Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Partner of Guardian's Snowden Reporter Detained Under Terrorism Act

samzenpus posted 1 year,1 day | from the papers-please dept.

Privacy 426

hydrofix writes "The partner of the Guardian journalist Glenn Greenwald, who has written a series of stories revealing mass surveillance programs by the National Security Agency (NSA), was held for almost nine hours on Sunday by UK authorities as he passed through the Heathrow airport on his way home to Rio de Janeiro. David Miranda was stopped by officers and informed that he would be questioned under the Terrorism Act 2000. The 28-year-old was held for nine hours, the maximum the law allows before officers must release or formally arrest the individual. According to official figures, most examinations last under an hour, and only one in 2,000 people detained are kept for more than six hours. Miranda was released without charge, but officials confiscated electronics including his mobile phone, laptop, camera, memory sticks, DVDs and games consoles. 'This is a profound attack on press freedoms [...] to detain my partner for a full nine hours while denying him a lawyer, and then seize large amounts of his possessions, is clearly intended to send a message of intimidation to those of us who have been reporting on the NSA and GCHQ,' Greenwald commented."

cancel ×

426 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Update the constitution (5, Insightful)

fey000 (1374173) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602353)

Land of the Free(*).

*Conditions may apply.

Re:Update the constitution (5, Interesting)

compro01 (777531) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602369)

In this case, you need to create a (written and involved to amend) constitution.

Re:Update the constitution (4, Insightful)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602381)

You also need a vigilant citizenry.

Re:Update the constitution (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602561)

" The partner of the Guardian journalist Glenn Greenwald...David Miranda "

You can bet your ass that they cavity-searched him, 'cause you know he's got enough room in there to hide things.

Ooh! Ooooh! I have another one...ahem...I hope they read him his Miranda rights! Hahahah! Fuck, I'm so funny.

-- Ethanol-fueled

Re:Update the constitution (5, Informative)

dkleinsc (563838) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602671)

However, given that the UK likely violated the European Convention on Human Rights, GP is not entirely wrong. There's definitely an issue of how legal this all was, given that:
1. There was no suspicion that Mr Miranda committed a crime, which brings up Article 5.
2. The only reason to seize Mr Miranda's electronic devices was to search them, again with no reason to believe that they were used for a crime, violating Article 8.
3. The reason they picked Mr Miranda was because of his association with Glenn Greenwald, violating Article 11.
4. And what Glenn Greenwald did was covered under Article 10.

So yeah, Land of the Free, unless you embarrass important people or organizations in the US or UK or NATO.

Re:Update the constitution (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602387)

Since this is the UK, it's the Magna Carta that needs to be revised.

Re:Update the constitution (5, Insightful)

AxeTheMax (1163705) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602459)

It can be revised all you like but it won't do any good if you have a corrupt police (secret service?) who know their job is to protect their masters in Westminster and Washington.

Re:Update the constitution (2)

Cederic (9623) | 1 year,1 day | (#44603037)

The Magna Carta's been revised continually since it was written - to the extent that almost none of it is currently in law.

The UK does however have a constitution, and the Prevention of Terrorism Act is a fucking awful addendum to it.

Re:Update the constitution (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602437)

Land of the Free(*).

*Conditions may apply.

There are no conditions whatsoever. No one should use Land of the Free to refer to the US of A even in a restricted fashion anymore.
It is a fascist country. They only pretend to not be one.

Re:Update the constitution (5, Insightful)

sumdumass (711423) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602513)

What does the USA have to do with this. This happened in the UK by UK agents using a UK law that was written pre 9/11.

Re:Update the constitution (1, Flamebait)

Arrogant Monkey (2818767) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602545)

AC is American, and assumes all others are.

Re:Update the constitution (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602577)

The implicit assumption is that they detained him for reasons related to Greenwald's publication of US secret documents. Considering the close relationship between the intelligence communties of the two countries, that seems likely.

