On 15 December 2017, The New York Times ran an editorial piece by Mikheil Saakashvili, with the NYT altogether neglecting to mention Saakashvili is not only wanted (arrest warrant) in his native Georgia for corruption, abuse of power and shielding murderers from prosecution, but is increasingly implicated in the murders of some 80 police and protestors in February of 2014. This latter, Ukraine event, the so-called ‘Maidan Massacre’, has risen to a level of ‘preponderance of the evidence’ necessary for a civil conviction of Saakashvili under USA law, and were the known, necessary parties [witnesses] available to honest prosecution, almost certainly a criminal ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’ conviction could be reached as well. Yet, the Times ran this man’s opinion piece as though he were a lily-white reformer, unjustly persecuted, as Saakashvili claims.

The evidence timeline:

Initially, an intercepted, leaked phone call between the European Union’s Cathrine Ashton and the Estonian foreign minister (verified as authentic by the Estonian), indicates it was a member (or members) of the new USA supported Ukrainian administration were behind the snipers who killed both protestors and police during confrontation in February 2014 at Kiev. (conversation begins about 2 minutes into this youtube posting)

John Kerry had claimed it was the ousted (Russia friendly, Yanukovych) administration behind the snipers.

Subsequently, in April 2015, a Polish MEP (Member of European Parliament), who happens to be a conservative Catholic – indicating an honest man – as opposed to the more typical Polish-Catholic Russophobe, states in a Polish press interview, the Maidan snipers were trained in Poland by USA intelligence services:

Question: “[you are] a supporter of the thesis it was a CIA operation?”

Answer: “Maidan was also our operation. The snipers were trained in Poland”

The original interview transcript in Polish language (Polish online magazine) HERE

A reasonable English language summary of the interview by PRAVDA:

In November 2017, Italian investigative journalist, Gian Micalessin, has interviewed three of the snipers who shot the people in Maidan square. They were Georgians sent to Ukraine by security services people aligned with American allied-educated Mikhail Saakashvili. American Brian Christopher Boyenger ran the sniper operation on location:

 

Excerpts from an expanded English translation of the Italian (the video subtitles are abridged)

“Both [witnesses] Nergadze and Zalogy are linked to former Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili”

“All three of our participants say that they were recruited at the end of 2013 by Mamuka Mamulashvili, a Saakashvili military advisor who, after the Maidan action, will move to the Donbass, to lead the so-called Georgian Legion in clashes with ethnic Russian insurgents”

““One day around February 15 [states Alexander] Mamualashvili personally visited our tent. There was another guy in his uniform with him. He introduced him and told us he was an instructor, an American soldier.” The US military veteran Brian Christopher Boyenger, is a former officer and sniper for the 101st Airborne Division. After Maidan, [Boyenger] moves on to the Donbass front, where he will fight in the ranks of the Georgian Legion alongside Mamulashvili”

““We were always in touch with this Bryan, [Nergadze explains] he was a Mamulashvili man. It was he who gave us the orders. I had to follow all his instructions“”

““On February 18 [recalls Zalogy] someone took some weapons to my room. In the room with me there were two Lithuanians, the weapons were unpacked by them.””

This preceding, newest information, begins to bring a larger picture into focus; the Lithuanian snipers, taken together with the American, are consistent with the Polish account of a CIA operation. Brian Christopher Boyenger, in the larger picture, profiles as a CIA paramilitary officer. What’s more is, the Lithuanians are clearly trained per a Georgian witness going on to state…

“the Lithuanians opened the window. One of them fired, one shot, while the other closed the window”

…consistent with the Polish account. This training is reflected in the coordinated action of the two Lithuanians, concealing the location of the sniper fire.

All of the preceding is consistent with one of the Georgians stating…

“The first meeting was with Mamulashvili [was] at the office of the National Movement” [Zalogy said] The Ukrainian uprising in 2013 was similar to the [Pink Revolution] that took place in Georgia years before. We had to direct and guide it using the same pattern used for the “Pink Revolution”

Saakashvili was brought into power by the so-called ‘Pink Revolution’ and this Saakashvili associated veteran’s statement points to old allegations the Pink Revolution had been a CIA engineered event are more than credible.

