Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
Sign in to follow this  
bleeding heart

UK Equates Journalism With Terrorism

Recommended Posts

[edit: a slight problem with the included link, don't know why, but no problem: when you reach the page, hit the "Glenn Greenwald" tab at the top, and the story comes up.]

The UK's Government's Communication Headquarters (GCHQ) has won a victory, perhaps only temporarily, from a lower court: they can deem any journalist a "terrorist suspect," and detain them on this note, with precisely zero evidence or information.

This is of no surprise in a place like the UK, whose support for press freedoms is notoriously bad. In the 1970s, a reporter named Duncan Campbell was criminally prosecuted simply for reporting on the fact that the GCHQ existed.

However, since then, many top secret GCHQ reports have been published in various places, notably by the Guardian, about

...the GCHQ's role in spying on the Brazilian oil company Petrobas, [their] targeting of UN Charities and officials, [their] use of "dirty tricks" including "honey traps" and fake victim blog posts....[their] surveillance of YouTube and blogger activity to covertly influence internet discourse, [their] surveillance through phone Apps such as "Angry Birds," and--just yesterday--GCHQ's covert monitoring of visitors to the Wikileaks website.

It is quite clear why they should wish to criminalize any reporting on their activities:

The British Agency has "repeatedly warned it fears a 'damaging public debate' on the scale of its activities because it fears it could lead to legal challenges."

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/02/19/uks-equating-journalism-terrorism-designed-conceal-gchq/

Edited by Charles Anthony
fixed type in hyperlink

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess opening and reading this makes us part of the network of terror and especially you for linking to it.

How do you sleep at night?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:)

Yes, well, the UK government actually seems to agree with this view; unlike their counterparts in the US, Canada, France, et al, the British authorities have actually gone after the newspapers for reporting this stuff: The Guardian, notably, was ordered to destroy harddrives with the information.

Of course, a useless endeavor, since info floats through the air, moves through cables, etc; so presumably the authorities meant this a demonstration effect, not unlike wars of aggression against weaker nations, writ small.

And while I'm glad that Canada, America etc are not stooping quite to these levels, it does raise some interesting questions about our hypocrisy: that is, if Snowdon, Assange, Greenwald et al are "guilty" of disseminating "dangerous material"....why aren't the NYTimes, Globe and Mail, etc etc guilty of publishing said material?

It would appear the Powerful are as stupid and selectively hypocritical as they are dangerous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, they're moral cowards, all right. If they weren't, their supporters wouldn't have to spend so much time arguing for their courage, wisdom, and so on. ("Methinks the lady doth protest too much.") And the cults of Reagan, P.E. Trudeau, Thatcher, Kennedy and Churchill wouldn't have to exist.

Edited by bleeding heart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess it's just my law and order beliefs, but as far as I'm concerned if you're caught carrying tens of thousands of classified government documents which you have no right to own you ought to be carted off to prison for a very long time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess it's just my law and order beliefs, but as far as I'm concerned if you're caught carrying tens of thousands of classified government documents which you have no right to own you ought to be carted off to prison for a very long time.

Snowdon was revealing secrets that governments have no right to. He should be awarded the highest public and civic honors possible and the people he exposed should be thrown in prison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess it's just my law and order beliefs, but as far as I'm concerned if you're caught carrying tens of thousands of classified government documents which you have no right to own you ought to be carted off to prison for a very long time.

I am confused as to why you have this personal law and belief about a person who is trying to expose a government who is breaking the law by spying on you and taking away your rights to privacy.

Why are you numb to the fact that the government is secretly gathering personal information about you?

Why this bizarre selectiveness in your personal beliefs?

Edited by Hudson Jones

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess it's just my law and order beliefs, but as far as I'm concerned if you're caught carrying tens of thousands of classified government documents which you have no right to own you ought to be carted off to prison for a very long time.

I guess its just my respect for liberty and limited government, but as far as Im concerned if a government becomes so opaque that the people that fund it no longer have any oversight into a large portion of its activities, that government should destroyed by the people, and its members should permanently incarcerated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Snowdon was revealing secrets that governments have no right to. He should be awarded the highest public and civic honors possible and the people he exposed should be thrown in prison.