Re: Update the constitution (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602637)

Presumably, he was detained for leaking information against the NSA, a U.S. agency. That is what the U.S. has to do with this.

Re: Update the constitution (5, Interesting)

IamTheRealMike (537420) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602767)

He also leaked documents about GCHQ, including some quite embarrassing ones (or hopefully quite embarrassing ones) that showed GCHQ was basically being partially funded by the NSA and acted almost as a subcontractor to them. The fact that one countries signals intelligence agency might be paid for by a different one is quite amazing and their attitude of "we've gotta make sure we deliver the Americans the goods" absolutely scandalous.

No, the British government has plenty of reasons of its own to try and kick Greenwald. Unfortunately Parliament has been much sleepier than Congress when it comes to GCHQ abuses. Hague lied in front of MPs and the entire country, and just like Clapper nothing has been done about it. Unfortunately the British Parliament doesn't seem to have an equivalent of Amash right now, so it may well be that the issue simply dies there in deafening silence. MP's are all too intimidated by the intelligence agencies to do anything about it, and sadly they have a long track record of illegal surveillance that started long before 9/11 (dating from the time of the battles against the IRA). Although Congress routinely wipes its ass with the constitution, at least it gives Americans a rallying point and something concrete to get upset over. The lack of one in the UK means it's easier for the government to walk over basic principles.

Re: Update the constitution (2)

xaxa (988988) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602837)

Although Congress routinely wipes its ass with the constitution, at least it gives Americans a rallying point and something concrete to get upset over. The lack of one in the UK means it's easier for the government to walk over basic principles.

We could rally round the Human Rights Act / ECHR, but somehow the mainstream media (and the Tories) have convinced lots of people that it's a bad thing.

Re:Update the constitution (1)

mspohr (589790) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602649)

It is well known that the UK is a lap dog of the US so I'm sure they did this at the bidding of Obama.

Re: Update the constitution (4, Interesting)

Rougement (975188) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602787)

Did the governments of Italy, Spain, Portugal, etc act independently when they forced the Bolivian President's jet to land?

Re:Update the constitution (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602857)

What does the USA have to do with this. This happened in the UK by UK agents using a UK law that was written pre 9/11.

You are joking right? If he had been detained for an hour or less I could see your point, but the length of time he was held can only mean one of two things, either they are so completely ignorant that they have absolutely no idea who is a threat and who isn't while simultaneously so useless that they couldn't figure it out and had to hold him for 9 hours OR more likely, they were instructed to hold him by their boss, who was told by his boss, and he by his, and so forth all they way up the ladder to some dick who knew exactly who he was and wanted to send a message as a favor for some friends in Washington.

Re:Update the constitution (0)

sumdumass (711423) | 1 year,1 day | (#44603035)

Oh, so it's some massive conspiracy that the facts for proof exist only in your mind.

I don't doubt him being connected to a report who printing about the crap snowden released, but it still is the UK.

Re:Update the constitution (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602869)

Partner of Greenwald held by cops under terrorism laws. Greenwald reporting on UK and US agencies from US source Ed Snowden. Ed Snowden under indictment in the US but escapes to Russia. US security agencies originally set up by UK security agencies during WWII. Do you see a connection now?

Re:Update the constitution (1, Troll)

Ol Olsoc (1175323) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602967)

What does the USA have to do with this. This happened in the UK by UK agents using a UK law that was written pre 9/11.

New around here aren't you? In slashdot world, all problems are the direct fault of the United States.

Re:Update the constitution (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602599)

"Land of the free" is like "Religion of peace". They've been parodic statements for a long time.

Re:Update the constitution (5, Insightful)

currently_awake (1248758) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602485)

There is a legal limit on detaining suspects without charging them, there should be a legal limit on taking their stuff without charging them. Without a time limit, it's just theft.

Re:Update the constitution (5, Informative)

Teun (17872) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602631)

Please realise this is a country where they can and will detain you for not handing over the key for encrypted data.

