General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHow can ANY Democrat defend the detention of Greenwald's partner?
If you support the core values of the Democratic Party, doesn't that give you a personal obligation to OPPOSE the national security state when it clearly oversteps its boundaries? When it treats people like terrorists just because they engage in free speech? When the work against government secrecy(a practice that never has anything but right-wing objectives and right-wing results)?
How can anyone call themselves a Democrat and ever back the use of repression against those who are simply defending the people's right to know?
It's not like secrecy and the shadow world of covert action are wrong when the Republican use them, but ok when our guys do it. Secrecy is always aimed against the common people, against workers, against the poor, and against peace. No one but Reaganites or Nixonites should EVER defend such despicable things.
cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
LearningCurve
(488 posts)eom
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)Some Democrats have sold out to corporations. They defend cuts to SS and Education, they'll sell out the enviroment and working class for a trade agreement, and are shredding the Bill of Rights. They may call themselves Democrats....but they're just fascists with a smiley face.
RKP5637
(67,107 posts)creeksneakers2
(7,473 posts)to "sell out?"
Zorra
(27,670 posts)and a whole bunch of them got Reagan/Bush elected twice.
They are apparently still relatively numerous, and doing their conservative, regressive, nasty RW business on a daily basis.
backscatter712
(26,355 posts)silvershadow
(10,336 posts)KoKo
(84,711 posts)I've not known what to think about that. Or, maybe there are folks too afraid of getting involved with it. Yet...it's a huge issue.
I don't know why. Maybe someone will come forward to explain it. If reporter's Partner/Spouse is gone after and detained in a major World Airport for 9 Hours...it would seem to be a BIG DEAL.
proverbialwisdom
(4,959 posts)MONDAY, AUGUST 19, 2013
Heathrow Isn't an Incident. It's a Principle
In case you missed it, yesterday for nine hours at Heathrow Airport the UK authorities detained David Miranda, the partner of Guardian journalist Glenn Greenwald, under an anti-terrorism law, and have confiscated all Miranda's electronic gear, including games and a watch. No explanation was given; no news about when or even whether Miranda's property will be returned to him. This is the kind of thing the US likes to criticize when it's China or Iran doing it.
<>
Little Star
(17,055 posts)"This is the kind of thing the US likes to criticize when it's China or Iran doing it."
WillyT
(72,631 posts)grasswire
(50,130 posts)It's a long list, and a sorry history.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)I've been dealing with bullies all of my life.
Fortunately... I was so successful... that my sisters started to scare the crap out of me.
Point is... doing the right thing...
NEVER goes out of fashion.
Swagman
(1,934 posts)..never goes out of fashion "
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)If it's offensive to the administration, they seem to be just fine with him being detained, arrested, intimidated, and/or beaten senseless.
ChangeUp106
(549 posts)Just make this NSA story STOP PLEASE! As someone who watches/reads progressive sites all day, I'm sick of it!
EDIT: Before people say "you're not a progressive," what was exposed was important and needs to be reversed but the constant 24/7 coverage is too much. We've known for years the govt. was spying on us. It's a shame we didn't put this much effort into something like health care.
Cerridwen
(13,258 posts)infringing on "your people?"
Tough.
Deal.
When they "come for you" will there be anyone to defend your cause?
I don't care. I'll be long "detained."
eta: fat fingers
additional edit: we did bring this to the attention of many "democrats." They were fine with the anything so long as it benefited them. The rest of us? Who gives a flying fuck.
burnodo
(2,017 posts)and they ignored us there as well
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)uponit7771
(90,335 posts)...be treated as such
regards
burnodo
(2,017 posts)nt
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)...agency the company was contracted to help?
tia
burnodo
(2,017 posts)uponit7771
(90,335 posts)burnodo
(2,017 posts)"they" were detained under a terrorism law
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)...were trying to do..
O wait, he already told us...
burnodo
(2,017 posts)How do you decide who is a terrorist or not? Were "they" on a list of terrorists?
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)...possible or an extremely slim chance of it.
Possible terrorist is a pretty high bar IIRC
burnodo
(2,017 posts)and, that would be ok with you
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)....only should I be held for 9 hours I should be thankful they didn't send my ass to some place were I will be
If I'm helping said person, then I should expect to be fucked with.
