Checkmate: Garry Kasparov rips apart ‘pathetic’ NYT for providing Putin a platform for ‘condescending propaganda’

Former World Chess Champion and political activist who is on the board of directors of the Human Rights Foundation, Garry Kasparov, has some harsh words for the New York Times for publishing an op-ed article by Russian President Vladimir Putin.

All we can say at this point is “checkmate!”

Editor’s note: This post has been updated with additional tweets.

  • Jaerene

    If we had a leader not a follower for this country..this would not be happening…Obama is such a weenie loser…

  • kywildcat

    If the USA are indeed arming the so called rebels, which are Al Qaeda. Then Russia needs to step up arms to the Syrian Army.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      Given that we can’t think of a way to stop 0’Bama from arming the Sunni caliphate movements. Putin is all we have right now.

      Doesn’t that suck.

      • Elaine

        Why don’t they BOTH stay out of it. I love Sarah Palin’s advice. Let ALLAH sort it out, because no matter what we do or how many die, nothing will change in the Middle East. I’m trying to remember, but I think there was some kind of wonderful Carter Peace Plan? How long ago was THAT?

        • MizDi

          Exactly. Nothing we do for either side in the fight will do *anything* to make it better for the people of Syria. They lose either way!

  • HARP2

    Maybe Bill Ayers could write an OP-ED piece for Barry.

    • Doug Dryden

      Why not? He already wrote one of his books.

    • Elaine

      I say we send Obama and ALL his men over to the chemical hell zone! They all want the US to go so badly… GO!

  • Maxx

    I’m not at all for censoring the opinions of others simply because I disagree with them. The fact that the NY Times gave Putin an opportunity to muse isn’t going to change the way our flag flies freely in the air. Democracy is at its strongest when dissent is on full display.

    Generally, the citizenry are fully capable of separating the wheat from the chaff, with the possible exceptions being November 2008 and 2012.

    • Michelle

      “I’m not at all for censoring the opinions of others simply because I disagree with them.”

      That’s not what his point was about.

      • Maxx

        “Pathetic of the New York Times to provide Putin with a platform for condescending propaganda.” @Kasparov63

        Kasparov isn’t just angry of Putin’s opinions and record. Β He’s angry the NY Times allowed him the opportunity to voice an opinion at all.

        The words “pathetic….to provide Putin with a platform” implies he would have been happy if the paper had denied Putin the opportunity to speak. In addition, one man’s “propaganda” is another’s politics. If anything, this piece shines a light on Putin’s hypocrisies.

        Not quite censorship in the legal sense, more of a denouncement of their editorial decision to publish Putin’s words, which I find interesting even though much I don’t agree with. I find myself rarely agreeing with anything the NY Times does these days but in this case, allowing Putin the opportunity to opine seems logical when placed in their opinion section.

        • Michelle

          “The words “pathetic….to provide Putin with a platform” implies he would have been happy if the paper had denied Putin the opportunity to speak.”

          I believe you are getting closer. Your initial comment that simply an opposing view being published is what upset Garry, and that doesn’t appear to be the case.

          Garry is simply expressing his opinion of an opinion.

          • The Penguin #PublishThatSh*t

            I have an opinion on Putin’s opinion…but not so much on Maxx’s opinion of Gary’s opinion. Although, I will say your opinion of Maxx’s opinion regarding Gary’s opinion of Putin’s opinion being posted by the NYT, although a matter of opinion…seems to be spot on. IMHO.

          • Michelle

            You crack me up.

          • The Penguin #PublishThatSh*t

            πŸ˜‰

          • Maxx

            Upvoted for the early am chuckle. Well played sir! Historically, Michelle and I agree on nine out of 10 topics. It would be way too weird if it was 10 out of 10.

          • The Penguin #PublishThatSh*t

            And boring… It’s actually refreshing to see two intelligent adults debating on a “subjective” issue without it getting heated and eventually reduced to insults and name calling by one or both sides.

