MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
UK espionage next in the list of revelations, anticipates Greenwald
Journalist Glenn Greenwald, who broke news on former security contractor Edward Snowden’s allegations of U.S. surveillance programs, said he will publish revelations on U.K. intelligence after his partner was detained in London. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesHow quick they lose their morals.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 01:39 am - Link - Report abuse 0Threats and blackmail. Isn't that what they complain the US and UK government of doing?
Was he in possession of classified material, illegally obtained, that could be of use to potential enemies of the UK?
Aug 20th, 2013 - 01:43 am - Link - Report abuse 0Who knows, but I rather suspect that this was the reason behind his detention, questioning and seizure of his electronic data equipment.
I think that the Met would have taken legal advice before using this legislation, claiming it was illegal is just plain rubbish.
If you have possession of or are suspected of possessing classified material illegally obtained, you can expect this sort of thing to happen. Being a journalist or the gay boyfriend of a journalist does not give you immunity from the law. If you believe it does, then you are just being naive.
Free speech is terrorism.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 02:46 am - Link - Report abuse 0Exposing Big Brother is terrorism.
/sarcasm OFF
Defending the undefendable reduces credibility.
Remember 2005 when the MET murdered Brazilian electrician Jean Charles de Menezes because somebody was taking a leak?
Remember all the lies the MET told?
The police officers on the carriage all maintain that a warning was shouted before two of their number opened fire. Rachel Wilson and her boyfriend Ralph Livock were sitting opposite told the inquest nothing was said to alert the man before shots were fired. etc. etc.
The IPCC's report was a “damning indictment” of a catalogue of failures made on the day.
Hahaha, UK and USA, 1984s.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 03:15 am - Link - Report abuse 0Anglotino, sometimes to fight evil, evil must be used. Though I'd hardly call it that here, at least these men are willing to do something to fight the tyranny that YOU either appease or deny like an ostrich.
I guess that constitutional monarchy isn't so wonderful after all?
Aaah Nostrils so you must become what you loathe?
Aug 20th, 2013 - 03:53 am - Link - Report abuse 0A bit like you!
A moral high ground is obviously not something that you have learnt in English class.
And when the constitutional monarchies within the Commonwealth have endured as many years of military juntas as Argentina has in the past 100 years, then I will believe that your system is superior to mine. That will be around about when hell freezes over in my estimation.
@2 Yes, Miranda was carrying information. He is sulking about stolen property being confiscated. He was just questioned but he uses emotive words like 'interrogated'. Poor little love shouldn't get involved in a mucky business if he doesn't want to get dirty.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 04:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0Greenwald has now undermined his credibility by throwing a hissy fit because someone was 'not nice' to his boyfriend. Not incidentally, Snowden has expressed distrust of Greenwald and anyone involved with Wikileaks. How quickly the thieves turn on themselves.
The fact that Miranda is Brazilian is entirely irrelevant to the story.
Why does this feller think that he should be immune to investigation if the authorities think he is in possession of something he shouldn't be in possession of, that might or might not be detrimental to national security? Is it because he is a journalist? Is it because he is a Brazilian national? Is it because his partner is a Guardian journalist? Is because he is gay?
Aug 20th, 2013 - 05:36 am - Link - Report abuse 0Non of these things would make anybody else immune, why do we think this is a special case?
Sorry for the inconvenience Mr Miranda but if you have nothing to hide why all the fuss? stopped, searched, questioned happens all the time unfortunately some individuals think they are above the law fly home via Cuba next time.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 05:46 am - Link - Report abuse 0Comment removed by the editor.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 06:17 am - Link - Report abuse 0@9 True Blue
Aug 20th, 2013 - 06:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0I have reported your post for it's abusive nature, and the fact it is irrelevant to this thread, and the fact that it is the same thing you post over and over again.
You are not Australian. You are a troll.
@10 I rather enjoy the posts like True Blue's where distraction is their only purpose. You know they have nothing to say regarding the post, any relevant opinion and they are uncomfortable with the truth.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 06:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0- “Yes, Miranda was carrying information.”
Aug 20th, 2013 - 07:39 am - Link - Report abuse 0Prove he was.
- “He is sulking about stolen property being confiscated.”
Let's see how youd'd feel if you had your cameras, computers, video game consoles and even a watch taken away from you. Btw, why did they do that, is British police starving?
- “He was just questioned but he uses emotive words like 'interrogated'.”
He was detained under terrorist legislation, threatened with prison in case he didn't collaborate and hand over personal information to the police. Interrogation is exactly what happened. Let me do this to your ass in a foreign country and let's see how unemotive you'll feel afterwards.
- “Greenwald has now undermined his credibility by throwing a hissy fit because someone was 'not nice' to his boyfriend.”
It's completely normal to feel offended when a dear one is bullied and stolen by the police state of a rogue country under no clear reasons whatsoever. As for credibility, most of us think that who really lost it, is so-called British democracy.
- “The fact that Miranda is Brazilian is entirely irrelevant to the story.”
But the fact that the police is British is not. You are America's slave monkeys.
#7 America's War Poodle
Aug 20th, 2013 - 07:46 am - Link - Report abuse 0If he thought to be in possession of any of those things, he'd have been arrested. That's not what happened, and neither is the sort of information you fantasize he was carrying justify a 9 h detention under anti-'terrorism' legislation, which was clearly abused here.
A British journal, The Guardian, is in possession of hundreds of copies of Snowden's files. If Miranda or Greenwald present such a threat to your parody of a police state, why don't you try and pull this trick on national soil against British journalists? Why did you have to use a free zone such a an airport to play out America's demands (and this was clearly the result of American demands) for theft, civil rights violations and, it seems, spionage too?
It's Morales' plane hijacking all over again - the Britard maggots can't see an injustice when it is rubbing itself against their face, only because the party doing the wrongdoing is British/European and the one on the receiving end is from South America/the developing world. Jingoism and blind partisanship to one's own is a poison to humankind, especially to the sense of justice we all supposedly harbor. I do not doubt that, if pressed, the rats would be saying the children and women their soldiers raped in Iraq are ultimately better off now than they'd be had the bloody, illegal invasion - carried out under US orders, as no doubt was Miranda's detention, interrogation and theft - not happened.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 07:54 am - Link - Report abuse 0@12 LOL! Try again without the exaggerated narrative.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 08:00 am - Link - Report abuse 0Forgetit, you're so right, he's a martyr like Nelson Mandela, I feverently wish that us nasty english britishers would respect sovereignty and latam brothernesshood and stop the rape of miranda, its super serial, people! You bet your last peso that the OAS/UN/AA/RAC/Womens Weekly will be hearing about this !
Aug 20th, 2013 - 08:14 am - Link - Report abuse 0So Mr Miranda why did you tell lies as reported below
Aug 20th, 2013 - 08:23 am - Link - Report abuse 0“Contrary to some reports the man was offered legal representation while under examination and a solicitor attended. No complaint has been received by the Metropolitan Police Service at this time.”
Comment removed by the editor.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 08:40 am - Link - Report abuse 0I am not in favor Brazilian trip, even in transit, to countries where individual rights are not respected. Everyone knows that England is not the best place for us Latinos. They are racist. Better to have used another plane that does not pass through their land.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 08:43 am - Link - Report abuse 0@ Brasileiro Perhaps you could tell us all why so many Brazilians decide to come here and pass of as Portuguese ???? London is full of Brazilians and my own town also so what is it that draws so many to a land that by your accounts totally dislikes them
Aug 20th, 2013 - 08:48 am - Link - Report abuse 0Comment removed by the editor.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 08:53 am - Link - Report abuse 0Believe me I would rather be stopped, searched or interviewed by British police than any police force in South America.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 08:57 am - Link - Report abuse 0Yay True Blue's back to ignore the article and follow me!
Aug 20th, 2013 - 08:58 am - Link - Report abuse 0*blush
@22
Aug 20th, 2013 - 09:03 am - Link - Report abuse 0And I trust more in our state.
As a gay man it was embarrassing to see Glen Greenwald having a tantrum at Rio airport when meeting his partner proclaiming he was going to be more aggressive in his reporting against England-I do wish these drama queens would get our country's name right.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 09:04 am - Link - Report abuse 0@23:
Aug 20th, 2013 - 09:08 am - Link - Report abuse 0So you agree that you are a pommie bastard. When are you going home to pommie land?
The editor of The Guardian has confirmed Miranda was carrying sensitive, encrypted material to pass to Greenwald and his flight was paid for by The Guardian. If you travel as a courier carrying sensitive information the chances are you will be questioned and have the material confiscated.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 09:17 am - Link - Report abuse 0Miranda was offered a solicitor but refused asking to speak to his boyfriend instead. This was refused.
That Greenwald cannot separate his personal life from his work as a journalist further undermines his credibility. As I said before, even Snowden no longer trusts him.