EVEN IF THIS WAS UNDER BUSH I would NOT support Snowden...
What he's doing is fucked up in a big way
burnodo
(2,017 posts)so you're excusing any detention based on any idea that someone might be a terrorist. Or, are you saying that the UK types knew beforehand who this person was? Does that mean the US orchestrated it?
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)...not out of the question at all.
That's why you don't steal gov docs that REALLY don't prove a damn thang new
burnodo
(2,017 posts)NOW we're down to the nitty gritty.
And AQ knows its being spied on. American citizens DO NOT know they're being spied on.
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)...from across the street is NOT spying on them.
Looking at your internet traffic isn't either, it's on a public street
regards
R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)isn't doing all of those things, and how are we to find proof that they are or aren't? By trusting a spy agency to tell us?
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)A gay couple would simply never do that, for God's sakes.
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)...bit he bites with assholic vitriol.
Then his writings are full of sophistry
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)What I was saying there was that nobody would willingly aid an organization that wanted to see that person and all like him and his partner executed.
A gay person aiding AQ would be the equivalent of a Jewish person assisting the Nazis.
creeksneakers2
(7,473 posts)Greenwald's other partner is on a watch list. She's been detained every time she's gone to an airport for years. That shoots a hole in the theory that the latest episode must be just an attempt to intimidate Greenwald. It probably doesn't take a big plot to put somebody on a list. There are probably hundreds or even thousands of people who can do it.
It appears though that there was more going on than just a listing in the latest episode. The authorities had strong reason to suspect that classified information was being smuggled. It probably was.
burnodo
(2,017 posts)That argument holds no water.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)burnodo
(2,017 posts)why wasn't he arrested??
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)and he wasn't the target? Was he expecting the red carpet treatment?
creeksneakers2
(7,473 posts)They probably took Miranda's devices in hopes they could decrypt the information.
noiretextatique
(27,275 posts)not remotely a terrorist, even though she is on the watch list. it has every thing to do with politics, and very little to do with national security.
burnodo
(2,017 posts)never heard that
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)Snowden Went to Booz Allen to Steal Files, but Didn't He Already Have Some?
Whisp
(24,096 posts)Here is an excerpt:
For the first time, Snowden has admitted he sought a position at Booz Allen Hamilton so he could collect proof about the US National Security Agencys secret surveillance programmes ahead of planned leaks to the media.
My position with Booz Allen Hamilton granted me access to lists of machines all over the world the NSA hacked, he told the Post on June 12. That is why I accepted that position about three months ago.
burnodo
(2,017 posts)He was endeavoring to expose illegal US government activities. He should be considered a hero. Or, do you like US government criminality to stay in the dark?
Whisp
(24,096 posts)Road Warrior, Mad Max - the Paul's do like that idea too.
oh, and fuck them. Fuck the Pauls.
oh jesus...what a way to prop up your argument!
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)burnodo
(2,017 posts)you're getting punchy
R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)*Murder, torture, spying, cover-ups, graft, etc. Regardless of D or R Government is ours.
Once one stops believing that Government is accountable to the people the Government won't be accountable to the people.
This dirty LibRul is sure damn glad that Government gets a kick in the pants every now and then.
Wikileaks, Manning, Snowden:
Appeasers and cheer leaders of any Admin that wants to hide the truth:
Swagman
(1,934 posts)that enemy was closer than i thought.
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)...audits that no one believes anyway about non prove to be purposeful oversteps either
thx
burnodo
(2,017 posts)So you admit there is no real oversight of these criminal activities on the part of the US government?
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)I gave what was requested I'd like the respect as same
regards
burnodo
(2,017 posts)which means you know they're breaking the law and noone in your vaunted government seems to care about it
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)...not including myself which I could care less about.
I vote for people who lean towards proper oversight of these agencies, I don't demonize them because they haven't done said oversight the way I want
burnodo
(2,017 posts)then LIED about it!
one_voice
(20,043 posts)Maybe I don't condone ANY criminal activity.
And don't act as if Snowden happened upon this information. This was done with forethought.
He thought out and planned this crime. Yes, stealing is a crime in this country.
No he's not a fucking hero. He's a common thief. No better than someone that picks your pocket, hell he probably has some of your information.
This is not an excuse for the sorry ass spying that's going on either. That's wrong too.
burnodo
(2,017 posts)but without that crime there would be no exposure of the sorry ass spying. That is contradictory.
