General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHas it been established that David Miranda was carrying any documents from Snowden?
MADem
(135,425 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)consistently ruled that Journalists are covered by 1st Amendment protections if they receive material from a source, even if the source obtained the material illegally.
And since the material came from the NSA what interest could the UK possibly have had in it, or what standing would they have to steal it, as they did?
MADem
(135,425 posts)the wrong side of the tracks in Rio is not a "journalist." He was a courier, carrying stuff that Greenwald said was from Snowden's "trove" to his partner in Rio.
USA and UK have a longstanding intelligence relationship. You can use the internet to read up on it, if you'd like. Many Americans who find themselves living in UK while serving the US government in uniform or in a civilian capacity aren't there doing needlepoint, you know. Many Brits over here in the same capacities are here for the exact same reason.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/19/world/europe/britain-detains-partner-of-reporter-tied-to-leaks.html?_r=0
GeorgeGist
(25,326 posts)Savage and Schwirtz never talked to Greenwald. They read the Guardian and added some STUFF to make it sound original.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)I mean, that's terrible!!! I am sure that Mr. Greenwald will be issuing his statement regarding this falsity of this, soon.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)what crime is committed by a Journalist who has obtained material from a source regardless of how the source obtained it?
And since the material came from the US's NSA, what interest or excuse could the UK possibly have in stealing it??
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)could recommend to him the novels of John LeCarre. They contain various insights that might help his tradecraft and make him look less the bumbling doofus spymaster.
MADem
(135,425 posts)bemildred
(90,061 posts)GeorgeGist
(25,326 posts)DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)...convenient lies from attorneys notwithstanding.
sweetloukillbot
(11,156 posts)"Mr. Greenwald said all of the documents encrypted on the thumb drives came from the trove of materials provided by Mr. Snowden."
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/20/world/europe/britain-detains-the-partner-of-glen-greenwald.html?hp&_r=0
MADem
(135,425 posts)Little Star
(17,055 posts)http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/19/world/europe/britain-detains-partner-of-reporter-tied-to-leaks.html?_r=0
So it sounds like he was carrying documents regarding Snowden.
But it also sounds like he was working for The Guardian Newspaper at the time.
Autumn
(45,120 posts)they paid for his trip because he was assisting Glenn.
Little Star
(17,055 posts)who are assisting their reporters. That's just nuts that they don't employ them on a per-diem basis at least, if it's true they don't.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)reason to question WHY he was detained and why the 'source material' was stolen from him?
Since when did carrying source material, regardless of how the SOURCE obtained it, by a Journalist, justify being treated like a terrorist?
Unless of course, Journalism is now Terrorism.
Autumn
(45,120 posts)This link will tell you about Laura Poitras
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023491854
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)via twitter:
https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/369591413438033920
@ggreenwald The NYT got that wrong - I never told them what he was carrying - only that our work was about Snowden/NSA
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)that we'd be fishing."
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)have misheard or misinterpreted Greenwald.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)meet with the other person who has electronic copies of the Snowden documents, and then fly to Brazil. So far as we know, Miranda, a student, has no relevant expertise on these issues.
If the security agencies couldn't figure out that hey'd be carrying those files, I'd really worry about their competence.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)for a journalist, who was working on a news story, should be considered a 'terrorist'. You are rambling and not addressing the question everyone is asking. Where is the crime in assisting a Journalist do his job, which is to inform the public on issues that are 'in the public interest'?
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)the Patriot Act.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)controversial laws? Why was he detained? The law was invented, yes, INVENTED, with the excuse of 'fighting terror'. So how are they 'fighting terror' by detaining an assistant to two journalists carrying source material, a completely legal thing to do, which had zero to do with Britain? The material came from the NSA, a US organization and had zero to do with Britain, they didn't own it, it didn't come from any of THEIR spies, so what was THEIR interest in the material?
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)They could have been trying to exchange work product.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)given the subject matter.
If they needed couriers to have any kind of communication, Miranda would have about ten million frequent flyer miles.
