Putin deals with Civil Disobedience

When someone claims to be engaging in “Civil Disobedience” he means “We are the state. You have to obey our laws, but we do not have to obey our own laws.”

Observe that Bill Ayers, Obama’s bomb making pal, never spent a day in jail despite having organized the bombing of numerous buildings to “protest the war” – actually of course, he was a state department proxy making war on the Pentagon, hence, no jail time. If you try bombing the Pentagon to protest the latest erroneous drone strike, you will get a big surprise.

But when state department proxies committed acts of piracy against Putin’s state, they got a big surprise too.

Greenpeace has committed trespass, vandalism, and piracy on the high seas all over the world, acts that a hundred years ago would have resulted in them hanging from yardarm, and have never received any real punishment. Until now.

Take a look at the expressions on their faces.  They are thinking

“Hey, surely they cannot charge us with piracy on the high seas just because we engaged in piracy on the high seas, can they?  Can they?”

Please Putin, please, hang them from the yardarm.

24 Responses to “Putin deals with Civil Disobedience”

  1. […] Observe that Bill Ayers, Obama’s bomb making pal, never spent a day in jail despite having organiz… […]

  2. […] Putin deals with pirates. […]

  3. It appears that the Ruskies will be charging the Greenpeacers with Piracy

    Too bad the max sentence here is 15 years and not hanging.

  4. Didn’t France do something similar years ago?

    • jim says:

      France sank the Greenpeace ship, the rainbow warrior, with no one on board. This, however, was only a minor inconvenience, since it was paid for with lightly laundered government money.

  5. Alrenous says:

    My concern with attributing this to Putin is that, were Putin to attempt a similar analysis of what we did, he would get the personal responsibility wrong. Why are we better placed to analyze Russian politics than the reverse?

    My concern with getting the personal responsibility wrong is that one day, Putin will conflict with the real decision-maker (if they exist) and then Russia will do something unexpected but not unpredictable.

    • jim says:

      You have seen all those photo essays comparing manly Putin with unmanly Obama. Putin looks like he runs Russia. Obama looks like the Cathedral’s hapless PR guy.

    • jim says:

      I think I am pretty good at seeing the unseen, hearing the unspoken, and reading the unwritten. And I think Putin runs Russia and Obama does not run America.

    • Thales says:

      Putin is old school tribal leader, a leader of merit. He is there by demonstrable ability to crush all below him. If someone could usurp Putin, he would. No one can, thus he remains.

      Obama is there by way of Affirmative Action. He is a cipher. When he is gone, the Cathedral will install another marrionette that looks and sounds remarkably similar, only a bit smarter (i.e.: whiter) and thus less reliance on the teleprompter.

      • Alrenous says:

        @Jim @Thales

        Well yes, that’s true. I didn’t say Obama, though, because I don’t know how Putin would describe American politics. I just know he’d get it wrong.

        So we’re concluding that Russian politics is definitively less sophisticated than American politics?

        • Thales says:

          Until such time as George Soros starts openly calling the shots, yes.

        • Samson J. says:

          I don’t know how Putin would describe American politics. I just know he’d get it wrong.

          Did you read Putin’s recent piece in the New York Times? It was hilariously accurate and perceptive.

          • Alrenous says:

            The bit about Syria? Has he written anything else? He speaks of ‘the United States’ which is vague.

            What I want is the people I need to plug into Bueno de Mesquita’s political model to get an accurate forecast of what the US will do next. Nobody knows who these people are.

        • jim says:

          As Samson says, observe Putin’s extremely perceptive New York Times piece.

          Also, recall that Obama’s handlers did not know the difference between the Malvinas and Maldives.

          In the recent Australian election campaign, the Australian Broadcasting Company campaigned, and continues to campaign, for the browning of Australia. All the material that they published on this topic appeared under the byline of various Australians, but it seemed obvious to me that much of it was written in Washington by people profoundly unfamiliar with Australian culture and history, presumably by the same leading lights of the State Department who do not know the difference between the Malvinas and the Maldives.

          I don’t think that “sophisticated” is quite the right word for a system that results in ignorant idiotic courtiers in Washington ruling countries far away. If they had given their Australian servants a free hand, they might have won, would certainly have done much better, but presumably they did not trust them. Or perhaps they thought they were the really smart sophisticated people.

          • Alrenous says:

            “Presumably the same leading lights.”

            Who? Who hired them? Who can fire them? Are they going to quit or transfer, and if so, why?

            The conclusion is that we know the answers for a country thousands of miles away: Putin. Himself. Nobody. No. But for a country zero miles away, we don’t. The reason is sophisticated obfuscation.

  6. Vlad Putin is a hero for our times.

  7. Scharlach says:

    I’m beginning to think that my (future) children should learn Russian. Does the Cathedral operate in Russia? Or is European-style progressivism a fringe there?

  8. fnn says:

    For a time there was some right-wing civil disobedience directed against abortion clinics. Then came RICO indictments and new draconian federal laws threatening abortion protesters with ten years in prison.

    • Red says:

      A fully accounting of what happened with the anti abortion movement would be interesting information.

  9. Alex says:

    When someone claims to be engaging in “Civil Disobedience” he means “We are the state. You have to obey our laws, but we do not have to obey our own laws.”

    “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

  10. Peter Blood says:

    Hoist those scurvy dogs from the highest yardarm!

Leave a Reply