Do they really blame Putin? Apart from Geraldo, my impression was that most of them were hesitant to jump to any conclusions. And in this case, wasn’t pretty clear to begin with who the possible suspects were?
I wouldn’t see it’s clear, but the evidence does point down a couple of paths only. But that’s not my point here.
Wouldn’t you say that in most terrorist attacks in the last 20 years there’s pretty clear evidence as to who’s behind them? The media are never so quick to assign blame in those instances. In fact, they devote time and space to attempting to explain how it’s NOT Islamic terrorists.
So my question is why is this case different? What’s different about Putin and Russia compared to Islamo-fascists. Why is it OK to take the initial reports and anecdotal evidence, synthesize them, and draw such an emphatic preliminary conclusion in this instance?