Well, your impression was correct - I’d not seen them. Following your links, I watched the one in the church and another one that appeared to be in a court room. Worth the trip to fill out the picture, so thanks.
The Wiki entry on them doesn’t quite correspond to Cunning Fish’s narrative, as the group wasn’t formed as such until August 2011, though it emerged from the group CF referred to. And, obviously, they can’t be punished in this case for what they did on some other occasion.
The translation of the lyrics to their “song” at the cathedral didn’t contain profanity beyond the word “crap,” but that in itself is not very signfiicant.
Giving due regard to the videos, I grant the point that the disruptions they caused are sufficient to warrant their physical removal from the premises and their arrest on very minor charges. If all I knew was the videos, and nothing of the court statements, I would have very little sympathy for them. But their court statements are eloquent and compelling for the reasons that are obvious if you read them. The protests themselves, not so much. They are also on a slippery slope of self-justification, insofar as what they think is appropriate to do.
May I suggest we agree that (1) their deeper message as set out in their court statements has merit; (2) their time, manner and place of expression were legitimately curtailed at the time; and (3) they were excessively punished thereafter?
This group exists since about 2008. I don’t think it makes any difference if they took a name “Pussy Riot”(for PR reason) in 2011.
That is their earlier videos, you can see all that same faces:
Spraying urine on police officers and playing outrage over “illegal” arrest. Pay attention to babies these vermins always hang with them to make police soft on them:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6B_mDPtz9t4
“Humiliating a cop at his home”. A flashmob in a small town’s police station involving harassment of random policemen and disrupting their work.
part 1:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i80awcTO7GA
part2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJwzQ_AoUbk
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.