Yakov Kedmi, political activist (Israel):
- Speaking of this interview, as far as I know, the journalists prepared the questions on their own specifically for this interview. They didn't know what to expect. Putin answered all of their questions. Perhaps in his answers, he made an emphasis on relevance but he didn't choose those questions, they weren't coordinated in advance. So all of the issues were raised by the journalists.
Secondly, they're making so much fuss around Putin's statement about liberalism to divert the attention of their readers, viewers, and the general audience from what Putin actually said in his interview. And Putin gave great answers to a lot of critical questions. They absolutely wreck all of the statements by the Western anti-Russian propaganda. But in order to divert attention, they chose a single statement and tried to portray it in a negative light. Because they have no objections regarding Putin's other answers. He wiped the floor with them. What they did was a propaganda trick. They tried to divert attention to a different issue in an attempt to portray it as negative.
Speaking of liberalism, we have fake liberalism today. It has nothing to do with the classic liberalism of the past, the same as the communism of Gorbachev and Yeltsin had nothing to do with communism. On the other hand, we have Pol Pot and his Khmer Rouge. Liberalism isn't based on hatred. It's exactly the opposite. Classical liberalism isn't based on violence. But that's what those fake-liberal circles promote today. The hysteria in the American newspapers and the British press has two reasons. A long time ago, the Western media ceased being (the Russian press is still holding on but they're trying to convert it) a means of conveying information about current events to its audience and became the means of determining state policies and shaping popular opinion in accordance with the policies. That's why the press ceased to be objective a long time ago. The press, the Western press especially, ceased being liberal in the classical sense of the word. Studying the American media, you'll find almost nothing contradicting the official policy of the press, which is rightfully called fake news.
The current hysteria was caused by their impotence, by the realization that Trump couldn't care less about what they do and keeps implementing his policies like a president is supposed to. Now, there's only one thing they can do: crying, yelling, and trying to return to the tired formulas about Russia's interference in the elections and their propaganda titles that look a bit like those propaganda slogans that the Soviets had in their darkest days. They're sticking labels: Trump's a traitor. An enemy of the people. He must be prosecuted. Bring him to justice. They have the same slogans that Russia had in the 1930s and 1940s. It's the same method. It has nothing to do with liberalism. Their hysteria shows that their influence is getting weaker and weaker.
My last statement is about the presidential race. Almost no one from the Republican party and even the Democratic party mentioned Russian interference in the elections at the debates.
Yuri Rogulyov, political analyst:
- I'd like to comment on what Yakov said. It reminded me of Trump's press conference after the Osaka summit. He was talking to the journalists when they started criticizing him right at the conference for trying to establish relations with the wrong people. He said, "Guys, I have decent relations with everybody except for you." The journalists are his main rivals. Right at that conference, they tried to criticize him for attempting to establish decent working relations with many participants of the conference. But no, it appears he had no right to do that. It's the paradox of our times. I agree that... I've been reading the American press for many years. There were times when all respectable people read the New York Times in the morning. They started their day by reading an issue of the New York Times. I remember when the New York Times was struggling against printing colored photos. They believed it wasn't as impressive. A serious paper doesn't need color and decorations. The content is the most important thing. I remember when the New York Times would never publish unverified information. I remember when after publishing a partisan article the NYT would publish another article that either criticized the former one or proved it wrong. What do we have now? One American journalist told me, "The press has become more yellow. It's like we have hepatitis. Our press is getting more and more yellow." It chases sensations and publishes stories that have nothing to do with reality. The modern-day press is sick. The modern-day media is sick. And it's far from that freedom that we're used to seeing in the United States, Nikolay. We're used to the press being free and behind held to a certain standard of journalism. Now, there are basically no standards. Everyone writes whatever they want. What's even worse, they publish a lot of unverified, absolutely fake, and evidence-free data, news, and facts. I believe that's very sad.
But let's get back to those events. Many state leaders arrived in Osaka. Each state has its issues. And each state was trying to present those issues, bring them into correlation with the issues of other nations, and work out some bilateral or multilateral agenda. But it appears they were discussing the wrong things. It appears nobody's interested in real matters and issues. And suddenly, when this article was published, new discussion topics emerged. I agree with Andrey. If you study the press, you'll see that everyone's discussing the crisis of liberalism. But Putin had no right to say that. That's not politically correct, especially coming from Putin. It's a scandal.
- Look how polite he is: Elton John argues with Putin and Putin replies to Elton John at the press conference. They had a calm and civilized dialogue. That's a good thing. However, there's no calm and civilized dialogue within the USA, where a former president calls the incumbent president names. I can't remember somebody else ever saying that if you look closely, he's not fit to be a president. I don't remember anyone saying that before. It used to be somewhat…
Yuri Rogulyov, political analyst:
- Everyone used to be treated with respect.