Re:Update the constitution (1)

IamTheRealMike (537420) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602725)

Please realise this is a country where they can and will detain you for not handing over the key for encrypted data.

Yes indeed ..... sounds a lot like LavaBit doesn't it?

Re:Update the constitution (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602657)

With a time limit, it's a time-limited theft where you know the time by which you'll know that your belongings were "mistakenly destroyed" or something.

Re:Update the constitution (5, Informative)

EmagGeek (574360) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602673)

At least in the US, there is no limit to civil forfeiture. If authorities think that your possessions were used in a crime, they can take them even if you are never charged with a crime at all. This includes personal effects, possessions, and real property.

Re:Update the constitution (2)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602759)

Used in a crime, or proceeds of a crime. Fodder for the police auction. Cars are most common, if someone drives to the site of a crime or to visit their drug dealer.

Re:Update the constitution (1)

Mitreya (579078) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602827)

There is a legal limit on detaining suspects without charging them,

Not a lot of legal limits -- apparently when detained thusly one is not entitled to a lawyer or to being silent.

Re:Update the constitution (1)

Cartotype (1158091) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602883)

Could you word your requests a bit more carefully? I don't want to see a new law come into effect that says "If an agent takes more than four articles of stuff from an innocent civilian, the agent must charge the civilian a 'processing fee' of $100 per item."

Bad enough your stuff can be appropriated, but putting a limit on how much stuff can be taken before you start getting charges? Eugh!

Re:Update the constitution (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602503)

Update the constitution (Score:2) by fey000 (1374173) Alter Relationship on 2013-08-18 16:10 (#44602353) Land of the Free(*). *Conditions may apply.

I've never heard the UK called the "Land of the Free". Normally people use that term for the US, which has a constitution, unlike the UK, but it doesn't say anything about being free.

Re:Update the constitution (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602569)

Update the constitution (Score:2)
by fey000 (1374173) Alter Relationship on 2013-08-18 16:10 (#44602353)

Land of the Free(*).

*Conditions may apply.

I've never heard the UK called the "Land of the Free..

Yeah its the Queen's backyard and supply of labour. I have a copy of the Australian constitution right here and thats pretty much what it says.

Re:Update the constitution (4, Insightful)

Spottywot (1910658) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602625)

Land of the Free(*).

*Conditions may apply.

Yup this is the UK where we have a general belief that some freedom would be quite nice, but in reality our democracy is a bit half arsed due to trying to keep the spoiled bastards called Royalty happy, and no constitution of any kind that would let us call ourselves the 'land of the free'. No-one can really be bothered to get angry about our freedoms being constantly erroded because most of the mainstream media are already aware of the giant boot stamping on our faces and know that if they report about it then it will stamp on their faces a bit more if they do. This article is a case in point.

On the subject of 1984 people often don't realise that the book wasn't George Orwells vision of the future, it was his view of Britain at that time i.e 1948, he just reversed the last two numbers of the year.

Re: Update the constitution (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602803)

No it wasn't. Orwell wrote 1984 after beeing delusional on how the communists behaved during the Spanish civil war, where he inititially fought for the communists.

Re:Update the constitution (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602897)

Land of the Free(*).

*Conditions may apply.

"Land of the free" only if you are a sheeple citizen who focuses only on kardashians, american idol, mcdonalds, football, and your low wage job as a slave at wal-mart and believe fox news, cnn, abc and nbc are all true and would never lie to you.

Re:Update the constitution (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602937)

Naw, it has always been "Land of the fearful". Only when realizing that can wounds start to heal.
Those who lived the land before were the bold and wise ones.

Captcha: restart

Re:Update the constitution (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602989)

Do you need a lawyer to explain that the US-Constitution does only apply inside the US, and the article is about the UK?

Play it their way (4, Interesting)

ColdWetDog (752185) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602355)

Yep, you're gonna get stopped. Yep, they're going to go through your stuff.

