David Miranda detention: Labour demands review of anti-terror powers

[dipsydoodle]

Labour has called for an urgent investigation into the use of anti-terror powers to detain David Miranda, the partner of a Guardian journalist who interviewed US National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden.

Yvette Cooper, the shadow home secretary, said ministers must find out whether anti-terror laws had been "misused", after Miranda was held for nine hours by authorities at Heathrow airport under the Terrorism Act.

His detention has caused "considerable consternation" and the Home Office must explain how this can be justified as appropriate and proportionate, she said.

Miranda is the partner of Glenn Greenwald, who has written a series of stories for the Guardian revealing mass surveillance programmes by the NSA. He was returning to their home in Rio de Janeiro when he was stopped at Heathrow and officials confiscated electronics equipment, including his mobile phone, laptop, camera, memory sticks, DVDs and games consoles.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/19/david-miranda-detention-labour-glen-greenwald

[muriel_volestrangler]

1. On the bright side: if we detain travellers passing through Heathrow, we won't need a 3rd runway

because all international travellers will avoid the UK as an authoritarian surveillance state that confiscates your electronic devices and detains you for hours. No-on will want to use Heathrow if they can possibly avoid it.

[Jeneral2885]

8. they can detain any one

British or non-British

[malthaussen]

2. Interesting that his name is Miranda. That took planning.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miranda_warning

Also interesting that the USSC recently denied standing in a suit brought by assorted journalists who were afraid that the anti-terrorist provisions of the NDAA might be used against them... of course, the UK is not the US. The USSC rationale? The plaintiffs could not show damages, and a nebulous "fear" that something "might" happen was not sufficient cause for standing.

And of course, apologists will argue that detention is not damaging.

-- Mal

[LeftishBrit]

3. People might consider signing this petition

http://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/ukhomeoffice-theresa-may-review-the-use-of-schedule-7-of-terrorism-act

[non sociopath skin]

4. Done. I will need a deal of persuading that this wasn't meant as intimidation.

Bastards!

The Skin

[muriel_volestrangler]

5. Done - and I've written to my MP, which the terrorism law reviewer suggested

Schedule 7 is being revised now, and if MPs hear that we don't like it, it could go the way of Section 44 (which Walter Wolfgang was stooped under at the Labour conference, and which Liberty got declared unlawful in the ECHR).

[T_i_B]

6. Hold on a moment.......

......is this the same Labour Party that introduced these Anti-Terrorism laws themselves by any chance?

[fedsron2us]

7. Reminds of the old Soviet era joke about why secret policemen went round in threes

One to read, one to write and one to keep an eye on the two intellectuals

The clod hopping and unimaginative attempts by the authorities to intimidate Greenwald and to discover what information Snowden took reminds one of the old Stasi or KGB modus operandi. I am old enough to remember when the British security services were supposed to have a bit of class. Looks like they have gone down the crapper with everything else in the UK.

Anti terrorist laws are now being cast so wide that soon they will be locking you up without trial for failing to return your library book on time

Putin and the FSB must be laughing themselves silly at this farce.

[muriel_volestrangler]

9. YouGov poll: Tory, UKIP voters support the detention of Miranda

and 18% & 20% (Tory & UKIP) say "The law should be extended – the police should have the right to detain anyone in Britain (and not just those entering or leaving the country) and seize their computer and mobile phone, without needing ‘reasonable suspicion’ of a crime being planned or committed. "

http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/f07e9dzq7d/YG-Archive-David-Miranda-results-210813-Schedule-7-Terrorism-Act.pdf

Overall, a plurality (44% v. 37%) say it was inappropriate to detain Miranda, with a majority of Tory and UKIP voters saying it was OK, and a majority of Labour and LD voters saying it was inappropriate. The one region where more thought it was appropriate than inappropriate was 'Midlands/Wales' - very few Lib Dems, and not enough Labour to overcome the right-wingers, I suppose.

[PorridgeGun]

10. The same old same old.

Another "review," much "concern," a few token apologies, and the security state continues unabated.

The power to arbitrarily detain someone incommunicado, seize their personal electronics, deny them access to legal counsel, and to make failure to "cooperate" with this outrage a crime in and of itself does not "invite" abuse, it is abuse.