Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

How Pussy Riot Bamboozled the Media
Townhall.com ^ | August 22, 2012 | Rachel Marsden

Posted on 08/22/2012 4:31:56 AM PDT by Kaslin

If Justin Bieber or the Rolling Stones suddenly decided to stage an impromptu concert in a public place somewhere in America without a permit, would the authorities ignore it and shrug it off? Doubtful. Even buskers performing in the New York City subway system can't play without formal authorization from the city.

What about taking such a musical performance into a church? If Jennifer Lopez or Madonna just showed up in a place of worship, stripped down to their skivvies and started dancing around the altar, would that fly in any Western democracy? Not likely.

So why, then, are three young women in Russia getting so much sympathy from the mainstream media for doing precisely this inside a Russian Orthodox church?

Last week, three members of the activist group Pussy Riot were each sentenced to two years in prison for hooliganism motivated by religious hatred. The group's members are part of a larger protest group called Voina, which has previously been involved in various acts of public nuisance, including group sex in a museum and shoplifting a whole chicken from a supermarket by stuffing into an activist's lady parts.

Voina and Pussy Riot are the Russian version of the Occupy Wall Street protest crowd. Their modus operandi is to use "art" in its various forms as a cover for acting like jerks and flaunting police warnings. They exploit the sentiment that artists worldwide generally should be given more behavioral license than the general public because they've historically pushed the boundaries of free expression.

One would hope that the public is able to tell the difference between Pussy Riot and, say, Voltaire -- who was thrown into a French prison for criticizing government and the Catholic Church in his extensive body of writing. Voltaire's career was writing, while Pussy Riot's entire career consists of hooliganism with a sprinkling of poor-quality "music" thrown in. Voltaire published several novels, plays, poems and essays, and in doing so, just happened to tick off the powers that be. Pussy Riot hasn't even recorded an album. Their credibility as artists is poorly established, unlike their activist background.

Boiled down, the Pussy Riot case is just another example of the social media generation's demand for instant gratification and attention in the absence of any sustained hard work. The protesters chose the shallowest form of subversion possible, their rationale apparently being that by doing a lewd can-can-girl number in a church, they can successfully overturn the government of a G8 country. That's some serious stoner logic.

The longer game of subversion would have required them to spend years working to get into a key position within the power structure, then influencing and subverting the system to change what they don't like. The effects of such an effort would have been more organic, credible and durable.

Or, at the very least, they could have practiced for several years to hone their "art" in the event that they were serious about being artists and not just serious about being hooligans. That's why Madonna can say all sorts of nonsense from a concert stage and constantly push the boundaries of free speech without getting arrested -- because she's actually earned the "artist" label and the leeway society affords it.

Somehow Russian President Vladimir Putin has been dragged into all this, presumably because this story is sexier with a Bond villain -- and because it's always preferable to hold someone else responsible for one's own bad behavior. Pussy Riot supporters claim that Putin has the long knives out for the band because they mentioned him in a song. The idea of Putin sitting around blubbering over being badmouthed by some girls in a YouTube video certainly undermines any evil image. The smearing of Putin as hypersensitive and vindictive would have been more credible had they intelligently addressed Putin's policies without breaking any laws, or associated themselves with a larger group of activists known for flaunting it relentlessly and treating it as a joke. Pussy Riot didn't keep its powder dry.

It's not as if Putin just invented the Russian law against hooliganism. The penalty of up to seven years in prison wasn't concocted especially for Pussy Riot. In fact, the same crime of religious hooliganism in Germany carries a maximum penalty of three years imprisonment -- a year more than the sentence Pussy Riot members received.

The Western media should save its tears for those who truly deserve them.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-188 last
To: dirtboy

Solzhenitsyn never would have supported what PR did in the church.


151 posted on 08/22/2012 10:20:52 PM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: Buckhead
they can’t be punished in this case for what they did on some other occasion.

Yes, that's true - good point. Those earlier "activities" give a more complete picture of these women and the rest of their group. But the three women were charged for only the church protest.

They were charged with Russia's version of a hate crime against religion. It carried a maximum sentence of seven years, but the prosecutor asked for three years. They were sentenced to only two. When the story first broke, at first, two years seemed a bit much for one incident - I would've agreed with you there. But, when I found out how much of a public nuisance they've been, I lost all sympathy for them.

I didn't notice these women speaking out against hate crime legislation in their statements. Considering their left-wing positions, maybe they agree with hate crime legislation. Which would be ironic.

I read through their statements earlier. Indeed, they are well-written statements. (I did wonder if they themselves wrote the statements, or if someone else did - or if the translator used creative license...) But, in those statements, they were trying - as you noticed, too - to justify their actions. Also, the way they compared their trial to Stalin's "troikas" and "purges" in their statements - that was quite a stretch.

152 posted on 08/22/2012 10:38:26 PM PDT by Tired of Taxes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

Well said. It’s hard to believe that these people are serious about their political positions when it seems all their forms of protest are some act of deviance. Really, the thing with the chicken-I could have lived all the rest of my life without knowing that-is a serious act of political opposition? That’s what they consider effective?


153 posted on 08/22/2012 10:45:58 PM PDT by mrsmel (One Who Can See)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

I’m seeing a lot “the ends justify the means” rhetoric from their apologists, and that’s a leftist meme. It was their responsibility, if they felt so strongly, to find a venue of protest which didn’t assault people of faith’s reverence. This is exactly what the left here does-any means of protest, no matter how outrageous and disrespectful, is “justified” by the righteousness of their cause. Greenpeace, Occupy, the Weathermen, all of them. The difference with them and the Revolutionaries is that the Revolutionaries were serious men and willing to take the consequences.