I think a couple of Terabytes of 'Hello Kitty' videos placed on every bit of electronics that he owns should teach them the error of their ways.

Re:Play it their way (2)

Jeremy Erwin (2054) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602373)

perhaps randomly permuted to suggest the use of stenography.

Re:Play it their way (4, Funny)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602481)

OR, actually containing steganographically encoded JPEGs of Obama having it off with Cameron.

Re:Play it their way (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602539)

Yep, you're gonna get stopped. Yep, they're going to go through your stuff. I think a couple of Terabytes of 'Hello Kitty' videos placed on every bit of electronics that he owns should teach them the error of their ways.

If you're going to troll, have about 400GB of concatenated copies of trollface.jpg, and rename them as follows:

wlinsurance-20130815-A.otp
wlinsurance-20130815-B.otp
wlinsurance-20130815-C.otp

Re:Play it their way (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602663)

Yep, you're gonna get stopped. Yep, they're going to go through your stuff.

I think a couple of Terabytes of 'Hello Kitty' videos placed on every bit of electronics that he owns should teach them the error of their ways.

And then, strangely, on further analysis the forensics specialist discover thousands of pictures of child porn in an almost overlooked subdirectory on one of the pieces of electronics. Oh dear, that's decades in prison for you, to learn the error of your ways.

Re:Play it their way (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602909)

if they want to find child porn they will have decided to beforehand, not because they see troll faces on the disks.

Re:Play it their way (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602669)

Nyan Cat ftw!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QH2-TGUlwu4

Re:Play it their way (1)

Teun (17872) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602679)

I think you just gave them reasons for hefty fines due to IP or copy right infringement.

Or can you show a receipt for that stuff?

Re:Play it their way (4, Funny)

VortexCortex (1117377) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602711)

Yep, you're gonna get stopped. Yep, they're going to go through your stuff.

I think a couple of Terabytes of 'Hello Kitty' videos placed on every bit of electronics that he owns should teach them the error of their ways.

Are you insane?! They would jail him for possession of Kitty Porn!

Re:Play it their way (3)

girlintraining (1395911) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602747)

I think a couple of Terabytes of 'Hello Kitty' videos placed on every bit of electronics that he owns should teach them the error of their ways.

If they insist on calling everyone and everything a terrorist, might as well turn everything into terrorism... I mean, if you're going to be treated like a criminal, what's there to hold you back from actually being a criminal then? Distribute SDcards that melt when connected to a computer, fill up harddrives with spyware and malware... encrypt everything with incriminating-sounding names and impossibly-long keys.

There's no deterrent to terrorism if everyone is treated like one -- it's criminal law theory 101. When everything results in the death penalty... the law effectively has zero deterrent value. Whether you steal a candy bar, or the moon, it all means the same. Zero tolerance leads to people concluding... hey, if you're gonna go at all, go big.

Re:Play it their way (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602851)

Yep, you're gonna get stopped. Yep, they're going to go through your stuff.

This is a new (and apparently controversial) "anti-terrorist" measure in UK. Hard to come with a better example of abuse.

Waiting.. (2)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602377)

For all the Miranda rights jokes.. c'mon, get them out the way..

Re:Waiting.. (1)

maroberts (15852) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602389)

For all the Miranda rights jokes.. c'mon, get them out the way..

Damn you, I'd just logged on to start this meme... :-)

Re:Waiting.. (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602409)

For all the Miranda rights jokes.. c'mon, get them out the way..

In the UK, you don't have Miranda rights.

It's up to you to decide if that's a joke or not.

Re:Waiting.. (4, Funny)

Jeremy Erwin (2054) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602651)

Nor do you have the right to contact a solicitor, as this is ostensibly about terrorism. Can't have the proper climate of fear with pesky lawyers running around.

Re:Waiting.. (1)

Jade_Wayfarer (1741180) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602653)

That's a good one, pity I have no mod points today.

