Pussy Riot Is Much Ado Propaganda For Naïve Americans

international | gender and sexuality | opinion/analysis Thursday February 13, 2014 01:35 by Joe Justice - none

Pussy Riot, a Russian female punk band of recent notoriety, very much seems to have one tunnel vision goal—at least as reported to Western audiences by Western media—and that is to discredit and defame Russian President Vladimir Putin. The band name ‘riot’ is not hard to understand, as their supposed “art form” resembles a riot, as punk music often enough does; but it is more anti-music in its ear-splitting aggression. Behind scenes of this shallow morality play …lays larger political stories, pseudo-stories, propaganda, foreign inspired revolutions with plenty of American tax money being circulated to bribe public relations schemes and more lately accusations that even NGOs that supposedly care about human rights and the environment have been infiltrated to the point that their real mission is to engage in propaganda operations.

Pussy Riot Is Much Ado Propaganda For Naïve Americans

By Joe Justice

{Note: If you agree with this essay feel free to email, post, and generally disseminate—no permission required.}

Pussy Riot, a Russian female punk band of recent notoriety, very much seems to have had one tunnel vision goal—at least as reported to Western audiences by Western media—and that is to discredit and defame Russian President Vladimir Putin. Their raucous riots, engaged as anti-social actions (they call “guerilla protests”) seem to amount to little more than obnoxious forms of non-rationalized angst as noise pollution.

Their 15 pivotal minutes of fame transpired a couple of years ago, that is two weeks before presidential elections were heard in Russia, in which Vladimir Putin was up for re-election. Then this band of bandits with no musical talent, broke out into a cacophonous and anarchist display of guitar rage, as violent form of psychological insult, by protesting inside one of Russia’s biggest and renown Orthodox Churches—namely shock and awe blitzkrieg as calculated surprise and confusion—for the edification all congregations who attend such kind of religious institutions at the Cathedral of Christ the Savior. (Ironically Madonna had just landed in Russia with her coterie of staff—and this coincidence compounds at the AI concert hosting Pussy Riot in Brooklyn).

The band’s name choice ‘riot’ is not hard to understand, as their supposed “art form” resembles a riot alright, as punk music often enough does; yet here it is more anti-music or ear-splitting aggression (and could have been included in U.S. repertoire of torture music technique recently used in secret and not-so secret torture camps).

Whereas their performance costumes are comprised of a bright and gaudy array of monochromic revolution colors as jarring a phenomenon of tackiness as you might imagine.

While their pornographic name “Pussy Riot” easily conjures up any and all manner of pandemonium and sexual affront—something calculated to add insult to injury—especially when done in a staid institution not especially known for supporting erotic pleasure. Thus their actions of siege warfare at that church stage as covert coup could have equally insulted dead corpses in any graveyard.

So naturally when their pussies (their term) overtook what is a space normally for a mass of ritualized sleepiness, so as to upstage a riot, strategically and premeditatively decided in advance, that is to protest “one” political figure versus millions of believers, all hell broke out.

Granted one could admit such a stunt could be viewed as mildly amusing, that is in its innovation, even if obvious form of deliberate abuse. But it is fair to ask what personality types are attracted to punk music in general. It’s the aftermath of the political propaganda we have been fed that we need pay attention, such as to how the United States media, and disparate players as maybe some flight crews from Madonna Transport, interprets and manipulates this particular aspect of a larger anarchist, feminist movement in Russian. Perhaps there is something far more nefarious going on as psychological warfare in which we Americans are the real butt of the joke?

Wikipedia defines Pussy Riot as an “…anti-Putinist punk band…”. Whereas ‘Putinist”, the concept, is noted to be a Western media term of origin (and this factoid has much significance), as focus of anti-Putinist propaganda then seems not to have much evolved from within Russia or by the Russian people. Instead this media saturation stunt of capitalizing on simplistic explanations was likely influenced heavily by foreign sources (not too surprisingly as even we Americans have come to realize many news stories here too have hidden political agendas).

