"Treason:" Russia seeks 15-year sentence for ballerina after she donated €45 to a charity that supports Ukraine
"Treason:" Russia seeks 15-year sentence for ballerina after she donated €45 to a charity that supports Ukraine
Ksenia Karelina pleads guilty to treason charge after February arrest for donating to pro-Ukraine charity.
Russian-American ballerina Ksenia Karelina has pleaded guilty to treason charges after she was arrested for donating money to a charity supporting Ukraine.
Russian prosecutors are seeking a 15-year sentence after the security services accused Ms Karelina of collecting money that was used to purchase tactical supplies for the Ukrainian army.
She was detained by authorities in Yekaterinburg, about 1,600km (1,000 miles) east of Moscow after a family visit in February.
The sentence comes one week after Russia and the West carried out the largest prisoner exchange since the Cold War, where 24 people jailed in seven different countries were exchanged.
Ms Karelina's lawyer said the prosecutors' request for a 15-year sentence in a penal colony was too severe as the defendant had cooperated with the investigation.
Mikhail Mushailov also said it was "impossible" for Ms Karelina to have been included in the recent prisoner exchange, because an exchange can only happen once the court verdict comes into force.
You're viewing part of a thread.
Although you personally don’t think journalism should be penalised, you were okay with him living the life he did for the last years and openly said so?
I openly denounced the fact that our "friends" from the "Western values" are imprisoning a journalist for doing his job. I demanded that they raise their laws to a non-dictatorial level. The fact that international and national law are not always the same thing has once again been clearly demonstrated here.
But what does this excursion into whataboutism have to do with the criminals being prosecuted in Russia?
the barbaric and imperialistic war Russia brings to Ukraine until this very day
Treason is not only a crime during a war.
I openly denounced the fact that our “friends” from the “Western values” are imprisoning a journalist for doing his job. I demanded that they raise their laws to a non-dictatorial level. The fact that international and national law are not always the same thing has once again been clearly demonstrated here. But what does this excursion into whataboutism have to do with the criminals being prosecuted in Russia?
So "I like criminals if the victim is someone I don’t like!” is apparently something you are as equally guilty of as those you are trying to attribute it here. It would have been more consistent for your standpoint if you had actually also applied it towards those criminals you feel inclined to.
Treason is not only a crime during a war.
It is not. But as you can read in the article, it has recently been tightened in line with fear of growing criticism of the Russian war of aggression. Of course you might choose to defend this. Maybe as it isn't, for a change, a war of - your words and punctuation - our "friends" of "Western values" and some might find it challenging to escape from their traditional world view with America as the force behind wars. Or maybe because you simply support Russian nationalism and aggression, I don't know. It is, however, a very strange look and a weird hill to die on.
So "I like criminals if the victim is someone I don’t like!” is apparently something you are as equally guilty of as those you are trying to attribute it here.
I dislike the law that makes them a criminal. That's a different thing. That said, I still can't see why Assange having been kept in prison for something that should not be illegal is relevant here. Two wrongs don't make one right.
some might find it challenging to escape from their traditional world view with America as the force behind wars. Or maybe because you simply support Russian nationalism and aggression, I don’t know.
I support the endeavours of every country and every people to counter supranationalism ("strong state EU", "strong state USA", that sort of thing) with sovereignty. This also applies if the country in question misbehaves, to put it mildly. However, the USA as the driving force behind the attempted destruction of Julian Assange was an example that I did not bring in. As I said, two wrongs don't make a right.
I dislike the law that makes them a criminal. That’s a different thing.
What makes you think this is different here? I don't know her, but I think 15 years of penal colony for a 45€ donation is absolutely ridiculous. Especially, as the underlying war of aggression is - as we hopefully both agree?? - wrong. Why you choose to defend this is beyond me.
I still can’t see why Assange having been kept in prison for something that should not be illegal is relevant here.
Your words:
But I guess everyone here has a problem with people who violate the law. Now I can see that the laws in Russia are not what you, personally, think is right. FWIW, each country has laws which other countries don’t agree with.
He's in violation of the law just as much as this ballerina. One of them you defend, the other not.
I support the endeavours of every country and every people to counter supranationalism (“strong state EU”, “strong state USA”, that sort of thing) with sovereignty.
