature Yanukovych. We met with him three or four hours that night, and it was a decision without blood and without upheaval. Yanukovych on all agreed (agreement between Yanukovych and the opposition, Feb 21).
Q: But why at that time, Pindosis believed that they needed to arrest you?
A: No, not at that time.
Q: Why Yanukovych fled?
A: You must ask Yanukovych that. In this scenario, I did not take into account the interests of Tymoshenko.
Q: In what respect?
A: Signed by all according to the plan, Yanukovych conveyed by the government next year. There would be elections, but Tymoshenko would be unable to attend because she would be in prison.
Q: What was Tymoshenko’s party? It was the opposition?
A: Yes, it was headed by Yatsenyuk. And when I woke up in the morning, we saw that the opposition went to the Maidan and announced what they had made and read the Memorandum, which they signed with Yanukovych, the guarantor of which were foreign Ministers of European countries. And then the Maidan didn’t support them. And I think that it was a provocation on the part of people of Yulia Vladimirovna (Tymoshenko), because she knew that she wouldn’t get anywhere. And then the opposition have sold the interests of the Maidan. Further, Yanukovych fled. Then the Pindosi government clearly knew how to move. they understood that I will support Klitschko, and they supported force, where Tymoshenko, Yatsenyuk and Turchynov. Then the Pindosi government and their local representatives, Yatsenyuk and Tymoshenko, was the purpose to take me out of the Ukraine so that they win. And then I get arrested.
Q: You met in Vienna with Poroshenko and Klitschko?
A: Yes. Further, Yatsenyuk as the Prime Minister, Turchynov speaker, and their goal, Tymoshenko for President. The fact is that their power is always love Ukraine so that every time they come, Ukraine loses something. The first time we lost gas; the second time, the Crimea. And Yatsenyuk and Turchynov are responsible for this, as they lost Crimea.
Q: Klitschko, Poroshenko, Firtash: tell us about this meeting.
A: Yes, we met, I expressed wishes and they happened. Unfortunately, I can’t talk about them more, as I have signed confidentiality obligations.
Q: Say all (that you can).
A: There was a meeting and I am pleased with the result.
Q: What was the result?
Q: Well, you cannot answer this question. I understand that when Tymoshenko was released and Yanukovych fled, they filed a second application about your arrest, that you may not have influenced the election results?
A: Absolutely.
Q: We are now going into the so-called lunch break. Then after we will hear as witnesses Kravchuk, Lyovochkin, Bogoslovskaya, Boyko, Pizek (Raiffeisen) and Klitschko. And I haven’t decided about public access to this portion of the meeting. I would like to see Klitschko interrogated without the involvement of the public.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment