Patterico's Pontifications


British Cowards Ban Journalist from Film Awards Show Because Putin Wants Him Dead

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 11:05 pm

In the Weekend Open Thread, Dana mentioned the valentine Alexei Navalny sent to his wife. Speaking of Navalny, the documentary film about him (which I saw when it first came out, and commend to you) is up for an Academy Award. I think those awards are stupid, but when they can bring attention to a film like this, I’ll support that attention.

Meanwhile, the film also won the British Academy Film Award for best documentary. But Christo Grozev, the Bellingcat investigator whose incredible online sleuthing was central to Navalny getting an admission from the people who tried to kill him, was not in attendance. The filmmakers who accepted the award dedicated the award to Grozev:

The filmmakers behind Navalny have dedicated their Bafta documentary award to investigative journalist Christo Grozev.

Bulgarian Mr Grozev, who features in the documentary about Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny and events related to his 2020 poisoning, claimed before the ceremony he and his family were not allowed at the event due to being a “security risk”.

At the ceremony, producer Odessa Rae said: “We want to dedicate this award to Christo Grozev, our Bulgarian nerd with a laptop, who could not be with us tonight because his life is under threat by the Russian government and (president) Vladimir Putin.

“I met Christo in the summer of 2020. His life is fairly private then and he gave up everything to tell the story and many other stories that need to be told.”

How sweet. Except, Grozev was not absent because he was scared. He was absent because he was banned by the cowards who ran the awards ceremony. Grozev was not welcome because he posed too much of a danger, as the New York Times reported in advance of the ceremony:

A journalist who investigated the poisoning of the Russian opposition figure Aleksei A. Navalny and was prominently featured in a documentary film about the imprisoned leader said he was “banned” from attending the British Academy Film Awards, where the film was nominated, after being told his presence would represent a security risk to the public.

The journalist, Christo Grozev, is on the Russian Interior Ministry’s “wanted” list, according to the Russian state-run news agency TASS. His reporting on Russia with the open-source investigative group Bellingcat, including into the 2018 Novichok poisonings, has won multiple international press awards.

The more I think about this, the more irritated I become.

The premise of Navalny’s recent life, and thus the underlying theme of the film about him, is his courage. This is a man who willingly flew into Vladimir Putin’s Russia knowing that Putin had tried to have him killed, and that he would be arrested on phony trumped-up charges the moment he set foot on Russian soil. And still he went. Why? Because it was his homeland. Because he had done nothing wrong. Because he was not going to cower in fear and change his behavior based on ridiculous threats of prosecution for non-existent crimes.

This is a man who knew he was walking into the lion’s jaws, but did so anyway. Why? Because it was the right thing to do.

Christo Grozev is a brilliant researcher who, by taking on Putin, has put his own life at risk. He knew the risks and he acted anyway. Why? Because it was the right thing to do.

Now here are a bunch of artsy ponces — from the nation that made famous the phrase “Keep Calm and Carry On,” no less — scurrying in fear at a ridiculous non-threat to the safety of an audience at a self-congratulatory event for the glitterati. Grozev, I’m sure, would have had the courage to attend if he were allowed to. And it’s his neck that was truly at risk, not the audience’s.

Imagine. This crowd could have told themselves they had the COURAGE and BACKBONE to attend an event where, somewhere else in a room, a man sat whom Vladimir Putin would like to kill. They could have applauded him as he won a prize, and congratulated themselves on their incredible courage in being willing to sit in the same room, dressed in fancy tuxedos and dresses, with a man whom Putin wanted dead. And they lived to tell the tale! They could have kept friends spellbound for weeks at their tales of personal bravado.

My, my, perhaps they could even have sent Alexei Navalny a letter in prison telling him how brave they were.

But no. It was not to be. These fancy-clad nobility of the film arts remained safe in their seats, and did not have their safety threatened by the presence of the likes of Grozev.

Good for them! I mean, the decision may not have been brave, but it certainly was, I think we can all agree, the very sensible thing to do. Eh wot?

Keep a stiff upper lip, gents!

10 Responses to “British Cowards Ban Journalist from Film Awards Show Because Putin Wants Him Dead”

  1. These are the same Brits who would edit Roald Dahl books to take out offensive words like “fat”, and they’re the same Brits who wouldn’t prosecute pedophiles in Rotherham out of fear of being labeled Islamophobes.

    Paul Montagu (8f0dc7)

  2. Kudos on the correct use of “artsy ponces.”

    LYT (00bda4)

  3. ‘British Cowards Ban Journalist from Film Awards Show Because Putin Wants Him Dead’

    “I hate the British! You are defeated but you have no shame. You are stubborn but you have no pride. You endure but you have no courage. I hate the British!” – Colonel Saito [Sessue Hayakawa] – “Bridge On The River Kwai” 1957, nominated for 8, winning 7 stupid Academy Awards…

    DCSCA (1d337d)

  4. So shameful. I read that Prince William and his wife, Kate Middleton attended the ceremony, I have no idea, but have to wonder if that was what the “security risk” was actually about. Not a risk to the public per se, but to British royalty? If so, that’s even more disappointing. It might not have just been that Grozev wasn’t allowed to attend, but it might have been that he wasn’t allowed to attend because his appearance could have put the royal couple in jeopardy. IOW, their presence at the awards ceremony was more important to the glitterati than the presence of a real-life, heroic freedom fighter like Grozev.

    Dana (1225fc)

  5. Tell us how you think!

    Actually, I mean that. It’s good to see you posting here again, and it will be interesting to see if any of your views have altered in the past few years that your energy has been elsewhere.

    Kevin M (1ea396)

  6. I am reminded of the TV actors and such who would not board a plane in November 2001 to attend the Emmy Awards for which they had been nominated.

    This is worse.

    Kevin M (1ea396)

  7. We mustn’t offend the London dwelling, draft dodging, sons of the oligarchs.

    steveg (13fca3)

  8. @4. Well, consider the recent history of anti-Russian types getting bumped off in the UK by poisoning, hangings and so forth… it’s a significant list so there may be some validity to the risk assessment by the Brits we may never hear about.

    Vladimir Putin issues new ‘kill list’ – and six of the targets live in Britain

    DCSCA (4b6189)

  9. I think Patrick used the word “cowardly” perfectly.
    To quote Jimmy Cliff: I’d rather be a free man in my grave than living as a puppet or slave
    Then there is this guy Fabrizio Quattrocchi: His kidnappers forced him to dig his own grave and kneel beside it wearing a hood as they prepared to film his death, but he defied them by trying to pull off the hood and shouting “Vi faccio vedere come muore un Italiano!” – “I’ll show you how an Italian dies!” He was then shot in the back of the neck.[via wikipedia]

    steveg (512ace)

  10. @9. Always amuses me when Americans refer to Brits as ‘cowardly.’ Try it in a pub off Picadilly or along Kensington High Street pub some time or in an eatery along the Serpentine… it’s an embarrassing lesson a Yank can learn the hard way, as both my late father as well as myself did back in the day.

    DCSCA (3f45e9)

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1104 secs.