Glenn Greenwald's partner detained at Heathrow airport for nine hours

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Crablezworth**

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/18/glenn-greenwald-guardian-partner-detained-heathrow

So this is a bit messed up, apparently you have no right to remain silent and doing so can lead to charges. That's really messed up.

**rubiksnoob**

Well, that's fethed up.

**Relapse**

I find it ironic that the man's name is Miranda...

**Crablezworth**

Relapse wrote:
I find it ironic that the man's name is Miranda...

Damn, never thought of that, that's indeed quite ironic.

**rubiksnoob**

Relapse wrote:
I find it ironic that the man's name is Miranda...

I noticed the same thing.

**Kanluwen**

Saw some interesting speculation that they singled him out because Greenwald has been using him as a courier/go-between for the documents that Greenwald received from Snowden.

**AlexHolker**

Oh look "terrorism" laws being used to intimidate someone who is clearly not a terrorist, just the loved one of someone whose journalism exposes the US government as the bunch of corrupt fethers they really are. What a surprise.

**Howard A Treesong**

Whatever the truth behind he's reasons for being stopped, being refused legal representation and being told that its a criminal offence to maintain silence is inexcusable. That couldn't possibly be abused.

**Flashman**

Shocking and a bit stupid on the part of the police & government (who must have at least been informed that it was happening).

If there's any justice at all, this is going to snowball into a huge fething embarrassment for David Cameron and William "the innocent have nothing to fear" Hague.

**Da Boss**

Well, looks like I owe Seaward an apology. UK isn't as far from the US in rights abuses as I thought. Poor show.

**Crablezworth**

It just seems like entrapment in a way, like all of a sudden because the individual isn't telling them what they want to hear they can just claim they're not cooperating and invent a charge that didn't exist before they detained said individual.

"Under schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000, UK authorities are allowed to detain people, without probable cause, for up to nine hours. Only 40 of the 60,000 to 70,000 people questioned under schedule 7 were held for more than six hours."

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/08/19/glenn-greenwald-detaining-my-partner-was-a-failed-attempt-at-intimidation/

**Medium of Death**

The can confiscate your electronic items for 7 days too.

Was listening to this on Radio 4 on the way back from work. Pretty mad.

I hope somebody gets fired for this.

This law needs a changin'!

**Crablezworth**

If I walked up to someone in the street, confiscated their ipod and cell phone, handed them a card and said "call this number in 7 days and you'll get it back but right now I need it, because, uhh... the terrorists!" I'm pretty sure I'd be locked up, possibly in a padded room.

**Avatar 720**

I barely trust Theresa May (or the Home Office in general, really) to act within the best interest of the public - hell, I barely trust any politician to do that.

This story comes as no surprise to me, and that fact alone is why it's so deplorable.

**reds8n**

http://rt.com/news/snowden-greenwald-uk-secrets-681/

Glen Greenwald, the Guardian journalist who first published secrets leaked by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden, promised Monday to release more documents, saying the UK would be “sorry” for detaining his partner for nine hours.

The journalist’s partner, David Miranda, was held by British authorities under anti-terrorism laws while transiting through London’s Heathrow Airport on his way to Rio de Janeiro on Sunday.

The US government has released a statement saying that British officials told them about their decision to detain Miranda, although Washington denied its own involvement.

"This is a decision they made on their own," White House spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters at a briefing.

The move by UK authorities sparked a furious response from Greenwald.

"I have many more documents to report on, including ones about the UK, where I'll now focus more. I will be more aggressive, not less, in reporting," said Greenwald, speaking in Portuguese to reporters at Rio de Janeiro's international airport, Reuters reported.

"When they do things like this, they show the world their real character. It'll backfire. I think they'll come to regret it," he said.

There was also angry reaction from Brazilian authorities, as well as from journalists and human rights activists in the UK.

The Brazilian government said in statement that Miranda’s detention was “without justification.”

The Guardian said it was dismayed at the detention of Miranda and was “urgently seeking clarification from the British authorities” as to why it happened.

Keith Vaz, a Labor lawmaker who chairs parliament's powerful interior affairs committee, told the BBC that he had written to the head of London's Metropolitan Police to ask for clarification of what he labeled an "extraordinary" case.

