Headline: Alexei Navalny is a real threat to Vladimir Putin
Sub-headline: The fragility of the Russian regime is becoming clear
The publisher of this report may not be to your liking. Please, no dull-witted Anti-Russian catchphrases … But how can ‘you’ resist the bait?
‘Navalny is a convicted felon, found guilty of fraud and embezzlement by a Russian court in 2014. But his jail sentence had been suspended with the condition that he report regularly to Russia’s prison authorities. A normal condition.
For nearly five months, however, he had sojourned out of the country as a de facto. That’s a brazen breach of his parole conditions. And the Russian prison service was right in issuing him a warning at the end of last month that violation of his suspended jail term risked the sentence being converted into detention behind bars.
It’s a sovereign matter of Russian laws that on returning to Russia at the weekend Navalny was arrested and is now in custody awaiting court proceedings in coming weeks on whether to revoke his suspended sentence. The hue and cry from Western politicians and human rights groups over his arrest Sunday at Moscow’s Sheremetyevo airport is predictable.
High level officials from the United States, Britain, Germany and France, among others, have all made strident statements demanding Navalny’s release.
In reply to Chris Fr
Thank you for your comment. Does the argument offered by RT have any validity : that Assange is a ‘dissident’ to use one of those ‘good old cold war’ terms?
‘Assange is languishing in a British torture-dungeon, for the “crime” of revealing to the world the truth about illegal wars and war crimes committed by the United States and Britain.
In all of the years of Assange’s barbaric detention, there has never been a fraction of the official Western public outcry that has been expressed for Navalny.
That’s because Navalny, unlike Assange, is a political asset for a Western agenda to undermine Russia.
Or is it a propaganda ploy to rationalize the arrest of Navalny? What of his legal status as ‘convicted felon’, who broke the conditions of his parole? Or is it like those Soviet sentences to Mental Institutions? Is this just the purest hyperbole?
Should the reader look to the 2014 Ukrainian Coup, in which Victoria Nuland was one of the many ringleaders, of American/Eu/NATO Coup? These American controlled who was granted ‘leadership status’: who/what was legitimate leadership, in sum, determined who had political legitimacy. All this under the rubric of ‘might makes right’?