David Miranda is taking legal action over his detention at Heathrow. In particular, Miranda wants the material that was taken from him returned. (Earlier suggestions that it was the Guardian itself taking legal action were wrong, although the Guardian is backing what Miranda is doing. The official line from Guardian HQ says: “David Miranda has filed a legal claim with regard to his detention at Heathrow Airport on Sunday 18 August under Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act. The Guardian is supportive of that claim.” Rusbridger said it was not clear that Miranda was committing any offence taking the material through Heathrow.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 09:26 am - Link - Report abuse 0Regardless of where you stand on the Snowden issue, this is very clumsy handling by the Brits. The horse has gone, slamming the door is not helping.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 10:15 am - Link - Report abuse 0I read that yesterday MI5 went round to the Guardian and smashed up hard drives to the bemusement of the editor who had to explain that it doesn't work like that anymore.
The real “hissy-fit” seems to be coming from GCHQ. I blame that nerd they have has the new “Q”. Handbags at Heathrow! Where is Bond when someone has to “pull the trigger”?
A provocative and contrarian anti-Greenwald/Snowden article from the LEFT. Go fig.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 10:39 am - Link - Report abuse 0http://paulocanning.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/the-left-must-challenge-greenwald.html
@27 Elaine B.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 10:39 am - Link - Report abuse 0“Sensitive information” could mean a lot of things. No doubt many people travel through Heathrow in possession of all kinds of information that is considered sensitive... to someone. Was it really worth the ensuing hue and cry? It seems rather heavy-handed to me.
@18 True Blue (the fake aussie)
Aug 20th, 2013 - 10:54 am - Link - Report abuse 0He is free to post his views on anything he likes. That's how it works in a free country. You don't have to agree with him, but if you were truly Australian, you would support his right to speak.
The fact that you are infantile and resort to racist homophobic insults and swearing says it all. It certainly reveals that you are not Australian, but a troll.
As to the story. A complete non-event, blown up out of proportion by an attention seeker.
And what will he reveal? That UK security services spy on people (like wot they are paid to do). Gasp! Shock! Horror!
This excuse of terrorism is undermining what remains of democratic value in the U.S. and England. The final victory of the National Socialist Party. HEIL!
Aug 20th, 2013 - 11:01 am - Link - Report abuse 0Here is a description of some of the UK government intimidation towards the paper: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/19/david-miranda-schedule7-danger-reporters
Aug 20th, 2013 - 11:05 am - Link - Report abuse 0I think most Americans understand just what a police state the UK is.
@32:
Aug 20th, 2013 - 11:10 am - Link - Report abuse 0Homophobic? I've never talked about any being a homosexual - unless you think that all pommie bastards are gay.
http://en.mercopress.com/2013/08/20/uk-espionage-next-in-the-list-of-revelations-anticipates-greenwald#comment269809: Juan Cole has already beaten you to it! See: http://en.mercopress.com/2013/08/20/uk-espionage-next-in-the-list-of-revelations-anticipates-greenwald#comment269809:
Aug 20th, 2013 - 11:13 am - Link - Report abuse 0Wound or kill one citizen is the same as killing 6,000,000. May be UNK (United Nazi Kingdom)......Heil Hitler! I remember of the young Jean. and now this.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 11:17 am - Link - Report abuse 0@31 Obviously 'sensitive information' could be applied to many things but I doubt the police are interested in those compromising holiday snaps you wouldn't want you partner to see. In this case it refers to information sensitive to national security.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 11:26 am - Link - Report abuse 0@29 I understand it was the journalists that destroyed the hard drives under threat of prosecution but I will check into it further. (For me)
Can we just put into perspective that the information we are talking about was obtained illegally by Miranda et al and the government was recovering it. We are not talking about someone being randomly stopped and their personal camera with holiday snaps being confiscated because a customs officer wants one. (I have seen that happen in a Latin American country).
Still no response for you, Hep, on how Argentines (as just one example) would be “expected” receive a leaking countryman, having fled to Paraguay (as just one example) who leaked information not only on an unconstitutional plan to invade the falklands by force (or other explicitly and domestically/internationally embarrassingly illegal action) and then to ingratiate himself with his new hosts also blabbed about how Argentine intelligence has been undermining Paraguay or the dissident movement in Venezuela in danger (ala Manning)... Well? Is transparency ok when Latam sideboobs are exposed as much as Norte ones?
Aug 20th, 2013 - 11:28 am - Link - Report abuse 0Snowden illegally downloaded this material. In a sense he stole it, he passed some of it, not all of it on to Greenwald, who as a journalist is controlling the release of the information to maximise the impact of his story. Why do we think he has not released it all? Anyone thinking that the editorial staff at the Guardian have it, are being extremely naive. As for the issue of sensitive material, what they are talking about is classified material, classified, meaning secret or above and stolen at that!
Aug 20th, 2013 - 11:42 am - Link - Report abuse 0Anyone carrying it is bound to be stopped by the police.
As for law used, it was passed through our parliament and as been on the statute book since 2000. If it seems to be inappropriate then change it the proper manner.
Seems OTHER journalist are not so sympathetic.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 11:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100231711/why-does-being-a-relative-of-glenn-greenwald-place-you-above-the-law/
@41 He makes the point so much better than I tried to.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 12:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@38 Elaine B
Aug 20th, 2013 - 12:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Quite so. Perhaps I was being pedantic. Still, in the light of 30Gface's excellent link, Greenwald's credibility is being seriously eroded by the very audience he might reasonably be expected to appeal to.
Giving Greenwald enough rope would seem to me to be a smarter strategy than detaining his lover under anti-terrorism laws.
41 andy65 (#)
Aug 20th, 2013 - 12:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Aug 20th, 2013 - 11:44 am
My favourite bit:
”So, far from being a professional journalist working on a one of the most sensitive stories on the globe, Miranda was really just some bloke carrying something through customs for a mate. Which brings us to the first big issue. Presumably, Miranda was asked – as we all are at security – “have you been asked to carry anything for anyone else?” To which, if he was being honest, he should have replied: “Yes. But I don’t know what it is. Could be to do with a film. Could be highly classified national security files. Can’t be sure.”
So good luck with that legal action Mr Miranda. After lying to UK Customs officials you should count yourself very lucky that you weren't arrested and charged.
@43 Yeah, I can see that would be tempting if the information Greenwald is intent on exposing to gain notoriety was not sensitive to national security. I want the security services to protect me and mine. I don't want famewhores blabbing.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 12:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0On a wider note. The editor of The Guardian has been at pains to stress that Miranda is not a journalist. I think that is important in defusing the hyperbole about journalists being gagged.
As for the debate about Schedule Seven, it was introduced for a reason and has been law for some time. If it is the will of the people to change it, so be it. Until then there is nothing illegal about using it. I hope it is fully debated and people understand it.
I see that Mirandas QC is now asking the police not to access his material until a court rules on whether or not it was obtained legally.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 12:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Strange, I always thought that if it was the courts job to hear any evidence and if it found it to be obtained illegally, to rule it inadmissible.
Are we now to change our rules of evidence gathering?
The comments on this article have become very confusing. @3, 4, 12, 13, 14, 18, 24, 26. Has anybody noticed how such posters never say anything provable, verifiable or of real interest?. Isn't it a shame how sites sites as this attract latam total tossers? I think there should be a law that permits suitable organisations to send operatives to visit such latam total tossers, creep up behind them and put a bullet through the space where a human would have a brain. Who could consider, from their comments, “Don Alberto”, The Truth PaTroll, Forgetit whatever, et al to be human.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 12:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Actually the two are legally joined in a Civil Union, according to the newspapers here.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 12:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I am in agreement with Elaine on this one. The Gringo Greenwald really set up his lover to take a fall by asking him to transport the Snowden files to him as a courier from Germany. The consequences of him being stopped and questioned will now follow the young Miranda now for the rest of his life. I believe Greenwald did this because he is a persuasive speaker, has a big ego, and thinks he has such a great legal mind. Not another attorney, or reporter, but his lover. How very sweet and compassionate.
Think about this: Asked nicely to be a courier doesn't work for drugs, contraband, stolen money, or documents. You try that entering Brasil and our PF will ensure that you do hard time in prison immediately, before being declared persona non grata for the rest of your days.
Knowing all the possible consequences here that would drop on you like an avalanche, would you ask your wife or husband to be a burro (mule) ?
Conqueror, you are a CRAZY, man! Much more crazy that i think. You are a comedian, is not? hahahaha
Aug 20th, 2013 - 01:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@38 Elaine
Aug 20th, 2013 - 01:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Here is a link to the FT article on the GCHQ security men smashing up hard drives at the Guardian.
Legally Miranda doesn't have a case but it looks bad for the British authorities. Cameron will try to distance himself from this and order a review of the anti-terror laws. Like Obama he will have to beat a retreat and try to suggest that he was going to do it anyway.