It used to be a crime to free slaves. It still is a crime to be in posession of cannabis in most places. All crimes are the same? All crimes are crimes?
one_voice
(20,043 posts)what Snowden did to slavery. NOT even in the same universe and frankly it's insulting as hell.
I'm not trying to tell you anything, he stole, stealing is a crime. It's that simple.
There's nothing contradictory about what I said. Snowden didn't expose anything. NOT A DAMN THING.
So I reiterate, my distaste for what Snowden did is not an excuse for the sorry ass spying that's going on.
I never said all crimes were the same. Show me where I said that. Stop fucking putting words in my mouth and reading shit into my comment that wasn't there.
burnodo
(2,017 posts)and if Snowden didn't expose anything, WHY THE FUCK HAVE WE BEEN TALKING ABOUT HIM FOR 3 MONTHS?!?!?!
one_voice
(20,043 posts)I didn't make up any definitions for crime.
Is stealing a crime? Yes. That's the extent of what I said. I didn't say all crime was the same. I didn't make up any definitions. Stop being dishonest and putting words in my mouth.
Don't take this the wrong way, but have you been living under a fucking rock?
We've known about this since Babybush was in office. Snowden took shit from the gov and ran....he leaked shit about the UK and China too that was new. But the spying...not new.
Jesus Christ dude pay attention there's a story on the first page of GD about it being known back in 2006
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3496919
Stop yelling.
burnodo
(2,017 posts)Evidence of wrongdoing by the government?
Again, if everything Snowden exposed was known, then the major kerfuffel were under now shouldn't be happening. And Obama's lying about NSA spying then his walkback less than a week later should be MORE than enough to convince you that SNowden's "crime was the crime of whistleblowing.
one_voice
(20,043 posts)If you take something that doesn't belong to you it's stealing. end. of. story. I don't need convincing of anything. He's a thief.
I'm done playing your games. go yank someone else's chain, I know what you are.
burnodo
(2,017 posts)Please explain!!
And, again, if you went to a slaveowners property and freed his slaves, you'd be guilty of stealing. It's a crime! It's a crime!
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)Swagman
(1,934 posts)considering there are even some on DU who would string him up without a trial just for merely hanging out with the Ruskies.
Swagman
(1,934 posts)you seem to have read all about Snowden and Greenwald's writings and so on...perhaps you broke the law by even commenting on information you think was illegally obtained.
you should turn yourself in today.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)They did "break the law"
So are people who defend gays from slander and insult in Russia, at this moment.
So did people who gave Central American refugees sanctuary in the 1980's.
So did those who helped bring in food and supplies to help the Wounded Knee uprising in 1973.
So did people who protected Jews in Germany.
So did those who helped slaves escape.
A country where "the law is the law and that's all that matters" cannot be a country with humane values, and it cannot be free.
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)You do understand where you question is going right?
tia
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)"The Law is the Law" is a right-wing concept and can NEVER have anything but right-wing, anti-woman, antigay, anti-worker, anti-poor, anti-pluralist applications. The law is never neutral, and it always biases towards the rich.
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)... the US governments justice system is corrupt is a benefit Snowden supporters would NOT .. NOT give EVERY SINGLE PERSON OF COLOR in America seeing statistically people of color have a BETTER reason to fear the US justice system more than Snowden
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Who is to say that what Greenwald and Miranda did here was a "needless" breach of the law?
Should we just trust those who are secrecy fetishists simply because we have a supposedly Democratic president?
Remember, it was under several Democratic presidents that J. Edgar Hoover persecuted leftists, used clandestine powers to help preserve Jim Crow, and possibly conspired in the murders of major American figures in the legitimate struggle for justice for all.
Only the rich would benefit from Snowden being punished anyway. Arresting and persecuting him(as they have persecuted Bradley Manning)could never be for the good of the people. Secrecy is the enemy of all that is positive in life.
Wilms
(26,795 posts)Did MLK, Parks, and thousands of others "needlessly" break the law?
You, like others, seem to view (or wish to portray) what is being revealed as an attack on Obama, rather than an effort to expose the fact that the Constitution is under attack. Seeing it as a personal matter (or claiming that it is in order to further the position), responding in kind by making personal attacks on Greenwald and Snowden. If that is true, it's regrettable.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)It's byzantine and problematic, and needs to be reformed, but the existence of classified documents is not itself comparable to Jim Crow.