Re:Waiting.. (3, Interesting)

Zocalo (252965) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602779)

I'll take the UK's non-existant Miranda rights over the "Menezes rights [wikipedia.org] " that got applied the last time an innocent Brazilian national had a front-page run in with the UK's security services.

Re:Waiting.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602595)

Fruity Oaty Bars!

Re:Waiting.. (1)

Reeznarch (2465314) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602701)

In Republican America, Rights have Miranda!

Confirms what all of us know about our rulers (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602385)

They're bad people.

Re:Confirms what all of us know about our rulers (1)

cervesaebraciator (2352888) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602719)

Our rulers are, for the most part, not people. They're institutions and bureaucracies.

Where's The People (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602411)

The People should act now, in their sovereign powers.

Games consoles? (2)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602415)

"I don't always travel around the world to topple foreign governments by revealing their deepest secrets, but when I do, I have my Famicom games collection with me."

Re:Games consoles? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602565)

I don't think "partner" in this case refers to reporter.

Re:Games consoles? (1)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602685)

Neither do I. Should I?

They took his electronic devices (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602425)

Even if he gets them back, would you trust a device that has been alone with a spook?

Re:They took his electronic devices (4, Funny)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602509)

would you trust a device that has been alone with a spook?

Not before you wash it.

Voltaire's dictum still applies (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602457)

To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.
  Voltaire

The odds of this fellow being used as sneakernet for Greenwald may not be zero but I'd be surprized if he had anything in his possession as he's not a working reporter and can't claim any defenses. That being said, reading and owning classified material that is not your own is not an offense unless you are bound by an oath of service.

For example, Bradley broke the law by distributing classified materials. Assange did not break any laws by receiving it or reading it.

Re:Voltaire's dictum still applies (2)

CRCulver (715279) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602579)

To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize. Voltaire

This discussion [wikiquote.org] suggests this is a spurious quote, like most attempts to lend prestige to a banal remark by attaching this writer's name to it.

Re:Voltaire's dictum still applies (4, Funny)

VortexCortex (1117377) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602755)

To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize. Voltaire

This discussion [wikiquote.org] suggests this is a spurious quote, like most attempts to lend prestige to a banal remark by attaching this writer's name to it.

"The spurious quote, like most attempts to build prestige from mediocrity, requires attaching things to it."
-Voltron

Re:Voltaire's dictum still applies (2)

Jeremy Erwin (2054) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602757)

in US v Franklin et al [wikipedia.org] , Rosen and Weissman were charged with " "Conspiracy to communicate national defense information to persons not entitled to receive it", and Rosen was charged with "Communication of national defense information to persons not entitled to receive it,"

The government believes that Assange conspired with his sources and communicated to his readers.

"Partner" (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602489)

Call him boyfriend or spouse or something. Partner makes it sound like he might have been involved in the journalistic work (and detaining him would still be wrong).

Instead, they're targetting the journalist's relationships. It's absolutely despicable.

Re:"Partner" (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602533)

They want all the names, phone numbers, addresses, etc. from the devices.

Then they can harm, blackmail, investigate, force them to work for nefarious purposes... all of those acquaintancies.

Re:"Partner" (1)

VortexCortex (1117377) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602859)

They want all the names, phone numbers, addresses, etc. from the devices.

Then they can harm, blackmail, investigate, force them to work for nefarious purposes... all of those acquaintancies.

Haha, oh man, that's rich! So, the folks who are reporting on the latest of a series of enormous spying apparatuses -- Omnivore, Carnivore, Five Eyes, ECHELON, now PRISM -- All of which could collect names, phone numbers, addresses, etc. from everyone in the world, are having their electronics stolen so that $THREE_LETTER_AGENCY can get at this info they already have? Ha ha! That's hilarious.