@50 From the Telegraph
Aug 20th, 2013 - 01:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“The second reason we know just how damaging the release of this information could be is because of an extraordinary article written this morning by the editor of The Guardian, Alan Rusbridger. In the piece, Rusbridger describes a series of conversations he’s being having with a cast of shadowy Whitehall figures over his paper’s Snowden coverage. These culminated in what Rusbridger calls “one of the more bizarre moments in the Guardian's long history” as he invited “two GCHQ security experts” into the Guardian basement to watch as hard drives containing the Snowden files were voluntarily smashed to pieces.”
The Guardian staff did it. Apparently voluntarily. I understand it was because The Guardian was liable to prosecution. If they were not on shaky legal ground they would never have done it.
I think some of the reporting on this makes the police look bad but I am really glad it has sparked the debate. People should stop looking at these people acting like loose cannons with personal agendas as modern day Robin Hoods.
@51
Aug 20th, 2013 - 01:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0This is not how people act, but as the state acts with people. Your sense from democracy as a same like Stalin!
@ You are dangerously naive and your comment is irrelevant to the discussion, as usual,
Aug 20th, 2013 - 01:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Look at it from the stand point of the authorities, could they allow an individual to transit through UK territory, suspecting that person of transporting stolen classified British material and not take steps to recover it?
Aug 20th, 2013 - 01:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I think not and what's more, I do not think that the authorities of any other country, that includes South American countries, would allow it either.
I seem to recall an incident where Argentine authorities boarded and seized items from an American aircraft on their territory, having invited them there in the first place.
@51
Aug 20th, 2013 - 01:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0GCHQ must have deleted the link from my post @50!
“If they were not on shaky legal ground they would never have done it.”
Or perhaps they knew they had nothing to lose by smashing up hard drives and by doing so they would get the “security experts” off their back.
The debate has only been sparked by these “loose cannons”. The public wins whilst the leakers are forced in to exile. It is not much of a personal agenda.
@48 BOTHINO
Aug 20th, 2013 - 01:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You make a good point.
@55 LOL, yeah they are after you. :) And probably me. :)
Aug 20th, 2013 - 01:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I always welcome debate. I don't need an unelected individual deciding what should and should not be classified information. JMO
@57
Aug 20th, 2013 - 02:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Is the unelected individual Greenwald or the GCHQ security expert?
It is not one GCHQ individual making these decisions. They may act on behalf or with the approval of the elected government, and in this case, within the law.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 02:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Yes, BOTHINO makes a very good point. Greenwald has been bleating about the treatment of his partner but HE put him in that position. I hope the gullible Miranda realises that sooner rather than later.
“I will report much more aggressively than before,” “They will regret what they did.”
Aug 20th, 2013 - 02:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Do these sound like the words of a professional journalist?
As for the desire to disclose secrets simply because you know them - some secrets benefit us all. If the State has no secrets at all then the Nation's weak points are more easily targeted and the State's likely security responses more easily anticipated and neutralised.
Plus, anyone that has watched Mark Thomas et al over the last 10 years ago pretty much knew all the generalities of this stuff anyway. The idea that any of the revelations are particularly shocking is just journalistic hyperbole.
I will report much more aggressively than before.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 02:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Report what?
What you mean is, you will do an Assange and release more of the information that was given to you, to your editor!
Some reporting!
The UK (A police state) is a lapdog of the US with no teeth.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 02:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Brazil needs to stay out of this farce. Our world is not with you.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 02:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0some salient facts:
Aug 20th, 2013 - 02:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 01) Miranda turned down a solicitor
2) he turned down drinks
3) he lied saying he wasnt offered a solicitor
4) he lied saying he wasnt given any drinks
5) A Jounralist who says “Im gonna get the Uk now!” has just shot his own reputation down by proclaiming open bias
6) The “world press furore” over journalistic rights to information security - where is such a right?
7) ... it wasnt a journalist who was stopped - it was his “courier” - that “courier” just happened to be his boyfriend.
... when you get right down to it, its a storm in a tea cup and a rather typical Latino “flounce in public” - just the sort of left-liberal types the Gruniad loves in fact.
Was the guy tortured? no
Was he threatened physically? no
Was he detained beyond the legal limits? no.
its a big fat Gruniad drama-queen story as per usual.
Wow, detained for a whole nine hours and given access to a lawyer paid for by the tax payer, some police state. Let's have more of them.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 02:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Am I the only one that thinks this is boring and of no consequence given the fact that the security at Heathrow just enforced the law.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 03:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I do think that keeping the mule for nine hours to the minute is not only amusing but is sending a strong message to his hysterical “partner”.
CryingR,
Aug 20th, 2013 - 03:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I waiting for you,. You are a good fighting. I like fight against you......myenemy, Honor, Glory....for my country, for Rome. for Londinium! For ever! FIGHT
@65, drug mules in south east asia and the middle east would give their eye teeth for such due process.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 04:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0ElaineB (#6)
Aug 20th, 2013 - 04:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0'Yes, Miranda was carrying information.'
This is a *justification* under the UK terrorism laws? ... !
Oh, Elaine!
Everybody, but everybody carries information. Laptops, cellulars, mamory sticks, ...
The most damning information the world has ever seen is carried by everybody, even when stripped naked. Fingerprints, DNA ...
But does that give a NSA, a GNVQ, a Stasi, (sorry about the last one, but they were the world's best collectors of information at the time) .. does it give them the right to strip a person naked of ALL data, on a whim, on a hint, on an ichy feeling, whenever they pass through a port or airport terminal.
HELL! What are we coming to??? OK, I know that it will dissuade millions of people from coming through the UK ports of entry because on the off-chance they can be data-stripped, humiliated, imprisoned.
Guys, this is *where it starts*!
I thought the US Homeland Security was bad, but THIS .... !
I know the UK has no Constitution, so it can do absolutely anything it wants to anybody living in or visiting the UK.
Why? Because the clauses of its anti-terrorism legislation are so loosely drafted that we have given 'the state' the right to do what the hell it likes to any one of us ... because ANYBODY could be a terrorist. Just like in the McCarthy era, when ANYBODY could be a communist; and today, when anybody in the USA could be a Ssssocialist!
I remember when the Catholics hunted down the non-conformists, and vice versa (not that I was there, of course, except in Ireland) ; the Christians hunted down the Muslims and vice versa; the Sunnis killed off the Shias, and vice versa; and everybody hunted down the 'indians'.
My God! don't we hate 'The Other'!
Even the Spanish Inquisition could complete its inquisitorial tasks within nine hours. And the Witchfinder General took even less. Yes, 9 hours is plenty of time to create hate. Plenty of time to radicalize.
This produces an inbuilt acceleration of hate. We are doing it to ourselves.
Andy65's linked article is gold. I'll post the link again because it is clear that Brasiliero and Fido Dido have no idea what is going on.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 04:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100231711/why-does-being-a-relative-of-glenn-greenwald-place-you-above-the-law/
Geoff, you are the best!
Aug 20th, 2013 - 04:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0(69) GeoffWard2
Aug 20th, 2013 - 05:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You say....:
“ We are doing it to ourselves.”
I say....:
Jupppppp, you are.....
@69 Did you read the rest of the thread? Or the articles? Or the statement by The Guardian editor.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 05:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You think we should let a courier carrying information that could pose a threat to national security just walk out of the country with it? Why?
The people responsible for all this are actually the preachers of hate, the terrorists and bombers that blight all our lives. What they cost us is a lot in terms of safety, peace of mind and money. Without them there would be no need to question and detain someone for 9 hours. What a load of absolute tosh and fuss about anything. I remember 4 hours intense questioning coming out of Israel because of an old Turkish sticker on the suitcase I had borrowed from my suitcase.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 06:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If they have to detain someone for 9 hours to keep the rest of us safe so be it. The Guardian is a crap newspaper for whingers and nimbys, no wonder only 0.25% of the UK population bother to read it. Sue away!
If Brazil holds all Englishmen outside our borders to protect us from your thoughts uncivilized, so be it. Visa and burocracy for these rest of humans.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 06:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Blame the Yanks.......English puppets.....if he was carrying sensitive material it came from your Yankee masters!
Aug 20th, 2013 - 06:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Ditch the Yanks.....Ditch the EU and combine with the Commonwealth to create a real power!
This news story is starting to unravel and already sinking without a trace.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 08:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://en.mercopress.com/2013/08/20/uk-espionage-next-in-the-list-of-revelations-anticipates-greenwald#comment269867: First it was not the police, it was a secret agency of the executive branch of government.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 09:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0But the editor made the (what I would have thought) obvious point that destroying the disks made no material difference. The information is held elsewhere. The agency operatives seemed not to understand this point. Apparently they are still operating in a pre 1970s world.
@70, 77:
Aug 20th, 2013 - 10:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Anglo pretends to be an Aussie when he posts his crap but he is really a pommie bastard. Don't believe him!