And the eloquence of their statements doesn’t justify their actions either. I’ve read them. I didn’t think they were all that eloquent. They didn’t explain why the action they took was the only one possible or what it did to forward their cause. Patrick Henry it wasn’t.


154 posted on 08/22/2012 11:04:20 PM PDT by mrsmel (One Who Can See)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: BlueDragon
But what were they on trial for? Not those other things.

Yes, that's true. Who knows why they weren't charged for other crimes. But, in any case, under the law, they faced a maximum sentence of seven years for this one crime. They were sentenced to two years - far less than the maximum.

I can't find the group's position on hate crime legislation. To be honest, in searching for it, some of the websites are just too vile. But, considering the group's left-wing politics - according to Wikipedia, they oppose abortion restrictions and support "LGBT" issues - it wouldn't be surprising if they themselves support hate crime legislation (oh, the irony of it all).

Anyway, why are people so supportive of these women? Is it because they're "girls" - more specifically young women in their 20's? They probably look harmless as they skip away from the security guards at the cathedral. Here's a website with more info on what they were singing about and the words they were using.

Suppose these were men doing the same thing? Would they have come across as so harmless? Would so many people be as supportive? Consider how the women were walking up to police women to forcibly kiss them. Would men get away with doing the same thing? We might not have even heard the story if not for the name - PR.

155 posted on 08/22/2012 11:29:34 PM PDT by Tired of Taxes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: BlueDragon

You may be both right and wrong.

AFAIK group claimed it’s responsibility for burning a truck but no one was prosecuted for this act because authorities had no evidence to charge any exact person.

They were prosecuted for public pornography, throwing cats at McDonalds, their “performance” in courtroom and damaging another police car, thus they weren’t sentenced to any real jail time.

I got your point but that is your achilless heel vs this kind of agitators.

These people are targeting public morals and institutions designed to defend it. It may look pretty innocent at the very beginning but if you won’t stop it at that moment it won’t be that funny in near future.

Their idea is to make unrest a fact of daily life and accepting it will bring followers. Burning a government vehicle and desecrating church by one group today may lead to full scale attack on public institutions and burning down dozens of churches tomorrow.

“Girls kissing girls” is not innocent. I haven’t seen if one was pleased with such an attack.

44% of Russians supporting this trial simply knows a history of their country.


156 posted on 08/23/2012 12:24:10 AM PDT by cunning_fish (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: Tired of Taxes

I’m not complaining that they were punished...I just think two years in prison is way too harsh for a public disturbance where no property was damaged and nobody was physically injured. If you held up a sign at some leftist gathering and said some things, do you think you should get two years in prison?


157 posted on 08/23/2012 3:55:37 AM PDT by driftless2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: Buckhead

Good statements. This firmly exposes that Vladimir Putin remains an unrepentant unreconstructed Chekist. These women might not have experienced the repression of the Soviet Union firsthand, but they are not ignorant of it. Just what did Putin have on Yeltsin to be his designated successor?


158 posted on 08/23/2012 4:08:56 AM PDT by Fred Hayek (The Democratic Party is the operational wing of CPUSA.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: mrsmel
The difference with them and the Revolutionaries is that the Revolutionaries were serious men and willing to take the consequences.

Excellent point.

There's considerable inconsistency in claiming to be serious political dissidents - when it's useful to impress some people - and at the same time claiming they shouldn't be punished because they're just delayed adolescent merry pranksters doing a little sexual posturing for fun.

Just like our "progressives," such serious "causes" providing their justification to copulate and eliminate in public. Nothing I've read on this thread has changed my original opinion, which was that if "our" media and the Zero administration are supportive of this demonstration, then it must be destructive.

159 posted on 08/23/2012 4:24:05 AM PDT by Tax-chick (Now for wrath, now for ruin and a red nightfall.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

bmfl


160 posted on 08/23/2012 6:48:40 AM PDT by Titan Magroyne (What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

bmfl


161 posted on 08/23/2012 7:32:06 AM PDT by Titan Magroyne (What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: driftless2

After posting, I actually looked into this some more, and if nothing else saw that there are two sides to this.

If nothing else, I got some more info appearing to show that Putin doesnt eff around.


162 posted on 08/23/2012 8:45:45 AM PDT by freedomlover
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: cunning_fish
44% of Russians supporting this trial simply knows a history of their country.

That is assumption on your part, that those who support the prosecution, somehow know more or better about "the history of their country" than those whom do not support the prosecution.

If it be true that 72% view themselves as Russian Orthodox, that still leaves a sizable percentage of Orthodox whom for whatever reasons, didn't think this particular prosecution made good sense.

From all other sources, the criminal charges brought to trial, have been consistently characterized as being solely for the obnoxious activities that transpired in the cathedral.

Criminal trespass charges for those offenses, would have been more accurate, and more likely to have had wider support.

I got your point but that is your achilless heel vs this kind of agitators.

What of your own lack of armor? The shield of faith is what is to be used to quench fiery darts hurled by the wicked one. Not "the powers of the State".

What is more profane? These loud and obnoxious punks, or Putin, the one whom seemingly has no qualms against murder, and lesser acts of injustice perpetrated against political, and business/financial opponents, lighting candles in the Church?

Ask yourself, which is more offensive, and potentially destructive to true worship of our Creator?

Wedding the powers of State, to the Church, has proven to have been a mistake, over & over throughout history.

The Church is called to be holy, and set apart. What State, established by men, managed, governed, used and manipulated by men, has ever truly been that?


