Connect with us

RussiaFeed

News

Politics

Russian presidential candidate is offended RT questioned her outrageous phone behavior

Kseniya Sobchak angrily interrupted the interviewer when asked about a rude phone call which has become public

Published

on

0 Views

Presidential hopeful Ksenia Sobchak slams RT Journalists, for criticizing her very offensive behavior which she didn’t even deny doing!

During an interview, RT’S Oksana Boyko discussed Sobchak’s platform in a fair and balanced way, but when the journalist wanted to discuss Sobcak’s own actions, the “candidate against all” felt she was above scrutiny.

RT reports:

Boyko suggested that a certain part of the Russian public sees Sobchak as quite a snobbish person, because of past public statements and some leaked telephone conversations. In particular, she referred to a 2013 leaked phone conversation between Sobchak and her house manager, in which she complained about noise caused by repairs in the building and about noise restrictions that would allow children to have a short nap during the day.

After the leak initially appeared on the internet, it drew some attention from the press and the public – mostly because of Sobchak’s extremely rude language and manners, along with statements like: “If you plan to have some sort of ‘quiet hours’ for these little bastards, I will be having rave parties at exactly this time,” as quoted in a report by Komsomolskaya Pravda newspaper.

The election hopeful interrupted the interviewer and began shouting that she would not answer the question because the leak had resulted from eavesdropping by Russia’s federal security service, the FSB. Sobchak also noted that she has a right to say anything during her private conversations, or write anything in her private correspondence, adding that it was unethical for reporters to bring up such things in interviews.

Apparently, it’s unacceptable to criticize someone’s poor behavior, if they didn’t want said behavior to become public. Apparently, people cannot be scrutinized for poor behavior, or expected to answer for it, so long as that behavior was in private.

Sobchak’s line of defense in the story is not new. Back in 2013, she first claimed that the recording of the conversation had been heavily doctored, and the comment about the “little bastards” was taken out of context. A short time later, she switched to portraying herself as the victim of unnamed pranksters with alleged connections to the Kremlin.

He excuse and blatant evasion of responsibility reminds me of a story on the 29th of January, when a youtuber, Ayra Mosallah, threw water in the face of London pedestrians in a “prank” video. His actions caused outrage, as London is suffering an acid attack epidemic, and his water “prank” terrified several people initially. He defended his vastly inappropriate behavior as the typical “it’s just a prank”.

He claimed he was being “slandered”, because the media drew attention to the actions which generated outrage, the very actions that he didn’t deny doing. This brings up a really good point that must be hammered home, as we have seen this pandemic – a failure to talk responsibility for ones own actions – happen all to often lately.

Thanks to the internet, something you say, write, or do, can be immortalized for potentially centuries to come. A Public figure is slammed for doing something inappropriate, and instead of denying the actions due to the existence of proof, they begin to say they are being slandered by the media.

News Flash: When journalists, critics, or the general populace calls you out for something you don’t deny doing, something which makes you look like a complete moron, unimaginably cruel, or profoundly insane, that’s not slander!

People who criticize you for massively offensive (and possibly criminal) actions are not “haters”, they may or may not hate you, but it’s not hateful to point out when someone is doing something deplorable or otherwise unethical.

In the case of Miss Sobchak, we have seen another defense, that her statements were “taken out of context” as RT reports.

If that is true, then that is a valid argument. President Putin’s comments are constantly taken out of context. Take for example when he speaks about the tragedy of the fall of the Soviet Union (he wasn’t talking about communism or political power, he was talking about a humanitarian tragedy), or when he spoke about Lenin’s body being similar to the idea of venerating Orthodox relics, (he wasn’t saying he believes Lenin is a Saint, he is saying the Bolsheviks stole the idea from Orthodox people). We discussed how the west misunderstands him in great detail here.

In our day and age, it is all too common for overly sensitive people to become offended at everything, and for journalists to rush to publish any statement before fact-checking or clarifying.

In the case of Miss Sobchak, if her arguments are truly taken out of context, and we can only truly know if we were there, then she may have a valid argument, however, it seems as if she isn’t denying saying the actual words.

It’s like if someone says “Those children are hideously ugly” and then says “That was out of context! I was referring to their outfits, not to their faces!”. The defense falls flat.

It seems like Miss Sobchak did indeed say what she said, but her argument seems to actually be the media has no right to report on it, (you can tell she is embracing western democracy there) along with the infamous “that isn’t me, that’s not who I am as a person”, that we hear ad nauseum.

Anytime a poor innocent girl is sexually assaulted, or a mother leaves her children unattended and they get injured, or someone spouts a racial slur that goes viral, we constantly hear from the criminal about how that’s not really them. How they are actually a devout feminist, or a dedicated mother, or we get a long list of how many friends of X race that person has, and how they love “those people”.