          • Deborah Hallsted

            That won’t happen because they’re not liberals.

          • PatriotRG

            thats so opinionated!

          • Maxx

            The “I believe you are getting closer” is incredibly condescending. πŸ˜‰ We’ll agree to disagree.

            “The admirable 1st Amendment has nothing to do with The New York Times choosing to publish Putin.” @Kasparov63

            …speaks volumes about how he “feels” the first amendment should be applied. Love his chess game (‘been playing since the age of five and followed him for decades) but not so much his opinion that hypocrisy (as he sees it) voids first amendment rights or the right of a newspaper’s opinion section to publish….eegads…an opinion. As I recall, Garry also said last year “Putin and his criminal regime are a Russian problem for Russians to solve, but western hypocrisy about human rights gets tiresome when they could take serious measures instead of just talking.” This guy has a boner for hypocrisy but who made him the arbiter?

            Perhaps I come at this from a different perspective since I’m a long-since retired journalist. I find efforts to silence opinion troubling…even if it’s 100% opposite my own. Kasparov is better than this. If he wants to knock himself out by tweeting WHY Putin is a hypocrite, that’s fine…and entertaining, but its nonsensical to attack a newspaper for doing what newspapers have done for generations….publish opinions.

          • Michelle

            “The “I believe you are getting closer” is incredibly condescending.”

            I was referring to you narrowing down your take on Garry’s comment other than you believe Garry’s point was he doesn’t like opinions with which he disagrees to be printed in the NYT. It wasn’t meant as condescending and neither do I believe it was.

            But now you’re back to saying Garry’s issue was an opposing opinion was printed in the NYT.

            I’m thinking Garry’s point is not about the opinion itself, but rather…by whom it was expressed and that it was done on that platform.

            Anyway, yep – you have an entirely different take on it and we can agree to disagree. :-)

          • Jason Call

            Kasparov takes no issue with the NYT’s rights. He criticizes their choice. You mischaracterize his statements.
            Also, when you allow as how Kasparov’s remarks don’t quite constitute censorship in the legal sense, you obviously mean that the former chess champion almost, but not quite, threw the New York Times in jail.
            No? Then it seems you’ve just got a boner for the guy.

          • Michelle

            Thanks Jason, as with clandaddy, you both made the point in a way I failed to last night.

          • clandaddy

            The point that you are missing is not that someone’s opinion is being circumscribed, but that an American outlet is being used for propaganda, with the consent of the Times.

            The Times makes clear, with distressing regularity, their ‘blame America first’ approach. What is sad is their attempt to give this absurd view gravitas and legitimacy by printing a propaganda piece by a foreign dictator who maintains a stranglehold on free speech within his own borders.

          • Michelle

            Thank you clandaddy, that is exactly what I was trying to say to Maxx, but just wasn’t finding the right words last night.

          • Mack Bonham

            For a retired journalist you seem not to understand the purpose or practical implications of the First Amendment very well.
            Kasparov’s point is this: the NYT is a prestigious newspaper that millions of people take seriously (why that’s the case is beyond me, but whatever). They have a finite amount of space available each day for op-eds, and so they are forced to make judgement calls about whom to give that space to. In making those decisions about what to print they unavoidably create the impression that they approve of, or at least do not oppose, the opinions that end up on the page. That’s why you’ll never see op-eds in the Times championing traditional marriage, the right to self-defense or voter ID laws. Kasparov is saying that to allow their paper to be used by a dictator to humiliate the US and its President with naked propoganda is wrong. For what it’s worth I agree with him.
            The First Amendment requires that we allow people to speak, it doesn’t obligate anyone to give them the platform to do it. In CHOOSING to give Putin that platform the Times behaved shamefully… as they so often do.

          • Christoph DeHaven

            You used to be a journalist and I used to publish a small circulation newspaper. I was under no obligation to publish anything, and my editorial decisions were not censorship.