Now you see it


Now you don't

163 posted on 08/23/2012 10:26:59 AM PDT by BlueDragon (going to change my name to "Nobody" then run for elective office)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: cunning_fish; driftless2; Fred Hayek; BlueDragon; Buckhead; dirtboy
I just want to add a thought to cunning_fish's post # 156 where it's pointed out that:

AFAIK group claimed it’s responsibility for burning a truck but no one was prosecuted for this act because authorities had no evidence to charge any exact person. They were prosecuted for public pornography, throwing cats at McDonalds, their “performance” in courtroom and damaging another police car, thus they weren’t sentenced to any real jail time.

Have any of you ever lived in a neighborhood where a group of young people were wreaking havoc, but the neighbors could never prove it to the police? I have... many times. I'm betting most (if not all) of you have, too.

In one neighborhood, a group of teens was harassing everyone. Among other things, they even spread feces once all over our front door. The police could do nothing. It was our word against the teens'. Finally, these young people were caught and punished for something minor. I remember hearing them complain that they were being overly-punished. The way they were talking, an outsider who didn't know their history would've felt bad for them. But those of us who lived in the neighborhood were relieved.

Where my folks lived, a few young people have been terrorizing the neighborhood for years. They slit tires, crack windows with BB guns, throw used condoms all over lawns, steal things from private property, and verbally harass the neighbors. Everyone hates but fears them, but for a long time, the police could do nothing. Neither could other local authorities. These young people also deal drugs, and finally one was busted for drugs and put into prison. Things got quieter in the neighborhood. An outsider, who didn't know their history, might think, "This poor young man has been thrown in prison..." But, those of us who knew the history wish they all could be put away for awhile.

Think of Russia as "the neighborhood" and PR as "the neighborhood punks." The police finally got them on something. That's why most Russians are happy about it. We're the outsiders.

164 posted on 08/23/2012 10:59:32 AM PDT by Tired of Taxes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: Tired of Taxes
Anyway, why are people so supportive of these women?

I think it stems from a hatred for Putin and the logic which states that the enemy of my enemy is my friend. That logic is ok, but folks should realize that it works the other way-round. In my case, I see PR as representatives of the hedonistic secular left and the vile celebrity culture which is a much more subversive and dangerous force in the world than Vladimir Putin and the Russian Orthodox Church.
165 posted on 08/23/2012 11:13:35 AM PDT by Antoninus (Sorry, gone rogue.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: Tired of Taxes
Why must you persist in exaggerating the evils of these disaffected Russians? Now you are linking them to crime in your own neighborhood!

Have you considered how the fallout due to the how & why these scene stealing "protestors" were eventually prosecuted, can be more damaging to the Church overall, then it is helpful?

Remember what the [son of] Man said;
"The kingdom of heaven is within".

Why be in such a hurry to wed the powers of the State, and it's own effort to affect civil order, to the Church?

Consider what PR was singing about. Do they have a point? Is there some dis-connect between what the Church stands for as to morality, and how the Russian State exercises it's own powers? There is some un-evenness there, though it also stands to be mentioned that the present Russian State, is not the first to fall short of the high mark.

This other thread has what looks to be an accurate translation of their little protest song;

The Church has always endangered it's own holiness when too strongly allied with State.

If we try to force the one, before the other, then the girls are right. What we result with is truly crap, crap, crap. Decidedly, not so holy.

Or do you think we can force the issue by rule of law? Efforts along those lines have often enough fallen woefully short. The exceptions to this can be seen in clearest example, in the individual first, whom can then lead others by example.

Yet we are living in an age when even the best examples will scarcely be followed, and if followed, then by a great many, somewhat superficially. When that occurs, let us not be so quick to declare victory, when looking at present, and past times.

By which I mean, there is strong tendency among some Catholics to look back upon times when their own churches were blended quite directly & strongly with the powers of State, as some sort of past, rose colored Nirvana.

Clean first, the inside of the cup, then one can see enough to clean the outside. Other efforts tend to result in only smearing the dirt around.

166 posted on 08/23/2012 12:42:28 PM PDT by BlueDragon (going to change my name to "Nobody" then run for elective office)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: Tired of Taxes

It’s a fair point that they are repeat offenders insofar as public disruption is concerned.

Nevertheless, there are a couple of problems with your analogy.

1. PR, by their court statements, have important political, theological and cultural points to make. Teenage hoodlums do not.

2. Putin and his gangster government are the ones terrorizing the neighborhood.


167 posted on 08/23/2012 1:54:11 PM PDT by Buckhead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: Buckhead

>>>>>>>
It’s a fair point that they are repeat offenders insofar as public disruption is concerned.

Nevertheless, there are a couple of problems with your analogy.

1. PR, by their court statements, have important political, theological and cultural points to make. Teenage hoodlums do not.

2. Putin and his gangster government are the ones terrorizing the neighborhood.
>>>>>>>>

I don’t know if Putin is really that bad or not but from these videos Russian government looks like a pretty peaceful bunch.

No batons, no kicks and punches for these “protestors”.

Two year term is a joke as well if you’ll listen them talking on Stalinism comeback.


168 posted on 08/23/2012 8:50:08 PM PDT by cunning_fish (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: cunning_fish

169 posted on 08/23/2012 9:00:03 PM PDT by JoeProBono (A closed mouth gathers no feet - Mater tua caligas exercitus gerit ;-{)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

170 posted on 08/23/2012 9:17:50 PM PDT by JoeProBono (A closed mouth gathers no feet - Mater tua caligas exercitus gerit ;-{)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus
I think it stems from a hatred for Putin and the logic which states that the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

I think you're right.