This happens especially when alcohol is involved, apparently drinking turns you magically into a different person, and whatever you do while intoxicated can’t be blamed on you. People make mistakes, but some mistakes can’t be washed away by claiming you just weren’t feeling like yourself, or your incredibly vile behavior was just misunderstood.

In this situation, Miss Sobchak was rude to RT’s Oksana Boyko, when being interviewed about her actions, switching the subject, and threatening to contact the authorities if reporters continue to criticize her outrageous behavior.

According to RT:

Oksana Boyko said she did not consider the issue to be Sobchak’s private affairs, and it should not be protected from scrutiny by the press. Instead, it was an insight into how someone who is seeking a top public post communicates and negotiates with her neighbors.

That is the issue at hand: Sobchak claims she is against corruption, for an open and fair media (so long as they criticize her opponents), but seemingly becomes infuriated when the media criticizes her.

Anyone with aspirations to become a Head of State must understand they are no longer a private figure, they forfeited that right the moment they expected people to grant them the senior executive post.

Such a person would do well to understand that their actions have real consequences, especially know when anything you say can be remembered forever.

In all, it is this failure to take responsibility for one’s own actions that is plaguing the world today.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of

Latest

Constantinople: Ukrainian Church leader is now uncanonical

October 12 letter proclaims Metropolitan Onuphry as uncanonical and tries to strong-arm him into acquiescing through bribery and force.

Seraphim Hanisch

Published

on

The pressure in Ukraine kept ratcheting up over the last few days, with a big revelation today that Patriarch Bartholomew now considers Metropolitan Onuphy “uncanonical.” This news was published on 6 December by a hierarch of the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church (running under the Moscow Patriarchate).

This assessment marks a complete 180-degree turn by the leader of the Orthodox Patriarchate of Constantinople, and it further embitters the split that has developed to quite a major row between this church’s leadership and the Moscow Patriarchate.

OrthoChristian reported this today (we have added emphasis):

A letter of Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople to His Beatitude Metropolitan Onuphry of Kiev and All Ukraine was published yesterday by a hierarch of the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church, in which the Patriarch informed the Metropolitan that his title and position is, in fact, uncanonical.

This assertion represents a negation of the position held by Pat. Bartholomew himself until April of this year, when the latest stage in the Ukrainian crisis began…

The same letter was independently published by the Greek news agency Romfea today as well.

It is dated October 12, meaning it was written just one day after Constantinople made its historic decision to rehabilitate the Ukrainian schismatics and rescind the 1686 document whereby the Kiev Metropolitanate was transferred to the Russian Orthodox Church, thereby, in Constantinople’s view, taking full control of Ukraine.

In the letter, Pat. Bartholomew informs Met. Onuphry that after the council, currently scheduled for December 15, he will no longer be able to carry his current title of “Metropolitan of Kiev and All Ukraine.”

The Patriarch immediately opens his letter with Constantinople’s newly-developed historical claim about the jurisdictional alignment of Kiev: “You know from history and from indisputable archival documents that the holy Metropolitanate of Kiev has always belonged to the jurisdiction of the Mother Church of Constantinople…”

Constantinople has done an about-face on its position regarding Ukraine in recent months, given that it had previously always recognized the Metropolitan of Kiev and All Ukraine of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church-Moscow Patriarchate as the sole canonical primate in Ukraine.

…The bulk of the Patriarch’s letter is a rehash of Constantinople’s historical and canonical arguments, which have already been laid out and discussed elsewhere. (See also here and here). Pat. Bartholomew also writes that Constantinople stepped into the Ukrainian ecclesiastical sphere as the Russian Church had not managed to overcome the schisms that have persisted for 30 years.

It should be noted that the schisms began and have persisted precisely as anti-Russian movements and thus the relevant groups refused to accept union with the Russian Church.

Continuing, Pat. Bartholomew informs Met. Onuphry that his position and title are uncanonical:

Addressing you as ‘Your Eminence the Metropolitan of Kiev’ as a form of economia [indulgence/condescension—OC] and mercy, we inform you that after the elections for the primate of the Ukrainian Church by a body that will consist of clergy and laity, you will not be able ecclesiologically and canonically to bear the title of Metropolitan of Kiev, which, in any case, you now bear in violation of the described conditions of the official documents of 1686.

He also entreats Met. Onuphry to “promptly and in a spirit of harmony and unity” participate, with the other hierarchs of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, in the founding council of the new Ukrainian church that Constantinople is planning to create, and in the election of its primate.

The Constantinople head also writes that he “allows” Met. Onuphry to be a candidate for the position of primate.

He further implores Met. Onuphry and the UOC hierarchy to communicate with Philaret Denisenko, the former Metropolitan of Kiev, and Makary Maletich, the heads of the schismatic “Kiev Patriarchate” and the schismatic “Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church” respectively—both of which have been subsumed into Constantinople—but whose canonical condemnations remain in force for the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church.

The hierarchs of the Serbian and Polish Churches have also officially rejected the rehabilitation of the Ukrainian schismatics.