“Now you have a complaint from Mr. Greenwald and the Brazilian government. They have said that they are concerned at the use of terrorism legislation for something that does not appear to relate to terrorism. So it needs to be clarified and clarified quickly,” said Vaz.

Shadow Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said that “swift answers” were needed as to why Miranda was detained for so long.
Any suggestion that terror powers are being misused must be investigated and clarified urgently - the public support for these powers must not be endangered by a perception of misuse,” she said.

Labour MP Tom Watson called for parliament to look into what he said could be an attempt to “get the genie back into the bottle” when it returns from summer recess in September.

He also questioned whether government ministers had been briefed of the move which he said was “clearly an embarrassment for the government.”

Michael Mansfield, one of Britain's leading human rights lawyers, told Reuters that the action amounted to an act of oppression.

“The detention of David Miranda is a disgrace and reinforces the undoubted complicity of the UK in US indiscriminate surveillance of law-abiding citizens. The fact that Snowden, and now anyone remotely associated with him, are being harassed as potential spies and terrorists is sheer unadulterated state oppression," he said.

Widney Brown, Amnesty International senior director of international law and policy, questioned what danger Miranda could possibly be to the UK government.

“He was detained under a law that violates any principle of fairness and his detention shows how the law can be used for petty vindictive reasons. There is simple no basis for believing that David Miranda presents any threat whatsoever to the UK government,” she told the Daily Mail.

Journalists groups have also accused the authorities of misusing their powers against "terrorism."

“Journalism may be embarrassing and annoying for governments but it is not terrorism,” Bob Stachwell from the Society of Editors told the BBC.

Miranda, 28, who is a Brazilian citizen, said he was questioned for nine hours by numerous agents before being released without charge. Authorities seized his laptop, mobile phone, and flash drives.

He said that six British agents questioned him on all aspects of his life and only released him after he started shouting in the airport lounge. He was traveling from Berlin to Rio de Janeiro, Brazil after visiting US filmmaker Lauro Poitras, who has been working on the Snowden files with Greenwald and the Guardian.

The Daily Mail reported that Miranda was carrying USB drives of encrypted documents from Edward Snowden.

Greenwald didn’t confirm what Miranda was carrying but said that only he and Poitras have “copies of the full archives of NSA documents which Edward Snowden gave to journalists, so much of the speculation about what [Miranda] was or wasn’t carrying is misinformed.”

The Metropolitan Police confirmed that a 28-year-old man was held from 08:05 BST until 17:00 BST, under Schedule 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act 2000, which allows police to hold someone at an airport for nine hours for questioning.

The UK Home Office did not comment on Miranda’s detention, but has defended Schedule 7 in the past.

David Anderson, the official independent reviewer on the UK’s terrorism legislation, said he asked authorities why Miranda was detained for so long. Of the 69,000 people detained under Schedule 7 in 2011-2012, only 40 were held for six hours or more. In most cases, people are released after less than an hour.

Snowden, who has been granted asylum by Russia, gave Greenwald up to 20,000 documents with details about the US National Security Agency and the UK’s GCHQ surveillance operations.

**ironicsilence**

Howard A Treesong wrote:
Whatever the truth behind he's reasons for being stopped, being refused legal representation and being told that its a criminal offence to maintain silence is inexcusable. That couldn't possibly be abused.

move along citizen theres nothing to see here

**Crablezworth**

Greenwald on the warpath, nice!

**Auxellion**

Read this on RT - it just keeps getting worse

**purplefood**

If he died now there is no way people would believe it wasn't the government.
Note: Not suggesting the government should kill him, just saying the political context of his death would mean the government would have issues even if they had done nothing.

**Seaward**

Crusading sleazeball muckraker vs. overstepping authoritarian British government.

Why can you guys never give us stories with sides worth cheering for?

**Gentleman_Jellyfish**

I'm going with the sleazeball muckraker

**Medium of Death**

Family members and loved ones are fair game now apparently.

Calling journalists "Sleazeball Muckrakers" is pretty ridiculous considering they are dealing with a pretty serious issue/story in this particular instance.

**AlexHolker**

Medium of Death wrote:
Calling journalists "Sleazeball Muckrakers" is pretty ridiculous considering they are dealing with a pretty serious issue/story in this particular instance.

Seaward's just channelling Obama and blaming the messenger. If he had anything resembling morals he'd be pissed off at the NSA for creating the muck to rake by committing federal crimes, not at the journalist who did his fething job and refused to be complicit in their coverup.