@78.. Come On Hepatia... tell me what how a LatAm Snowden would be received by people like you? Not just blowing whistles about possible wrongdoing in his own country but also leaking information about “legit” intelligence activity for no other reason but to show off and ingratiate himself to his hosts. Still waiting.
Aug 20th, 2013 - 11:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Cinderealla's other foot awaits. And her sideboob is showing...
@78
Aug 21st, 2013 - 12:51 am - Link - Report abuse 0They destroyed the disc because they knew possesing the information held on it was illegal, against the law of land.
How difficult is that to understand, who gives a shit what you think about it!
It's the UK law, end of.
It's my guess that the Spanish people currently visiting the UK are ALL potential terrorists.
Aug 21st, 2013 - 06:00 am - Link - Report abuse 0The UK police have the legislation and the right to hold every one of them for 9 hours, interrogate them and crush their phones and laptops.
This should be done ... at least until the Gibraltar crossing reverts to normality.
Only joking, folks.
That would be using standard British law and procedures to rack up the hate; I'm against that.
I mean I'm against racking up hate.
I couldn't be against standard British law, could I? It's known across the world as the benchmark of good justice.
......
And what about all you good people posting here prefering to use 'boyfriend' and 'lover' to demean this Brasilian guy?
I have had 'wives' and 'partners' - some of whom I have loved, but they are not defined by their juvenility or their sexual proclivities; just by the fact that the have been or are my 'partner'.
Come on you demeaners .. a little less weasely gay-bashing.
You are beginning to sound as weasely as does the BBC.
At least they say they 'put a slant' on their news to 'protect the state' ...
you have no such excuse.
@Geoff Ward2
Aug 21st, 2013 - 07:00 am - Link - Report abuse 0I'm not unsympathetic to the general tenor of your argument, however, as one who did use the term 'lover' to describe the relationship between Mr Greenwald and Mr Miranda I reject your characterisation as one of gay-bashing.
I have no problem with either gentleman's sexual orientation, and I believe, in this context, my use of the term was entirely appropriate.
Cheers Geoff.
@82 You think 'boyfriend' is offensive? I'll let my gay friends know because they use it all the time. They use 'partner' too but only in a more formal context. Try not to get too tangled up in what you think is PC. The fact that Miranda IS Greenwald's boyfriend is very relevant to the whole story.
Aug 21st, 2013 - 07:06 am - Link - Report abuse 075 Brasileiro (#)
Aug 21st, 2013 - 09:46 am - Link - Report abuse 0Are you deranged? We’ve all seen the documentaries about Brazil, the truly appalling slums, the murders of street kids by the police, a truly appalling murder rate of 40,974 (21 per 100,000 inhabitants) compared to the UK of 722 (1.2 per 100,000) - (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime 2012) massive institutionalised corruption; Brazil ranked 69th most corrupt country by transparency International index 2012 compared to 17th for UK. Brazil is one of the world’s most un-equal societies (measured by Gini coefficient) and possesses dreadful public health, transport and education services. Brazilian history is littered with political turmoil and military dictatorships. And you’re complaining about the UK? There are loads of Brazilians living happily here in London, especially in Stockwell in South London. They love it. They have their own South American festival in Southwark Park every summer. They enjoy a freedom and opportunities to get on in life which the majority of their compatriots back home can only dream about.
Perhaps you need to see some more of the world, open your mind a little. Europe is not as bad a place as South American zenophobic, nationalistic, anti-western bigots may tell you.
Geoffward2
Aug 21st, 2013 - 10:12 am - Link - Report abuse 0While your post is reasonable, it is probably unwarranted. From personal experience I can tell you that the English language, and many others for that matter, have so far failed to adapt to this societal change.
While different people have different opinions there is not hard and fast rule on what to entitle a gay partner. Husband has a heterosexual feel to it and smacks a little of ownership to some, partner is sometimes too generic for others, life partner (at least in Australia) has a bit of a lesbian feel to it, lover can be viewed as more sexual and boyfriend for some is a little too shallow to many.
The truth is that there is no term that works for all. Each person brings their own outlook to whatever term they use. While I have nearly always used boyfriend; I will sometimes use partner depending on the audience. Should my country's politicians finally pull their finger out and I am one day able to get married, I have no idea what term I would use or prefer.
But I would never get upset if someone used a different term. The fact that a gay couple doesn't raise eyebrows or cause frowns of disapproval is enough for me.
I see Bradley Manning has been sentenced to 35 years in prison and is likely to be free in 8 years.
Aug 21st, 2013 - 11:19 am - Link - Report abuse 0Oh dear what will Julian Assange do now, no fear of death in the USA now.
http://en.mercopress.com/2013/08/20/uk-espionage-next-in-the-list-of-revelations-anticipates-greenwald#comment270019: Where to start? I would like to offer you the benefit of the doubt and say that you have resorted to sarcasm. But, after scan some of your past posts, I doubt that you have even the wit for this poor form of humor.
Aug 21st, 2013 - 12:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0First in a country where the rule of law operates it is the judicial branch which decide who is guilty and of what. It is most certainly not the role of a secret police force, or any other agency of the executive branch. The procedure you describe is a signature characteristic of a police state.
That aside the only first person account of the incident that I know of is the one given by Alan Rusbridger and there is nothing in his article that supports your assertion that “they knew” what was on the disks at all. In fact if the Guardian staff are at all competent (and I assume that they are) it would have been impossible for the agents to know anything about the contents of the disks.
But, if the agents honestly believed that the information on the disks was held by the Guardian in contravention of some (unstated) law then that information would have represented evidence of a felony. And destroying that evidence would, arguably, be itself a felony crime - that is, obstruction of justice. Are you accusing the agents of committing a felony?
The operative point is that the agents have not destroyed anything other than some disks. The Guardian has all the information after the raid as before it. Rusbridger tried to point this out to the agents but they seem not to understand - and you likewise seem not to understand.
You have the gall to lecture us on the behaviour of “secret police!”
Aug 21st, 2013 - 12:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0When was the last time 30.000 British men, women and children disappeared?????
No fucking comparison between our police and yours, ours police by consent, yours police by fear and denunciations.
Jesus Christ, your president even has a youth movement monitoring your people!
The British Government must be scared silly to do this to a free individual..
Aug 21st, 2013 - 01:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0What are they so scared off?? ummm
We will soon find out won't we, after all Mr Greenwald is going to make them pay for it, isn't he?
Aug 21st, 2013 - 01:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Ah! Ever the consummate professional.
' The fact that Miranda IS Greenwald's boyfriend is very relevant to the whole story.' ElaineB (#84)
Aug 21st, 2013 - 02:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0What's the relevance?
@92 Do you understand now that it is OK to use the term 'boyfriend' and 'lover' without it being in any way offensive?
Aug 21st, 2013 - 02:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Do you retract your insult by calling many of us gay-bashers? We were doing no such thing.
Once we have cleared that up I will answer your next angry accusation.
I am most certainly no gay-basher, I just don't want it made compulsory! :o)
Aug 21st, 2013 - 03:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0So, what is the relevance of this journo being a homosexual? (#84)
Aug 21st, 2013 - 05:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Does it make them better spies?
Less trustworthy?
More likely to topple the pillars of your society?
My favourite gay joke.
Aug 21st, 2013 - 05:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“My mother made me a homosexual.”
“if I gave her the wool, would she make me one too.”
I find that funny, does it make me a homophobe? Think not.
I have two daughters in their early twenties, they have several gay friends from their days in high school. Does it bother them? Does what bother them!
Strange isn't it, I always thought it was the parents job to instill values into their children, man did I get that wrong. Thank god for the young!
What brings Greenwalds sexuality into relevance here, is the way he behaved, in front of the camera, when his partner, boy friend, lover or significant other half, call him what you like, was detained.
He threw a hissy fit, not what you would expect of someone who is supposed to be a professional journalist of some repute!
I'll get my own back on them! Very mature.
@95 OK you are not the GeoffWard2 I used to respect. You call people gay-bashers and refuse to apologise when you are shown to be completely and utterly wrong in your accusations.
Aug 21st, 2013 - 05:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It DOES NOT MATTER IF HE IS GAY!!!!! It matters that he is the boyfriend, just as it would matter if it was a girlfriend. Read what Greenwald said about revenge and revealing far more damaging material than he would have done. That is the point. He is no longer a journalist exposing what he thinks is in the public interest, he is writing for personal revenge. He has totally undermined his credibility.
When the real GeoffWard2 returns we can have a reasoned debate.
Ooo..... all the PC and righteous indignation........whatever!
Aug 21st, 2013 - 06:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0What I find curious is who does the strip search.....a man or a woman?
.......will the real Geoff Ward please stand up, please stand up!
http://en.mercopress.com/2013/08/20/uk-espionage-next-in-the-list-of-revelations-anticipates-greenwald#comment269915: In times in the distant past we used to set up situations which would force the late Soviet Union to react. And, of course, they would react badly because it was in their political DNA to do so. And then we could say, “See, the Soviets are showing their true colors.” When I read about this detention in London I wondered if somebody was not setting up the British in the same way.