But, considering PR's far-left politics, I'm still surprised at how much support they're receiving on this forum.

171 posted on 08/23/2012 10:45:07 PM PDT by Tired of Taxes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: Buckhead
PR, by their court statements, have important political, theological and cultural points to make. Teenage hoodlums do not.

I have to disagree. I don't think what PR has been doing is any better than what teenage hoodlums do. IMHO, their political statements are no better than what hoodlums might say.

Putin and his gangster government are the ones terrorizing the neighborhood.

I don't know if that's true. Russia is not what it used to be.

Well, each of us is looking at this story differently, that's for sure.

172 posted on 08/23/2012 10:55:47 PM PDT by Tired of Taxes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: BlueDragon

No one is exaggerating about their behavior.

And both Putin and the Russian Orthodox Church publicly called for leniency. According to the reports, Putin is popular in Russia. This anti-Putin group is so vile that they probably added to his popularity. Apparently, many Russians were sick of this PR group. Russia has been doing well economically under Putin’s leadership; this PR group could not have been any threat to him.

And the Orthodox Church publicly asked for mercy for the PR group.

But they’ve been a public nuisance to everyone else, apparently.

As stated earlier, for this particular crime under Russian law, the maximum sentence is seven years. That means other Russians may have been sentenced to seven years for this crime. These PR women were sentenced to just two... after all the havoc they’ve been wreaking with their group.


173 posted on 08/23/2012 11:32:50 PM PDT by Tired of Taxes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: Tired of Taxes
Please, try and get news and background information about this case from sources other than limited only to 'Life Site News' and the official Russian State informational/propaganda organs. There is more to all of this than meets the eye.

No one is exaggerating about their behavior.

They were tried only for what occurred at the church, yet wasn't it you(?) who tried to claim they were tried for these other things you wish to keep bringing up?

You compared them to tire slashers, drug dealers, and vile hoodlums in the U.S. who spread feces all over YOUR door, also. That sort of comparison would and should get you kicked off a jury.

Yes, I'm sure that many in Russia are sick of them, but less than half (from a statistic brought here by your buddy) actually supported the trial. Even with full-time efforts on the part of Putin's media outlets to paint these punk protestors as some sort of horrible evil..

I'm going to assume some of the majority of Russian citizens whom disagree with the prosecution, may have thought PR improperly charged, or over-charged for what they did do in that church, since less than half are fully on the side of the government. The case has been all over the news and media in Russia recently.

Excuse me? They were a component of the vocal opposition whom pointed out multiple instances of voter fraud during the last election. You know, the one where Putin was looking to be re-elected? And did. These protest punks jeopardized that, embarrassing both Putin and the Patriarch. At first Putin's government tried to laugh it off, but the Patriarch and a significant portion of the Orthodox were offended. That it ultimately what they were prosecuted for. Even then the government fell short of actually proving their case.

Ask Gary Kasparov. He was there, and among many others, and concurs Putin's operators jiggered the election. Pussy Riot just pushed too many buttons, calling foul in their foul way, for his using the Church as an election campaign backdrop (which he undoubtedly DID do).

After the fact that Patriarch Kirill very publicly demanded they be tried in the first place.
One prominent Orthodox commentator called for them to be burnt at the stake, as I have already provided quotes and links for, here previously on this thread.

Do you even read what I have to say before replying? I ask this, for the replies from you seem always the same old, same old. Just repetition of the enmity which you seem to hold for them...

Try looking into a conversation I had with a Catholic living in Poland, on this thread...he might not fully agree with me in all which I have otherwise said, but I'm certain he doesn't agree that the slant you keep pushing here, is the full and complete story, either.

IN FACT;
Many Orthodox in Russia are not quite buying the State media line --- which is the line you are pushing here, whether you know it or not.

There you go AGAIN! Convicting them for all this other junk, which charges were not brought for, nor for which they were allowed any chance to provide for their own defense. What is this? The Inquisition?

The five months they spent waiting for trial was more than enough "time served", for their real crime or offense (trespass) but the government can't admit that, so the girls are stuck.

Possibly yourself, and more assuredly a number of Orthodox in Russia, view these girls' "punk prayer" as blasphemy, as a desecration. Yet the "prayer" was not an indictment against the Church itself, for the motives of the performance were political. It's not their fault, after all, that the KGB has long sought to control, and frequently has succeeded in controlling or manipulating the Church.

The difference being is that nowadays, rather than just keeping it repressed as in Soviet times, they now co-opt the Church and religious sentiments, when they can get away with it.

174 posted on 08/24/2012 2:15:35 AM PDT by BlueDragon (going to change my name to "Nobody" then run for elective office)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: JoeProBono
"In conclusion I would like to read the words of a Pussy Riot song, that, strange as they may be, proved prophetic. We foresaw that “the Head of the KGB and the Chief Saint of the land place the protesters under guard and take them to prison.” This was about us."

175 posted on 08/24/2012 2:41:16 AM PDT by BlueDragon (going to change my name to "Nobody" then run for elective office)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: BlueDragon

176 posted on 08/24/2012 3:20:14 AM PDT by JoeProBono (A closed mouth gathers no feet - Mater tua caligas exercitus gerit ;-{)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]

To: mrsmel; dirtboy; gdani; Buckhead; Antoninus; BlueDragon

And here’s a clear example that these are anarchists, not real protesters — now it’s “inspired” Germans to do the same thing inside another cathedral —> http://rt.com/news/pussy-riot-cologne-cathedral-463/


177 posted on 08/24/2012 6:02:30 AM PDT by Cronos (**Marriage is about commitment, cohabitation is about convenience.**)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: JoeProBono

178 posted on 08/24/2012 9:06:24 AM PDT by BlueDragon (going to change my name to "Nobody" then run for elective office)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: BlueDragon
wasn't it you(?) who tried to claim they were tried for these other things you wish to keep bringing up?