(See Scott Horton’s interview with Chase Mader, author of “The Passion of Bradley Manning: The Story behind the Wikileaks Whistleblower” at:
http://scotthorton.org/interviews/2014/01/22/012214-cha...adar/ here we learn and from Madar’s article “Hawks for humanity: Does the human rights industry adore war?” that apparently had to be posted overseas, organization that are supposed to be free from biased political agendas have changed their mode of operation. See: http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/1/hawks-for-....html.) P.S. Scott Horton is always a good source of real debate about real issues and deserves far more financial support.

Behind the scenes of a this shallow morality play about women and guitars (anti-Russian and anti-Putin psychological warfare) provided as sound bite entertainment and titillating conceit here in the West (surprisingly by what one can argue as Jewish run leftist media outlets that usually do a better job of selecting their battles), all manner of sensationalism is wafting that includes connotations of vaginas and riot gear.

But therein lays larger political stories, pseudo-stories, propaganda, foreign inspired revolutions with, again apparently, plenty of American tax money being circulated to bribe public relations schemes and more lately accusations now that even NGOs that supposedly care about human rights and the environment have been infiltrated to the point that their real mission is to engage in propaganda operations for certain groups with our foreign policy bureaucracy? See also: “Amnesty International Propaganda Targets Russia & Syria: Shameless propaganda stunt by US State Department run, Soros-funded front Amnesty International,” by Tony Cartalucci at: http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2012/04/amnesty-inter....html

One such accusation is that Vladimir Putin is connected to a coterie of police state cronies (Siloviki) who have worked together from within their security state bureaucracies in Russia, and this cabal is controlling certain kinds of political initiatives not thought especially democratic.

Related was the imprisonment of Mikhail Khodorkowsky for 10 years for his tax evasion while he controlled the Yukos Petroleum Company, etc. Supposedly Yukos was absorbed by special interests including Siloviki, etc. And obviously it is related as a New York Times Op-Ed Column by Joe Nocera continues the insinuations that Putin let these women out of jail to deflect from protects at the Sochi Olympics (and even if true it doesn’t prove anything save the man has some common political sense). But Nocera equally brings up the Khodorkowsky story about his billions and at least admits to his shady dealings—but Pussy Riot (these delightful young women—come on “you couldn’t ask for more appealing activists” writes Nocera with his kid gloves version minus and real intuitive assessment? Imagine if this kind of thing would have happened in a New York Synagogue—do you think no one would have shouted out “anti-Semitic hate crime” and demanded far more than two years in imprisonment? Do you think leftist media and people like Madonna would be making a big deal about this? Why is Amnesty International promoting this particular instance of human rights violation when there are many far worst situations?

But then who wants to learn about all those many details of Russia’s political detritus and rumormongering when most of us Americans avoid knowing too much about our own back home? Ain’t it enough to know two young women from this band (or x-band members as they were very recently kicked off the band by the other band members) don’t want “…to be led by a shirtless man on a horse…”)? Well hell, they come all the way to America (who is paying for their tour) after being in prison for several months to delivery that bit of sophistry—nothing superficial or phony here?

Nevertheless, according to media rhetoric and some protestors in Russia, their government is a pretense democracy (you just knew you could never trust those Godless types). And yet ain’t it ironic, given the United States is equally a pretend democracy too—with all manner of tinsel pretense for any third party candidate trying to gain any real chance of winning a high office (especially if not in tune with certain special interests objectives—and instead wanting to actual work primarily for the people of our own country). And ain’t ironic too there are accusations of rigged elections there too?

Nevertheless it has become obvious to most of the world the United States is pretty much a full-blown police state (that is with all the apparatchik in place in case any real crackdown and marital law ensues that is very likely to happen at some point) and currently with all kinds of crooked stuff going on and Wall Street (New York hello!!!!)—and such as The Department of Homeland Security’s and NSA’s ever increasing far-reaching tentacles of information gathering and control (and their orders to purchase over a billion of hollow point bullets?).

So why then would some circles of political suasion here in the West be so farcically looking to point fingers elsewhere such as at Putin and Russia?

