banner
May 13, 2022
0 View
0 0

Kiev backstage becomes deadly

Kiev backstage becomes deadly

Photo: Irina Yakovleva/TASS

The body of a 55-year-old ex-deputy of the Verkhovna Rada from the Odessa region, a banker, was found in Ukraine David Zhvania. He was one of those who are called the “architect” of “Maidan”, but in recent years he has become one of the main critics of the Kyiv regime, and therefore has become very inconvenient for the Ukrainian authorities.

The adviser to the Minister of the Interior was the first to report the death of a well-known politician Anton Gerashchenko. According to him, Zhvania allegedly came under shelling on May 9 in the “gray zone” not far from the Russian checkpoint near the village of Novopokrovka, Zaporozhye region. But in this story, as he noted, “there are more questions than answers.”

Meanwhile, not everyone believes in the official version of the circumstances of the incident.

So, the former Ukrainian parliamentarian, ex-speaker of the parliament of Novorossiya Oleg Tsarev believes that the Security Service of Ukraine is directly related to the death of Zhvania.

“David was with me in different camps. But David has been exposing Maidan lately. A long and non-public story why he did it, but the fact remains. For this reason, David was included in the lists of disloyal and was sentenced by the SBU to be eliminated in the event of an aggravation of the situation with Russia (the wording of the speaker was changed by the editors),” he wrote in his Telegram channel.

Tsarev is sure that “David was killed and the corpse was taken to the gray zone in order to legalize death. Allegedly, he was not killed in the SBU, but died by accident at the front.” Moreover, as he writes, “Zhvania is one of a very large list of people who were sentenced to death in advance. One of those whom I warned, and who did not hear me.

First Deputy Minister of Information of the Donetsk People’s Republic Daniil Bezsonov also does not believe in the accidental “mysterious” death of Zhvania.

Zelenskyin his opinion, he uses his repressive machine quite skillfully, especially in combat conditions. The persecution of those who do not agree with the regime “has reached a completely new level, the political and information field has been cleared to zero. Bloggers are under arrest, opposition politicians have either been forced to flee, or in prison, or they are trying not to show their nose.” And Zhvania, who at one time was especially close to Petro Poroshenko“knew everything that was going on in the Ukrainian political backstage.”

In other words, as a harsh critic of the Ukrainian authorities, which he has become in recent years, has become simply very dangerous for them.

Recall that in July 2020, the former parliamentarian, in an open statement on YouTube, admitted that he was an accomplice in the criminal seizure of power by Poroshenko and his team in 2014. At the same time, he suggested to the Prosecutor General of Ukraine Irina Venediktova summon him for interrogation, promising to testify against all the putschists: himself, Poroshenko, Yatsenyuk, Turchynov, Klitschko and others.

In particular, Zhvania was ready to provide the investigating authorities with the circumstances of giving a bribe in the amount of five million euros, which he and Pavel Klimkin passed through the Ukrainian embassy in Germany to a high-ranking European official at the time in order to secure support for Poroshenko as a candidate for the presidency of Ukraine from the EU. The only condition that was put forward by David Zhvania was to ensure his personal safety.

However, the Ukrainian prosecutor’s office ignored his statement about the crimes of the Maidan leaders. As well as his words about the danger threatening him personally. Now the inconvenient politician is dead. And, according to sources of the Ukrainian TG channel Legitimny, it was “removed” under the guise of hostilities, attributing everything to shelling. Because he knew too much.

Can, in this case, the death of Zhvania (and before him – the former people’s deputy, a candidate for the presidency of Ukraine Alexander Rzhavsky and a member of the Ukrainian delegation at the first negotiations with Russia, a banker Denis Kireev) testify that the Kyiv regime has begun the physical elimination of disloyal politicians?

“We don’t know all the details of Zhvania’s death and, most likely, we will never know,” he comments on the situation. Director of the Ukrainian Center for Political Marketing Vasily Stoyakin.

– This is not the kind of information that goes anywhere from the relevant circles. There are a lot of questions there. In particular, why did Zhvania make these revealing statements.

There are various rumors. It is clear that he did not have any confidence in the Ukrainian legal system, but for some reason he needed, let’s say, to push these topics into political discourse in order to talk about them. Why it was necessary is completely incomprehensible. That is, he personally was unlikely to have such an interest. Most likely, someone asked him. And this request, apparently, was based on some sprouts of pressure on the business of Zhvania himself.