I wasn't talking about Snowdon, but if you must, whatever degree of self-righteousnss he might be able to claim to excuse the release of information about how the NSA allegedly gets information from within the United States that cannot be used to excuse his repeated release of information on how the NSA gathers intelligence on foreign governments. For that matter, Snowdon could be tried for espionage here in Canada, or in the UK, or in Australia, and sent to prison for a long, long time because of his release of their secret intelligence gathering information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am confused as to why you have this personal law and belief about a person who is trying to expose a government who is breaking the law by spying on you and taking away your rights to privacy.

Why are you numb to the fact that the government is secretly gathering personal information about you?

Why this bizarre selectiveness in your personal beliefs?

Google is working much harder to gather information on me than the NSA is. So is Yahoo and Bell, for that matter.

And Snowond released information, a lot of it, related to how the NSA and other intelligence agencies gather information on foreign governments and on terrorists. Which is unquestionably treason and, outside the borders of the US, espionage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess its just my respect for liberty and limited government, but as far as Im concerned if a government becomes so opaque that the people that fund it no longer have any oversight into a large portion of its activities, that government should destroyed by the people, and its members should permanently incarcerated.

Judging by your previous postings you don't HAVE any respect for limited government.

And there's no evidence what the NSA or any of the other intlligence agencies Snowdon spied on were doing was illegal or beyond the notice or control of their respective governments. If you believe the means and methods intelligence agencies use to gather intelligence should be an open book for everyone, well... that's just silly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't talking about Snowdon, but if you must, whatever degree of self-righteousnss he might be able to claim to excuse the release of information about how the NSA allegedly gets information from within the United States that cannot be used to excuse his repeated release of information on how the NSA gathers intelligence on foreign governments.

On the contrary, a bit of collateral damage is acceptable when shining light on the shadowy dealings of the NSA. There wasn't exactly a legal way to do what he did, not one that would have gotten anywhere. And even Obama has now promised (falsely, of course) to review the procedures the NSA uses, due to the complete unacceptability of what they were doing. Snowden is a hero and widely respected almost everywhere in the world except by a portion of the US population. Gone are the days when speakers of truth would flee from tyrannical nations to seek protection and freedom in America, instead, we have the reverse.

And there's no evidence what the NSA or any of the other intlligence agencies Snowdon spied on were doing was illegal or beyond the notice or control of their respective governments.

Doesn't matter whether it was legal or not... what matters is if it was right or not. That's a judgement people have to make for themselves. As to the notice/control of the respective governments... that only makes it worse, not better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have mixed views. I think this kind of thing may lead to erosion of free speech and the freedom of the press and the sanctity of the freedom of the press is an important one. It is one of the checks and balances that assure governments remain accountable. "Democracy" what ever that really means depends on critical press being able to challenge the government in open discussions.

So the question then becomes, can the press remain free to criticize the government and remain effective but also be checked when it comes to

"state security" issues. The problem is that "state security" claim to repress evidence could be exploited by government to simply use it as a pretext to censor the press.

Is their a balance? Well that is where the courts will have to step in and hopefully clarify with some new ground rules ad I can see some complicated legal arguments being raised all the way to the top court in the UK that will have implications in all democracies over this topic.

I will say this about Snowden. What I object to is that he released information he knew would endanger the lives of government operatives and he was selective in only focusing on the US and to a lesser extent other Western nations but silent on Russia and China. In doing what he did he in fact enabled Russia and China a huge intelligence advantage that will enable them to do the very thing he thinks he was exposing by the US.

He could have run the same stories providing a balanced critical analysis of all governments not just the US. He also did not have to reveal the actual names of certain people to get his point across.

I think what he did was irresponsible. The ends did not justify the means he used.

Edited by Rue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I object to is that he released information he knew would endanger the lives of government operatives

Oh the humanity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

snowden is a hero.

snowden has not revealed information that would endanger any country. the information he has released is to inform and alert its citizens of the illegal and secretive information gathering. the government now has access to all of our emails. they have access to our phone calls. they have access to our activities on the internet. not only that, but the u.s. government has been sharing our information with a foreign country:

NSA shares raw intelligence including Americans' data with Israel

• Secret deal places no legal limits on use of data by Israelis
• Only official US government communications protected
The National Security Agency routinely shares raw intelligence data withIsrael without first sifting it to remove information about US citizens, a top-secret document provided to the Guardian by whistleblower Edward Snowden reveals.
The disclosure that the NSA agreed to provide raw intelligence data to a foreign country contrasts with assurances from the Obama administrationthat there are rigorous safeguards to protect the privacy of US citizens caught in the dragnet.
that's not okay.
Edited by bud

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bud as usual you can't wait to turn this thread into pretense to engage in criticism of Israel.