Now, I want you to think strongly about the next part said. What the admittedly corrupt and covert folks would do if they had access to this information about this one Journalist: "harm, blackmail, investigate, force them to work for nefarious purposes", just to what? Further a political agenda? Ask yourself if you should be worried that folks who have job descriptions requiring precisely this level of nefariosity have the information already -- Not just for the journalists exposing them, but for everyone in the world.

Re:"Partner" (5, Informative)

Psyborgue (699890) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602589)

It's Glenn's own word [theguardian.com] ! I'm in a civil union with my "partner" and I don't particularly mind this term. Although I agree it can be confusing, most of the time people get what you mean by context. When I marry him this November, i'll call him my "husband" but not before then. You can blame the homophobes for creating this dual tier of unions but it does exist and I might as well use the proper confusing term as much as possible to emphasize just how idiotic it was that until just recently I couldn't get married.

Re:"Partner" (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602647)

The word you are looking for is "fag", or "cocksucker" for the uncouth.

Re:"Partner" (2, Interesting)

girlintraining (1395911) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602655)

... you know, some of us use the term partner because we wish to emphasize our commitment to each other, instead of the sex of our lover. Especially considering that not everyone fits into the boxes of 'man' and 'woman', thus 'wife' and 'husband' are poor fits. This has nothing to do with Glenn Beck, who deserves to be tied up in a public square and everyone who wants to given a free punch to his face. Don't worry... we won't let him die. Doctors will be on hand to stitch him back together again... and we're happy to wait until he's healed up again before resuming using his face as a punching bag.

-_- It's less harsh of a punishment than anything he's advocated.

Re:"Partner" (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602713)

What the hell are you talking about? Glenn Beck has no bearing on this conversation. Glenn Greenwald is the subject of this discussion.

Re:"Partner" (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602995)

Are you drunk?

It's not Glenn Beck.

Re:"Partner" (5, Insightful)

sribe (304414) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602721)

It's Glenn's own word [theguardian.com]! I'm in a civil union with my "partner" and I don't particularly mind this term. Although I agree it can be confusing, most of the time people get what you mean by context. When I marry him this November, i'll call him my "husband" but not before then. You can blame the homophobes for creating this dual tier of unions but it does exist and I might as well use the proper confusing term as much as possible to emphasize just how idiotic it was that until just recently I couldn't get married.

And in a written article, without any context to convey whether this is a personal or business relationship, the term "life partner" would be much better.

Re:"Partner" (1)

wisnoskij (1206448) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602619)

Partner implies that he was his journalistic partner in Snowden case.

Re:"Partner" (5, Informative)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602727)

Partner makes it sound like he might have been involved in the journalistic work (and detaining him would still be wrong).

He is involved - he was returning from a trip to Berlin to work with Laura Poitras the documentary film-maker whom Snowden also reached out to. The trip was paid for by Greenwald's newspaper, the Guardian.

MOD PARENT UP (2)

forand (530402) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602805)

I agree it is just as misleading to use partner to imply ONLY a personal relationship when the facts of the matter indicate that he was both a personal partner and a journalistic partner.

Sounds like ... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602497)

Sounds like they violated Miranda's rights. ....

*crickets*

Thats a lot of electronics (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602529)

He travelled with a laptop, phone and games consoles? What did he have ? A Wii and a PS2 to use on the plane?

Re:Thats a lot of electronics (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602689)

The non gaming public refers to things like the vita and ds as games consoles.

President McCain strikes again (0, Troll)

Kohath (38547) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602549)

They told me if I voted for John McCain we would see press freedoms abridged around the world to cover up US Government lawlessness. And they were right! [pjmedia.com]

Re:President McCain strikes again (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602705)

Garbage GOP propaganda doesn't really update the situation here. Sorry.

Re:President McCain strikes again (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602715)

They told me if I voted for John McCain we would see press freedoms

They told you? Citation needed.