Now, certain statements of Saakashvili himself, in his Times editorial, are worth examining:

“By November, I, along with a team of my former Georgian colleagues, helped create a new Ukrainian police force. We also completely transformed the corrupt way state contracts were purchased and helped to form the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine, a watchdog. At that time, Mr. Poroshenko welcomed our help. He described me as “a great friend of Ukraine” and granted me and other Georgian reformers citizenship.

Several of us were invited to join the Ukrainian government. One became the head of the national police force and another was appointed minister of health. Another Georgian became the deputy director of the anticorruption [sic] bureau”

What appears to have happened here is, Central Intelligence had, subsequent to the 2014 coup and related massacre, used Saakashvili to initiate building a so-called ‘5th column’ into civil Ukrainian security structures, aside from the American trained and supplied (overt, NATO, Pentagon), and battlefield advised (covert, Central Intelligence) military structures. The purpose of penetrating the civil security structures would be, primarily, to build ‘leverage’ within the civil administrative apparatus to better control recalcitrant personalities, President Poroshenko especially, for reasons having to do with the Ukrainians put into power were, in the beginning, too stupid (Svoboda or neo-nazis) to manipulate properly, and in the subsequent case of Poroshenko, too stubborn.

Poroshenko, was willing to bring Saakashvili onboard, they had, after all, been partners in crime to a point of closeness where the only sensible question in any circumstance of betrayal between the two would be ‘et tu Brute?’ But Poroshenko somehow got wind of (was tipped) to what Saakashvili, a long time CIA asset, was actually up to, and began counter-moves to block him, leading to the circumstance of today.

What Poroshenko does understand is, the USA’s pressure to take on the Donbass ethnic Russian rebels will see him deposed and the east of Ukraine lost to the Dnieper River, inclusive of Odessa and Kiev. Putin has made clear the present, Russophobic, regime controlling Kiev, will not be allowed to militarily overrun the ethnic Russian Donbass region of Ukraine. Putin has also stated his military would take Kiev in two weeks time, maximum, if and when a decision is taken to do so. But this is what NATO wants, to further politically isolate Russia as an ‘aggressor’ state and justify its military buildup on Russia’s borders. The NATO problem is Poroshenko gives lip-service to this but doesn’t initiate the wider military action in the rebel region necessary to actually trigger Russia.

What Saakashvili apparently does not understand is, his currency as an asset for the CIA is about expended. Saakashvili’s Central Intelligence asset track record:

1) CIA ‘color revolution’ in Georgia, successful.

2) Led Georgia’s NATO (Condoleezza Rice engineered) proxy war with Russia, 2008, and badly mishandled it.

3) Lost Georgia itself, as a NATO proxy state, with his incompetent handling of domestic fallout from the 2008 war, lost in several absolutely humiliating ways, to Russia.

4) Co-author of CIA ‘color revolution’ (coup) in Ukraine, winter of 2013-14, successful.

5) CIA insertion into Ukraine’s administrative apparatus, 2015-16, mishandled.

6) CIA December 2017 counter-revolution to it’s own February 2014 coup, in progress.

It is this last which bodes very ill for Saakashvili. His score in polls is at 2% or less. There is virtually no chance of success, despite other western intelligence assets (example given, Yulia Tymoshenko of Germany’s Bundesnachrichtendienst, as well, spook controlled groups and NGOs such as ‘civil society’ fronts), offering what amounts to artificial support.

In chess terms, CIA asset Saakashvili has been devalued, from a rook (castle) to pawn, to be sacrificed on the board-game of geopolitics. Saakashvili’s handlers know he cannot win this most recent gambit. What does his sacrifice accomplish? To remind (send a message to) Poroshenko, pointing out who actually calls the shots by demonstrating Poroshenko’s helplessness to deal with Saakashvili. This first part has already been accomplished. The second act should be upcoming assassination of Saakashvili, to be blamed on either Poroshenko or Putin, depending on whether or not Poroshenko begins to ‘play ball’, while ridding the CIA of a badly compromised asset and possible problematic witness, that is Saakashvili, were he to be apprehended in a competent jurisdiction of law and held account to his recently exposed crimes.

Meanwhile, The New York Times, a CIA asset since the days of “Operation Mockingbird“, brings the western world Saakashvili’s (actually the agency’s) ‘cover story’ when neglecting to point out any of the known, compromising facts, concerning Mikhail Saakashvili.

*