            Only a government can censor. Not a publisher, not a private citizen. A periodical like the NY Times makes editorial choices—which Garry is critiquing. He is right. This has nothing to do with the First Amendment.

        • http://www.black-and-right.com/ IceColdTroll

          I’d much rather read something by Putin than by our own Dear Leader.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            Now it feels like we’re talking about Dante’s Inferno.

          • The Penguin #PublishThatSh*t

            At least he’s got “balls”.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      Publishing something is not merely opting not to “censor” (it’s not really censorship since he wasn’t blocked). It’s an endorsement that the view should be heard.

      • Elaine

        It’s a good thing we all do our own homework and realize what Putin is all about. He is just like Obama, a huge, self centered hypocrite!

    • beebop1952

      You are right. 0bama has us at half mast, not Putin.

    • Jeff McCabe

      that isnt his point. He also has the right to express his opinion about the clear hypocrisy of Putin lecturing others.

  • lee martell

    Normally I would be 1000% behind what the reporter said. I grew up during The Cold War, have not forgotten how devious they can be. However, Putin is now acting more presidential and in control than our guy. Putin’s people are acting more as a singular unit with logical actions and inactions based on their spoken beliefs. I don’t trust them a lot, Putin is still arming Assad and Iran, but somebody has got to act now to keep us out of a 3rd war we cant afford. Obama seems more concerned about his personal reputation and lack or credibility than preserving and (truly) moving our nation forward.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      I’ll put it this way: Russia’s interests in Syria happen to align with ours (America’s) at the moment, but not with POTUS.

      Long term we really shouldn’t be empowering Russia, Iran or 0’Bama. And there are better choices than Assad but he’s not really the worst problem in the neighborhood. Not even close.

      So Putin is doing us a favor by shutting down some of 0’Bama’s treason, but he’s not motivated by helping the USA in any way.

      • Christoph DeHaven

        Good summary of the situation!

  • BoscoBolt

    Uh, the NY Times provides obama with a “platform for condescending propaganda” all the time – so, what’s the difference? Let’s face it – President Putin has a lot more credibility than obama – the NYT is wise to offer Putin, a real world leader, a chance to tell his side of the story. We don’t have to agree with Putin, or his opinion of America, to understand that he is no amateur, and he puts his country first, unlike that guy who is OCCUPYing our White House.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      “Uh, the NY Times provides obama with a “platform for condescending propaganda” all the time – so, what’s the difference?”

      That was my very first reaction as well. At least they’re coming further out of the closet.

    • Markward

      This time they have a real KGB guy doing it! That’s the difference… I guess…

  • The Masked Avatar

    In Soviet Russia, the New York Times writes an op-ed for you.

    • Matthew Koch

      In America , man fork road. In Soviet Russia, road forks you! Ha-ha-ha.

      • Jeremy

        ha ha

  • Love of Country

    Garry Kasparov @Kasparov63

    Pathetic of the New York Times to provide Putin with a platform for condescending propaganda. Putin lecturing on peace & international law!

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Hey Garry …… get over it! They do the exact same thing for Comrade Dinglebarry every single day of the week!!!!!!! Are you kidding me?

  • Ty Pryor

    Kasparov is spot on. Putin is a criminal and would have thrown every columnist in the NYT in prison had they worked in Russia. Them giving a platform to him to opine on law and order would be like giving Saddam a platform on free elections. Its not about stifling speech, its about integrity and not sullying your paper with hypocrites and monsters, and make no mistake, Putin is a monster, regardless of how he’s looked lately. Putin has the freedom to speak here in America, but our “Paper of Record” didn’t have to give it to him.

  • Garth Haycock

    Kasparov: “Checkmate.”

    NYTimes stands up, kicks the table over and storms out of the room.

    • forgetyoutooo

      And calls you a racist.

  • AZWarrior

    My utmost respect for your accomplishments Mr. Kasparov, both in the chess world and in your constant advocacy of human rights. I have to say that Americans need to read words of other nation’s leaders, propaganda or not. We Americans are not as world wise as most nations and not being exposed to the words of foreign leaders is part of the problem. Fortunately, Americans have a good nose for bullsh#t.