Do you really want people to believe Israel is the only country the US exchanges intelligence with?

Really?

Lol.

So for example the exchange of intelligence between Britain, Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the US known as the 5 eyes, what are they in on this Zionist conspiracy?

Imagine that-the US exchanges intelligence with Israel. Wow. The world did not know that. The world also had no idea that intelligence monitoring exists internally as well as externally.

Yes thanks to Snowden I now feel safer now that he has enabled North Korea, Russia, China, and lord knows what terrorists a strategic advantage as the US has to now undo years of work while these other countries intelligence operations can exploit those leaks. Yah that makes sense. lets criticize one country and ignore all the rest in our expressed indignation..

No one was endangered you say. Hell even Eyeball is laughing. Even he knows names were revealed of undercover operatives. In his case he doesn't think their lives are worth a damn in your case exposing the names of undercover operatives doesn't endanger them nor does it endanger the security of many nations by now allowing terrorists to exploit the compromised information melt down.

Yes I know in your world terrorists don't exist, only Israel and the US exist.

Edited by Rue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the contrary, a bit of collateral damage is acceptable when shining light on the shadowy dealings of the NSA.

First, I disagree. Second, this was not 'collateral' but deliberate. Snowden didn't need to shine his light on foreign intelligence gathering. He could simply have focussed on efforts within the United States. He exposed foreign intelligence gathering deliberately.

Snowden is a hero and widely respected almost everywhere in the world except by a portion of the US population.

You mean the thinking portion? I'd wager Snowden will never be able to walk down a street in the United States without being beaten. And he will be arrested if he sets foot in any western nation, including Canada.

Gone are the days when speakers of truth would flee from tyrannical nations to seek protection and freedom in America, instead, we have the reverse.

Snowden is a shallow, callow, self-righeous moron who now lives in a police state where every word he says or types is monitered by the intelligence services. After doing his best to damage United States and western interests, Russian tolerance of him will only last so long. Any word he puts wrong, anything he does in a similar manner to what he did in the US will land him in prison or dead.

I won't shed a tear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Snowden is a shallow, callow, self-righeous moron who now lives in a police state where every word he says or types is monitered by the intelligence services.

You mean just like he did before? That's what you don't seem to be understanding, the US is monitoring every word he (and everyone else) says or types just as much as Russia does, even more so in fact due to America's spy agencies superior funding and technological abilities. Any moral high ground you may want to claim in regards to Russia being a "police state" relative to Western countries simply just does not exist anymore, period. Russia is more overt with its police statism, Western countries are more secretive, but that's about all that can be said.

You mean the thinking portion? I'd wager Snowden will never be able to walk down a street in the United States without being beaten.

First, I don't think that's true... if Snowden is allowed back into the US, I don't think many people will be beating him up. The type of people who care about international news stories, intelligence gathering, etc, aren't generally the type of people who walk around streets looking to get into fist fights. Second, if they did, that would say a lot more about the average inhabitant of an American street than about Snowden.

Edited by Bonam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you really want people to believe Israel is the only country the US exchanges intelligence with?

Really?

Lol.

according to the information, no other country has received this raw intelligence data but israel.

why is israel, a foreign country, so special in the eyes of the u.s. government that its willing to give away raw personal information of americans (and others around the world that they have information from)?

the nsa and whoever is signing off people's personal information to a foreign country should be tried for treason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bud you have no clue what intelligence the US exchanged with Israel. You have no specific intelligence that was sent from Israel to the US or vice versa. So stop acting as if you know. Secondly you missed the point of course. When the US exchanges intelligence with Britain or Canada or Israel or any of its other allies sometimes the intelligence will be different, sometimes it will be the same. You don't know. You have no clue. So don't come on this board and make it appear the US has some kind of unique conspiracy going on with Israel. It exchanges intelligence with countries like Israel for the benefit of both. They also have spied on each other. Allies spy on each other and exchange intelligence with each other.