Ultimately self-defeating (4, Informative)

niks42 (768188) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602623)

Surely anyone worth their salt would just put their data in the Cloud, and password-protect it? Ah, just remembered it is illegal in the UK not to remember a password when the Authorities want you to decrypt something - punishable by itself with 2 years imprisonment - not to mention obstruction and all of the other offences they could mention.

Re:Ultimately self-defeating (2, Interesting)

jpublic (3023069) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602717)

Ah, just remembered it is illegal in the UK not to remember a password when the Authorities want you to decrypt something

Looks like similar things happen in the US. [slashdot.org] A damn shame.

Re:Ultimately self-defeating (1)

lxs (131946) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602761)

If by "Cloud" you mean "The Pirate Bay" then that may be exactly what they have done. [slashdot.org] With a little help from mr. Julian in the London office of course.

Re:Ultimately self-defeating (1)

VortexCortex (1117377) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602915)

Surely anyone worth their salt would just put their data in the Cloud, and password-protect it? Ah, just remembered it is illegal in the UK not to remember a password when the Authorities want you to decrypt something [...]

This is why I keep large blobs of random noise on all my devices. I even put them in my games. That?! Oh, it's just the random number look up table, or source and destinations for seemingly random yet looping particle swarm positions, or bitmap frames for the TV static in the game.

No, REALLY, it is!

Re:Ultimately self-defeating (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602969)

You don't get out much, do you? A great deal of allegedly confidential data is already "in the cloud", protected by nothing but contracts that specifically hold the cloud vendor not accountable for governmental intrusions. I just went through this with a school, who were keeping unencrypted student passwords in a MySQL server "in the cloud" so that teachers could "easily reset student passwords" and prevent student's from saying "I can't log in!!!"

YUo FAIL IT!! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602729)

Damn Journalists (4, Insightful)

Fuzzums (250400) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602763)

They're the worst kind of terrorist. Fighting with Pen And Truth and using the internet as IED and WMD.

The loyal ones write about what the government want you to believe.
Then there is a bunch of them that write about oil spills and the banking system.
But the worst are those that turn against their government and write the truth.

Tar, Feathers, etc (2)

Freddybear (1805256) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602777)

Some assembly required.

The kids (1)

no-body (127863) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602809)

in the sandbox are mad at the guy digging up their secret stones (treasures) and now they get at him and his friends whenever they are showing up.
"Getting even" - what a child's play!

Grown-ups? No way Jose...

Greenwald is a crook (-1, Troll)

globaljustin (574257) | 1 year,1 day | (#44602891)

'crook' as in he is 'crooked'...

here's what I mean: He should have done the professional journalist move and **release Snowden's info anonymously**

Greenwald and the Guardian would then assume the risk. The US government could subpeona him to reveal his source, and if he refused he would be jailed for up to 6-9 months...but then he'd be let go. Source intact....with major book deal and street cred.

And Snowden would have been able to keep his job, just like Deep Throat from Watergate [wikipedia.org]

Instead, it seems like Snowden was duped (or fooled himself) into thinking he was a people's hero and he went public.

There are reports [beforeitsnews.com] that Greenwald is shopping around a Snowden exclusive interview for 7 figures. They haven't been directly denied by Snowden's team but he did release a statement.

It's stinks to high heaven! Greenwald is a villain in this...at the least he's a smarmy bottom feeder journalist who mislead Snowden for his own career gain.

Only Obama is the terrorist (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602959)

Too bad Americans don't have the balls to try him for treason!

Global abuse of terrorism legislation (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#44602983)

Such blatent and in-your-face abuse of power only serves to curtail legitimacy of the state. These actions accomplish nothing and are ultimatly self defeating.

Obvious lesson. (2)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | 1 year,1 day | (#44603041)

When traveling internationally, make backups. And don't take anything remotely incriminating - even if it means reformatting the laptop. Any data you need to work with, store online somewhere.

And if you really want to annoy those who seek to annoy you, take the family photo album and be happy knowing that some low-level agent is going to have to spend eight hours looking through the library of pictures of people standing around.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>