**purplefood**

AlexHolker wrote:
Medium of Death wrote:
Calling journalists "Sleazeball Muckrakers" is pretty ridiculous considering they are dealing with a pretty serious issue/story in this particular instance.

Seaward's just channelling Obama and blaming the messenger. If he had anything resembling morals he'd be pissed off at the NSA for creating the muck to rake by committing federal crimes, not at the journalist who did his fething job and refused to be complicit in their coverup.

**AlexHolker**

purplefood wrote:
AlexHolker wrote:
Seaward's just channelling Obama and blaming the messenger. If he had anything resembling morals he'd be pissed off at the NSA for creating the muck to rake by committing federal crimes, not at the journalist who did his fething job and refused to be complicit in their coverup.

http://cdn.ebaumsworld.com/thumbs/2013/02/06/082843/83074105/thankbama.jpg

You're the kind of person who posts "LOL, Godwin's Law" in a discussion of mechanised warfare. Look up John Kiriakou, and educate yourself: the only person the Obama administration prosecuted over the CIA's use of torture is the guy who refused to help cover it up.

**purplefood**

AlexHolker wrote:
purplefood wrote:
AlexHolker wrote:
Seaward's just channelling Obama and blaming the messenger. If he had anything resembling morals he'd be pissed off at the NSA for creating the muck to rake by committing federal crimes, not at the journalist who did his fething job and refused to be complicit in their coverup.

http://cdn.ebaumsworld.com/thumbs/2013/02/06/082843/83074105/thankbama.jpg

You're the kind of person who posts "LOL, Godwin's Law" in a discussion of mechanised warfare. Look up John Kiriakou, and educate yourself: the only person the Obama administration prosecuted over the CIA's use of torture is the guy who refused to help cover it up.

Look up sarcasm and educate yourself.

**Seaward**

AlexHolker wrote:
Seaward's just channelling Obama and blaming the messenger. If he had anything resembling morals he'd be pissed off at the NSA for creating the muck to rake by committing federal crimes, not at the journalist who did his fething job and refused to be complicit in their coverup.

Yeah. The guy going, "You pissed me off, so I'm going to release classified documents to get back at you!" is clearly operating in only the purest strata of morality.

Grow up.

**AlexHolker**

Seaward wrote:
AlexHolker wrote:
Seaward's just channelling Obama and blaming the messenger. If he had anything resembling morals he'd be pissed off at the NSA for creating the muck to rake by committing federal crimes, not at the journalist who did his fething job and refused to be complicit in their coverup.

Yeah. The guy going, "You pissed me off, so I'm going to release classified documents to get back at you!" is clearly operating in only the purest strata of morality.

Grow up.

Do you have a wife, Seaward? How would you feel if the police arrested her and interrogated her for nine hours, just to feth with you? Would you be able to recognise this as a sign of corruption that should be opposed, or would you keep on blaming the victim?

**d-usa**

Seaward wrote:
AlexHolker wrote:
Seaward's just channelling Obama and blaming the messenger. If he had anything resembling morals he'd be pissed off at the NSA for creating the muck to rake by committing federal crimes, not at the journalist who did his fething job and refused to be complicit in their coverup.

Yeah. The guy going, "You pissed me off, so I'm going to release classified documents to get back at you!" is clearly operating in only the purest strata of morality.

Grow up.

Do you even know who was actually detained, or is the flag you are wrapping yourself in cutting off the circulation to your brain?

**Kanluwen**

d-usa wrote:
Seaward wrote:
AlexHolker wrote:
Seaward's just channelling Obama and blaming the messenger. If he had anything resembling morals he'd be pissed off at the NSA for creating the muck to rake by committing federal crimes, not at the journalist who did his fething job and refused to be complicit in their coverup.

Yeah. The guy going, "You pissed me off, so I'm going to release classified documents to get back at you!" is clearly operating in only the purest strata of morality.

Grow up.

Do you even know who was actually detained, or is the flag you are wrapping yourself in cutting off the circulation to your brain?

Glenn Greenwald's "partner".

It is very interesting that Greenwald has been so adamant in saying that David Miranda was not carrying any of the documents that Snowden passed on, but confirms that Miranda has met repeatedly with the US filmmaker who is helping Greenwald go over the documents.