Maria Alyokhina and Nadia Tolokonnikova (both recently released from imprisonment after serving 21 months of their two-year sentences for ‘hooliganism’ (these two x-band members touring the United States and elsewhere to promote their anti-Putinist invective and also prisoner rights), argue to all who will listen, that President Putin is a dictator. (But a question we should be asking is why are these two women suddenly so eager to travel here to America to narrow the supposed feminist band’s mission of anarchism to mostly foment on Putin and his supposedly gays rights bashing in Russia?).

Also given the reality of the enormity of imprisonment in the United States, and many cases of prisoner abuse in this country, and the privatization of prisoners for profit and the lessening of resource to house prisoners—why do these women see America as the beacon on the hill? Seems a little hypocritical for Western media to be hosting this parade of chatter—that is against the unspoken backdrop of Edward Snowden needing to find refuge outside the United States such as in Russia and the fact that Chelsea Manning was abused as a human rights prisoner for whistle-blowing on our federal government?

One has to wonder what’s up, given the leftist media outlets, which have been hosting these self-appointed spokespersons of Putinist oppression, is these college women who give us very few specific and verifiable reasons as to why Putin is such a dictator—don’t they have the intellectual wherewithal even if one graduated as a journalist and they both had plenty time to think about it?

Being able to scream noise like adolescents while jumping and shaking one’s fists in tantrum on a church stage while pretending to play guitar doesn’t really qualify one to speak with much authority about anything does it? So it seems especially dishonest the New York media has taken these women at face value, apparently assuming some kind of attitude of moral superiority to us common mass that is playing their shoddy journalism and comedy with low standards of credibility?

But wait a minute!!! Putin is also homophobic!! According to some sources he’s blatantly oppressive to homosexuals. However the sources here who give airtime to this assertion from these dissidents, seem to be slipping us some dishonest or distorted information (regarding to Putin’s actual stated stances)? BBC actual did a live interview with Vladimir Putin that suggests a very different story and details.

Whereas we are being told what seems exaggerated accusations on how terribly Russian gays are suffering at the hands of this singular Vladimir Putin?

[Note: This opinion piece is not written by a Russian: but rather an American. This writer gets no compensation of any kind for his opinions and is not aligned with any political group. He has never been to Russia and knows very few people from Russia. These opinions are truly his own as an American. Believe what you want but this is the truth. Furthermore there is no claim here to be some expert or to know a great deal regarding either Putin or the internal politics of Russia—but sometimes you don’t need to be, as some messages don’t require that level of specialization.]

If Putin is a homophobe and is oppressing homosexual lifestyles there would there not likely be several examples of his behavior or attitudes depicting such a truth since he has been in the political arena for a long time? Where are the instances recorded? If we check alternative sources of what exactly the so-called anti-gay law in Russian actually stand for we get alternative explanations that seem far less alarming and contrary to the story we are being hyped?

Still a propaganda war has begun that includes various sources of demagoguery as even a Youtube video with rap song performance singing all manner of distortions and reverse hatred—while pretending to be pro-gay (and ironically as polished and ready to play just as this Brooklyn concert kicks off with the same message of shirtless Putin)? It is a macho mash up of hate Putin (because well he poses sometimes in pictures without a shirt—being a bit narcissistic) and then the shirtless man suddenly morphs into a closet gay as innuendo) a video that while adapting a hate attitude like a vicious gang-banger band (calling Putin a closet gay while being pro-gay) pawns itself off from pro-loving and pro-caring enlightened folk?

Whereas Amy Goodman briefly interviewed these two anarchists with a question, as if they were Apollonian priestesses from the Delphi Oracle dispensing true wisdom and knowledge, asking them what they would ask of leaders Obama and Putin, and their response to Putin “…aren’t you sick of it yet…” and Obama “…don’t be afraid to speak your mind…” (paraphrased) is about as lame as one could possibly get—and yet Amy Goodman is normally pretty sharp with her capacity to interview and choosing who to interview as worthy?

OK, to be the devil’s advocate, while on trial these women claimed Putin had created a “one-man” dictatorship in which the voices of the masses go unheard—and let’s assume this is true and there is some manner of dictatorship going on of sorts in Russia—still the mixed messages reaching us here in the States are far from rational or clean (which usually is the case when the issue is about controversy in Russia). The mere fact that this is happening on the eve of the Sochi Olympics is questionable.

