ChatterBank5 mins ago
Custody
When Joe Bloggs is held overnight and then released without charge there is no Furore from the Press. But then he's not the lover of a Journalist is he ?
Answers
1 to 17 of 17
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by brionon. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
http://
This may be the story Jno
"Glenn Greenwald’s partner David Miranda was held at London’s Heathrow Airport under a terrorism law after visiting one of Greenwald’s collaborators in Berlin. The reporter called the detention ‘a failed attempt at intimidation.’ Greenwald has done a series of interviews with Edward Snowden about the security agency’s surveillance programs."
This may be the story Jno
"Glenn Greenwald’s partner David Miranda was held at London’s Heathrow Airport under a terrorism law after visiting one of Greenwald’s collaborators in Berlin. The reporter called the detention ‘a failed attempt at intimidation.’ Greenwald has done a series of interviews with Edward Snowden about the security agency’s surveillance programs."
As observed before, just wait until a DM journalist gets arrested or their partner does! The Times has been covering the story extensively and so has the BBC (of course, aren't the BBC guardianistas to a man and a feminist?). Only get The Times and the Guardian; can't work out whether I am one of those who knows they run the world or one who hates it !
Seriously missing the point here Brionon
Edward Snowden exposed the American NSA breaking the law
The UK police have now used anti-terrorist legislation to stop the partner of the journalist that broke the story and had electronic media confiscated.
This allows police to hold someone at an airport, port or international railway station for up to nine hours for questioning about whether they have been involved with acts of terrorism.
There is no belief that any of these people are terrorists nor that the data on these devices belongs to any terrorists nor that they have been involved in terrorism.
So there is a reasonable case that the police have exceeded their powers, indeedthey may have even been acting illegally if the intent was intimidation.
That's reason enough for a furore I'd say
Edward Snowden exposed the American NSA breaking the law
The UK police have now used anti-terrorist legislation to stop the partner of the journalist that broke the story and had electronic media confiscated.
This allows police to hold someone at an airport, port or international railway station for up to nine hours for questioning about whether they have been involved with acts of terrorism.
There is no belief that any of these people are terrorists nor that the data on these devices belongs to any terrorists nor that they have been involved in terrorism.
So there is a reasonable case that the police have exceeded their powers, indeedthey may have even been acting illegally if the intent was intimidation.
That's reason enough for a furore I'd say
The UK government has "form" in this area. In 2008/2009 they put an entire European nation on a blacklist alongside Al Qaeda, etc. as undesirables/untouchables. This accelerated the collapse of that country's financial institutions and did nothing to divert attention from the troubles British banks and the British government's faced - UK banks collapsed as well.
The UK, along with the Netherlands then proceeded to intimidate the other country and used their influence to obstruct access to IMF and other assistance while insisting on dictating terms for "compensation" from the smaller country for losses in the collapse. The terms were rejected in a referendum over there and the UK and Netherlands governments took the other country to an international tribunal/court. The court found in favour of the underdog and criticised not just the UK and Netherlands governments for bullying, but also the IMF and others. To my knowledge there was little or no mention of this in the UK media and the whole thing has now sunk without a trace, although UK investors such as local authorities have recovered almost all their money through due process and the executors in the other country.
The target/victim in the story is Iceland. What we are witnessing is a sad and crumbling has-been that does not accept reality and tries desperately to remain one of the big boys (the process has many names, one of which involves kissing/licking). Maybe Scotland will next year vote to remain part of it or maybe Scotland will decide that it actually has nothing to gain from UK "togetherness" of this or any other sort.
The UK, along with the Netherlands then proceeded to intimidate the other country and used their influence to obstruct access to IMF and other assistance while insisting on dictating terms for "compensation" from the smaller country for losses in the collapse. The terms were rejected in a referendum over there and the UK and Netherlands governments took the other country to an international tribunal/court. The court found in favour of the underdog and criticised not just the UK and Netherlands governments for bullying, but also the IMF and others. To my knowledge there was little or no mention of this in the UK media and the whole thing has now sunk without a trace, although UK investors such as local authorities have recovered almost all their money through due process and the executors in the other country.
The target/victim in the story is Iceland. What we are witnessing is a sad and crumbling has-been that does not accept reality and tries desperately to remain one of the big boys (the process has many names, one of which involves kissing/licking). Maybe Scotland will next year vote to remain part of it or maybe Scotland will decide that it actually has nothing to gain from UK "togetherness" of this or any other sort.
Well that's one way of looking at it karl - not quite sure of it's relevance to the detention of a journalist
But if we're discussing it it's worth noting that the day before the Icelandic bank's collapse Icelandic law was changed to exclude foreign investors from bank guarantees whilst retaining them for Icelandic investors.
I would say that's about as close to fraud as I've seen by a European state
Some degree of recompense has however happened
http://
But if we're discussing it it's worth noting that the day before the Icelandic bank's collapse Icelandic law was changed to exclude foreign investors from bank guarantees whilst retaining them for Icelandic investors.
I would say that's about as close to fraud as I've seen by a European state
Some degree of recompense has however happened
http://
Part of the court case dealt with the emergency laws and, as I understand it, the court found no case to answer over that. The assets of the collapsed banks are gradually being sold off and the proceeds are being distributed. This includes legally stipulated EEA guarantees to individual foreign depositors, as was always promised although UK media wrongly claimed the authorities were refusing to honour them - curious that.
brionon
When Joe Bloggs is held overnight and then released without charge there is no Furore from the Press
Except...when there is...
http://
When Joe Bloggs is held overnight and then released without charge there is no Furore from the Press
Except...when there is...
http://
And...
http://
(You get the drift...)
http://
(You get the drift...)
1 to 17 of 17
Latest Posts
Crosswords23 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles54 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles58 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles66 mins ago
Christmas In The Good Old Days
ChatterBank101 mins ago
