Why Putin Won’t Reveal the Names and Ages of His Grandchildren

______________________________

Editor:

Compare Putin’s sanity to the sick publicity-seeking of such amoral filth such as Donald Trump and the Clintons (and their dysfunctional families). I needn’t add anything more.

BMD

******

As a popular and influential world leader, V V Putin faces a serious dilemma… how can his family expect to lead a normal dignified existence when there are so many crazy people with selfie sticks who’d love to chase them down in the streets of Moscow? Of course, this is more or less standard practise in the “civilised” Anglo-Saxon world, where they fawn over royal babies from birth, who then later in life develop cocaine habits; and in America, they even make goofy movies starring Sinbad about the First Kid. Imagine the psychological trauma. Putin doesn’t want his grandchildren growing up to be Chelsea Clinton. Therefore, on Thursday, during his nationally broadcasted Q&A session, he made it clear why he doesn’t parade his family around the Kremlin for the tabloid press (in fact, he doesn’t even feel the need to divulge the names of his grandchildren, or even how old they are):

You know, my children, my daughters, live a normal life here in Moscow, contrary to all rumours. I also have grandchildren. They live a normal life, too. I don’t want them to grow up as “blue bloods”; I want them to develop into normal human beings. For that, they need ordinary human interaction as part of a children’s community. Once I expose their ages and names, they’d harass them immediately. That would damage a child’s development. Therefore, I’d like to ask you to treat my position with understanding.

We can already imagine the Daily Beast headline:

“Putin threatens to kill journalists who stalk his infant grandchildren”.

16 June 2017

Russian Insider

http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/why-putin-will-not-reveal-names-and-ages-his-grandchildren/ri20126

10 July 2012. Is There Trouble in “Paradise?”

Some of the usual suspects on the Internet forums are spouting their usual stuff. It’s almost as bad as the interminable Toll House argument… oh, yes, I do think that such sorts belong in the playpen whilst we adults have a pleasant drink and chat.

______________________________

There’s much Sturm und Drang over supposed events at Manton and over Meletios Webber. Let’s keep this simple. If Meletios Webber is, indeed, going against Church order in the case of this or that private individual, then, the proper way to handle it is to make a formal complaint against him to the bishop. If there are irregularities at Manton, that’s the logical first step. No… it isn’t the only step… but it’s the first logical one. Yes, Benjamin Peterson could decide to stonewall it or sweep it under the rug, but that would put him in the spotlight, so to speak. All those having problems with Webber should make a formal complaint, the sooner the better. Then, if Peterson defends him… go to the Holy Synod. If they fail in their duty, then, make an appeal to the Centre… to ask them to pull the Tomos from the OCA. It CAN be done… but only in the proper order, and one thing at a time.

At present, there’s confusion over what actually happened. Well, I’d say that since JP was a follower of the Imyaslavie heresy, by all accounts that I heard, the fact that there’s screwy things afoot shouldn’t surprise anyone. However… if you think so strongly about Webber and personal pastoral matters, do make a formal complaint. I wonder if they’d do such a thing… I think not. In fact, the “news” that’s coming out made me think of an old saying of Fr Alexander Lebedeff’s, “They don’t know an ecclesiastical court from a tennis court”. Lebedeff may be a First Family apparatchik, but he’s also a competent historian and canonist… which none of the loudmouths on the internet forums are. It’s one thing to talk of public figures… when one starts flinging about private pastoral matters… you really should take such things up with the bishop (I always PhotoShop out non-public figures if I can… there’s something known as privacy). I’m going to hold all priests and hierarchs up to scrutiny… they’re public figures. However, if you have something against a private individual or the pastoral consideration shown them, not a public figure (priest, bishop, elected lay official), don’t drag it into the internet fora… do something of it in such a way that the person involved has some privacy. If I can observe limits… so can these people (you don’t know the stuff that I reject because it either involves private people or its the private doings of public people (an image of Jillions at a private party isn’t mine to publish)).

Put up or shut up.

BMD