But then there is this one Ms. Minky Worden, no less than the Human Rights Watch Director of Global Initiatives—who ironically has little of the type of background you’d expect from a real human rights activist? Instead she is all about politics as her background is heavily related to the Democratic Party and Public Relations big time such as working for the Justice Department (where there are always fires to put out). More importantly she sounds like an attack dog for Fox News—so anyone with even the most rudimentary of intuitions can see this woman is a trained political propaganda machine. HRW and Amnesty International have been mainly reporting “one” side of the atrocities happening in Syria—and not too much of what likely were atrocities committed by the opposition supported by the United States, Israel and Saudi Arabia (in another words these non-profit NGOs too have become infiltrated by political agency with political agendas and the news media reports what they put out as if gospel truth—and this is hardly a laughing matter).

Given how Bradley Manning was treated in military style tactics, and given the true story of how the many prisoners in Guantanamo were, as some still are, locked up indefinitely, in relation to Congress attitudes of not giving a damn, and given our recent, and some say still current, history of secret renditions that has included torture and murder, and given the entire world’s high levels of anger over NSA spying, what moral high ground do people working for American foreign policy have making a big splash about pussy riots?

American media pundits (and comedians) seemingly are saturating our supposed republic with disinformation, either naively or deliberately, as if to lead Americans around with various red herrings? How could an NGO be infiltrated—well that is not to hard to figure given the NSA has been likely listening to their communications with potential hostile information, but then they learn about a job opening and low and behold political operatives with an agenda are applying for such jobs with all manner of insight on how to apply and what to say in an interview.

Where the jokester Stephen Colbert’s Report humor piece (choosing to interview these women he referred to as ‘girls’) asked them to describe what got them into trouble (as sentenced for hooliganism) and one of them replied: “…singing a ‘fun’ song in a church…” followed up with “…we sing other fun songs too like …Putin piss off…”.

Quickly then we are made aware, from this sophomoric attitude, comedy context aside, that we are arrogantly being asked to consider these women, who seem to possess little more political or social maturity than a Miley Cyrus or a Justin Bieber, to be worthy of our attention for serious consideration to their grievances, that is being convicted two years for a hate crime against a religion.

These are not people who have suffered torture. They were not condemned to indefinite detention. They were made aware of their offenses and given a trial in a habeas corpus manner (however imperfect), and that trial has become a political documentary of sorts. One could argue their sentences were harsh but they were not victims of third strike laws in which they were sent back to prison for life (things that happen with repetitive redundancy here within the United States).

Instead they were sentenced for the equivalent of a misdemeanor, for what seemed a hate-crime, in this case against a religion. And we note hate-crimes are something plenty Zionists especially like to promote as legitimate forms of prosecution and persecution—even if it is a manner of well we don’t like certain kinds of criticism they claim are anti-Semitic or anti-Zionist regardless of third party objectivity? There are laws now established that makes what is referred to as holocaust denial as a crime (for improper thinking) and people are being imprisoned for this sort of thing. Equally we have organizations here in the United States like Campus Watch that acts as an oppressive force calling every criticism against Israeli policy as if a human rights violation or a social crime supposedly making Jewish people feel uncomfortable (but the fact that Americans are killing Muslims all over the place doesn’t really matter since, well, they are just darker skinned Semitic peoples). Even the ADL engages in political witch-hunts here whereas people like Norman Finkelstein loose their professorial jobs because they speak harshly of holocaust profiteering?

Equally plenty of presumably leftist professionals have zeroed in on condemning Edward Snowden’s whistle-blowing—including the likes of a Dean of the University of Chicago Law School Geoffrey Stone. See Chris Hedges debate this law professor at: http://www.democracynow.org/2013/6/12/is_edward_snowden...ero_a ). Apparently what matters is that since American foreign policy has placed Israel’s welfare before even that of the National security of the United Stated then many flanks of those who call themselves Jewish (even if secular and are really not) find the psychological wherewithal to host double standards?