No, I did NOT make such a claim. I brought up those other "activities" to give a more complete history of what this group has really been doing.

Please, try and get news and background information about this case from sources other than limited only to 'Life Site News' and the official Russian State informational/propaganda organs.

I did check a variety of sources before forming an opinion on this story. However, I do wonder about the sources YOU have been reading.

You compared them to tire slashers, drug dealers, and vile hoodlums in the U.S. who spread feces all over YOUR door, also. That sort of comparison would and should get you kicked off a jury.

We're not on a jury. This is an internet forum. We're not on jury duty; we're just talking. I'm allowed to say: "This group is nothing more than a group of hoodlums." Or, are you saying that this PR group can do and say anything they want as a form of protest, but no one should comment on their behavior? Why, how dare I comment on their behavior on an internet forum! What is this world coming to when a group of young women can't burst into a cathedral and cause a disturbance without being criticized for the many other disturbances they caused? /sarcasm

full-time efforts on the part of Putin's media outlets to paint these punk protestors as some sort of horrible evil..

The Russian media didn't have to do anything. The hoodlums themselves filmed their activities and posted videos and pictures of what they did on the internet.

...a component of the vocal opposition whom pointed out multiple instances of voter fraud during the last election... etc. .... Ask Gary Kasparov. He was there, and among many others, and concurs Putin's operators jiggered the election... etc.

On the one hand, you're very defensive of this group of hooligans who engage in sexual activities in public, flip police cars, set police vehicles on fire, and use profanity to disrupt the public, among other "activities." Because they were convicted for only ONE crime, you seem to think no one should criticize their other activities. You even excuse their other activities.

Yet, without any real evidence, you believe their stories about elections being rigged. Maybe the elections were rigged; maybe they weren't. Where is your proof that they were? Because Gary Kasparov says so?

Also, you insist that the PR group's former activities should have nothing to do with the discussion. But then you keep bringing up Putin and the Russian Orthodox Church.

Putin has been doing some rather interesting things to keep himself in power. Maybe he is a bad guy. Maybe not entirely. The U.S. should never trust him completely. But that is a completely different topic of discussion. These "girls" weren't convicted of speaking out against Putin. They were convicted of Russia's version of a "hate crime."

(And, yes, I do read your entire posts, unfortunately.)

179 posted on 08/24/2012 1:06:08 PM PDT by Tired of Taxes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: Tired of Taxes

Hey Jack-ass. I never said they couldn't "be criticized" for other disturbances. Only that they were not formerly on trial for those other antics.

Quit lying about my own comments.

This obnoxious group has been running around mocking what they see as absurdities of cultural conventions in present-day Russia, using State institutions as a backdrop. That has been their schtick. I am aware enough of that.

Yet it is you and your ilk who persist in justifying long prison terms for their form of expressing "criticism", while they were tried mainly, only for offending the sensibilities of the religious, in a church of historical, religious, and now political significance.
That last part is quite important. It IS central to the entire affair, but is hiding itself behind the umbrage of the reaction, frequently characterized by such as your own refusal to consider much beyond this groups history of being disruptive.

Now they get punished for all of that, rightly or wrongly, but with the Church left holding the bag as being the repressive bad guys.

Is that the image we should want? The Church as part of a power paradigm which cannot suffer it's critics gracefully? Is willing to imprison them, if they become inconvenient to the image they have been carefully working to portray?

Putin has been at least partially successful in portraying, & selling himself as some sort of Orthodox Catholic.
Ask yourself --- do you think he has repented yet for all the killings of journalists his previous regime indulged itself with? Some criminals are punished in today's Russia. An entire other class appears to be the most deadliest to cross, and are above the law. Sound familiar?

Which is more profane, what those girls did, or Putin being given communion without repentance on his part, for evils perpetrated by his regime against critics? That is the taste left in the mouth of many in Russia and elsewhere concerning this.

It's like trying to go back to the time when the Tzars and the Church were united in one near monolithic entity.
Do we really want a return to that? With this time "the Tzars" being the oligarchs who control everything (including apparently, the Church?).
Many in Russia today, including a sizable number of Orthodox, and some number of the priesthood, do not want that.

Such a subtle liar you are. I most certainly never "excused" the above, save for "the use of profanity", which are just words, after all. That, and my being not too overly upset with them mugging police cadets with hugs and kisses...which "mugging" had as it's basis, it's own intended agitation of the political realm in Russia today.
That particular guerrilla theater was employed to frame the issue of questioning support for the current cultural paradigm, in which police powers are routinely employed as political weapon against investigators, questioners, and political challengers across the board, both "morally" legitimate or otherwise.
Perhaps you've missed notice of such? Or is this a growing case of the denials, allowing your boy Putin to F' over anyone he wants to, as long as he gives the Catholic Church, in this instance the [Russian] Orthodox Church it's "due"?

Ask guys like Kasporov, what happens to some dissenters, or other competitors to the regime. It can get real ugly. Should the Church give rubber-stamp to such? All in the name of suppressing the indecency of Pussy Riot, of course...

The question remains. Should Putin be allowed to get away with cloaking himself with the righteousness which could more properly belong only to the Church?*

That is what Pussy Riot, in all their profanity, was focusing upon that day, when they entered into that church.

We can all be uncomfortable with the way the question was framed, (and who it was that framed it) yet still the question leads us to ever more questions.

