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.
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.