And the big problem here is the baby and bathwater are inextricably linked. There's stuff that's classified that shouldn't be. There's stuff that's classified that seems like it shouldn't be but when you combine it with other stuff that's also classified suddenly makes sense that it's classified. (And keep in mind "Confidential", the level that protects your medical history, SSN, etc., is a form of classification.) There's been a 20-year-long push tighten this up and classify fewer things, and it's born some fruit, but this is going to take a long time.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)Daniel Ellsberg should have been arrested and imprisoned?
Should all journalists who "aid and abet" whistleblowers who reveal government secrets be prosecuted? Is that really your position?
bowens43
(16,064 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)by stating that Greenwald used him... they are doing their best to turn him into the "other".
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)GG used him, his partner to transport information which was suspected to be stolen information, therefore putting Miranda in possession of stolen property and in some places having stolen property in your possession is a crime.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)between releasing unjustly classified information and trafficking in drugs.
Drug trafficking kills. What Snowden, Greenwald, and Miranda are doing can only SAVE lives. Secrecy is never for humane or life-affirming purposes, and it never protects GOOD people. All those involved in secrecy and espionage ouare working to make worse. There simply can't ever be a humanistic, progressive, liberating secrecy. Secrecy is simply the facilitation of killing and oppression.
creeksneakers2
(7,473 posts)published or not. Greenwald said he is angry and is now willing to publish information to get even with the government. That goes beyond just acting in the public interest.
The word "mule" is probably being used for lack of a better one word term.
There can be good reasons for secrecy. Should the police inform the public before they go on a child pornography raid?
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)the items, so he set up Miranda as his mule to transport the items. Beast of burden.
Skittles
(153,160 posts)cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)Now having grown substantially under Obama.
ohnoyoudidnt
(1,858 posts)It's not hard to imagine how some of the defenders would be reacting if McCain or Romney were in office and the same things were happening.
Skittles
(153,160 posts)this Tiger Beat-type of adoration will end at the end of his term
Summer Hathaway
(2,770 posts)of Greenwald, Snowden, Manning and Assange will end the minute the next new shiny object gets dangled in front of the easily led.
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)RetroLounge
(37,250 posts)RL
forestpath
(3,102 posts)quakerboy
(13,920 posts)Those "core values" are not universally accepted by those who call themselves Democrats. We have a "big tent" full of "Democrats" and it includes everyone from center right members, all the way over to full blown centrists. Sometimes they are kind enough even to make center left people feel comfortable in the party. They do seem intent on excluding progressive left from being welcome in the party. But that's the price you pay for corporate sponsorship.
mia
(8,360 posts)Cuts across all lines that define morality and ideology of whatever sort. Who gains from this?
ConservativeDemocrat
(2,720 posts)He's not some innocent little waif like the screamers try to make him out to be.
That said, I'm really not up enough on British law to know if this detention is legal in their system or not.
I do know that your rights when crossing the border are extremely low, especially when you are not a citizen.
- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)that it classifies everything, whether releasing the info would harm anything or not. And Britain is even worse about this...they're still holding secrets from World War ONE, for God's sakes(are they afraid the Hapsburgs and Hohenzollerns are gonna try for a comeback?)
You can't trust any regime about what should and shouldn't be classified. And secrecy isn't more legitimate just because we have a Democratic president. There wasn't any moral difference between the top secret operations Nixon carried out and the ones JFK carried out...most of them, in both cases, were just terrorist acts to keep the world's poor in their place...face it, folks that's all "anticommunism" ever really meant.
DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)RetroLounge
(37,250 posts)RL
Skittles
(153,160 posts)Caretha
(2,737 posts)No I didn't know that. Give. me. a. link.
Seems to me if your above assertion is true, they would have arrested his ass and he'd been in the klinker right now.
Making false accusations is libel and against the law btw, and at the very least it shows you are simply a liar.
Maybe you should change your handle to ConservativeDemocratLiar
ConservativeDemocrat
(2,720 posts)Bottom line: According to court documents, it turns out he was carrying 58,000 pages of classified UK documents, including a list of British spies worldwide.