Questions such as reexamining, once again; "what is the Church?", and what should be "the State"? How best should the two exist?

Kirill I has long ago made up his own mind and expressed himself concerning the hoped for inter-action of the two.

That particular hope sounds all fine and well.. but while these two entities, Putin, and the former "tobacco Metropolitan" are blowing kisses towards one another "in mutual respect", then what are the rest of us to make of it? Shall we call it "holy"? Or is it as much or more, something else instead?

I do think we have all seen this particular movie before. It has it's high points, times when the human spirit be can touched by the Divine. Yet in the basements and dungeons, are works and deeds, acts of men committed in the name of that which is Holy, but are more suited for hell itself.

In the end (of the movie?) does the cozy relationship not result in a profanity far more disgusting than even one of these girls masturbating (the one previously put in a mental hospital for being rebellious) in a grocery market, using a chicken leg?

For sake of comparison, let us now look at how the most fanatical among the Islamists, in their own wettest dreams, fantasize about a much similar Church/State relationship, as Kirill hopes for.

Why should not the Islamists think it their right? In their perspective, that "right" has been rightly endowed to them by the Creator. For they too make the claim "we have Abraham as our father", with in their instance, Mohammed of course [may-pork-be-upon-him] being the interpreter of God's heart & mind towards man.

I know the answers to why the Islamists shouldn't be allowed to rule...but it runs a bit deeper than "the hierarchical entities of Catholicism instead...should be the ones to rule".

If I have uncovered our philosophical differences here, I must tell you, it is not news to me. I have understood this from the very beginning of our conversation.

180 posted on 08/24/2012 8:31:31 PM PDT by BlueDragon (going to change my name to "Nobody" then run for elective office)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]

To: BlueDragon
* This is all our righteousness, nothing but the blood of Jesus
181 posted on 08/24/2012 8:47:06 PM PDT by BlueDragon (going to change my name to "Nobody" then run for elective office)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: BlueDragon
I know the answers to why the Islamists shouldn't be allowed to rule...but it runs a bit deeper than "the hierarchical entities of Catholicism instead...should be the ones to rule". If I have uncovered our philosophical differences here, I must tell you, it is not news to me. I have understood this from the very beginning of our conversation.

No, I don't think you've uncovered our differences at all. You seem to believe that I believe a theocracy would be a good idea. If so, you have the wrong person. I have never been in favor of a theocracy.

Here's where I think we really differ: Because you believe Putin is guilty of rigging elections, etc., you are supporting these women because they oppose Putin.

To be perfectly frank, even if Putin was guilty of rigging elections, I still would have no sympathy for these women based on their other behavior, much of which would be criminal here in the states.

Also, because the Patriarch spoke out against the group, you believe the Orthodox Church is responsible for the group's conviction. Whereas I believe many Russians were just sick of the group's antics, and the courts probably were glad to be able to prosecute them for something.

BTW, after accusing me of lying about you excusing the PR group's activities, you did it again - you excused their activities:

Such a subtle liar you are. I most certainly never "excused" the above, save for "the use of profanity", which are just words, after all. That, and my being not too overly upset with them mugging police cadets with hugs and kisses...which "mugging" had as it's basis, it's own intended agitation of the political realm in Russia today.

As posted earlier: The group was facing seven years under the law. The prosecutor asked for three. They were sentenced to two. That begs the question: How many Russians have been sentenced to the maximum under the same law? And what did they do?

Notice the PR women didn't speak out against the "hate crime" legislation under which they were prosecuted. I didn't see in their statements where they spoke out against the anti-hate crime law itself. Instead, they merely contended that they weren't guilty of breaking it.

IMHO, we've both spent too much time talking about this ridiculous group. There are many more serious cases in the world, including cases in our own country, that merit more attention. You think these women were railroaded. I think they got what they asked for. I don't think we will change each other's opinions.

182 posted on 08/24/2012 11:42:21 PM PDT by Tired of Taxes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: Tired of Taxes

The first part of the above statement is next to meaningless.
They did make the claim the prosecution didn't make the case against them, that they were "hate crime" motivated. And that they were scarcely at all allowed to defend themselves against that core element of the charge. That element was discussed by way of "expert opinion" brought in by the prosecution to prove that crucial point, but lacked basis in actual facts of evidence. They were convicted to a large extent by "opinion", if it be any "hate crime" charge stuck. As for "hooliganism", what they did falls a bit short of what that sort of law was intended to punish, for they scarcely damaged a thing. Leaving only the less than proven, religious hate crime stuff. The charges brought were a poor fit.

What is up with this other weird tangent? They are somehow supposed to be opposing "hate crime" law? What good would that do them? Bringing up that element is ridiculous. Is that the best you've got?

Try reading what my stated reasons for opposing this prosecution are. I have been extensive enough. Election irregularities are but one part of the larger overall picture. Am I supposed to touch upon every aspect of that larger setting?

Flat, linear descriptions of the type which you have expounded, misidentify more than adequately describe. Hence my continued effort to deny those descriptions to be fair assessment, or the real truth behind the story, the only parts which can matter.

Why persist in trying to tell me what I believe? Like you know better my own mind, than I do?
I guess subtleties, and layers of complexity are over your head. You offer above, more lopsided, woefully limited comprehension -- interestingly enough, favoring the status quo of the State. The very storyline they have been wanting to push. Half-truths designed to mislead (away from the substance of the complaint the protest punks made) leaving Putin's gang apparently more firmly in control.

"Hey, don't look at us, we are the good guys. It's those profane punks who are the real threat to your humanity. Just look at how indecent they are, blah, blah, blah..."

