YET ANOTHER NOTE OF CAUTION THAT IS LIKELY TO BE IGNORED (11/04/2014) The following was reported on Democracy Today, A newly disclosed document shows the British government justified detaining the partner of journalist Glenn Greenwald by accusing him of espionage and terrorism. In August, David Miranda was on his way home to Brazil when he was held for nine hours at London’s Heathrow airport. He faced repeated interrogation and had many personal items seized, including thumb drives carrying information used by Greenwald in his reporting on National Security Agency surveillance. An internal police order authorizing Miranda’s detention from that day says: Intelligence indicates that Miranda is likely to be involved in espionage activity. It continues: We assess that Miranda is knowingly carrying material, the release of which would endanger people’s lives. Additionally the disclosure or threat of disclosure is designed to influence a government, and is made for the purpose of promoting a political or ideological cause. This therefore falls within the definition of terrorism. What?? How is promoting a political ideological cause equivalent with terrorism? It seems that the term, terrorism has been so broadly defined as to cover all acts of protest that harm nobody but those who are in power. Shouldnt it be obvious that blowing oneself up in the midst of innocent non-combatants is in a different league altogether? So, from whom are we being protected by the surveillance state? Increasingly, the answer seems to be we need to be protected from ourselves. This is an outrage and threatens the very foundations of democracy (even though little seems to be left to us).
Posted on: Tue, 05 Nov 2013 03:23:55 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015