Then you should have a critical opinion on Russia's imperialistic adventures in its neighbouring country and the laws ensuing this aggression. Or does this support conveniently only include those countries under attack/pressure from "the West"?
As I said, two wrongs don’t make a right.
No one is trying to make this point. The point is that you defend the victim of American "unfair" laws but not the victim of Russian "unfair" laws, making your argument seem rather shallow.
You’re still whatabouting here. It is perfectly legal to call a violation of a law (however dumb it might seem to be) “illegal” without having to condemn all crimes anywhere in the world.
You’re still whatabouting here.
Pointing out that you yourself do not abide by the bold general statements you chose to make here is not whataboutism. That you permanently try to avoid any statement regarding Russia's war and these laws doesn't help you and your position either..
It is not even "Russia's war". Are you aware of how Crimea was made a part of Ukraine in 1995?
Ahh, finally! So this is where we are going here.
It is not even “Russia’s war”.
Who invaded, then? Who massacred settlements like Bucha? Who declared that Ukraine isn't a state but a part of Russia?
Are you aware of how Crimea was made a part of Ukraine in 1995?
No, I am not. Because Crimea was already a part of Ukraine beforehand (1954/1992), acknowledged by Russia. But I wonder what your point is? Ukraine deserved this war?
So this is where we are going here.
I'm going nowhere. Please let's stay on track.
Who invaded, then?
It's not like Putin woke up one morning and thought "I'm bored, I'm gonna invade Ukraine".
Who massacred settlements like Bucha?
Do you deny the fact that both sides committed (and continue to commit) war crimes?
Because Crimea was already a part of Ukraine beforehand (1954/1992), acknowledged by Russia.
Crimea attempted to become an independent republic between 1992 and 1995. In 1995, the then government of Ukraine declared the government of Crimea inadmissible on its own authority and thus de facto annexed Crimea. It is debatable whether it was a "part of Ukraine" between the dissolution of the USSR and 1995.
But I wonder what your point is?
My point is that there is a long history of injustice in East Ukraine.
Ukraine deserved this war?
No country deserves a war. I just found the phrase "Russia's war" too simple.
Please let’s stay on track.
I won't stop you exposing yourself.
It’s not like Putin woke up one morning and thought “I’m bored, I’m gonna invade Ukraine”.
That's not an answer to my question. Who invaded?
Do you deny the fact that both sides committed (and continue to commit) war crimes?
Do you deny the extents of the crimes that happened in Butcha when attempting to "bothside" Ukraine and Russia here or do you actually think Ukraine has done equally horrible things?
It is debatable whether it was a “part of Ukraine” between the dissolution of the USSR and 1995.
From your source: In June 1992, the parties reached a compromise, that Crimea would have considerable autonomy but remain part of Ukraine.
I just found the phrase “Russia’s war” too simple.
Seeing how much difficulty you have to correctly name the country invading, I bet you do!
Let me ask: is it the German political landscape you are at home at or maybe even the Russian? Because even the putinophilic far-right nutjobs from the AfD only excuse Russia's invasion (as does the equally putinophilic and equally populistic self-declared "left" poster girl Sarah W), but denying it is new. In which rabbit hole do I have to crawl to find these kind of positions?
I won’t stop you exposing yourself.
I don't think that "exposing" is the right term here. You're behaving as if you've let me in on a secret. That's not the case.
Who invaded?
Russia did, and it had reasons for that. Whether I agree with the reasons is not the issue here, by the way, and you simply don't know either.
do you actually think Ukraine has done equally horrible things?
I do not hold the view that there are cruel and less cruel war crimes. "But these war crimes are less horrible!" tells more about you than about Russia and/or Ukraine.
Crimea would have considerable autonomy but remain part of Ukraine.
And Ukraine has cancelled this autonomy at the expense of the people of Crimea. Do you agree with me?
Seeing how much difficulty you have to correctly name the country invading, I bet you do!
Lol, seriously. No, it's not difficult for me. This "aha, WHO attacked WHOM, huh? YOU SEE!!!" just misses the point of everything that's happening in eastern Ukraine; and you're not proving anything to anyone.
is it the German political landscape you are at home at or maybe even the Russian?
Could you please tone down your pitiful attempts at an ad-hominem discussion? It's getting tiring.