Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by MacNut, Aug 21, 2013.
I heard this morning that this story was unraveling a bit.
I just got to work and don't have time to check into it, but can anybody corroborate either way?
First the UK stopped Greenwald's partner at the airport and detained him for 9 hours. The next day they raid The Guardians offices.
The Wizard's curtains are being pulled aside. The Wizard likes his privacy.
"If the police believe that an individual is in possession of highly sensitive stolen information that would help terrorism, then they should act and the law provides them with a framework to do that"
Seems fair enough.
On TV tonight when asked if he (Miranda) was carrying classified documents that may have originated from Edward Snowden back to Brazil he said that he didn't know, that he was asked by Laura Poitras to take something back to his partner Glen Greenwald in Brazil and that he didn't ask or know what it was, and furthermore didn't want to know what was in the files.
He'd make a wonderful drugs mule.
What is the terrorist activity? The leaked documents or the fact that the documents exist at all.
Yes, but that is unbelievably broad. If I somehow got ahold of the passcode to someone else's apartment building entry door, that information could be useful to terrorists.
Did the police at Heathrow actually know for sure that Miranda was carrying stolen information?
Even more troubling to me is the fact that, under current British law, you cannot refuse to give up information.''
I have little sympathy for Snowden, Greenwald, or anyone else who illegally discloses classified information. But at this point the terrorists have already won. Leakers can and should be prosecuted. But trashing any semblance of civil liberties, as the British security services and Government have just done, is too high a price to pay.
The only thing that is illegal is the way these agencies got people's private data to begin with. They are more concerned with their deeds getting out than they are about stopping terrorists.
You said it all right there. Well done.
Well if it was the intention on UK government to bury this story. BIG FAIL.
In rare warning, European rights body says UK reaction to NSA leaks may have chilling effect
LONDON In an unusual warning, Europes top human rights organization said Wednesday that Britains reaction to the exposure of the United States vast surveillance program had potentially troubling consequences for free expression.
Using language usually reserved for authoritarian holdouts in Eastern Europe or the Caucuses, the Strasbourg-based Council of Europe asked British authorities to explain why they ordered the destruction of computer equipment held by the Guardian newspaper the publication at the center of the revelations and the detention of a reporters partner at Londons Heathrow Airport.
These measures, if confirmed, may have a potentially chilling effect on journalists freedom of expression as guaranteed by ... the European Convention on Human Rights, Secretary General Thorbjoern Jagland said in an open letter to British Home Secretary Theresa May.
Britains Home Office declined to comment on the European Councils letter late Wednesday.
The Council of Europe, a separate entity from the EU, runs the European Court of Human Rights, which enforces the rights code signed by the councils 47 member states. The watchdog body regularly intervenes on human rights issues across the continent, but the language deployed in the letter was more familiar from council communications to countries with shaky records on the rule of law.
Council spokesman Daniel Holtgen said the words chilling effect had previously been used in reference to situations in Turkey and Azerbaijan.
Rarely has there been the case that weve expressed concern over a Western state, he said in a telephone interview. The bottom line is: We have to have the same standards.
Britain has been on the defensive since Sunday, when London police used anti-terrorism powers to detain David Miranda the partner of reporter Glenn Greenwald at Heathrow and seize disks carrying what his lawyers said was sensitive journalistic material.
Greenwald has been at the center of the Guardians reporting on the U.S. National Security Agencys secret domestic espionage program, and Mirandas detention drew outrage from many who saw the incident as a clumsy attempt to put an end to an embarrassing series of scoops.
The next day, Guardian Editor Alan Rusbridger revealed that British spies had overseen the destruction of hard drives carrying the leaked material which has served as the basis for much of the papers reporting, sending intelligence agents into the newsrooms basement to watch as the disks were smashed with angle grinders and drills.
Although Rusbridger said other copies of the leaks exist elsewhere and British officials defended the move as an attempt to keep the sensitive intelligence out of foreign hands, the image of spies overseeing the destruction of journalists hard drives rang alarm bells across Europe.
Holtgen posed a rhetorical question: What would have happened had a journalists partner been detained in Moscow, or if a Russian newspaper had had its hard drives smashed?
You would have the Western press all over Russia, he said.
We need to apply the same standards to Western countries including founding members of the Council of Europe, such as France, the U.K., or Germany, he said. Its not an explicit, harsh criticism, but it is a reminder that we are following this.
U.K. officials have previously justified the detention of Miranda on the grounds that he was believed to be carrying classified documents which could be useful to terrorists.
British officials have also made no apology for smashing the Guardians computers.
Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg argued the leaked data being kept by in the Guardians newsroom could have seriously damaged national security if it had to fallen into the wrong hands.
The European Council isnt the only one asking questions.
Keith Vaz, chairman of Parliaments Home Affairs Select Committee, has demanded that Prime Minister David Cameron make a statement about the issue to Parliament when it returns from summer recess next month.
And lawyers acting for Miranda say they plan to go to Londons High Court on Thursday to demand an injunction preventing British authorities from using or sharing the data they seized during Sundays detention.
People do seem to think the government should not keep any secrets from us whatsoever. There are some things the public just don't need to know.
Like the Truth about Hillsbrough, or the facts about Bloody Sunday, the Parlimentary Expenses, or Jimmy Savile?
Right but who gets to decide what is seen, and what is not.
Without journalistic coverage there would be no control over what governments could do, which would lead to a police state.
I suppose most people know this but Rusbridger decided to destroy the computer rather than hand it over and go to court because the "law" in the UK would prevent publication while the case chundered on.As there are copies allover it was the best move.
The complete paranoia of the spooks is shown by the fact they didn't just insist on the drive being destroyed but the memory,GPU and any other chip in the computer.
It's to be hoped that Greenwalds reputed distrust of encryption isn't true and that he has everything spread around if he hasn't got an encrypted torrent out there and half a dozen people with the password to act as a deadmans handle he should have.
This is really dodgy.
Was it the spooks or the Guardian's staff that insisted on destroying the chips?
From the Guardian's point-of-view, it might have seemed like a good idea to destroy the RAM. Strangely enough, under certain conditions at least, RAM has been shown to have some data remanence properties which may leave its memory contents readable for a few seconds or even a few minutes after power has been shut off. For example, a cold boot attack relies on the data remanence property of RAM to retrieve encryption keys. Supposedly, if you cool the RAM (e.g., by using a refrigerant), the RAM's data degradation rate can slowed down, extending its data remanence from a few minutes to a few hours.
I think we're not going to like the outcome of this governments seem to be scrambling to cover this stuff up it really must not be pretty.
Since I have been in the UK civil rights have eroded considerably. Not many people know this, but rights that the US holds as 'unalienable' are being denied in the UK. Right now there are isolated reports of the government int he UK abusing its power, but my worry is that nothing currently is stopping them from going down the slippery slope to being an authoritarian state. EU regulations and inefficiency: costly; EU oversight of human rights: priceless.
It's all a bit murky but this is from Borger's article:
The intelligence men stood over Johnson and Blishen as they went to work on the hard drives and memory chips with angle grinders and drills, pointing out the critical points on circuit boards to attack. They took pictures as the debris was swept up but took nothing away.
It's further clouded by the Guardian using a photo of old PC bits as well as the Mac motherboard as its illustration.
Presumably as they took nothing away other than photos they were trying to prevent highly unlikely scenarios such as sticking a file in the GPU's memory.