A quick search on Maria Alyokhina reveals she was recognized as a “political prisoner” early on by the Union of Solidarity for Political Prisoners. This recognition is from an organization that seems primarily meant to support oppositional forces in Iran—supposed enemies of Israel and Saudi Arabia?

Is this just coincidence or could it be that Putin is getting a lot of flack of late because Russia has been on friendlier terms with the Iranian and Syrian government than what Israel, Saudi Arabia or some here in the U.S. like, and he has not bowed down to turn Snowden over? Is this Western-instigated media kangaroo court for gay rights in Russia not some opportunistic politically stunt—that is Russia does not automatically kowtow to Israel and United States demands that Iran and Syria submit to their commands?

What are the articulated cases against Putin is respect to his connection to the Orthodox Church as conspiracy theory about using religion politically? Some news wires and houses have claimed Putin has been cozying up to the Orthodox Church and arguing for the Church to play a bigger role in Russian life (even promoting for some media channel friendly with that predominant church to have even more reach—and thus supposedly extending his own influence).

Whereas some have argued feminism has been loosing ground while the Russian State has become more nationalistic (using religion to do so). How does that differ from many other countries including the United States and Israel being nationalistic and using religion to become more rigid and hidebound? In another words Putin is being accused of doing what many American politicians do all the time—namely playing patriotism with Godism—that is wooing Christians of one stripe or another in order to gain personal support.

He is using religion as a political tool. Well that certainly deserves some kind of blatant, in-your-face, anarchist pussy riot right in the middle of a Church for all the shock value one might expect with screeching noise, while equally succoring our American sympathies for lack of democracy and human rights (values incidentally that if they didn’t evolve from Christian morality certainly that religion helped promote them)? After all how dare any Russian people feel offended just because their symbols of sacredness were run roughshod so as to have felt violated?

Attacking religious congregations with this sort of frantic and frenetic aggressive disturbance should invite peoples’ tolerance world wide with good sport? Yet if it wasn’t meant to be an act of hate (how does one know the motives of others) it certainly looked like one, even if it could be called political protest, from what one can glean from videos on the Internet. But we in the United States are routinely taught to doubt everything about Russian motive, as we are to be forever suspecting—and by the way American athletes need to turn off their cells phones while in Russia so the Russian government doesn’t spy on them?

After all what does the word anarchism mean? It means: “I respect no law” and “I do what I want to do when I want to do it”. Sophists have written tracts that attempt to explain anarchism in more pseudo-sophisticated verbiage such as (paraphrased) “…since most forms of authority, in final analysis, prove to be self-serving and often corrupted, then I will respect no authority save myself”. In a nutshell then everyone can do whatever he or she pleases—as there is no law except the law of the self. This is the message some Russian feminists seem to want to promote and sell to American counterparts who equally have a soft spot for such sentiment to contemplate?

Why then, given the anarchist nature of Pussy Riot, do these very same people who glory in illegal acts and in-your-face affronts, expect others of a less radical nature to sympathize and empathize with their narrow-minded and juvenile take, when some very serious issues are being played out across the world? More importantly why do media people and filmmakers expect some kind of tacit approval—other then assuming we Americans are eternally shallow and can be expected to yawn at everything?

It so, then, we should support all manner of Pussy Riot events all across this great land of enlightenment here in the United States with people like the demented Samantha Powers leading the pack (she has a kind of wild-eyed The Exorcist possessed gaze too that Would be perfect for this sort of infotainment). Pair her with Mindy Worden for the dynamic duo, add Arianna Huffington leading around a carnival clown barkers from comedy central. Add Madonna and her crucifix outfit and throw in a little titillation to suggest some porn (after all we are the porn capital of the world—it’s all good). After all there are thousands of Churches in our huge Bible belt. And there is no good reason why people like Jon Stewart, and the crew at Democracy Now, Huffington Post, and those at The Nation Magazine, etc., can’t start sponsoring some of these obnoxious punk riots as they blast through complacent churches across the country (maybe doing a little fundraising at the same time) starting there of course in New York City?

