nexus wrote:
If I've understood you correctly Biff, you favour the 'cock up over the conspiracy' version of history. Therefore this Adam Curtis blog post about the failings and dodginess of some spooks may be right up your alley. http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/
What an excellent piece! Thankyou.
But back to the present case of Sunday's detention of David Miranda at Heathrow, it is hard to see what is going on. Surely the spooks are not so silly as to think that taking his laptop will return to them the only copy of a significant document. So they may have been trying to find out what and how much he was carrying and/or they may have been trying to discourage others from associating with journalists.
Or maybe they were just dumb and did what they did because they could and hadn't got round to engaging brains.
So they may have been trying to find out what and how much he was carrying and/or they may have been trying to discourage others from associating with journalists.
Yes- trying to intimidate journalists. Classy.
Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will. Frederick Douglass
The state that is building such a formidable apparatus of surveillance will do its best to prevent journalists from reporting on it. Most journalists can see that. But I wonder how many have truly understood the absolute threat to journalism implicit in the idea of total surveillance, when or if it comes – and, increasingly, it looks like "when".
We are not there yet, but it may not be long before it will be impossible for journalists to have confidential sources. Most reporting – indeed, most human life in 2013 – leaves too much of a digital fingerprint. Those colleagues who denigrate Snowden or say reporters should trust the state to know best (many of them in the UK, oddly, on the right) may one day have a cruel awakening. One day it will be their reporting, their cause, under attack. But at least reporters now know to stay away from Heathrow transit lounges.
nexus wrote:If I've understood you correctly Biff, you favour the 'cock up over the conspiracy' version of history. Therefore this Adam Curtis blog post about the failings and dodginess of some spooks may be right up your alley. http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/
So are you suggesting that our spies don't know everything about everything, aren't better gamblers, fighters, skiers, divers, pilots and drivers than everyone else in the world, can't defuse nuclear bombs, and don't drive Aston Martins, stay in the best suite at the top hotels, drink vodka martinis, shaken not stirred, and pull every classy beautiful bit of crumpet on the planet?
The Guardian Hard Drive story was the lead on the Russia Today website this afternoon. Having grown up during cold war hysteria, it is strangely dislocating to see Russian media reporting on British press-gagging.
The remains of a computer that held files leaked by Edward Snowden to the Guardian and destroyed at the behest of the UK government. Photograph: Roger Tooth
Matt Damon wrote:If we're going to trade our civil liberties for our security, then that should be a decision that we collectively make. It shouldn't be made for us.
And it looks like Snowden is cleverer than some commentators give him credit for: see here.
The disclosure undermines the Obama administration's assurances to Congress and the public that the NSA surveillance programs can't be abused because its spying systems are so aggressively monitored and audited for oversight purposes: If Snowden could defeat the NSA's own tripwires and internal burglar alarms, how many other employees or contractors could do the same?
NBC News reported Thursday that the NSA was ``overwhelmed'' in trying to figure what Snowden had stolen and didn't know everything he had downloaded.
I experience pleasure and pains, and pursue goals in service of them, so I cannot reasonably deny the right of other sentient agents to do the same - Steven Pinker
Also, several people have nominated Snowden for the Nobel peace prize, such as described here.
I experience pleasure and pains, and pursue goals in service of them, so I cannot reasonably deny the right of other sentient agents to do the same - Steven Pinker
David Cameron has been told that the government's attempt to destroy sensitive leaked documents about mass surveillance was "an act of intimidation" that risks a chilling effect on press freedom.
The World Association of Newspapers and News Publishers (WAN-IFRA) has written to the prime minister over the government's "deeply regrettable" response to files leaked by the National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden.
The body, which represents 18,000 publications from 3,000 companies, condemned officials for their "symbolic" attempt to restrict reporting by destroying computer hard drives held by the Guardian.
"That your government felt the need to threaten legal action in order to block reporting into issues of public interest is deeply regrettable," the organisation wrote in its letter to the prime minister.
"Furthermore, WAN-IFRA is extremely concerned that the government's actions were an act of intimidation that could have a chilling effect on press freedom in the UK and beyond."
Ed Miliband could learn a thing or two from this video.
I experience pleasure and pains, and pursue goals in service of them, so I cannot reasonably deny the right of other sentient agents to do the same - Steven Pinker
biffvernon wrote:
But back to the present case of Sunday's detention of David Miranda at Heathrow, it is hard to see what is going on. Surely the spooks are not so silly as to think that taking his laptop will return to them the only copy of a significant document. So they may have been trying to find out what and how much he was carrying and/or they may have been trying to discourage others from associating with journalists.
Or maybe they were just dumb and did what they did because they could and hadn't got round to engaging brains.
Biff -
given that the first requirement of the NSA would be damage limitation, their first goal would be finding out just what files were taken - and Miranda passing through Heathrow was a unique chance to advance that goal. From this perspective the intimidation of journalism looks like a secondary benefit.
You may be right, but seeing what Miranda happened to have in his bag would not show was taken, just what he happened to have in his bag. Still, it's all part of a piece with the Guardian preferring to destroy a computer than hand it over.
I think it's obvious to any reasonable observer that the UK authorities detained David Miranda, spouse of Guardian journalist Glenn Greenwald, to intimidate journalists and whistleblowers -- to "send a message," as Greenwald put it. But I also think there's something more going on.
It's an interesting article and spot on the money to my mind.