Journalistic work product would have a lot greater legal privilege/protection than would be the files misappropriated by Snowden.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)that they wished to exchange was work product based on those files. Certainly, British security had no idea what Miranda was carrying (and still don't) but seized his equipment anyway.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)as she was the original recipient, and had to convince Greenwald to come on board. 20,000 documents is a lot of data, especially the data dense stuff that Snowden probably has.
British security had a very good idea what he had on him, hence the demands for encryption keys.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)before they met up with Snowden in Hong Kong.
Security may think they knew what Miranda was carrying but they certainly did not know. Given that Poitras has been described as a security freak, I can't imagine her including original source material.
One thing for sure, Bart Gellman of the Washington Post better stay out of Britain.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)journalists, should be viewed as a Terrorist? Are you claiming that journalism is terrorism and therefore the detention of Miranda under a very controversial TERROR LAW, was justified? I'm clear at all on what you are trying to say. Please clarify. And remember, courts have consistently ruled that Journalists, the Press (which would include an assistant like Miranda) are not committing any crime by using material received from a SOURCE, regardless of how the SOURCE obtained the material.
Please point to the crime here that warranted an assistant to two journalist being treated like a terrorist.
I am very interested in your opinion on this.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)So does owning a subway schedule or road map, that's how bad the UK statute is.
It's being used abusively here.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)grossly misused in this case.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)But if you read that statute, it's a blank check.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)It would be foolish for Greenwald, having encrypted stuff hand-carried to him, to tell those who seized it what it was, no?
Catherina
(35,568 posts)Here is what I wrote earlier:
They cleverly sandwiched that inflammatory speculation between two indirect quotes. That speculation doesn't even make sense because Laura Poitras is an expert in electronically transmitting secure, encrypted files. It makes even less sense after the NYT throws in "All of the documents came from the trove of materials provided to the two journalists by Mr. Snowden". Both Poitras and Greenwald have had the full "trove" since Hong Kong. They don't need to send 'Snowden's documents', something they each already have, back and forth to each other trans-atlantically like that.
Mr. Greenwald said someone who identified himself as a security official from Heathrow Airport called him early on Sunday and informed him that Mr. Miranda had been detained, at that point for three hours. The British authorities, he said, told Mr. Miranda that they would obtain permission from a judge to arrest him for 48 hours, but he was released at the end of the nine hours, around 1 p.m. Eastern time.
Mr. Miranda was in Berlin to deliver documents related to Mr. Greenwalds investigation into government surveillance to Ms. Poitras, Mr. Greenwald said. Ms. Poitras, in turn, gave Mr. Miranda different documents to pass to Mr. Greenwald. Those documents, which were stored on encrypted thumb drives, were confiscated by airport security, Mr. Greenwald said. All of the documents came from the trove of materials provided to the two journalists by Mr. Snowden. The British authorities seized all of his electronic media including video games, DVDs and data storage devices and did not return them, Mr. Greenwald said.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/19/world/europe/britain-detains-partner-of-reporter-tied-to-leaks.html?_r=1&
What's most likely is that the Five Eyes countries need to intercept, or at least find out, what "dribs and drabs" Greenwald's might make next and so they can pre-emptively lie. Evo Morales plane, Lavabit, Silent Circle, and now this incident.
Not only does Greenwald not need any Snowden files from Poitras because they both already have the full set but Poitras is a woman who wipes her hard drive before she travels and no way would she have let Miranda travel with Snowden files on his computer IR that's what the trip was about.
These lies are so fucking transparent. And the NYT doesn't have such a great record when it comes to carrying water for the security state. A lie here, a lie there and pretty soon you got WMDs in Iraq.
I'm glad Greenwald directly confirmed what many of us have been saying about the NYT's article and grateful you caught that tweet.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023492681
Catherina
(35,568 posts)then I did a google search that brought Koko's thread up so I commented instead. Thanks for the link to yours which focused more on the legal, hard drives & NSA files. I'm going to your thread now.