Recording of conversation raises questions over death of pro-Russian ex-Rada MP in Bucha — RT EN

13 Apr 2022 09:19 am

Another detail has emerged in the case of the Ukrainian Bucha: a former member of parliament who lived there was probably murdered – which the Ukrainian side recently blamed on the Russian troops. New recordings of conversations are a strong indication against it.

At the beginning of April, the small Ukrainian town of Bucha near Kyiv became the stage for a false flag provocation by the Kiev government: after Russian troops withdrew from the city, which had been occupied since early March, Ukrainian troops placed suspected bodies in civilian clothes on the roadside of some streets and threw them mass murder before the Russian military. Another apparent provocation related to the city has recently emerged: on April 7, information appeared on social media about the alleged murder of resident politician Alexander Rzhavsky – a former deputy of the Supreme Parliament of Ukraine and alleged presidential candidate also murdered the Russian troops, it was said. In any case, he was found dead in Bucha shortly after the Russian armed forces withdrew from the Kyiv region on March 30.

The politician is said to have been unavailable since March 4th, was written, and on March 27, “the Russian occupiers” shot him “in his own house” because he “was upset about their behavior and didn’t want to pour them any vodka.” Statements of this kind were widespread among users in the Ukrainian segment of the Internet who were loyal to Kyiv precisely because Rshavsky was generally more positive about the Russian troops and the Russian military special operation in Ukraine: He is said to have received and entertained some Russian soldiers at his property .

However, a new audio recording obtained by RT suggests that the Russian military, whose representatives the politician is said to have received so hospitably, were concerned about Rshavsky on the contrary: in the recording, a suspected Russian officer urges him to get to safety bring. However, the politician decides to stay in Bucha.

The former MP’s death first became known last week, with Ukrainian officials and media alike blaming Russian forces. The Ukrainian account of the events was confirmed by Rshavsky’s family on Monday: in a Facebook post published In a statement, family members of the late politician said he was killed in Bucha on March 27 by a “Russian soldier in his own garden in front of his wife and sister.”

A sound recording (probably separated as an audio track from the accompanying video) of a conversation with the ex-parliamentarian, which RT has draws However, a different picture: The leaders of the interlocutor, presumably a Russian soldier or officer, were obviously very worried about the former MP. He even had to make an effort to defend his decision to stay in Bucha with arguments:

“So are you going home now?

“Yes.”

“Are you going to have problems in Bucha now? Because overall, our leadership is very concerned about your life after you’ve been with us.”

After a short pause, the alleged Russian military man continues:

“So that there are no incidents, you understand? If you return home now and you are found lifeless and everything is blamed on our leadership – the decision will probably be made to move you from here, from Bucha, to a recording site with water, to bring food and warmth.”

However, the politician steadfastly refused to be evacuated by the Russian troops. Instead, he says that the most likely scenario is a lynch mob anyway. And you only have to face it resolutely to stop it. Regarding any allegations against Russia, Rschawski emphasized that the Russian officer was in the process of filming the conversation anyway. What doubts could there possibly be if the worst came to the worst?

“Look, I want to explain it to you as follows: There have always been risks, but you have to weigh them up and define them with reason. I won’t jump off the house, so to speak, because it’s not necessary. I am [hier in Butscha] at home, my family [und ich]we know, …”

“How many are they then?”

“Usually five, but yesterday was [unklar] one of our workers left – so five of us: my wife, me, my sister and two workers, because we have a large property and they are therefore necessary. I don’t think it’s that dangerous. Especially since you’ve got me live on the air here, so to speak, now that’s the case…”

“Yes, I’ll record a video.”

“…I say yes, assuming that’s the case.

Well, maybe someone will think something about that – but in reality they are quite scaredy-cats, [viel zu sehr,] Than they come and lynch me If they’re in a crowd and it’s otherwise safe, then that’s possible. In reality, they are heroes only when they have mutton in front of them – but against valiant ones they are mutton themselves. That’s how I approach it, you understand? Well, then I’ve just been here – and by the way, I’m staying here for the third time. [Schließt kommentierend ein Fenster] So, you know, I’m not afraid. If this is my destiny, then this is my destiny. You have to look at it philosophically.”

Rshavsky was certainly not worried about possible unwanted attention from the competent Ukrainian authorities. Rather, he poked fun at the idea of ​​a Ukrainian “saboteur” waiting for him and “sharpening his knife”:

“Do you understand me? Look – who [soll sich das alles vornehmen]? That means a time-consuming journey – and a journey to where? To Bucha?! Good, Boucha is taken. But who will go there? Or do you really think one of the undercover saboteurs is going to be crouching in the dark sharpening his knife and saying to himself ‘Ha, I’m about to!…’?”

In addition to the above considerations, the former MP also felt safe because he had guns at home:

“Weapons haven’t been searched for you yet?”

“There are those who do that too – but almost more for the sake of arguments. Yes, I did [vorher] a [Selbstlade-]Carbines for hunting, that’s what the papers say. However, since the breaker was ground [sodass Dauerfeuer möglich wurde] – naturally [wurde er mir abgenommen]. But the sniper rifle with a 4.5x telescopic sight, they left that to me, thank God. It has a ten-round magazine – at least something, you see? I can shoot well and keep it at home.”

In any case, the version according to which the 1999 Ukrainian presidential candidate was murdered by Russian troops before they left Bucha seems unlikely. The tone of the conversation seems too confidential and too purposeful on the part of the Russian officer. The question of how many people live permanently in Rschawski’s property also reveals that Russian officers did not go in and out there as they did at home. The version circulating in Ukraine must therefore be untrue, at least on this point. And against this background, the point about the unserved vodka as a reason for argument and murder seems even more thought up for a foreign audience that could easily fall prey to prejudices about Russians.

With the appearance of this recording, however, it is probable that Alexander Rschawski died either of natural causes or through the influence of Ukrainian troops or security agencies (possibly disguised as Russian troops under false flags). And then the scenario sketched out by the suspected Russian officer also came about: the politician’s death was misused for a further provocation – perhaps to bring the city of Bucha back into the public eye.

Bucha made headlines in early April when the Kiev authorities accused the Russian military of mass killings of civilians in the city. This information about an alleged massacre caused widespread international condemnation of the Russian offensive. The Kiev suburb became a meeting place for top European politicians, who there expressed their solidarity with Ukraine and condemned the alleged “Russian war crimes”.

Moscow, meanwhile, has firmly rejected and continues to reject any involvement in the Bucha affair. Rather, it is seen as a deliberate “provocation” by the Ukrainian authorities to pollute Russian troops and corner the Kremlin itself.

More on the subject – Kramatorsk: Covering up Ukrainian lies is also a crime

By blocking RT, the EU aims to silence a critical, non-pro-Western source of information. And not only with regard to the Ukraine war. Access to our website has been made more difficult, several social media have blocked our accounts. It is now up to all of us whether journalism beyond mainstream narratives can continue to be pursued in Germany and the EU. If you like our articles, feel free to share them wherever you are active. It’s possible because the EU hasn’t banned our work or reading and sharing our articles.



Source link