Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsGuardian Editor to answer questions of Parliament.
The Editor of the Guardian has been called to answer questions before the House of Commons about the damage done to the British security and intelligence forces ability to track Terrorists, oh and Pedophiles. Yeah that's it Child Molesters.
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/nov/09/guardian-alan-rusbridger-questioned-mps-nsa-leaks
The GCHQ boss, Sir Iain Lobban, told the intelligence and security committee that since the whistleblower's revelations had been made public GCHQ had monitored terrorist groups discussing in "specific terms" how to avoid communications systems they now considered to be vulnerable.
He said the leaks could help dangerous criminals and even paedophiles avoid detection and had put operations at risk.
He said the leaks could help dangerous criminals and even paedophiles avoid detection and had put operations at risk.
But here is the great part. The part we've been waiting for. Remember that the Government of the UK now says that Miranda was a terrorist for carrying the Snowden Documents. That's all it takes, the transportation of those vitally important documents right?
They also asked him to confirm whether anyone at the Guardian had "directed, permitted, facilitated or acquiesced" in the transfer of the files obtained by Snowden to anyone in the US or elsewhere.
Talk about telegraphing a punch. They're doing that so the Editor will get up there and refuse to answer the questions. The right against self incrimination was first codified in Britain after all. So if the Editor goes up and tells the truth, the law which is written that makes Terrorism anything that seeks to change the minds of the nation, which could be viewed as any political opponent if you think about it, could be applied.
I wonder if the editor has some vacation time coming up, because it looks like he's going to be the next contestant in the journalist in exile game. http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024007884
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
3 replies, 713 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (1)
ReplyReply to this post
3 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Guardian Editor to answer questions of Parliament. (Original Post)
Savannahmann
Nov 2013
OP
I'm thinking that the best answer would be for the people to bum rush the hearing and stage a sit in
Savannahmann
Nov 2013
#2
malaise
(267,801 posts)1. The problem with amorphous concepts like terrorism is
that it can be anything governments or 'interests' want it to be - that is its danger to all our civil and political rights.
Give thanks for the UK Guardian - one of the few guardians of our rights.
Savannahmann
(3,891 posts)2. I'm thinking that the best answer would be for the people to bum rush the hearing and stage a sit in
If nothing else, the political bosses would find out that the people are not behind them in this witch hunt.
malaise
(267,801 posts)3. They should have learned that with the vote against invading Syria n/t