    • drw

      I’m sorry sir, I must disagree with your last statement, I remember 2008 and 2012. Although, if you were to consider modifying it to “some Americans” or even “most Americans” you could then dis-regard this reply.

      • AZWarrior

        You are right DRW, I meant it as a generalization. We Americans do tend to muck up our elections sometimes. :-l

    • Deborah Hallsted

      Sorry, that doesn’t include readers of the New York Times.

      • AZWarrior

        Yeah Deb, that was something to see, Putin putting the wood to the President in the left’s favorite paper, on their favorite editorial page. Say what you will about Putin, he knows how to go for the jugular.

  • Dennis the Dreamer

    .If I were Obama, I would resign and play golf everyday. kasparov chess for you dude. Putin, well Russia first.

  • Jeremy

    This is the New York Times they love commies there and it goes back years

    http://www.ukemonde.com/news/usefulidiot.html

    Walter Duranty of the New York Times who praised and covered up for Stalin for instance.

  • Always Vigilant

    Since most knowledge exists as personal insights into the ever-changing conditions each of us faces, it cannot be systematically organized.

  • objectivefactsmatter

    I’d be pissed too.

    Wait…I am pissed.

  • NRPax

    Ever hear of US first amendment allowing right of free speech for everyone?

    Poor dear. Like so many people, he makes a very easy mistake. You see, the First Amendment (in part) says that the government cannot go after you for saying things they don’t like. It doesn’t mean that you are free from criticism, which is what Kasparov is doing.

    And since the man still lives over there, he’s got quite the set of balls on him to openly criticize Putin since he doesn’t have First Amendment protection.

  • HARP2

    Even while circling the drain Barry manages to blame the tidy bowl man.

  • Still Determined

    I think NYT knew that the Putin Op-Ed would piss people off and make people upset at Russia and Syria. I think they knew the purpose it would serve in encouraging support for doing something in Syria.

  • Medicinewoman2

    First intelligent article in how long NYT? AHhhh, so Americans panties are in a wad, they elected the great Obama, enjoy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Right Wired

    He makes some amazing points. I had no idea Mr. Kasparov was such a vehement anti-communist

  • Liberty Cognition

    We should add up the acts of tyranny lies and hypocrisy between Obama and Putin and then find out who wins for worst dictator. My money is on Obama/Soetoro — as his very existence is most likely a lie ( source: Sheriff Joe’s cold case posse commander Mike Zullo)…. and I could go on, but we all get it by now.

  • opus6

    It is pathetic that Putin stands between the modern world and a barbaric world-wide caliphate.

    Let’s elect a president who’s on OUR side next time.

  • derfelcadarn

    This is supposedly America where our Constitution protects the rights of people to speak their minds even when you are the president of Russia and others do not like what he has to say.

    • Michelle

      Free speech is not at all, in any way whatsoever, the point of why folks aren’t OK with Putin’s words.

    • Misanthrope

      Typical leftist, doesn’t know the first thing about the Bill of Rights.

      The First Amendment applies only to the government. It does not include a right to be published.

  • chetnapier

    Why because he said the same thing obama said about Americans not being exceptional?

  • Karl H

    While Kasparov is certainly entitled to his opinions and to be sure they are far more articulate than Obamas. I think the point here to be made is that Putin unlike Obama spelled out a clear path for both diplomatic and military intervention.

    Obama on the other hand made is case as follows: This is the line in the sand, however I am not saying this is a line in the sand. And if you cross this line I will act unilaterally with the permission of Congress or maybe without their permission to make very small significant strikes on Syria. Come on everyone lets bomb Syria (stomping foot and pushing out lower lip while threatening to cry and scream)

    There is a reason 75% of the deaths in Afghanistan have happened under Obama. There is a reason people died in Libya. There is a reason no one at the UN takes the U.S. seriously. Even Kim Jong Un views Obama as a rank amateur street hustler who is way out of his league in Politics. And that is not a bad or incorrect assessment as Obama has proved in the last 2 weeks.

