Re: Miranda et al : Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:33 am  

Cronus wrote:

... Why is this even news?

a) Because the guy was detained under special anti-terrorism laws even though he was not/is not suspected of a terrorist offence.
b) Because, this time, they picked on someone who has friends in the newspaper industry.
c) Because it's not the first time that convenient anti-terrorism laws have been misused (e.g. the Brown government used it to reclaim money lost by UK citizens via Icelandic banks).
d) <Edit> Because No 10 ordered civil servants to contact the Guardian to tell them not to print anything obtained from Snowden.

All newsworthy topics.

HTH.

Re: Miranda et al : Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:43 am  

El Barbudo wrote:

a) Because the guy was detained under special anti-terrorism laws even though he was not/is not suspected of a terrorist offence.
b) Because, this time, they picked on someone who has friends in the newspaper industry.
c) Because it's not the first time that convenient anti-terrorism laws have been misused (e.g. the Brown government used it to reclaim money lost by UK citizens via Icelandic banks).
d) Because No 10 ordered the detention.

All newsworthy topics.

HTH.

Theresa May claims that it was a police decision to detain Miranda and had no involvement from government. She also aditted that she was previously informed of their intention to detain Miranda. If so, she seems to have forgotten to ask one simple question: WHY?

Re: Miranda et al : Wed Aug 21, 2013 8:33 am  

El Barbudo wrote:

b) Because, this time, they picked on someone who has friends in the newspaper industry.

It's a lot worse than that.

It's special measures taken against a person BECAUSE they are friends with a journalist who happens to have written an article that particularly displeases them.

I think it was Naomi Klein in the Shock Doctrine video who said that she had a special code printed on her travel documents that basically meant that every time she went through a port or airport she was detained and treated as a potential terrorist.

It's a blatant abuse of power. And it's a blatant abuse of power that they knew would be widely reported on. They just don't care about being seen to abuse power because they seem to be able to get away with it.

Re: Miranda et al : Wed Aug 21, 2013 8:43 am  

JerryChicken wrote:

Thats why its in the news, because some people feel a tad uneasy about how freely governments of all flavours ignore basic rules on privacy and electronic surveillance whilst using the paranoia of terrorism to cloak their activities - we elect and pay for them, we deserve to know at least the basics of what they are doing in our name.

The worrying message out of all of this is that any hack who dares to publish anything that doesn't show government's in a particularly great light is suddenly going to find their life made 'difficult', which is the sort of thing you would expect from Cuba or North Korea.

Today, it's a Guardian hack working on the Snowdon story who is stopped at Heathrow. Next week, its a Telegraph journalist who happened to find out about Parlimentary expenses gets held at Dover.

Theresa May has said that those who have a problem with this should "think about what they are condoning". Personally, I think that supporting this action is condoning far worse.

Re: Miranda et al : Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:01 am  

David Miranda, who was carrying secret CIA files

Was he carrying CIA files?

If he was then TBH I think he's utterly stupid, the Guardian journalist Greenwald is a ****ing moron too.

If Miranda was carrying nothing then I am 100% in support of him. If he was carrying CIA files then **** him and **** this non-story.

Re: Miranda et al : Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:12 am  

Personally, I think this young man is a bit of a drama queen, but that is of course simply my opinion, and is not based on the iron clad facts as trotted out in previous posts by those confidantes who rightously opine "he is not a terrorist or in anyway connected with terrorism"

I shall now eat my slice of Battenburg with a sense of relief.....

Re: Miranda et al : Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:25 am  

Cronus wrote:

This is a man who has released classified and sensitive (possible dangerous) stolen information into the public domain, and he's somehow surprised and outraged by all this? Give me a break.

It wasn't Edward Snowden or the Guardian journalist. It was the journalist's partner.

Provided you're happy to be detained when your Mrs does something untoward, I totally agree with your post.

Re: Miranda et al : Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:29 am  

Can't normally stand this woman but an excellent piece on this *cough* scandal.

Can't normally stand this woman but an excellent piece on this *cough* scandal.

Re: Miranda et al : Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:36 am  

Chris28 wrote:

It wasn't Edward Snowden or the Guardian journalist. It was the journalist's partner.

Provided you're happy to be detained when your Mrs does something untoward, I totally agree with your post.

If Miranda was carrying classified files, he was asking to be detained.

Given that Miranda was traveling between Berlin and Rio Di Janeiro WTF was he doing going through Heathrow? Again, he was asking to be detained.

Miranda also works as an assistant to the Guardian journalist, so there isn't the separation which I, for one, first assumed.

My first thought was that this was an outrage and intimidation from the govt. But TBH at the moment it's looking like Miranda has set this up to milk it for all it's worth.

Re: Miranda et al : Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:41 am  

Cronus wrote: Can't normally stand this woman but an excellent piece on this *cough* scandal. It might be if you ignore the straw men, untruths and a clear and unwavering missing of the point of the stoppage. But I didn't therefore it's another load of ensch bullshit

Cronus wrote: Can't normally stand this woman but an excellent piece on this *cough* scandal. It might be if you ignore the straw men, untruths and a clear and unwavering missing of the point of the stoppage. But I didn't therefore it's another load of ensch bullshit