Aug 21st, 2013 - 10:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Another possibility that occurred to me is that this incident was the result of a diversion and the real action was occurring elsewhere.
This is just speculation on my part. There is no evidence that I know of to support these, or any other, hypotheses. But one thing I think we can be sure of is that using a courier to transmit information is the most inefficient and insecure method available.
69 GeoffWard2
Aug 22nd, 2013 - 12:02 am - Link - Report abuse 0Well said Inglés.
This detention shows the true face of English imperialism, nowadays turned into a little poodle.
As Anglo #86 says, descriptors used here imply the Greeny's partner is both a sexualised individual and is shallow.
Aug 22nd, 2013 - 05:50 am - Link - Report abuse 0Elaine calls Greeny ''vengeful' and his partner a 'mule' - a carrier and a hybrid,
whilst R C #96 calls him immature with 'hissy fits' ... 'girly'.
And that's just a small sample of just one site.
I think we have all done a great job of conscious and unconscious denigration of the messenger and his partner.
Perhaps we should focus more attention on the perpetrator - Snowdon.
[Remember we did the same thing with Assange (sexual attack) and the Wikileaks perpetrator; diverting attention from the message to the messenger.
Standard tactic of disinformation, distortion and diversion whenever a government's activities are brought under inspection.]
Marcos #100 wants post-imperial England to show her teeth.
It's easier to show statesmanship if you carry a big gun; but even a little gun(boat), timefully deployed can show non-poodle-like 'statemanship' ... if you're faced with a naughty Rajoy.
GeoffWard2 climb down off your pulpit. Do not paraphrase me especially when you deliberately use it to misquote me.
Aug 22nd, 2013 - 07:26 am - Link - Report abuse 0“different people have different opinions”
“there is not hard and fast rule on what to entitle a gay partner”
“to some”
“sometimes”
“for some”
“Each person brings their own outlook”
To me, as a gay man, you are the one that is coming across as the most intolerant on this forum.
There's plenty of homophobes on this site, Think and Stevie for instance, perhaps you should keep that in mind when you next reply to them.
@ 101 GeoffWard2
Aug 22nd, 2013 - 07:30 am - Link - Report abuse 0ElaineB is MORE than capable of looking after herself, but I want to make something clear.
The security services tag these people as document mules in a similar way as they refer to drug smugglers are drug mules.
And whether you like it or not this character who I believe ‘played’ the security forces, which bent over backwards for him (no pun intended), in a manner not usually allowed, all to Greenwald’s advantage.
Yes, you would probably want to talk to your partner if you were caught by them but you would not be doing anything wrong. Those who are doing wrong, and he certainly was, if allowed access to outside people could arrange (via code if necessary) to destroy or move to another location the rest of the material / tip off another person, whatever, about what is going on.
With regard to the nine hours, that is what you get if your solicitor takes 8 hours to get there.
http://en.mercopress.com/2013/08/20/uk-espionage-next-in-the-list-of-revelations-anticipates-greenwald#comment270424: Miranda was doing something wrong? So, what was that?
Aug 22nd, 2013 - 09:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0104 Hepatia
Aug 22nd, 2013 - 09:56 am - Link - Report abuse 0I refer you to the reply I gave you before:
URINATE ON YOUR WAY OUT OF THE BUILDING.
Hopeless solicitor!! wasn´t there somebody more “available”....
Aug 22nd, 2013 - 11:55 am - Link - Report abuse 0I would have kicked his arse all over the terminal....
@101 Geoff
Aug 22nd, 2013 - 12:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Well how would you describe his reaction at the airport?
Do you consider it a mature reaction, or do you consider it the reaction over protective gay man, who let his feelings for his partner get in the way of his professional behaviour.
I never called him girlie, you did!
I simply described what I saw, if you interpret the word hissy (defined as an angry outburst or tantrum) then that is your problem, not mine.
Today's news says that
Aug 22nd, 2013 - 12:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0i. Miranda's brief has requested a stay of examination of the material on his computer and cellular pending a judicial decision on 'rights' and 'whether Miranda has been engaged in terrorism'.
ii The English police have declared that they have found a mass of secret information arrived at illicitly, and are beginning a criminal investigation.
iii. The English judiciary are intending to review rapidly Section 7, and have informed the Home Secretary that there is an urgent need so to do.
The competitors are facing off .... governments usually win in these matters, but they are keeping schtum, so the police will take the heat for The Establishment.
GNVQ will continue domestic and foreign spying without interruption until the Ministry of Defense instruct them otherwise.
Re. my 'pulpeting' (nice one, Anglo ;):
my central thesis is
'Remember we did the same thing with Assange (sexual attack) and the Wikileaks perpetrator, Bradley Manning;
diverting attention from the message to the messenger.
Standard tactic of disinformation, distortion and diversion whenever a government's activities are brought under inspection.'
I don't take Left, I don't take Right, I don't take straight and I don't take gay ... and I don't troll.
So focus, if you will, on my key points -
i. the state and its exceedence of its remit under the law,
ii. bad law - eg. Section 7, and
iii. the ways in which we are fed divertionary information to keep public scrutiny and opinion away from the central governmental illegalities (that have themselves been illegally revealed to us 'in the public interest' ... except they have NOT been revealed to us in the Snowdon case; perhaps that is still to come).
Remember the key illegalities are
i. our Governments' illegalities (all complicit governments), and
ii. our intelligence services illegalities (particularly but not exclusively NSA and GNVQ)
Exposure of the illegalities, we are being led to believe, are 'more serious'.
Geoff, but you did say I was gay-bashing which is entirely wrong and an attack on me. I am still awaiting your apology for projecting onto my words your own false interpretation. You have lost the plot on this one.
Aug 22nd, 2013 - 01:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Is this not a vengeful statement made by Greenwald?
‘I will be far more aggressive in my reporting from now,’ he said. ‘I have many documents on England’s spy system. I think they will be sorry for what they did.’
Are you suggesting calling someone 'vengeful' is to imply they are gay?
Thank you Chris @103 for explaining that 'mule' is a common term used describe smugglers and not an implication of homosexuality. (I don't even want to think how you made that connection).
I have never slurred Assange with sexual allegations. He has been accused by women in Sweden. My criticisms of him have been based on his actions under the guise of Wikileaks.
I hope Assange, Snowden, Greenwald et al face the criminal justice system. I cannot defend the actions of the few who decide for nefarious reasons to steal and publish damaging material. I want the law to deal with them for any and/all criminal offences they have committed. I want the intelligence services to protect me and mine because I know what goes on where most people prefer not to look.
Finally, maybe you should look at how you have reacted to criticism of Greenwald and Miranda and have set out to slur people here with the label 'gay-bashing' rather than debate the issues.
Remember, somebody did the same thing with Snowdon as they (or others) did with Bradley Manning …
Aug 22nd, 2013 - 02:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0diverted attention from the message (eg. illegal manipulations to justify US/UK intervention in the Middle East, illegal spying on us, at home and abroad),
diverted to the secondary messengers: Assange’s ‘sexual attacks’ and Greenwald/Miranda’s homosexuality. Salaciousness sells.
We are now used to these tactics of disinformation, distortion and diversion whenever a government's activities are brought under too close an inspection.
Don’t be diverted!
Focus (if you wish!) on my key points –
i. the state and the way it has been shown to be acting illegally,
ii. bad laws - now Section 7; previously, the ‘sus laws’ (Section 60 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994, which allowed the English police to stop and search without suspicion in a designated area for a 24-hour period.)
iii. the ways in which we are fed diversionary, etc, information to keep public scrutiny and opinion away from these governmental illegalities.
@110 Still no apology for your slur on my character?
Aug 22nd, 2013 - 02:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0How has the state acted illegally?
Bad laws can be changed by the will of the people. Stop whinging and do something about it.
You certainly used diversionary tactics here by labelling a few of us as gay-bashers just because we didn't agree with you. How are you any better?
110 GeoffWard2
Aug 22nd, 2013 - 02:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I advised you that ElaineB was more than capable of coming back to you.
I can see you are agitated about all of this, but as a friend I advise you to sit back and review your posts for your own sake.
You may wish to take a different route. ;o)
What was the name of that celebrity in the advert whose catch-phrase was “Calm down, dear!”
Aug 22nd, 2013 - 04:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Yeah I noticed the lack of apology too ElaineB. Seems I didn't get one either for being misquoted.
Aug 22nd, 2013 - 04:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0GeoffWard2 is trying to vainly make this into some sort of character assassination and it's not working. Honestly no one is making a big deal about their homosexuality.
He wasn't detained because he was homosexual
He was questioned because he was homosexual.
The material he was carrying was not homosexual.
But he was homosexual.
