22 ms·

Yeah, I see that link come up pretty often. First off, does it really make sense to attribute to government each and every journalist who was killed, for whatev

Yeah, I see that link come up pretty often. First off, does it really make sense to attribute to government each and every journalist who was killed, for whatever reason? Including sports reporter, including the guy from press service of the Moscow Region governor? Mind you, homicide rate in Russia is twice as high as that of the US. Sure, it looks like government isn't providing them (and everyone else, for that matter) with enough security, but it's nothing like saying it deliberately murders them. The most hard evidence for me is that Russian press itself doesn't put much emphasis on it.

tptacek 13y ago
Just so we can be clear about where we stand: the Russian government murders journalists. You'd have to present pretty clear, coherent, and surprising evidence to get me to believe otherwise. That's not helpful in an "orderly resolution of message board debate" sense, I know, but I wouldn't want to give the impression that I was endorsing this question as a meaningful debate. The Russian government murders journalists; it's literally part of their M.O.
- kutakbash 13y ago
  So somehow Russian government is unworthy of presumption of innocence? Or it is guilty as long as dominant discourse asserts it is? Once again, Russian government is not responsible for murdering journalists, there is no firm evidence it is. Certainly not for most of people on that list on the wiki.
  - tptacek 13y ago
    Even if I believed that judgements on nations must use the same jurisprudential mechanisms as criminal trials of individuals, and even if I overlooked the fact that the Russian criminal justice system doesn't fundamentally respect presumption of innocence (no surprise, given the legacy of the Soviet system), I am not an agent of a court and am in absolutely no way bound to presume anything about anybody.
    - kutakbash 13y ago
      That's a bit dodgy of you. Presumption of innocence is obviously used colloquially here. About Politkovskaya and Litvinenko: The version about Politkovskaya murder I find the most plausible is that her murder is linked with Putin's ally and appointed president of Chechnya Kadyrov. Before her death she was working on human rights violations in Chechnya, including torture. In fact, you can still find her last interview about it on Novaya Gazeta (newspaper she worked for) website, dated 9th October of 2006. What Russian government did here is covering Kadyrov and finding scapegoats who are supposed to represent Chechen 'terrorists' (opposed to Kadyrov and Russian govt). Torture committed by federal and local pro-Russian forces is still a reality in North Caucasus, just about a year ago there was a story on it in 170 thousands readers strong Russian Reporter Magazine. Western press didn't seem to give due attention to the cause Politkovskaya died for, instead preferring, as usual, to focus on apparently more important issues such as gay people forbidden to proclaim their sexuality in public. At least no one has died over that story yet. Litvinenko case is a weird one. So he is some sort of whistleblower who apparently disclosed Putin's inside job and had to die due to Polonium poisoning. The story goes like this: Litvinenko has disclosed Putin's inside job (which most likely isn't an inside job, basically it's a Russian equivalent of 9/11-as-an-inside-job story), so FSB had to make him painfully die almost in a Sicilian mafia fashion. I am not a Western layman so I don't automatically deem crazy everyone who happened to be in power and at the same time to the East from certain meridian. I see why Sicilian mafia would kill somebody after the fact: it doesn't care much about publicity and it doesn't want to be betrayed once again. But I don't see why would Putin do that, he deeply cares about his perception in the West (as long as it doesn't meddle with his authoritative pretensions and support of his electorate) and he doesn't often blow up houses (if at all). Since the word already spread and you could buy a book in Putin-blows-up-houses genre in any Russian kiosk that sells cigarettes, yellow rags and pulp fiction, killing the man responsible for that in such a bizarre fashion (poisoning someone with radioactive materiel is in the same basket with feeding someone to their pet bear, between two shots of vodka, saying 'Na zdorovje, tovarishchi') is acknowledgement of guilt. Tldr if Putin did kill Litvinenko, it was the most stupid thing he did in his entire career.
      - tptacek 13y ago
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]

tptacek 13y ago

Just so we can be clear about where we stand: the Russian government murders journalists. You'd have to present pretty clear, coherent, and surprising evidence to get me to believe otherwise. That's not helpful in an "orderly resolution of message board debate" sense, I know, but I wouldn't want to give the impression that I was endorsing this question as a meaningful debate. The Russian government murders journalists; it's literally part of their M.O.

kutakbash 13y ago
So somehow Russian government is unworthy of presumption of innocence? Or it is guilty as long as dominant discourse asserts it is? Once again, Russian government is not responsible for murdering journalists, there is no firm evidence it is. Certainly not for most of people on that list on the wiki.
- tptacek 13y ago
  Even if I believed that judgements on nations must use the same jurisprudential mechanisms as criminal trials of individuals, and even if I overlooked the fact that the Russian criminal justice system doesn't fundamentally respect presumption of innocence (no surprise, given the legacy of the Soviet system), I am not an agent of a court and am in absolutely no way bound to presume anything about anybody.
  - kutakbash 13y ago
    That's a bit dodgy of you. Presumption of innocence is obviously used colloquially here. About Politkovskaya and Litvinenko: The version about Politkovskaya murder I find the most plausible is that her murder is linked with Putin's ally and appointed president of Chechnya Kadyrov. Before her death she was working on human rights violations in Chechnya, including torture. In fact, you can still find her last interview about it on Novaya Gazeta (newspaper she worked for) website, dated 9th October of 2006. What Russian government did here is covering Kadyrov and finding scapegoats who are supposed to represent Chechen 'terrorists' (opposed to Kadyrov and Russian govt). Torture committed by federal and local pro-Russian forces is still a reality in North Caucasus, just about a year ago there was a story on it in 170 thousands readers strong Russian Reporter Magazine. Western press didn't seem to give due attention to the cause Politkovskaya died for, instead preferring, as usual, to focus on apparently more important issues such as gay people forbidden to proclaim their sexuality in public. At least no one has died over that story yet. Litvinenko case is a weird one. So he is some sort of whistleblower who apparently disclosed Putin's inside job and had to die due to Polonium poisoning. The story goes like this: Litvinenko has disclosed Putin's inside job (which most likely isn't an inside job, basically it's a Russian equivalent of 9/11-as-an-inside-job story), so FSB had to make him painfully die almost in a Sicilian mafia fashion. I am not a Western layman so I don't automatically deem crazy everyone who happened to be in power and at the same time to the East from certain meridian. I see why Sicilian mafia would kill somebody after the fact: it doesn't care much about publicity and it doesn't want to be betrayed once again. But I don't see why would Putin do that, he deeply cares about his perception in the West (as long as it doesn't meddle with his authoritative pretensions and support of his electorate) and he doesn't often blow up houses (if at all). Since the word already spread and you could buy a book in Putin-blows-up-houses genre in any Russian kiosk that sells cigarettes, yellow rags and pulp fiction, killing the man responsible for that in such a bizarre fashion (poisoning someone with radioactive materiel is in the same basket with feeding someone to their pet bear, between two shots of vodka, saying 'Na zdorovje, tovarishchi') is acknowledgement of guilt. Tldr if Putin did kill Litvinenko, it was the most stupid thing he did in his entire career.
    - tptacek 13y ago

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]