That issue, the emerging Church/State issues, and how such a blend is problematic given the situation in Russia (if not most anywhere), is still much larger than the conviction of Pussy Riot, in and of itself. The trial simply helped underscore those elements particularly and presently Russian.

The Patriarch publicly called for the prosecution. Now he and the church are stuck with the outcome, regardless of how much that may irk some.
The Church is being increasingly linked to the Putin regime. That can be or become a big problem, undermining the mission of the Church, turning the Church into a moral/political arm of the State -- driving many away, making it more difficult to trust the Church, since who in their right mind trusts Putin & his crew? Obama maybe?

Those are the things I "believe", that I've been trying to say. It is not limited to the overly simplistic "just because they also oppose Putin" or oppose and hate the church, etc. That sort of thing is the exact line from the Putin administration. And you are consistent in repeating it.

As far as any "excusing" of these profane punks went, I underlined and explained as honestly as possible, to what extent I did explain their reasons, or as you wish to put it, "excuse".

That admission of what my own words were intended to mean, falls far short of the way which you attempted to characterize, what I allegedly "excused".

Burning, overturned police vehicles? You included such and more in your initial list. That sort of over-reach is simply effort to dismiss the argument of those which you are in disagreement with.

I see right through that sort of half-baked "crap, crap, holy crap", to borrow a phrase from the newly minted convicts.

It's fairly obvious to me you either do not understand what I've been trying to say all along, or are unwilling to contemplate the implications of that which I have expressed.

You are correct we will not agree. Otherwise as a mind reader, you suck.

183 posted on 08/25/2012 2:50:37 AM PDT by BlueDragon (going to change my name to "Nobody" then run for elective office)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: BlueDragon
In typing my last reply, I hesitated to use the word "believe" because I figured you would respond, "How do you know what I believe? What are you, a mind reader?" I'm not at all surprised by your response. But, you yourself have been making erroneous assumptions about what I think, so I figured I might as well tell what I've construed about your beliefs based on your posts.

What is up with this other weird tangent? They are somehow supposed to be opposing "hate crime" law? What good would that do them? Bringing up that element is ridiculous. Is that the best you've got?

By pointing out the PR group's obvious lack of interest in opposing anti-hate crime legislation, here's what I'm getting at: They most likely support anti-hate crime laws. That's the irony in the whole story. Do you know what this PR group has been protesting against? Not just Putin's election and the Orthodox Church. They have been protesting against restrictions on abortion and in favor of "LGBT" issues. They are on the far left politically. Therefore, they most likely support the very kind of law under which they themselves were prosecuted - as long as they themselves aren't the ones being convicted. (If you can find evidence that they oppose such legislation, post it, but I don't want to click on a link to one of the PR websites. I checked one PR website for more information, and it turned out to be pornographic.)

That issue, the emerging Church/State issues, and how such a blend is problematic given the situation in Russia (if not most anywhere), is still much larger than the conviction of Pussy Riot, in and of itself.

Well, here's one point on which we might agree: The conviction of PR is not very important in the grand scheme of things. We're only talking about it because the press is driving the story, and celebrities and other misguided people are supporting the group. Meanwhile, Russian politics is not what people are talking about. And there are many other cases in the world that deserve far more attention than this one.

Burning, overturned police vehicles? You included such and more in your initial list. That sort of over-reach is simply effort to dismiss the argument of those which you are in disagreement with.

I don't see how pointing out their many activities is an overreach. They were prosecuted for the nature of one of those activities.

Speaking of hooligans, btw, someone stole from our car last night. But, hey, maybe whoever did the stealing was just protesting against oil dependency... maybe I should just try to understand their message...

No, nope. We're never going to see eye to eye on this issue. Good day.

184 posted on 08/25/2012 11:17:42 AM PDT by Tired of Taxes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: Tired of Taxes

Because you claimed I was defending or excusing such which include burning, overturned police vehicles, etc.

Can't you see that? I excused no such things.

As far as the irony you were pointing towards, yeah, I got that part right off the bat. No need for you to have to explain it. I can well enough imagine you posted that with a smug little smile on your face, too.

What is actually more ironic, while you continue to post against crime in general, mentioning your own car being broken into, etc., the "hate crimes" this group have been convicted of, could hardly have occurred.

That is, unless the mocking of Putin's recent exploitation of the Church in using it as campaign backdrop "scenery" (both physical & conceptual) and the mocking of some of the "religious" in the blind following of the man, can be best interpreted and defined as "hate".

Which ends up with YOU supporting the hate crime legislation! Even as it was misapplied! How's that for irony?

It's not like Putin's electoral competition ran on a pro-crime platform, either. But he did paint his opposition as being of the lawless profane sort such as these punkers.

You seem to keep trying to do the same thing, to me.

The inherent irony, the reality turned inside out, is obviously lost upon you.

It's a good thing you have decided to have made your "last reply" to me concerning this. The hole you dig just keeps getting bigger.

185 posted on 08/25/2012 12:08:43 PM PDT by BlueDragon (going to change my name to "Nobody" then run for elective office)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: BlueDragon
Because you claimed I was defending or excusing such which include burning, overturned police vehicles, etc. Can't you see that? I excused no such things.

You have defended/excused their "protest" inside a cathedral even though they were disrupting everything and using foul language.
Here are the other activities you've defended:

You've defended their interruption of the court hearing (according to the translation, they were using profane language there, too):

The trial they disrupted... interrupting the hearing set to send 2 leading curators of contemporary critical art in Russia to prison. needed interrupting. Simply respectfully "protesting" outside wouldn't accomplish diddly squat. That action most certainly WAS civil disobedience.