The US and Israel have exchanged mutual intelligence on terrorism. Of course they would. Its in their mutual interest. At other times they are logger's head over Iran, Syria, and other issues.

This thread was not about Israel as much as you would like to yet again hijack it to their.

This thread is about the UK equating journalism with terrorism. That was the issue.

Getting back to the actual thread I contend it is illogical to claim as Snowden did, that he was leaking info to expose intelligence to show intelligence is bad knowing that this alleged exposure would enable other intelligence operatives greater powers to spy. That makes no sense. It is a classic example of encouraging the very thing you think you are exposing.

Snowden knew intelligence operations do not act in a vacuum and the moment he expose one side's operation the other side'swould be empowered. He took it upon himself to decide for you, me and anyone else that he felt it his right to expose us all to Russian, Chinese, North Korean, Iranian, organized crime spying because he knows what is best for us all. If he felt the way he did why did he go work where he did in the first place?

All of you calling Snowden a hero I would suggest would be the first to call for his lynching if as a result of his exposure, terrorists were able to carry out an attack taking advantage of the chaos from the leaks he created.

Wlil the damage he has done with his leaks not outweigh the good you think he has done? Do you really know or do you just assume you know?

How do you even know what his motives are?

How do you know he was not an operative for the Russians or Chinese or as I said a misinformation stooge planted by the NSA?

The reason the UK and now or that matter all democracies have serious legal issues we need to re-examine is because we now have to re-balance the need of government to be accountable to the public, an essential ingredient for democracy with genuine security issues that may require certain information remain classified.

We no longer live in a world where you can walk down the street and do what you want in the West and think, terrorists are those swarthy bearded people far away who only do bad things to bad people, i.e.,Jews in Israel or neo colonialist imperialist Yankees..

ironically, terrorists hate you Snowden apologists. They consider you cowards,weak and decadent. They laugh at your presumptions that you understand their causes or beliefs. These are people who find freedom of speech and thought, the things you think you are advocating perversions.

That said I have full confidence in the UK legal system to commence a very complex legal balancing act to provide new guidelines as to freedom of the press v.s. state security issues.

Edited by Rue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You mean just like he did before? That's what you don't seem to be understanding, the US is monitoring every word he (and everyone else) says or types just as much as Russia does

That's paranoid BS along the same line as the birthers and 911 truthers and other conspiracy kooks.

. Any moral high ground you may want to claim in regards to Russia being a "police state" relative to Western countries simply just does not exist anymore, period. Russia is more overt with its police statism, Western countries are more secretive, but that's about all that can be said.

That's an even dumber statement, completely ignoring the facts. The US is not a police state, and it has no need of bugging people within the US in the manner an autocratic kleptocracy like Russia does. And you get back to me when the US starts murdering journalists and laywers and throwing people into prison for opposing Obama.

Edited by Argus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's paranoid BS along the same line as the birthers and 911 truthers and other conspiracy kooks.

Except that we have proof that it's true, you mean?

That's an even dumber statement, completely ignoring the facts. The US is not a police state, and it has no need of bugging people within the US in the manner an autocratic kleptocracy like Russia does.

Of course it doesn't need to "bug" people when it has backdoor access to Google, Facebook, Comcast, Verizon, etc.

And you get back to me when the US starts murdering journalists and laywers and throwing people into prison for opposing Obama.

Obama is a powerless figurehead. And like I said, the US is much more secretive with its police statism. Why murder journalists and lawyers? If they are trying to expose something you don't want known. See any people doing that in the US lately? Oh yeah, Snowden, and the US in fact does want to get its hands on him and throw him in prison for life or maybe even seek the death penalty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course it doesn't need to "bug" people when it has backdoor access to Google, Facebook, Comcast, Verizon, etc.

Also via cell phones, computer wifi hot spots, CCTV, smartmeter technology, key fobs, ONSTAR, drones (air and ground)built in GPS and black box systems in cars, voice and facial recognition monitoring devices and on and on and on.

Look at all that freedom we have. It's an electronic surveillance grid open air prison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...