So far seems the least reported part of the whole affair.
Give up Geoff, you're actually damaging the cause.
http://en.mercopress.com/2013/08/20/uk-espionage-next-in-the-list-of-revelations-anticipates-greenwald#comment270464: The reply you gave before? “Urinate on your way out of the building?” What a sad twisted little man you are.
Aug 22nd, 2013 - 08:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0In any case you have agreed with me that the UK is a police state so that's one thing in your favor, I suppose.
#116
Aug 23rd, 2013 - 02:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I suppose you live in a paradise where nothing nasty ever happens to the general public from suicide bombers or religious fundamentalists.
Whether you like it or not,the govt. has a duty to keep its population safe.
If this entails surveillance generally, so be it. They can read my emails if they so wish. If I want to communicate privately I can do it in other ways. Whatever country you are in probably does the same thing, as does Russia, China et al.
If what I read was true then Miranda was carrying hard drives and pen drives with information that was classed as secret. What is the fuss if he was stopped, questioned, and made to hand over the material. He was then allowed to continue his journey without any physical force used against him.
If I remember correctly, at immigration and customs control you are asked if you are carrying anything on behalf of anyone else.
The answer was “YES”. In my day it was “come this way sir” and explain what it is and for whom are you carrying it. That is exactly what happened.
I think you are rather disingenuous to think anyone carrying information that may damage ANY nation's security would be waved through with a friendly smile.
@113 GeoffWard2
Aug 23rd, 2013 - 05:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0His name was Michael Winner and he was famous for the Death Wish films (but not quite all of them).
He died on January 21st this year aged 77. Love him or loathe him he was an interesting character.
http://en.mercopress.com/2013/08/20/uk-espionage-next-in-the-list-of-revelations-anticipates-greenwald#comment270802: I live in a country where the president swears an oath to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” He, or she, does not take an oath to protect the population or any particular person or people and, in any case, certainly may not use unconstitutional means to do so. The position that you espouse was, in former times, known as, “Better red than dead.” That is you are prepared to destroy the country in order to save it. (Not that the UK has ever had much worth saving in the political domains.)
Aug 23rd, 2013 - 08:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Your particular political philosophy is a source of weakness, not strength. I have already speculated that either Greenwald or the Guardian set this operation up in order to attack the UK. If so they have succeeded.
How do you know that any information that Miranda was carrying was classed as secret? The UK police could not possibly know that. Could it be that it is possible for you to know something that it is impossible for the people on the spot to know? I think not. If what I have speculated is the case then Miranda would have been carrying encrypted copies of Greenwald's last 10 years of laundry lists. Or, even better, white plain text.
I have flown over to Europe many times as a member of a corporation. And, of course, on those occasions I was carrying corporate material and data. I have never been pulled aside to explain anything. Could it be that you are on a terrorist watch list?
#118
Aug 24th, 2013 - 05:31 am - Link - Report abuse 0I remember the AMERICAN credo - not BRITISH - better dead than red in the McCarthy era, however your analogy does not fit present times. Ask the populations of the USA and the UK, or any population. Would you rather be dead than have some curtailment of personal liberties ? I would imagine the answer would be NO.
Where to start ! Oh dear !
Did you read and comprehend what I wrote ?
QUOTE !
“If what I read was true” Note the word IF used in a conditional clause. The rest of my post was based on this “IF”
You interpret this, by your own standards , as meaning I knew.
So effectively, you are accusing me of something I did not say.
How convenient for your argument.
In most cases, police or relevant authorities do not know for certain what individuals are carrying. They knew of Miranda's association with Greenwood so it would have made him at least a suspect.
I served with HM Customs & Excise for 40 years and as such, I am aware of procedures in the UK as to the stopping and searching of travelers entering or leaving the country.
You speculated. That is all you can do. You have no more information or insight than I have on this matter.
We have been told that the hard drives he was carrying were destroyed under supervision of staff from GCHQ.
Hardly necessary if they were only laundry lists or plain white text.
So, by your reasoning ,Miranda should have been allowed to wander through innocently to preserve the liberties of the individual, although he MAY have been carrying information covered by the UK Official Secrets Act. Name any country that would permit this.
”Could it be that you are on a terrorist watch list ?
Where did this come from ? I had to sign the Official Secrets Act, and although retired, I am still bound by its contents. Anything is possible, however you are more likely than me to be on any list as it is obvious that you are no friend of the UK.
118 Hepatia
Aug 24th, 2013 - 07:05 am - Link - Report abuse 0“I have flown over to Europe many times as a member of a corporation. And, of course, on those occasions I was carrying corporate material and data. I have never been pulled aside to explain anything.”
As a nonentity why would ANY country pull you over, YOU WERE JUST A DOCUMENT MULE YOURSELF?
THIS DOES NOT MEAN I AGREE WITH YOUR STUPID, STUPID, BENT AND FLAWED LOGIC.
DID YOU GET THAT?
Miranda was under surveillance. And quite rightly as it turns out.
Aug 24th, 2013 - 08:31 am - Link - Report abuse 0http://en.mercopress.com/2013/08/20/uk-espionage-next-in-the-list-of-revelations-anticipates-greenwald#comment270985: Life is a risk. And, WRT terrorism the question is, “Am I in more danger from a terrorist attack or from an authoritarian whose claim to legitimacy is that they will protect me from such an attack.” It is my judgment that I am in far more danger from the authoritarian government than the terrorist attack. This question is the subject of current debate in the US - a debate prompted by the information released by Snowden.
Aug 24th, 2013 - 11:19 am - Link - Report abuse 0WRT to your “conditional clause” it is not possible that what you have read can be true because it was reported that Miranda did not have the keys. That's my point.
Your point about Miranda being known is why I say that using a courier is the least reliable method of transmitting data. So, why use it unless it was to trap the UK police?
When you say that your secret police destroyed the disks did they destroy the data? Why would your secret police destroy the information? Even if it where possible for them to read the data it would make no sense for them to destroy data or intelligence. If they have destroyed the information it is most probably an attempt to appease the Brazilian government.
“Official Secrets Act!” Do you really believe what you are saying. The countries that have an official secrets act are the PRC, the SRV, the late Soviet Union (and, possibly, the Russian Federation), (I think) Iran and the UK. All police states! In all other countries, assuming the rule of law is in force, would permit the free passage of people and their effects. That's how free countries are.
In any case it has been reported the Miranda was detained under terrorism legislation. Is that not correct?
@122 There were no 'secret' police involved. Police employed to uphold the law for all of us were involved in dealing with Miranda.
Aug 24th, 2013 - 11:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0You have never heard of the Official Secrets Act? How odd. How odd that your government does not consider protecting sensitive information from falling into the wrong hands, thus protecting the wider public.
I had not heard that the information Miranda was carrying had been destroyed. I understood it was in the hands of the police at the moment. Is this confusion with The Guardian voluntarily destroying the data they held, to avoid prosecution? Believe me, they would not have given up the data if they were NOT breaking the law, they would have delighted in thumbing their nose at the establishment.
I cannot work out what point you are trying to make. Miranda attempted to carry information from a documentary crew in Germany to Greenwald in Brazil. He was caught and the stolen information confiscated. All within existing laws. That you don't like the laws is irrelevant. I suspect Greenwald gave the information to the documentary crew for safe-keeping as he expected he may be under surveillance but didn't think his boyfriend was. All very amateurish but Greenwald is just a reporter. It would also explain his initial outrage that his boyfriend WAS detained.
It is worth noting that Snowden is denying all knowledge of the information transfer. Probably because he has been actively distancing himself from Greenwald and Assange, both of whom he has said he no longer trusts.
@123 ElaineB
Aug 24th, 2013 - 12:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Totally agree with you.
This Miranda guy was stopped under a british law designed to stop terrorism or to stop people helping terrorists either directly or indirectly. Whilst I don't believe this guy is a terrorist, it is clear that the people Miranda is associated have caused untold damage to the operation of free and democratic countries like the UK and USA and it would be remiss of any police force, operating with the law, to ensure the nation was at not risk from the data he was carrying. The UK has a regulator to ensure that the terrorism law is not misused, uk police cannot behave without scrutiny and it is good that such matters are brought before law courts.
The Guardian is misguided , it has confused in believing state secrets and state communications must be revealed to the public. A government is rendered impotent if its thought processes are revealed. It is different if the Guardian revealed for instance, that the government had some how engineered Bird Flu, or were dumping nuclear waste in the caves of Gibraltar, anything else is simply a government in normal operation.
@122
Aug 24th, 2013 - 12:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You don't have to have secrets to be classed as suspicious departing Argentina - having a few dollars is sufficient.
The Wiki list of freedoms by country http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_freedom_indices
#122
Aug 24th, 2013 - 01:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0First para.
You may feel that, I and most of my fellow citizens don't.
Second para.
“It was reported” by whom ? Does that make it true or is it just conjecture..
