That whole Miranda thing

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Probably ought to have a thread.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23769324

[Leftbehind]

F**king pathetic.

[Linus Van Pelt]

Obviously we sensible and respectable liberals can recognize that only a conspiracy-minded Ron Paul supporter would worry about any potential for "anti-terrorism" laws being improperly directed at those not actually in al-Qaeda.

[Marokai Backbeat]

The Guardian's take on the whole affair, and other things, is more than a little terrifying.

[Peter the Lefty]

This is absolutely f[inks]ing outrageous.  As if the U.S. government didn't order them to do it.  Give me a f[inks]ing break.

[Supersonic]

Blown out of proportion.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

He should have visited the US instead of the UK.  Here he'd at least have his Miranda rights when detained.

[Silent Hunter]

A definite overreach of this power.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Horrific.  HPs

[YL]

There's simply no way "anti-terrorist" legislation should be used in a case like this.  Either it's a bad law, or it was seriously misused, or more likely both; it sounds to me as if the powers it gives are too draconian except for the most extreme circumstances.

[Silent Hunter]

The Home Office statement on this was that it was due to highly sensitive information on his person; he's going to contest this in the courts and this law really should be tested there.

[MaxQue]

Welcome to the US colony of England!

[minionofmidas]

Oh no; Britain may be a US-EU double protectorate in many other respects, but its secret services have an ancient and rarely questioned tradition of genocide all over the planet and are outdoing the Americans quite independently. And its press has an ancient tradition of not questioning them, which with secret services means only ever one thing: sh!t goes from bad to worse with passage of time.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Oh no; Britain may be a US-EU double protectorate in many other respects,

'We're just an American missile base' in Jim Hacker's immortal words.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And every bit as enthusiastically incompetent, don't leave that part out.

[Franknburger]

Using anti-terrorist laws to detain a traveller and take possession of his personal belongings, data and messages? Threatening newspapers with closure, destroying their information storage? That's something I might expect to happen in Belarus, Iran, maybe China. But the UK? What has become of a nation that once was the bastion of democracy and individual freedom?
Luckily, the UK has for a very long time not had to experience authoritarian regimes. Unfortunately, this seems to have eroded sensitivity against misuse of powers. Had the events happened anywhere in Central Europe, Latin America, or a Western European country that was exposed to fascism, public outrage would be immense, as everybody would immediately recognise the patterns and know where they may lead to.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Good. Enemies of the state deserve no leniency.

[Silent Hunter]

Two points that need to be made:
* The Guardian actually destroyed the drives themselves under GCHQ direction on how to do it; they were basically told to do so or hand them back and this way, they could protect their sources. There was no threat of closure, but there was of legal action.
* A YouGov survey on this found only 44% felt the detention of Miranda was inappropriate.

[afleitch]

Two points that need to be made:
* The Guardian actually destroyed the drives themselves under GCHQ direction on how to do it; they were basically told to do so or hand them back and this way, they could protect their sources. There was no threat of closure, but there was of legal action.
* A YouGov survey on this found only 44% felt the detention of Miranda was inappropriate.

To be fair most people don't know what's going on, think that Miranda Hart is in trouble or don't care because the victim is a poof.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Two points that need to be made:
* The Guardian actually destroyed the drives themselves under GCHQ direction on how to do it; they were basically told to do so or hand them back and this way, they could protect their sources. There was no threat of closure, but there was of legal action.
* A YouGov survey on this found only 44% felt the detention of Miranda was inappropriate.

To be fair most people don't know what's going on, think that Miranda Hart is in trouble or don't care because the victim is a poof.

The greatest threat to democracy is apathy.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

What has become of a nation that once was the bastion of democracy and individual freedom?

We were only ever comparatively so...

[Silent Hunter]

What has become of a nation that once was the bastion of democracy and individual freedom?

We were only ever comparatively so...

Yes, that is true; for all the long history of Parliament and rights, we've done some pretty oppressive things in our time.

[Franknburger]

What has become of a nation that once was the bastion of democracy and individual freedom?

We were only ever comparatively so...

Yes, that is true; for all the long history of Parliament and rights, we've done some pretty oppressive things in our time.

I was obviously referring to the mid 20th century, plus things like habeas corpus. Anyway, I just try to imagine what would have happened if the Hungarian government had acted in a similar way on a major newspaper: Demonstrations in Budapest, outcries in the EP, the European Commission issuing a note of concern, etc.
Somehow, it appears the whole UK and European public is in a state of disbelief ("this can't happen in the UK"), and just wait for everything to turn out being a misunderstanding. How are other British newspapers taking the whole affair?