Pat. Bartholomew concludes expressing his confidence that Met. Onuphry will decide to heal the schism through the creation of a new church in Ukraine.

The Ukrainian Orthodox Church under Metropolitan Onuphry’s leadership is recognized as the sole canonical Orthodox jurisdiction in Ukraine by just about every other canonical Orthodox Jurisdiction besides Constantinople. Even NATO member Albania, whose expressed reaction was “both sides are wrong for recent actions” still does not accept the canonicity of the “restored hierarchs.”

In fact, about the only people in this dispute that seem to be in support of the “restored” hierarchs, Filaret and Makary, are President Poroshenko, Patriarch Bartholomew, Filaret and Makary… and NATO.

While this letter was released to the public eye yesterday, the nearly two months that Metropolitan Onuphry has had to comply with it have not been helped in any way by the actions of both the Ecumenical Patriarchate and the Ukrainian government.

Priests of the Canonical Church in Ukraine awaiting interrogation by the State authorities

For example, in parallel reports released on December 6th, the government is reportedly accusing canonical priests in Ukraine of treason because they are carrying and distributing a brochure entitled (in English): The Ukrainian Orthodox Church: Relations with the State. The Attitude Towards the Conflict in Donbass and to the Church Schism. Questions and Answers.

In a manner that would do any American liberal proud, these priests are being accused of inciting religious hatred, though really all they are doing is offering an explanation for the situation in Ukraine as it exists.

A further piece also released yesterday notes that the Ukrainian government rehabilitated an old Soviet-style technique of performing “inspections of church artifacts” at the Pochaev Lavra. This move appears to be both intended to intimidate the monastics who are living there now, who are members of the canonical Church, as well as preparation for an expected forcible takeover by the new “united Church” that is under creation. The brotherhood characterized the inspections in this way:

The brotherhood of the Pochaev Lavra previously characterized the state’s actions as communist methods of putting pressure on the monastery and aimed at destroying monasticism.

Commenting on the situation with the Pochaev Lavra, His Eminence Archbishop Clement of Nizhyn and Prilusk, the head of the Ukrainian Church’s Information-Education Department, noted:

This is a formal raiding, because no reserve ever built the Pochaev Lavra, and no Ministry of Culture ever invested a single penny to restoring the Lavra, and the state has done nothing to preserve the Lavra in its modern form. The state destroyed the Lavra, turned it into a psychiatric hospital, a hospital for infectious diseases, and so on—the state has done nothing more. And now it just declares that it all belongs to the state. No one asked the Church, the people that built it. When did the Lavra and the land become state property? They belonged to the Church from time immemorial.

With the massive pressure both geopolitically and ecclesiastically building in Ukraine almost by the day, it is anyone’s guess what will happen next.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Ukrainian leadership is a party of war, and it will continue as long as they’re in power – Putin

“We care about Ukraine because Ukraine is our neighbor,” Putin said.

RT

Published

on

By

Via RT…


Russia’s President Vladimir Putin has branded the Ukrainian leadership a “party of war” which would continue fueling conflicts while they stay in power, giving the recent Kerch Strait incident as an example.

“When I look at this latest incident in the Black Sea, all what’s happening in Donbass – everything indicates that the current Ukrainian leadership is not interested in resolving this situation at all, especially in a peaceful way,” Putin told reporters during a media conference in the aftermath of the G20 summit in Buenos Aires, Argentina.

This is a party of war and as long as they stay in power, all such tragedies, all this war will go on.

The Kiev authorities are craving war primarily for two reasons – to rip profits from it, and to blame all their own domestic failures on it and actions of some sort of “aggressors.”

“As they say, for one it’s war, for other – it’s mother. That’s reason number one why the Ukrainian government is not interested in a peaceful resolution of the conflict,” Putin stated.

Second, you can always use war to justify your failures in economy, social policy. You can always blame things on an aggressor.

This approach to statecraft by the Ukrainian authorities deeply concerns Russia’s President. “We care about Ukraine because Ukraine is our neighbor,” Putin said.

Tensions between Russia and Ukraine have been soaring after the incident in the Kerch Strait. Last weekend three Ukrainian Navy ships tried to break through the strait without seeking the proper permission from Russia. Following a tense stand-off and altercation with Russia’s border guard, the vessels were seized and their crews detained over their violation of the country’s border.

While Kiev branded the incident an act of “aggression” on Moscow’s part, Russia believes the whole Kerch affair to be a deliberate “provocation” which allowed Kiev to declare a so-called “partial” martial law ahead of Ukraine’s presidential election.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

When Putin Met Bin Sally

Another G20 handshake for the history books.

Published

on

Via Zerohedge


In the annals of handshake photo-ops, we just may have a new winner (much to the delight of oil bulls who are looking at oil treading $50 and contemplating jumping out of the window).

Nothing but sheer joy, delight and friendship…

…but something is missing…

Meanwhile, earlier…

Zoomed in…

And again.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Trending