What Canadians need to know about Sergei Magnitsky
Eurasia is now the enemy. Eurasia has always been the enemy.
Billyward wrote:
Following is a link giving an excellent perspective on the Maginsky case and its political and geopolitical implications. A key element is the film by Andrei Nekrasov, The Magnitsky Act. Behind the scenes; a film banned in the West but according to many who have seen it an authoritative version of events.
Apparently, the Empire is so incompetent it can't even get this "banning" to cover Washington DC...
WASHINGTON — Six years after his mysterious death in a Moscow prison cell, Sergei L. Magnitsky has become a byword for brutality in PresidentVladimir V. Putin’s Russia. Now, a documentary film that paints Mr. Magnitsky as an accomplice rather than a victim is generating a furor, with critics trying to block a screening of it next week in Washington.
Screenings of the film, “The Magnitsky Act — Behind the Scenes,” have been canceled in Europe after threats of libel suits from William F. Browder, an American-born financier who fell afoul of the Russian government and hired Mr. Magnitsky, a lawyer and auditor, to investigate a vast tax fraud scheme after the government seized three of his Russian subsidiaries.
“The Magnitsky Act” is to be screened on Monday at the Newseum, a private museum dedicated to the news industry. Lawyers for Mr. Browder and Mr. Magnitsky’s mother, Natalia Magnitskaya, sent a letter to the Newseum this week demanding that it call off the event. After a conference call on Thursday, the museum’s management refused.
“We stand for free speech and free expression,” said Scott Williams, the chief operating officer of the Newseum. “We’re not going to allow them not to show the film.” He noted that the museum was not sponsoring the screening, but merely renting out its theater. “We often have people renting for events that other people would love not to have happen,” he said.
Screenings were apparently canceled in Europe, after threats of libel action, but that's considerably less sensational than saying it was "banned in the west", since most reasonable people favour at least a modicum of legal protection from libel, and "ban" is usually meant to imply direct suppression by the state(which I'm pretty sure is why Billyard used that word.)
But I'm glad to see the "anti-Russophobia" crowd has inherited the marketing tactics of 1970s pornographers. "BANNED IN 17 COUNTRIES!" is what I used to see on Edmonton Journal ads for Dracula Sucks and similar material, circa 1979.
Full disclosure:
I've read Browder's book Red Notice. It's interesting enough, but you really can't avoid the feeling that you're only getting one side of the story. And it's hard to be 100% sympathetic to a guy(Browder), who apparently made a living going to a foreign country and buying up privatized businesses at what he himself admits were ridiculously undervalued prices. Regardless of what you think about the Russian government, that kind of activity is definitely going to put you on somebody's radar.
And just to confirm(since the NYT article was written before the scheduled date), the screening did go ahead...
'Magnitsky Act: Behind the Scenes' - Banned Documentary - Bill Browder (and vid)
https://steemit.com/billbrowder/@steemitcentral/magnitsky-act-behind-the...
"More and more, it appears that Browder's crusade is not a fight for truth and justice. The frightening fact is that far reaching laws have been put into effect in both the US and Canada backed solely on Browder's often unsubstantiated stories..."
So who is banning the documentary? They say "banned" several times, and "suppressed", but don't say where or by whom. It seems to be available online.
From the steelmit link...
Moreover, when a Canadian news anchor asked him about the Russians’ charging him with tax evasion, he replied, very hesitantly, “They-they-they-they-they-they-they’ve made that argument.” (Image source. You will notice that this site has been censored.)
When you click on the link to the "censored site", it goes to 4Chan!
(And click at your own risk. The page is called "politically incorrect", and seems to contain things like those abortion photos that anti-choicers like to hand out, though admittedly I didn't stick around long enough for a closer look.)
Aside from the links to god knows where and god knows what have you viewed the actual excellent documentary in question yet?
Aside from the links to god knows where and god knows what have you viewed the actual excellent documentary in question yet?
No, I haven't watched the documentary, and am not likely to. Nor am I expressing an opinion on it.
My point was about the steemit site. I'm kind of wondering how credible their case is if the only site they can find to back up one of their points is 4Chan.
It appears to be a huge platform with very many users of which one published the Magnitsky article. Whatever else the article does it raises pertinent questions about someone who continues to influence neocon foreign policy worldwide. The documentary is an important one.