And it's actually not illegal to possess or know classified information. It's only illegal to pass it on to someone if you have been entrusted with it.
Although your border crossings might be a bit more difficult.
- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community
MotherPetrie
(3,145 posts)does, when previously, under Bush, they would have condemned the exact same thing. Just like how Freeperville used to defend everything Bush did that was condemned here.
liberal N proud
(60,334 posts)That kind of shit is what I hear from republicans when they want to sway opinion.
jazzimov
(1,456 posts)in harm's way like that?
Would you have someone you claimed to LOVE used like that?
I hate Greenwald more for putting his lover in harms way. No feeling person would have done that.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)There was never any justification for detaining Miranda, and nothing either of them did here can POSSIBLY dbe equated to "terrorism" a word, btw, that is not all-but-stripped of any actual meaning and should probably be retired).
muriel_volestrangler
(101,311 posts)Do you approve of the UK being a regime which you regard as a danger to people?
Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)who believe in the authoritarian state. This struggle does not go strictly down party or ideological lines. It is shocking to find that people who we thought believe in the liberal and democratic society only believe in it when it is politically convenient.
mia
(8,360 posts)I don't believe in the authoritarian state.
Little Star
(17,055 posts)gopiscrap
(23,758 posts)DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)Thus, they do not represent any Democratic Party values that I can acknowledge ever having existed prior to the advent of the current administration. And thus I do not consider them Democrats.
I mean, yes this is bad. But goddamn, these mofo's have deep-sixed due process!!! HELLO!?!?!? They're justifying the murder of American citizens without any oversight. NO DUE PROCESS!!! You getting that!?!?! Fuck that shit! Okay?
So to me, they're just fascists. Pure and simple. Which is okay by me. You're free to express your own opinions and beliefs. But anyone espousing support for this bullshit, is a fascist. Period.
- I hope we cleared that up......
K&R
backscatter712
(26,355 posts)Which is why I ask why they are allowed here.
Isn't this a left-wing board?
This is supposed to be Democratic Underground, not Fascist Underground. I don't come here to engage with fascists.
If they can't uphold Democratic values, perhaps they should go to a place where their ideas would get a better reception...
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Democrats who support these Stasi tactics or ever did. I actually don't know too many people regardless of their politics, who support any of this. Other than maybe a few Fox viewers and Limbaugh listeners so long as it happens to a Liberals. But they are way out there on the fringes.
Caretha
(2,737 posts)and frankly I'm getting where I have about as much respect for them as I do the right-wing dickwads & teabagger knuckleheads.
creeksneakers2
(7,473 posts)I want to be on. First, I want to know the facts about why Miranda was detained. Trying to stay objective makes me a better Democrat.
TheKentuckian
(25,026 posts)They are just cut from a little better quality and brainier cloth.
Less bigoted, don't seriously entertain the idea of Adam and Eve riding dinosaurs, believe in the concept of government (some mostly due to no other rational options to manage populations in the millions and even billions in many ways and others who are pretty deep into the authoritarian axis), and some of them can in some fashion fathom that paying taxes isn't some heinous punishment (though for a nice chunk such only applies to folks that used to get featured by Robin Leach and then just a wee bit or we lose them).
I don't think the nearly full spectrum tent allows for even the cohesion of shared values so we are in a party with folks we ideologically oppose, don't share common values, have a widely divergent view of the purpose of government even if we can cobble together some agreement on role which cannot help but to seriously impact goals.
Summer Hathaway
(2,770 posts)one of the most frequently used phrases has been that "Democrats don't lockstep" the way Republicans do.
It was part of DU's appeal, the idea that despite disagreement on some very serious issues - often vehement disagreement - individuals were free to express their views without having their "Dem-cred" questioned.
What I have seen of late - especially when it comes to the topic of Snowden/Greenwald - is posts like yours, asking how ANY Democrat can think, defend, promote, etc. any statement, action, or behavior that is contrary to what a certain contingent here has deemed to be acceptable. In other words, it is a very thinly-disguised admonition to lockstep.
On the particular subject of Miranda's detention, it should be obvious that this is not a black-and-white issue. Greenwald has made statements that are threatening (e.g. the US should be on its knees hoping he doesn't disclose all he knows), has demonstrated a total lack of responsibility and/or understanding of the consequences of his actions, and has made no secret of his anti-Obama administration agenda and his Libertarian leanings, and has shown himself to be an attention-whore of the highest order when it comes to insinuating himself into the starring role of every news story he prints.