Third para.
If logic or the facts do not agree with your thoughts, try a conspiracy theory ! Did MIRANDA know he was known by the authorities. ?
Para four.
It would take more characters than I have left to explain this to you !
Para five.
You are slipping back into never never land here. I am not usually a fan of Wikipedia but this will save me a lot of time. READ IT !!!!!!!!!!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Official_Secrets_Act
This covers everything in a Civil Servant's job.
I was privy, in my working life, to Customs and Excise procedures and plans. Also to data bases of known and suspect criminals - both UK and foreign. I had access, by law, to companies accounts, tax records, research and development sources. I had the power to arrest people, search premises in certain cases without a search warrant, seize goods,ships aircraft - in effect my Commission granted me more power under the Law than a Police officer. To keep this information privy, I was covered by aspects of the Official Secrets Act, even in retirement. I accepted the terms when I was employed and understood that the act of signing it covered me forever.
You say that you work for a corporation. As such you probably have commercial information that could be of benefit to a rival company.
If you passed on this information what sanctions could your employer
raise against you. Dismissal yes, theft ? Did you sign a confidentiality clause when you were employed ? Or would you expect to get off without any sort of legal action against you ?
The Official Secrets Act is just an all embracing “confidentiality ” act.
NO government anywhere could operate if its employees could leak any information whenever they felt like it regardless of the consequences.
@126 Quite. Just as I can seek medical treatment with the National Health Service with the comfort of knowing my medical history will be confidential. All health workers need to ensure they do not break the confidentiality of the patient. Does that make them 'secret' health workers?
Aug 24th, 2013 - 01:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I think it important to point out that factually, Mr.. Greenwald is an accredited journalist for some time with The Guardian.
Aug 24th, 2013 - 02:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Mr. Miranda, his Civil Union partner IS NOT accredited with The Guardian, and never was. Early on here in Brasil, Mr. Greenwald stated on O Globo that there had been a home burglary, which is very common here, with the only item stolen being Mr. Miranda's laptop, which is not very common here.
Yet Mr. Greenwald then chose or convinced Mr. Miranda to courier materials to and from Germany for his purpose. And Mr. Miranda accepted, with no protection as a journalist for Mr. Miranda, and his carry-on items. Did Mr. Greenwald not bother to inform Mr. Miranda of that obvious possibility ? One wonders.
Mr. Greenwald has a long-standing column with The Guardian entitled Glen Greenwald: On Security and Liberty. ” It implies that, amongst other matters Mr. Greenwald is an expert for The Guardian on both security and secrecy, for it's readers worldwide.
Given his subsequent choice of Mr. Miranda to act as courier for him, that appointed title of a knowledgeable Security expert is diminished, and under the circumstances very doubtful. Either from ignorance, or selectively omitting that possibility to Mr. Miranda in order to further his journalistic aims, it was a very naïve and bad choice on the part of Mr. Greenwald.
128 BOTINHO
Aug 24th, 2013 - 05:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Perhaps they have had a lover's tiff and Greenwald wanted him to learn who “wore the trousers” so to say! :o)
(82), (95), (101), (108) & (110) GeoffWard2…..
Aug 25th, 2013 - 09:28 am - Link - Report abuse 0Focusing on the key points of your above comments, I can no other than concord with you…..
Just keep it up Greenwald your'e gonna get yours you loud mouthed scuzz bucket...Sooooo acording to your screwed up set of values the UK will regret taking all measures to protect itself along with its citizens..?I got news for you,just like Assange,Snowden, Manning and a few others you are in way over your head,and personally I cant wait to hear the bleating when your ass winds up in a sling.As it surely will...!!!
Aug 25th, 2013 - 10:41 am - Link - Report abuse 0so if a gay person was walking out of rgenweener with state secrets for his boyfriend you'd all be happy. Hope he does try and sue the British government he will end up a bigger laughing stock than he is now, who knows he might get a job at a decent newspaper...... clarin perhaps............but I doubt it. Arrested because he was homosexual? ............shut up he was DETAINED because his boyfriend is a potential SPY
Aug 25th, 2013 - 11:28 am - Link - Report abuse 0http://en.mercopress.com/2013/08/20/uk-espionage-next-in-the-list-of-revelations-anticipates-greenwald#comment271069: A sentiment you share with Fascists.
Aug 25th, 2013 - 06:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I read it on Huffington Post IIRC. Of course giving the courier the keys allows for rubber hose code breaking.
Yes, he did. But, my speculation remains just that.
I've had a chance to catchup on the news. The UK secret police have not destroyed the data. It is now subject court control.
Irrelevant so I will not waste any time reading more about repressive UK law.
If I transit the UK carrying corporate data the corporation has nothing to fear from me. They do a lot to fear from the UK government as this incident shows.
One of the questions is a matter of Ownership.
Aug 25th, 2013 - 09:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0IF Mr. Miranda is asked to identify the files, and can, then he knows what he was carrying. Not a good answer regarding stolen intelligence files from any country including Brasil..
If Mr. Miranda cannot identify what he was carrying as he says, then it is doubtful those files, or any others would be returned to him. Despite the fact they are probably under current analysis, ( in the UK, perhaps Germany, and even Russia, from the time they were on the Continent ) the UK court might require them to be destroyed.
Again, Mr. Miranda was not an accredited journalist, and might have a hard time recovering anything other than his game-boy. I think he would be foolish to accept anything back given the obvious contamination prospect..
#133
Aug 26th, 2013 - 04:42 am - Link - Report abuse 0No, I have next to nothing in common with Argentineans.
Rubber hose code breaking ? Explain with verifiable examples.
If I transit the UK carrying corporate data the corporation has nothing to fear from me.
How do they know that ? Are you so pure as to be beyond reproach ?
They do a lot to fear from the UK government as this incident shows.
How do you arrive at this conclusion ? Do they regularly send document etc which have been stolen from other businesses or governments ? If not ,what is your problem apart from everything British bad.
“ repressive UK law”. So you advocate freedom of information on EVERYTHING, with no sanctions on anyone who releases classified information .. Tell me what government in the world allows this - I can't think of any.
Interesting logic, #134.
Aug 26th, 2013 - 04:48 am - Link - Report abuse 0Ownership of stolen goods tracks one route with the police if
i the person carrying the stolen goods knows what the swag bag contains, and
ii another if he doesn't know - or claims not to know.
Police have been addressing this dichotomy for centuries, so the course of procedures is pretty much 'on rails'.
“My God! How did that little packet turn up in my pocket!?
”It was planted on me!“
”Yes, of course I was carrying an umbrella; it was raining. No, I didn't know it had a pointy end with ricin in it“
”My GameBoy was bought from Comet, and I'm not responsible for the NSA, GNVQ or the Stasi putting extra info into the chip. All I do is use it to play games, honest gov.“
”You must be joking ... do you really think I'd put those things up my bum?“
”I promise to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help me God”
Police, in my experience, tend to hold onto stolen goods whatever the carrier of the goods claims.
Here's another proposition:
If a bull is stolen and produces offspring, can the farmer be convicted for the owning the genetic offspring?
Similarly, if a dataset is stolen and then copied with modifications, can the mule be convicted for carrying the copy?
Looking at how things are panning out it seems Miranda was lucky to be let go.
Aug 26th, 2013 - 07:06 am - Link - Report abuse 0I wonder why the security forces allowed it? It couldn't be, could it, that Miranda as well as being a document mule is also a mole working for the security forces? :o)
Have you seen Assange's election rap video on Youtube filmed at the Ecuadorean embassy?
Aug 26th, 2013 - 02:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It is embarrassing beyond belief and tells you everything you need to know about Assange. Who ON EARTH thought it would be a good idea? He has no credibility left.
138 ElaineB
Aug 26th, 2013 - 05:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Shades of the Welsh Windbag and Glynis walking along the beach looking like “A World Statesman” he thought: then the idiot fell over.
People still talk about that at every election.
Given that Assange's people are leaving in droves I think he will do one better than Kinnock and sink out of sight.
You have to wonder just what his limit is on attention seeking. Credible he is not.
Aug 26th, 2013 - 05:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://en.mercopress.com/2013/08/20/uk-espionage-next-in-the-list-of-revelations-anticipates-greenwald#comment271407: Your preference of big, authoritarian government over liberty and your reliance on the politics of fear betray you.
Aug 26th, 2013 - 11:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The type of cryptanalysis attempted by the UK secret police is commonly known as “rubber hose cryptanalysis” - in contrast to brute force, math or side channel attacks. It is the preferred method of secret policemen all over the world.
Yes. Any suggestion otherwise is a libel.
You said above that if answering 'yes' to the question, “Are you carrying anything for anybody else”, then a person will be pulled aside. I have often carried corporate data which does not belong to me. By what you have said and following this incident it appears that the UK can seize the hardware and data if they decide to do so. You assert that Miranda was carrying stolen data but you have supplied no evidence. Interestingly, the UK secret police also could not provide any evidence when invited to by a judge. There was no probable cause.
