Comments on: Putin worth $40 billion

By: Michael Averko

Michael Averko — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 00:31:14 +0000

Your attempt to misrepresent my point flunks.

The point being that those prone to describing him as “another Russian punk” do so from a great distance and are unlikely to call him such in a face to face situation.

Note how you don’t seem to have problems calling the democratically elected head of state a punk. The specific phrasing “another Russian punk” can be considered passively bigoted because it suggests that being a punk is a Russian trait.

On another point of yours, dictators and bullies often use unsubstantiated characterizations of “punk” to describe others they disagree with.

As for the “civilized society”, between Russia and America, the post-Soviet score for attacking other countries is 2-nil in favor of the US.

By: Leonard V

Leonard V — Sat, 12 Jan 2008 22:33:11 +0000

“From a considerable distance, it’s safe to call a judo black belt a punk.”

Is that your position that one must have sabstantial combat prowess to call someone like Putin a punk?

Perhaps you need to remember that in a civilized sociaety, verbal exchange is an accepted manner of communication. Physical threat IS for punks and bullies. Dictators also use it a lot

By: Andy

Andy — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 10:13:58 +0000

Happy New Year!

The Die Welt interview doesn’t seem to be online or, at least, if it is online I couldn’t find it. Can any of the German speakers reading this help out with a link?

The Wall Steet Journal piece that I refer to doesn’t exist, because I should have typed Washington Post instead! I’ve fixed the typo in the article now. I assume that the article in the WaPo that the Guardian were referring to is this one by Anders Aslund on Russia’s New Oligarchy.

(Oh, and I haven’t noticed a technical problem with lots of pingbacks from comments on Russophile).

By: Russophile

Russophile — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 07:17:36 +0000

Wow, stopping by here I noticed that I can’t seem to spell of the word poisoning. Ouch that hurts to read. Sorry that that software constantly sends pingbacks even if it is from the comments attached to a post rather than in the original posting. Anyway, I fixed the spelling of that title so the original link won’t work any more.

Imagine someone printing an article like the one mentioned above ($40 billion) about Tony Blair or George Bush with zero proof. It would never make it past an editor to even discuss the rumor in print of any decent publication.

Thanks Andy for posting about it. By the way, do you still have the links to the Die Welt and Wall Street Journal articles?

Happy New Year!

By: Michael Averko

Michael Averko — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 05:37:49 +0000

Russophile

As per your link, I’m reminded of the Alexander Cockburn “beat the devil” kind of journalism.

It’s much needed to set he record straight on some commentary.

Stay tuned.

Operation Kick Ass 2008 promises to provide a number of revelations.

By: Russophile: Russian Blogs & News - Tommy Haas Poisiong Test Results Negative

Russophile: Russian Blogs & News - Tommy Haas Poisiong Test Results Negative — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 00:27:47 +0000

[...] if that were reasoning enough to assume that a tennis player had been poisoned. See this article on Putin being worth $40 billion for another example of implied guilt with zero proof. One guy makes an accusation and it can land [...]

By: Chrius Maximus

Chrius Maximus — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 15:39:32 +0000

Wow, I did not know Russia’s economy was dependent on oil exports to the US. Here I always thought that Russia exports almost nothing to the US, and here it turns out after all that I was wrong. Gosh do I feel dumb.

By: Venichka

Venichka — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 13:15:57 +0000

Belkovsky is a noted bullshitter (and mad Eurasianist) – for several years he wasspreading, not terribly convincingly, the “of course Putin does not want to be in power, he is a humble man who has taken this burden upon himself for the good of his people, he would like nothing more than to give up all power and status, there is no chance that he will seek to maintain his position beyond 2008 and would gladly give it all up much earlier if he could” line to gullible audiences.

Taking anything he says as proven fact is, to say the least, risky. I’m wondering if he’s had a falling out with Putin of late – just what is the motivation for his latest claims?

By: Michael Averko

Michael Averko — Sat, 29 Dec 2007 06:06:11 +0000

Is America the only market and doesn’t Russia have other economic sectors besides fossil fuel?

From a considerable distance, it’s safe to call a judo black belt a punk.

By: Tom

Tom — Sat, 29 Dec 2007 05:19:13 +0000

Just wait until America get feed up with oil and decides to buy very little in the next few years.
Putin will then be another russian punk who ego is bigger then his 5ft5 body.

By: Kyle

Kyle — Mon, 24 Dec 2007 07:33:35 +0000

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!

Kyle & Svet

By: Putin’s Wealth: The Next Episode? : Sean’s Russia Blog

Putin’s Wealth: The Next Episode? : Sean’s Russia Blog — Sun, 23 Dec 2007 18:01:44 +0000

[...] 23, 2007 | I first learned from Andy over at Siberian Light about the press brouhaha over Putin’s alleged $40 billion tucked away in banks in Switzerland and Lichtenstein. Intrigued, I set my sights on said press [...]

By: W. Shedd

W. Shedd — Sun, 23 Dec 2007 05:01:59 +0000

Stands in stark contrast to other recent news articles that placed him as the least wealth among the world’s prominent leaders.

If you own something but there is no proof of it … do you still own it? Sort of like the tree in the forest argument.

This seems to be a reaction from the original Reuters story in October of this year that showed Putin didn’t have much wealth at all.