Friday, December 27, 2013

Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin and the Grey Lady - 'Putin is a social conservative and a fierce patriot who, like many Americans, opposes regime change in the name of democracy.' (But please see my cautionary end note.)


Vladimir Vladimirovich and the Grey Lady

Putin and the Grey Lady


Bill Keller, editorialist for The NY Times and former executive editor of the paper, has recently penned a strong attack on Vladimir Putin arguing that Putin’s leadership “deliberately distances Russia from the socially and culturally liberal West”, describing the Kremlin’s policies as “laws giving official sanction to the terrorizing of gays and lesbians, the jailing of members of a punk protest group for offenses against the Russian Orthodox Church, the demonizing of Western-backed pro-democracy organizations as ‘foreign agents’, expansive new laws on treason, limits on foreign adoptions.”
Keller, who during his tenure as executive editor of The NY Times argued for the invasion of Iraq and wrote glowingly of Paul Wolfowitz, makes no mention of Moscow’s diplomatic maneuvers that successfully avoided a US military intervention in Syria or the Russian asylum given to Eric Snowden.  Keller, who had supported the US intervention in Syria by writing, “but in Syria, I fear prudence has become fatalism, and our caution has been the father of missed opportunities, diminished credibility and enlarged tragedy,” also made no mention of Seymour Hersh’s stinging dissection of the Obama administration’s misinformation campaign regarding the sarin attacks in Syria.  Hersh’s piece, which drives grave doubts into the case against Assad actually having carried out the attacks, was not published in The New Yorker or in The Washington Post, publications that regularly run his work.
Keller focuses on a Russian law that bans the promotion of gay lifestyles in Russia, a far cry from “giving official sanction to the terrorizing of gays and lesbians”, while failing to mention that according to his own paper, 88% of Russians support the law.
Putin did expel the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) from Russia, cutting off the $50 million in aid, most of which went to pro-democracy and anti-corruption groups.  The Kremlin believed that much of this money wound up supporting the protest movement against Putin that emerged in 2011.  If Russian funding had been suspected in the Occupy Wall Street Movement would The New York Times have supported Putin for promoting social equality in the US?  If the punk band Pussy Riot had broken into a prominent Jewish temple in New York, instead of a Moscow cathedral, and defamed it to call attention to the millions of Palestinians living in refugee camps, would the young ladies have done some time? And if so, would they have received supportfrom all corners of stardom? . . .

End note: 

     All very interesting, but personally I would like to hear from an arms-length expert, one who is not part of the American university high PC priesthood, on Russian politics on this whole topic. 

     Because some knowledgeable people are in agreement with what is written above, while, on the other hand, equally convincing observers and political actors have been saying that independent nationalist leaders in Russia and those who criticize non-Russian immigration have gotten into big trouble with Russian authorities. 

     Hence there seems be two entirely opposite views of what is taking place over there, and of course how that would relate to the ongoing fall of the open-borders multicultural West.