Given the circumstances, it would seem apparent that Miranda WOULD BE detained and questioned as a matter of course while acting as a paid courier to transmit documents that could well be detrimental to the national security of the UK, as well as the US. To insist (as many here are doing) that Miranda was a disinterested party with no involvement in this matter other than being Greenwald's spouse is not merely misleading - it flies in the face of the facts as they are known.
"If you support the core values of the Democratic Party, doesn't that give you a personal obligation to OPPOSE the national security state when it clearly oversteps its boundaries? When it treats people like terrorists just because they engage in free speech?"
I am a Democrat and, like many other Democrats, I do not see "the national security state" (?) over-stepping its boundaries when it detains and questions someone who's motives are questionable. I also do not see Greenwald as merely "engaging in free speech" so much as attempting to make a buck by hyping what he thinks he knows in order to sell himself as a journalist to be reckoned with - new book in the offing, all publicity more than appreciated.
Unless Greenwald is the stupidest man who ever lived, he KNEW Miranda would be detained - in fact, as things turned out, I'm sure he was counting on it.
You and others here have deified Greenwald (and Snowden - remember him?), and it is certainly your prerogative to do so.
But when you imply that ANY Democrat who refuses to lockstep behind your hero is not supportive of core Democratic values, you are the one doing the over-stepping.
I, as many here, am NOT a lockstepper. I am free to form my own opinions about Greenwald, Snowden, Manning, Assange - and anyone and anything else. I do not need your stamp of approval as to what opinions are acceptable, nor your interpretation of what constitutes core Democratic values.
Cha
(297,196 posts)in the wilderness. Glad I got to read it.
sheshe2
(83,751 posts)Well said, very well said!
muriel_volestrangler
(101,311 posts)Lord Falconer, who helped introduce Terrorism Act 2000, criticises home secretary's backing of police action at Heathrow
"But that section plainly doesn't apply here. What is happening is they are targeting Miranda because they believe that he may have information that has been obtained from [the US whistleblower Edward] Snowden. The reason that doesn't fall within schedule 7 is because: even assuming that they think there is material which has been obtained in breach of the Officials Secrets Act, the action of Miranda or anybody he is acting with could not be described as somebody concerned in the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism. You could not reasonably believe, if you were the state, that Miranda is commissioning or assisting somebody to commission terrorism, to prepare terrorism or to instigate terrorism."
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/21/david-miranda-law-detention-heathrow
There is excellent British legal opinion that the detention was not legally justified. It is simply not true to say Snowden 'knew' Miranda would be detained. He may have guessed the British government would overstep the mark, but you cannot count on the government doing the wrong thing all the time. Sometimes, they do obey the law. They just didn't this time.
frazzled
(18,402 posts)Since when does a 9-hour airport questioning turn into the most outrageous "detention" in the history of the world?
Try getting detained in Brazil, where reports of torture, according to Human Rights Watch, are abundant: http://www.hrw.org/world-report/2013/country-chapters/brazil?page=1
Try getting detained in China, like the artist Ai Wei Wei, who was detained for 81 days in a tiny solitary prison cell, for ... having spoken out about shoddy construction that led to the deaths of 5000 school children in the 2008 Sichuan earthquake? http://www.npr.org/2013/08/19/212711357/ai-weiwei-exhibit-shines-light-on-time-as-political-prisoner
What the hell are we even talking about here? Since when does this turn into a litmus test of one's liberalness and become a statement about "the workers, the poor, and peace"? I've had it up to here with this libertarian melodrama.
great white snark
(2,646 posts)I hope people here can truly grasp the colossal difference between "liberals" and Liberal Democrats whenever these purity tactics are used.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)they'd have had to explain to parliament WHY they were detaining him.
BTW, nobody was minimizing the other acts of detention you listed, and you damn well know it. The UK and the US are supposed to be better than places like that when it comes to human rights, though.
Little Milly
(76 posts)bowens43
(16,064 posts)Little Milly
(76 posts)1awake
(1,494 posts)but only when they're man/woman is in charge. To be clear, that does in no way cover everyone who either questions Snowden/Greenwald or who may support the surveillance programs(s).