Kyiv in April: three murders

For a few days, a journalist of the village of Sukhobok, a former deputy from the Party of Regions, O. Kalashnikov and journalist, Litter-Litter, O. Buzin, were killed in Kyiv. It seems that all these are different stories, but this does not calm the situation at all.

Succum

Sergey Sukhokok

Sergey Sukhobok is a good journalist. Several hundred articles on socio-political, social, legal and economic topics. Journalist and co-founder of Internet publications Proua and "regional committee". It was also published in "Contracts", "Ukrainian Pravda", "Criminal Ukraine", the ARD, "Telekritic". With his murder, he cleared up quickly. He was killed on the night of April 13, but the news came to the media only by the 15th, at the same time it became known that the killers had already found. At the "regional committee" they write that his neighbors are suspected of a crime, who, "falling into the Easter to the insanity, decided to get even with him for something." On the "regional committee" they wrote well and sensibly about him .

So this case was not considered systemic. Even the press secretary of the State Department M. Garf responded to the Kyiv killings, so she only had a Buzin and Kalashnikov. “I recalled” - in the sense of condemns and calls for an open investigation. Actually, Poroshenko demanded a "quick and transparent investigation" of these two murders.

Kalashnikov

Oleg Kalashnikov

Oleg Kalashnikov was killed on April 15 at the entrance of the house, "according to preliminary data, the man received firearms." Advisor to the Minister of Internal Affairs of Ukraine A. Gerashchenko said the main versions of the murder: “1. Kalashnikov’s political activity, including those related to the organization, financing and moderation of the so -called Tituster Anti -Maidan in the Mariinsky Park; 2. His business interests, including issues of loans and debts; 3. Personal relations; 4. Murders for the robbery; 5. Other versions of the murder.”

Moreover, Gerashchenko, as it were, suggested, saying that "according to some reports, Mr. Kalashnikov had quite serious financial and economic difficulties." This may look like a desire to get a matter from politics, but, in fact, who, in the current situation, needs such reprisals. The theme of Anti-Maidan does not play very much-in the end, if he felt that in this regard he was threatening something, he could just leave for Russia, as very many did. Well, such a moment: someone in fact could have figured out the business so, deciding that the main attention would be to the political version.

This case did not become resonant. Say, earlier there was a series of suicides of people from the Party of Regions-in general, they reacted quite coolly. He threw out from the 17th floor of M. Chechetov (he was the leader of the faction in the Rada), so what now. Moreover, the same Chechetov was not noticed in something so aggressive, performing in the Rada, rather, a technical role, and not a corrupt official-the corrupt official will live on the 17th floor, even if some elite house. Well, like it happens, the time is now nervous. Loss of position, depression, all that.

Elder

Oles Buzina

Oles Buzin was shot dead on April 16, 2015 at about 13:20 in the center of Kyiv, near his house in Degtyarevskaya, 58. The Ministry of Internal Affairs can only say that "killers were two unknown in masks." And there was a car with some numbers-"either by Belarusian, or Latvian."

In this case, mass resonance is evident. Both Russian and Ukrainian. The Russian, of course, is due to the fact that it turned out somehow compact in time-there is a straight line with a reinforced, information about the murder of an elderberry arises and manage to ask a question about it, and once, without a fact, Putin replies: "Where are the killers of these people (Kalashnikov and Buzins)? They are neither performers nor customers. And they prefer not to notice in Europe or in North America." Well, it would seem, when to look for the killers, they just killed? Well, how is it without resonance.

Here is such a reaction (yes, in fact, without it) gave almost the main Kiev trend: the Russian special services did it. For example, here is a selection of opinions on Facebooks of media characters. There is even an assumption that thereby Russia is swinging the situation in order to start another aggression about 9th. Opinions like that were correctly killed are present, but do not dominate. Here, the quite shocking B. Filatov (explain for a long time, easier to take a swearing) like this : “Most of all, I would like it not to have a showdown for debts, not noticeing traces, but our Bandera classic atent. Excuse me. But I can do anything with myself.” Of course, his opinion diverged everywhere, mainly in Russia. In Ukraine, they got used to Filatov. And there is no satisfaction from the fact that they kill Kiev on the streets of Kyiv. This, in fact, concerns everyone.