Since you appear far more interested in Steemit than Browder/Magnitsky there is more information on this site here:
I haven’t seen the doc - I have a number of others I need to watch before I’d have time or inclination - just curious about the claim that it’s been banned and suppressed. Still no real answer to that, and I’m not diving down a 4chan rabbit hole.
There are a lot of docs being made right now, it’s difficult for a production to get notice. So is it actual suppression or a lack of attention?
The Magnitsky Act - Behind the Scenes (and vid)
"The film tells the story of how William (Bill) Browder, an American-born investment consultant and manager of a fund trading in Russian energy companies' shares, invented a seminal narrative of Russian corruption and bribery..."
https://dlive.tv/v/majes.tytyty+1eqNuaKOm
"One of the highlights of Davos 2019: reconnecting to my dear friend and Magnitsky supporter Chrystia Freeland, the Foreign Minister of Canada." - Bill Browder-
Right, fine - but I didn’t ask what the story was. I asked where and by whom the film was banned.
ETA: Ok, I see from the link that there are legal issues. ARTE and other broadcasters have certain requirements, such as being able to obtain E&O (errors and omissions) insurance. If the problem is claims of defamation, that’s usually an indication that you haven’t got your releases and permissions in order or that the filmmaker hasn’t fully supported their claims.
No broadcaster invests the kind of money a commission amounts to in a film to pull it from broadcast for no real reason. If the topic was too controversial, they wouldn’t have commissioned it in the first place.
This does not pass the sniff test.
I haven’t seen the doc - I have a number of others I need to watch before I’d have time or inclination - just curious about the claim that it’s been banned and suppressed. Still no real answer to that, and I’m not diving down a 4chan rabbit hole.
Well, 4Chan is just one of the links supposedly backing up the writer's claims. The bulk of the information about the banning is contained on the steelmit page itself. And as far as I can tell, it consists entirely of...
(Screening of this documentary has been banned in several locations at different times, and the video has been removed from several sites. Let’s hope it remains at the link above.)
And that's it. As I posted earlier in the thread, the doc seems to have been pulled from some venues in Europe because of possible libel fears. But it played in Washington DC, at least, which would seem odd if the film were banned in the sense of suppressed by the government, since presumably the US government would have the greatest interest in banning the film.
Personally, I don't care for plaintiff-friendly libel laws(ie. laws that make it easier for the person suing), and I don't really see a lot of daylight between a film being banned by the state, and a film being pulled because the promoter worried about getting sued into the poorhouse. But European countries have their own libel laws, which long predate the existence of this documentary, so if you think the lawyers were wrong to take advantage of them, you should lobby the respective governments to change those laws.
Hi, VOD - I added to my post above. There are ways around the libel issues if you have your ducks in a row. In fact, there’s industry standard insurance that will insure your film provided you have sufficient evidence (4chan ain’t going to cut it) and proper releases. You never make a film like this without nailing down the legal.
Film by Andrei Nekrasov: 'The Magnitsky Act. Behind the Scenes'
https://www.newcoldwar.org/film/andrei-nekrasov-magnitsky-act-behind-the...
"...Despite all the threats of lawsuits and physical intimidation which hedge fund executive Bill Browder brought to bear over the past couple of months to ensure that a remarkable investigative film about the so-called Magnitsky case would not be screened anywhere, it was shown privately in a museum of journalists in Washington DC last week. The cinematic qualities of the film are evident. Nekrasov is highly experienced as a maker of documentaries enjoying a Europe-wide reputation.
At the end of the twists and turns in this expose the viewer is ready to see Browder sink through the floor in a direct transfer to hell like Don Giovanni in the closing scene of Mozart's opera. Nothing so colorful occurs, but it is hard to see how Browder can survive the onslaught of this film if and when it gets wide public viewing..."
Decide for yourself. Watch it now @ #13 above
Craig Murray: The Magnitsky Myth Exploded
"The European Court of Human Rights has found, in judging a case brought against Russia by the Magnitsky family, that the very essence of this story is untrue. They find that there was credible evidence that Magnitsky was indeed a flight risk so he was rightfully detained. And most crucially of all, they find that there was credible evidence of tax fraud by Magnitsky and action by the authorities years before he started to make counter-accusations of corruption against officials investigating his case. The judgement utterly explodes the accepted narrative and does it very succinctly..."