    The point being is our nation is currently headed by a street hustler and we as a nation will be given the respect and honor you would rightfully bestow on a street hustler. The rest of the world does not care one bit about a flag or a nations titles, they respond to men and women who actually have the stones to make hard choices.

    So far the only thing anyone has seen Obama do is play golf and defer to the lowest ranking person in the room for advice or to make the final call. he has refused to take responsibility for anything his administration is responsible for. Even my six year old knows that “it is not my fault” “someone else was supposed to get that done” or “it was that way when I found it” rarely will qualify as an excuse.

    5 years he has been in office, everything that happens in his administration is 100% the fault of the chief executive officer. weather it is war or someone forgot the PM of England can not play US region dvds on his European DVD player it is his fault and the buck stops at his Golf bag.

    • BeeKaaay

      The reason there are so many deaths is because leftwingwackos are bloodthirsty and love to see death and suffering.

  • Mack Bonham

    Well, in fairness the publication of condescending propoganda is what the NYT does EVERY day.

  • BeeKaaay

    Garry Kasparov for POTUS. :)

  • http://regularrightguy.wordpress.com/ Regular Right Guy

    Ketchum placed it but Putin wrote it? Uh-hmm. He’s also Fluent in Tagalog and Ket …

  • http://regularrightguy.wordpress.com/ Regular Right Guy

    Ketchum placed it but Putin wrote it? Uh-hmm. He’s also Fluent in Tagalog and Ket …

  • Suzyqpie

    Internecine Muslim tribal warfare has raged on since the 7th century. Syria is a humanitarian disaster. The Arab League met in Cairo on 9/1/13 and voted down any action on Syria. AlJeezera (Arab version in English) reports daily on the human carnage in Muslim countries. There is no expression of umbrage, just reporting the body count. Car bombs, throwing acid, suicide bombing, IED, and as weapons technology becomes more sophisticated, so the body count will increase. I speculate the tribes will have drones someday and they will accelerate the carnage. Americans are challenged to understand the schism of Islam. The USA
    can waste more blood and treasure if we chose, nothing that we can do will alter the trajectory of Islam debauchery. Sad, yes to our way of thinking, just a part of life to Muslims

  • Suzyqpie

    Internecine Muslim tribal warfare has raged on since the 7th century. Syria is a humanitarian disaster. The Arab League met in Cairo on 9/1/13 and voted down any action on Syria. AlJeezera (Arab version in English) reports daily on the human carnage in Muslim countries. There is no expression of umbrage, just reporting the body count. Car bombs, throwing acid, suicide bombing, IED, and as weapons technology becomes more sophisticated, so the body count will increase. I speculate the tribes will have drones someday and they will accelerate the carnage. Americans are challenged to understand the schism of Islam. The USA
    can waste more blood and treasure if we chose, nothing that we can do will alter the trajectory of Islam debauchery. Sad, yes to our way of thinking, just a part of life to Muslims

  • Misanthrope

    The Slimes has been Pravda’s New York bureau for 80 years.

  • kathleenirish

    I have never favorited so many tweets from one person, ever. Gary Kasparov is an inspiration and a revelation in this week of absurd politicians and despots

  • Hammerwielder

    Bravo, Garry. Thank you for calling it as it is. All of you commenting on here, take note. Kasparov is the most credible figure in Russia today. Don’t fall for anything this murderous manipulative dictator Putin is trying to put over on us. I support Garry and all freedom-seeking Russians.

    To all you hypocrites decrying Obama as a loser: it is because of the liberties Obama holds dear that you have the freedom to lambaste him with impunity. Try doing that in Russia with beloved comrade Putin. Doing so will land you in a 19th century psychiatric hospital that suddenly burns down, or worse.