You see here in the United States liberals and leftists are real big on promoting multicultural values. And as their dogma has it, it is politically “not” correct to discriminate or make fun of people because of their ethnicity, race, religion, sex, etc., but hey if it happens in Russia well then this is cause for celebration—don’t you think—its all relative?

After all we are a tolerant lot. We somehow managed to make it through The Vagina Monologues even if now we can have them all over again in operatic form. You remember The Vagina Monologues by Eva Ensler? It was a kind of theatrical masturbation celebrated as if it represented some kind of actual message of enlightenment—when in reality it was blatant form of reverse sexism to men. Even some feminists criticized the play screen as making men the enemy and more.

Nevertheless, accordingly to anarchist standards it doesn’t matter if you violate others’ values—it only matters if you personally have felt violated yourself—especially if you feel you are of some minority status—then everything is fair game—it’s because it isn’t that unusual here in the United States for certain smug forms of feminism to insult any and all manner of traditional values.

Mary Daly was one such celebrated type. And yet any close reading of her works (something Americans are not especially adept—perhaps the Russians fair better) of her work showed not just radicalism but a radical hatred of men—and yet she, apparently because she was a woman, was honored and accepted as someone supposedly worthy of social and political attention. So after the likes of her ilk you’d think our society has become inured to these kinds of preachers of double standards, such as who are vociferous against certain groups in which they criticize anything and everything perceived as slight, while other groups almost never are given wayward attention—after all you just know white men are suspect from the get go—especially if people like “theist” Putin was meeting with a Catholic Pope But oh wait a minute didn’t many Americans hate the Russians because they were so Godless?

Maybe I should give more of a damn about whistleblowers like Bradley (Chelsea Manning, Snowden and Greenwald since now we can well assume that even NGOs like AI and HRW (that are supposed to be blowing the whistle)? Again even some leftist intellectuals do not—see: “The Progressive Crack-up: As anti-NSA activism goes from protest to resistance, liberals balk” by Justin Raimondo (a man always worth reading for people who need a few brain cells stimulated in order to get interested) at AntiWar.com, see: http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2014/01/26/the-progr...k-up/. Raimondo’s AntiWar.Com website is far more valuable of a real news source and deserves far more financial support from the American public.

It’s hard to believe people like Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzales are deliberately reporting misinformation to the American people. One almost is forced to assume they are acting out of naiveté in supporting more military belligerence.

A couple of things should happen. First there should be investigative journalism should dig deep into whether non-profit organizations like HRW and AI have been turned political to distort truth to the world when that is not why they are being given monies from donors. Also if it is true the U.S. State Department is behind this then we need to know how many Secretaries of State have supported this kind of infiltration—does not anyone feel that some sacred code has been violated if true? And people need become aware so as to stop donating money to this corruption of their mission statements.

If Vladimir Putin or any of his cohorts are reading this, thank you for giving Obama at least a temporary out of these constant wars for other Middle Eastern players and their assumption that it doesn’t matter if common people are killed, bombed and maimed. Many of us Americans are not interested to supporting these Neo-Con-Artist games (even if supported as Neo-Con-Light).

Gay people here in the United State should think twice before being seduced by this tawdry political opportunism. If gay women as feminist radicals have an issue with anti-gay sentiments they might consider taking them up with the Old Testament/ Torah—as it was written before the New Testament and the Koran were written and became one the main branch of their moral prejudices:

“You shall not lie with a male as a woman; it is an abomination.” Leviticus 18:22

“If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death; their blood be upon them.” Leviticus 20:13

Amen and Good night ya’ll.

Pussy Riot, a Russian female punk band of recent notoriety, very much seems to have one tunnel vision goal—at least as reported to Western audiences by Western media—and that is to discredit and defame Russian President Vladimir Putin. The band name ‘riot’ is not hard to understand, as their supposed “art form” resembles a riot, as punk music often enough does; but it is more anti-music in its ear-splitting aggression. Behind scenes of this shallow morality play …lays larger political stories, pseudo-stories, propaganda, foreign inspired revolutions with plenty of American tax money being circulated to bribe public relations schemes and more lately accusations that even NGOs that supposedly care about human rights and the environment have been infiltrated to the point that their real mission is to engage in propaganda operations.