Replies

I didn't say "the protestors were as gentle as lambs", nor in any way portrayed them to be so.

How about dealing with what I did show -- like Dr. Bogomolets being badly misquoted.

Start there, then we can go on to some of the other. In fact --- in the link I provided, Bogomolets HERSELF provides some additional counter-point as to what she sees as the not-so-good among the political "side" of things the "protestors" almost by default (in opposing the corrupt Yanukovych) were forced to support as alternative to Yanukovych, his cast and crew of thieves, and Russia --who had been backing Yanukovych.

Why mention police escalating by using stronger ammo, without mentioning protesters were also increasingly using guns?

Because that's the way it went down -- then was lied about, with nobody on the Berkut side of the equation taking responsibility (Yanukovych ran away, when it didn't work, even if he himself did not order it)-- and it is looking like Yanukovych and the Russians have been attempting to blame-shift themselves entirely into being "the good guys".

Ask those in Kiev, who is worse. Ask Dr. Bogomolets.

I don't know that the protestors had all that many guns. I saw a only a few previously, and in various news sources, not any that I can recall prior to there being deaths on the "protestors" side of things, particularly late in Feb.

After the gloves came off and the Berkut went heavy, then there were pics of the protesters with a few guns. I saw a shotgun or two, a handgun, and a few air rifles (which can injure or even kill, in the right hands). The scoped rifle seen in the clip you gave link for --- I am pretty sure is an air rifle.

I know these are;

While the Berkut had been using these-- since some time in Jan., after "protest" itself was outlawed by Yanukovych.

By Feb. 18, the Berkut had started with the conventional ammo, early in the morning, I think. Prior to that...some protestors had been killed...and maybe a small number of Berkut? Around about the 18 of Feb., that's when the protesters suffered gunshots by the hundred (a couple of hundred +, maybe more) with 70-80 being killed outright.

You can show me different, if you like.

The only thing your comments tell me is that you are blindly biased as the fellow who wrote this article.

Who hired the snipers at the end? How do you know?

The standard investigative technique is to ask “who benefits”.

Well, who benefited from the snipers killing people?

The rapidly seen result was the unconstitutional replacement of the democratically elected leader of Ukraine, replaced by a western backed interim leader.

Which benefited the new coalition, and their western supporters.
That’s not conclusive, but it certainly is grounds for legitimate suspicion.

Yet somehow you don’t even consider the possibility that it was them.
I don’t pretend to know who hired them. You do.

Why is your presentation so one sided, showing only concern for protesters and none at all for police?
You ok with them being burned alive by molotovs, hit with heavy rocks, beaten with clubs, and shot?