In principle, Filatov’s shocking is approximately at the level of Buzina himself, only he was more consistent. Buzina-Kyivian, was born in 1969, graduated in 1992 by the philological faculty of Kyiv University named after Shevchenko. In the specialty, a teacher of Russian language and literature, but did not teach, but went to journalism. He worked in various Kyiv publications: newspapers "Kyiv Vedomosti" (1993-2005), "2000" (2005-2006); In the magazines "Friend of the reader", "Leader", "Natalie", "Ego", "XXL". According to the list of publications, it is clear that this is a journalist not an industry, but a journalistic-columnist type. It is logical that since 2007 he led a column and a blog in the newspaper "Today".

His books were popular. Names : "Vurdalak Taras Shevchenko", "The Secret History of Ukraine-Rusy", "Return to the women of the harem", "Revolution in the swamp", "Resurrection of Little Russia", "The Union of Plug and Trazuba. How they came up with Ukraine." About Shevchenko, he is seriously, yes. Actually, after this desecration of the shrine, he became popular (and this is the 2006th year). In general, pop stories based on certain ideological views. It is also specifically with them: "Svidomo Ukrainians are concerned not so much by the creation of Ukrainian culture as the destruction of Russian." In general, this material will fully give an idea of ​​all its components.

That is, by the aggregate of ideology, mass recognition and popularity (it was also the host of the Teen League program on the Inter channel-the Ukrainian version of Brain Ring, and since 2011 he participated in the program “Bachelor. How to get married? With Anfisa Chekhova”) He had a direct road to politics. But no, something here rejected him. In the penultimate parliamentary elections, he walked along the majority Kyiv district from the Russian Bloc party, but was only the fourth (8.22%). Moreover, there was a septum, so for the second time Buzina scored even less, 3.11%. Some kind of texture or something.

In short, he was not accepted for politics. But the fans were also enough ill -wishers. Femen was thrown into him a cake - considering him a sexist (which, in general, corresponded), well, he himself was straight and concern. About gays: "They must respect my human manifestation of physical disgust for them and try not to show their vicious inclinations with me. Moreover, not to impose on them to the society. The place of pederasts is among the pederasts." That's somehow everything is at such a level. Active life position for any reason. The FB was now even remembered that in childhood he fundamentally spoke in Ukrainian - even at home - when no one was doing this. And when talking in Ukrainian ceased to be a challenge to anything, he began to do exactly the opposite. You can see what his site looks like, everything will become clearer.

Actually, the only bosom binding to something serious was that at the beginning of this year he was suddenly appointed head of "Today" (R. Akhmetov). It was perceived almost so that Akhmetov chose a line of behavior, and it is clear which one, since he appointed Buzin to personify it.

But everything turned out to be wrong. Moreover, the journalists of the publication about Buzina were in great bewilderment, they did not work out the relationship and two months later he left. He told how he was tortured there by censorship, how he had no rights, etc. In general, he clearly exaggerated and translated the case into personal: “... and the curator of the newspaper from the Ukrainian media group Ekaterina Lapshin and the general director Vasily Potapov forbade me to communicate with the press, participate in the talk show and comment on any situations, starting with a hype in the media in connection with my appointment two months ago.” In general, this whole story was about the fact that it was not necessary to appoint Columnist chief edges - these are very different works. So this personnel moment is not playing now either.

Everything is really worse. Because the situation looks logical: if in the country for more than a year they are fighting and killing, and the weapon spreads in an unknown way, then what else to wait? It is difficult to imagine that under the current Val of Deaths, and that someone can do this at all is difficult. Well, perhaps in cases, as with a dry -handed.