A number of governments have attacked the UK government for their thuggish actions. One of these countries is Germany where a Merkel spokes person said, “I think a scenario as currently discussed in the U.K. is hardly conceivable over here.”
#141
Aug 27th, 2013 - 07:33 am - Link - Report abuse 0Madame hyperbole at work. No country has complete liberty. The correct term for this is anarchy. I presume you come from a country where the police routinely carry guns and use them. To me that is more scary than your incorrect assertion that Britain is a police state.
So, the UK were doing NOTHING that any other govt. has not sanctioned or done.
Your employer gives you free rein to act as you see fit with no checks on your conduct ? How do they find if they have a “bad apple” ?
State or government employees are subject to checks on their work and attitudes. The higher up they go they must be like Caesar's wife...beyond reproach.
Ignore Miranda for now. If a person is pulled over for a baggage check, one of the questions asked is “ are you carrying anything not belonging to you to give to another person” If you say yes, then you are then asked what the items are. If they are readily identifiable, books, clothes, souvenirs etc.and are below import duty concessions then you will be cleared through. If you say they are computer hard drives, I don't know what is in them, and give a name for the consignee, they may require further examination in case they contain child pornography, details of money laundering or other banned or suspect information.
Miranda would have been known to be associated with Greenwald.
This is conjecture---- The UK authorities MAY have known that Miranda WAS carrying information that they suspected was obtained illegally from UK Govt. sources. They then had the right to question Miranda on the contents of these hard drives----they were hardly the complete series of Downton Abbey. If they suspected that this was the case then they could be detained for examination. Did this not happen. Mr Miranda was not physically assaulted and allowed to continue with his journey.
“Thuggish actions”. Hyperbole again... a trait in your postings.
Or possibly not fully conversant with the use and understanding of English.
Clyde asks at #142:
Aug 27th, 2013 - 01:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Miranda was known to be the partner of Greenwald.
If the UK authorities even suspected that Miranda was carrying information that they suspected was obtained illegally from UK Govt. sources they had the right and duty to question Miranda on the contents of his hard drive – and check the drive contents.
Did this not happen?
Self evidently, YES.
The police declared that there were thousands of secret documents on this computer.
How did they know he was in transit? We have been told that the US tipped off the UK, so Miranda was under active and detailed surveillance.
These two facts being placed in the public domain by the authorities, why on earth did they let him go?!
He patently broke a number of English laws and would, under English law, be held pending his trial or be formally bailed.
If he was let go under the instruction of the Government we will find out eventually. If he was let go under the persuasion of the US, then they must have a more powerful reason to circumvent the law of a foreign nation – especially one with a ‘special relationship’.
I think that it will be announced that he was let go by the police ‘by mistake’. Believe that if you will.
http://en.mercopress.com/2013/08/20/uk-espionage-next-in-the-list-of-revelations-anticipates-greenwald#comment271604: Of course you find it scary. You are controlled by fear. And you expect that if you surrender your liberty your government will save you. They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Aug 27th, 2013 - 09:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Had the PRC pulled Miranda off the plane then we might not have been surprised. Likewise with the old GDR, communist Hungary and all the rest. But, in this case, the only country that did was the UK. Germany did not. Neither did Brazil. So I think it is truer to say that the UK is the only country to resort to these thuggish actions. This is why both Germany and Brazil, among others have commented negatively.
Irrelevant.
As I have already stated this has never happened. In any case, given the inability of the state to view the data, it is not clear how it can happen.
The UK did know Miranda was associated with Greenwald. That's why they announced over the plane's PA that all passengers had to have their passport in hand as they exited.
Miranda was held for 11 hours and questioned mainly about the riots in Brazil. The secret police could not question him about the data because Miranda had no access to it. Their math ability may not be all that good but even they could grasp this simple fact.
They sent him on his way minus his property. Some of the missing items he only found out about after he arrived in Brazil.
Chancellor Merkel thinks the UK secret police actions were thuggish as does the Brazilian government. Had Greenwald organized this trip to embarrass the UK then it could not have gone better.
#144
Aug 28th, 2013 - 06:28 am - Link - Report abuse 0More hyperbole and conspiracy theories !!!!
All that is missing is the 25 year( or is it now 24 year) deadline for the Falklands.
I really cant be bothered with this thread any more. From your postings you were obviously there at his questioning as you know, in detail everything about it
I give in !!!! I live in a scary police state where our police, in the main, are unarmed. Every night I wait in trepidation for the 3am knock on the door as the secret police in their size 11 boots take me in for questioning. The rubber hoses come out and I am threatened because I put some garden rubbish in the wrong bin.
The whole country keeps looking over its shoulder to see who is next.
Please tell us in what the paradise you were born so that we can escape from this hell to freedom.
The world has moved on from this story; which has disappaited like the drama it was.
Aug 28th, 2013 - 06:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0This week it is all about Syria.
Snowmen is safely in Russia, after all he stayed at the Russian embassy in Hong Kong. So he and the Russians got what they want. Miranda and Greenway were just pawns in Russian espionage. The sort of espionage that they seem to find so distasteful.
http://en.mercopress.com/2013/08/20/uk-espionage-next-in-the-list-of-revelations-anticipates-greenwald#comment271781: In order to address a problem it is necessary to recognize that the problem exists. So your acknowledgment that the UK is a police state is a beginning. Once you escape your fear you will find that your state of liberty will increase.
Aug 28th, 2013 - 09:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Here are a couple of links to Folha articles:
http://en.mercopress.com/2013/08/20/uk-espionage-next-in-the-list-of-revelations-anticipates-greenwald#comment271781:
http://en.mercopress.com/2013/08/20/uk-espionage-next-in-the-list-of-revelations-anticipates-greenwald#comment271781:
This is what Brazilians are reading. I understand that your first reaction is, “So what, Brazil is just another country inhabited by brown people”, but I think that the British have not fully understood the implications of some very important changes in America.
The US is now implementing our so called 'pivot to Asia' - that is a pivot away from Europe. And Brazil and the other American countries are also pivoting to Asia and Africa. As a result for the first time since WWII, Europe is no longer going to be propped up by America. The results of these strategic changes will become evident within the next 10 to 20 years but one effect that is apparent now is that the UK can no longer act in the manner of a rogue state. What Brazilians and other Americans think is important to the British.
Of course one of the incidental results of the coming strategic shift is that the Malvinas will be returned to Argentina within the next 25 years.
I can never tell who she replies to. And what does skin colour have to do with anything? Miranda isn't exactly “brown skinned”.
Aug 29th, 2013 - 02:10 am - Link - Report abuse 0#148
Aug 29th, 2013 - 05:34 am - Link - Report abuse 0I have given up trying to understand what she is on about. She has her own agenda which is Argentina/Latam good.......Britain bad.
That's all you need to know to make sense of her posts
I see we are still on the 25 year bit.
149 Clyde15
Aug 29th, 2013 - 01:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Yes, but you know the stupid bitch lives in the USA (so she says).
#149/150
Aug 29th, 2013 - 03:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0She also does not understand the concept of irony as at my post at #147.
I am coming round to the theory that it is a pre programmed computer we are corresponding with. The same limited phrases keep appearing with zero sign of a personality.
http://en.mercopress.com/2013/08/20/uk-espionage-next-in-the-list-of-revelations-anticipates-greenwald#comment272019: How old are you guys? You sound like a couple of 8th grade school girls talking about who's hot and who's not. You need to get yourselves under control and grow up.
Aug 29th, 2013 - 10:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0My interest in America and Europe is a result of my interest in the national interest of the US. And it is in the national interest of the US to have a strong, democratic America. Further the center of gravity of world activity is moving to Asia and Africa. The US policy of 'pivot to Asia' is a starting point for US recognition of this fact.
The US has a much reduced national interest in Europe. This has been true since at least 1990, if not before. It is due to the failures within the Clinton and Bush administrations, who were staffed by yesterday's people, that we are just now realizing this.
We should and will arrange now our alliances and forces, military and diplomatic, in such a way to build this new world.
Judging by the postings here the UK's national interest seems to be to have a weak and, sometimes, undemocratic America, and to cling, like a jilted lover, as tightly as possible to the US. Its creepy and you should stop it!
I have already mentioned the importance of a strong, democratic, America - which includes Latin America. Other than that I don't think I have said anything about Argentina being either good or bad. And I have commented on the UK only in the context of their policies being in direct opposition to the national interest of the US. Other than that I do not really have much of an opinion of the UK. A UK that is integrated into Europe may or may not be a reasonable country. I don't know or care.
Just in case you think that its only Brazil that is attacking the UK have a look at this op ed from Forbes:
http://en.mercopress.com/2013/08/20/uk-espionage-next-in-the-list-of-revelations-anticipates-greenwald#comment272019:
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!