As for the versions of his death, Tsarev, of course, knows a lot. And his opinion, in principle, in such matters can be trusted. But what goes around at the level of rumors, in general, has every right to exist. Zhvania, indeed, seemed to have questions regarding Poroshenko.

True, the whole story so far looks extremely cloudy, complicated and completely incomprehensible. And most importantly, those people who know exactly what was discussed, they, most likely, will never say anything intelligible about this. Moreover, even if conditions are created when they are asked about something, they will be asked about the death of David Vazhaevich last. And it is unlikely that anyone will be very interested.

The deceased was not a holy man. There were a lot of claims and questions of a very different plan to him. About his political activities, about doing business and about personal moral qualities. Therefore, no one will cry for him much.

“SP”: – Gerashchenko published his post about the death of Zhvania with the hashtag “traitors”. Should we expect it to continue to grow?

– No, you shouldn’t. The fact is that Gerashchenko, as far as I remember, marks everything with this hashtag that has to do with people who the current government does not like. That is, when it comes to arrest Medvedchuk or about someone else, then everything is indicated in exactly the same way.

Here we are talking about the fact that Gerashchenko himself perceived and perceives Zhvania as a political opponent of the current government. But was he, in fact, a political opponent of the current government, who knows …

And the fact that he died in the “grey zone”, allegedly heading for the checkpoint of the Russian troops, it may or may not say anything. He could have been killed in advance and then taken there. Thus legalizing murder.

I repeat, the information is still off the gulkin’s nose. And one can only guess what actually happened.

“SP”: – But the parallels with the death of Kireev and Rzhavkoy are somehow clearly visible? Don’t you think?

– The case specifically with Zhvania, this is just one of the episodes of the massacre of people who for some reason became objectionable to the current government. But we don’t even know if this is really a massacre, or if it’s just a combination of tragic circumstances. As, for example, in the case of Oles Buzina.

From all outward appearances, it was a fairly random incident. That is, there were bandits from the ATO, they saw a familiar face, they decided – “this is not a good person” – and shot him. Then they tried to bring them to justice, but they were never brought to justice. And now both occupy some big positions, but at the same time they continue to remain under investigation on charges of murder.

That is, from my point of view, there is no state intent here. And in the case of Zhvania, it can be exactly the same story, if he really went to the Russian side and came under fire. Gerashchenko announced a “overcome” after this. But even he, in fact, does not say that, as in the case of Buzina, it was some kind of “classic Bandera atentat”. No, that’s not what we’re talking about. Killed by gunfire. Why not? But to believe here Gerashchenko and rely on his evidence is not entirely correct. Because he is a liar.

“SP”: – Where did Zhvania have such confidence in the post-Maidan prosecutor’s office and the judicial system in Ukraine, if he knew everything?

“There really is a lot of stuff out there. But, it seems to me, it was important that he made his statements not on some “suspicious” platform (from the point of view of the average Ukrainian patriot, the Russian platform is extremely suspicious and toxic), but on the Ukrainian one.

However, I don’t think he knew anything special. Yes, Zhvania was an informed person. But it is unlikely that he knew the ultimate truth in most cases, which have become very publicized. According to the same Malaysian Boeing, the truth about which he also promised to reveal.

Basically, Zhvania dealt with the financial and economic support of the Maidan, being, first of all, a businessman, not a politician. It still needs to be understood. And it is quite possible that this whole story did not have any way out of Ukraine at all. That is, Zhvania was promised something, then they did not fulfill it, they threw him, and in this way he simply tried to return the loot.

By analogy with the same Zelensky, who was not at all eager to run for president, but Kolomoisky put him before the fact: either he is nominated, or the 1 + 1 studio, which broadcasts his programs and films, will not return the huge debt to the 95th quarter. And Zelensky went. Why such a story could not take place with Zhvania, for example?

“SP”: – And who benefited from his death?

– The death of Zhvania, most likely, would be beneficial to those people who were behind the organization of the Maidan in 2004 and 2014. That is, for the US Embassy and Western intelligence agencies. But they, in fact, had their own ways of neutralizing various kinds of threats. Since they did not use these methods – they allowed Zhvania, as they say, to chat, which means that their interests were not so much affected.

Article Categories:
Politics
banner

Leave a Reply