Even if the author is responsible for misery and destruction, which is debatable, it still doesn't mean we should marginalize his accusations or condone the actions.
If everyone is doing it, why does the hypocrisy matter?
Don't know, it's not my argument. I was objecting to what seemed to be an attempt to make an issue of osipov's feelings on the matter. Arguments whose topics include the emotional state of one of the participants rarely end well.
There also seems to be a lot of presumptive sorting into binary opposition; osipov disliking the author of the article doesn't mean he supports the "other side", and my objection above doesn't mean I agree with osipov (in fact I don't, though it sounded like you and rbanffy assumed I did).
If everyone is doing it, why does the hypocrisy matter?