You defended their pranks:

The one with the guy running on foot over the top of the "KGB" political police official's car qualifies as a form of civil disobedience. It was funny in a way. The guy making a fool of himself did a good job of making a fool of the political minders/ political police.

You defended the women for walking up to and forcibly kissing policewomen who quite obviously were trying to fight them off:

The girls kissing other girls -- whom cunning fish termed "attacks on police cadets" --- were "attacks" of unasked for hugs and kisses. Oh the horror!

You have been consistently defending this group.

I can well enough imagine you posted that with a smug little smile on your face, too.

Not so. I'm not smiling at all. Discussions on the internet can be very frustrating because no one really knows each other and cannot see each other (therefore, cannot read facial expressions). So, everyone fills in the blanks with their own imagination, whether we realize we're doing it or not. When you read what I've written, you imagine me smiling smugly. And, when I read your posts, I hear the voice of Stewie on Family Guy. That's why these types of discussions never get anywhere.

Which ends up with YOU supporting the hate crime legislation! Even as it was misapplied! How's that for irony?

I oppose "hate crime" legislation because all crimes are hate crimes. IMHO, public disturbance and harassment are bad enough. I don't care what reason this group used for their public disturbance. I don't care if they were poking fun at the church (which they were) or criticizing Putin. Based on their other despicable behaviors (for example, having public sex as a form of protest), I wouldn't care if their message was the opposite of left-wing, and they were protesting in favor of traditional marriage and against abortion.

When I first heard the story, I was on their side... but decided to do some digging. When I found out what they actually did in the cathedral, I thought two years was too excessive. When I found out the maximum they faced was seven years - and that the prosecutor asked for three - two years didn't sound so long. And then when I found out about their other "performances" in public, the story was complete - it's obvious they've been a nuisance, and the public probably wanted to catch them on something and teach them a lesson.

There are other real cases of innocent people being thrown into prison wrongly in other countries (and in our country, too). The only reason these women are receiving so much international support is that they're left-wing.

186 posted on 08/26/2012 1:40:39 PM PDT by Tired of Taxes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: Tired of Taxes
Here's the parts of the paragraph you wrote which I objected to. Notice how it starts. With things I in no way defended, but which you lumped in there with all. Which is why I called you a LIAR.

The bolded portions I of course in no way defended, and objected to your adding those. Then you end with the twisted and specious

Which is galling, for you bring up these things consistently to provide cover for the sham of a trial, ending with them convicted of "hate crimes", which you otherwise claim to oppose. Some claim. HA.

I don't believe you. You seem all for it, in this instance. Along with having repeatedly reminded you they were not on trial for these other things mentioned (which you seem rather desperate to pin on myself also) I pointed out to you also, that they were not allowed much opportunity for defense against those particular "hate crime" charges, either.

As others here have mentioned, including myself, the charges didn't fit well. Something like trespass, disturbing the peace, etc., would be more fitting. I didn't as you say "excuse" the actions as much as you would like to twist my own words into meaning. They could well enough have been tried for other disturbances of "the peace", and I wouldn't much complain of criminal, "civic" charges in and of themselves, for those other offenses. But they were not put on trial for those other disturbances, no matter how much you'd like to obfuscate your way away from that. Which leaves us in the end with a misapplication or miscarriage of justice having your seeming support.

I can only assume, judging from your own words, it is because you find PR offensive. Jesus never promised us we would not be "offended" for His sake. He promised us the opposite.

What is truly frustrating here, is the scarce attention paid to all the rest of the pertinent issues touched upon. I can only conclude you wish to avoid looking into the more difficult elements which extend beyond that which I've mentioned. That sort of thing is near replica of how the social "conversation" went on in Russia concerning the trials, first of the art curators, then Pussy Riot.

Although it is easy enough to see how many of the "forbidden images" can be found offensive, the curators too, were brought up on "hate crimes". Concerning that trial; http://finrosforum.fi/art-trial-reveals-clash-of-russian-cultures

Russian society was pretty well split over that issue.

Of course no charges were brought against the "vandal", but I can easily enough understand why he tore the image in two which he did. It was without a doubt provocative. I don't much like that image, and another like it, in particular. Using the same reasoning which you've previously employed against my own person, (here used for "excusing" the vandal) am I now to be seated with the fundamentalist Orthodox babushkas?

Yet you've continued here to make one over-simplistic statement after another, ending the latest diatribe with the partially true, (which results in coming across as another LIE);

The only" The ONLY? What of the Orthodox priests whom opposed the trial, conducted as it was, with the charges which were brought? Are they of the profane libertine left also?

I object to the phrasing, using the word "only". You have held closely to the Party line. Congratulations comrade. Putin and his band of powerful thieves thank you.

Alexander Kosolapov: Caviar-Icon

Bon Appetit!


187 posted on 08/28/2012 9:28:15 AM PDT by BlueDragon (going to change my name to "Nobody" then run for elective office)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: Buckhead
These women are not airheads. They are Russian dissident intellectuals with a direct lineage to Soviet Refuseniks. They are citing Dostoevksy and scripture in their Court statements to put their protests into the historical, theological and political context that gives them meaning. Your arguments are as valid as those of the prosecutors of all the refuseniks. They have general statures against offenses against public order that use to lock up anyone they don’t like. And you’re cheering them on.

Thanks bro. I will actually go ahead and take your word for all this. I, frankly, don't have the time nor the energy to put into 'Pussy Riot' issues. Right now, the fight is on my streetcorner.

To that end, please send me your phone number by freepmail again.

188 posted on 11/11/2012 7:39:00 AM PST by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-188 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson