Quote Originally Posted by edvalais View Post
I'm not referring to pseudo-corruption, as outlined in the link you gave, but unequivocal, direct bribes. I personally believe that this is how Russian won the Olympic bid.
The words 'unequivocal' and 'personally believe' don't sound quite right in the same sentence. So, in case of some other Olympics games the accusations in bribery of the MOC are 'pseudo-corruption', but simply because you 'personally believe' in something makes Russia 'unequivocally' guilty. Okay



Quote Originally Posted by edvalais View Post
Incidentally, it's interesting that you directed me to the Transparency International link. Of course, in Russia TI has to designate itself a "Foreign Agent". Why is this?
What? Is it not true? Has Transparency International moved its HQ to Russia when I wasn't looking?
Seriously though, TI is NOT a foreign agent. It's a foreign organization. But when TI establishes in Russia something called 'Русская национальная правдивая организация' (Russian national truthful organization) for example AND ALSO this organization goes straight into the Russian politics then and only then this organization must add 'A Foreign agent' prefix to its name so that people would know that it's not in fact Russian and not in fact national. What concerns 'truthful' part - that's up to people do decide. What's wrong with this concept? I think, people are ought to know who are they listening to. Such 'agents' are not even forbidden to do politics here. They simply have to wear that 'agent' sign.

Quote Originally Posted by edvalais View Post
It was Putin's response to the US Magnitsky Bill - and we all know the profound cesspit of corruption and violence that forms the basis for the Magnitsky tragedy
Sergey Magnitsky's death is probably a tragedy, but such things happen. People die due to lack of medical attention (ok, even because the officials who were responsible for his continued good health in prison were corrupt). Such tragedies happen now and then around the globe but the whole matter was blown out of proportions. What I know is a) Magnitsky himself was not so 'innocent' as he's depicted in the Western media; b) Mr. William Felix Browder who was up to his ears in corrupt schemes with several high-ranked officials lost a great deal of money. It was then and only then, when Magnitsky was ordered to start throwing shit into the fan about 'thievery', etc. The problem was simple - Browder underestimated his Russian partners. He thought they were civilized enough to start throwing the shit back at him in the court, but they chose a more direct approach - no man = no problem. Personally, I believe that it was Browder who set up Magnitsky; and c) nobody would care about Magnitsky's death if Browder hadn't existed.