Current Affairs Surveillance in the US reaches new levels

[peterms]

 

Imagine thousands of 60 year olds rioting in the streets 

Without laughing?

 

 

Perhaps not rioting, but a lot of people that age taking to the streets would be remarkably effective.

[Awol]

Glenn Greenwald's partner detained at Heathrow airport for nine hours

 

As Cameron said, "we're all in this together".

[peterms]

 

Glenn Greenwald's partner detained at Heathrow airport for nine hours

 

As Cameron said, "we're all in this together".

 

 

It is the intimidation of the playground bully, and about as effective.  Pathetic, shameful, and desperate.

[peterms]

...and if anyone wonders "Why is this UK story in a thread about US surveillance?", the answer is that the harassment was carried out at the behest of the US.  That is what our government has sunk to, arse-kissing foreign autocrats in return for trivial favours and a bit of "intelligence".  Maybe a weekend in Disneyland and a GM burger as a treat.  This is a subversion of the law for political purpose, and Cameron and May should be hauled up in front of the courts to answer for it.

[snowychap]

This is a subversion of the law for political purpose, and Cameron and May should be hauled up in front of the courts to answer for it.

I liked the above but I felt that the following names ought to be added to those of Cameron and May (and other Tories/Lib Dems): Blair, Straw, Miliband D, Johnson and John Reid.

Edited August 19, 2013 by snowychap

[leviramsey]

But as for your argument, I don't follow your linkage between being employed by the state, receiving state benefits or contracts, and supporting surveillance.  The people who benefit most from the exercise of state power are those with most property, as I suppose everyone would agree.  Where surveillance is about furthering existing property rights, as it mostly is, then the biggest beneficiaries will be those who apparently have less dependence on the state.

That's why I phrased it "those who believe that their livelihoods depend on the state".

By and large, those with much property tend not to believe that. Depending on the particular culture, those who receive welfare benefits may also tend not to believe that (essentially that they'd receive more or less the same benefits under a different government).

For the purposes of analyzing this sort of thing, esse is most definitely percipi.

[CrackpotForeigner]

That is what our government has sunk to, arse-kissing foreign autocrats in return for trivial favours and a bit of "intelligence".  Maybe a weekend in Disneyland and a GM burger as a treat.  This is a subversion of the law for political purpose, and Cameron and May should be hauled up in front of the courts to answer for it.

 

A million percent this. It is an utter disgrace. I couldn't believe it when I read what they'd been up to.

 

Hopefully it will draw attention to the most excellent writing of Greenwald, who should be read by everyone.

Edited August 19, 2013 by CrackpotForeigner

[peterms]

 

But as for your argument, I don't follow your linkage between being employed by the state, receiving state benefits or contracts, and supporting surveillance.  The people who benefit most from the exercise of state power are those with most property, as I suppose everyone would agree.  Where surveillance is about furthering existing property rights, as it mostly is, then the biggest beneficiaries will be those who apparently have less dependence on the state.

That's why I phrased it "those who believe that their livelihoods depend on the state".

By and large, those with much property tend not to believe that. Depending on the particular culture, those who receive welfare benefits may also tend not to believe that (essentially that they'd receive more or less the same benefits under a different government).

For the purposes of analyzing this sort of thing, esse is most definitely percipi.

 

 

I always find it odd when people with a lot of wealth say they are not dependent on the state, and I can't tell if they really believe it or are being deliberately misleading.  Most great wealth derives from theft and appropriation, usury, or exploitation.  The wealth holders depend enormously on the state to uphold and enforce their ownership of it, whether through contract law, or the use of state forces to crush rebellion and break strikes, or nowadays through things like enforcement of intellectual property rights and the subject of this thread, surveillance of anyone who might have a political agenda which the wealthy don't like.

 

Alongside that reality there sometimes sits a myth of the "wealth creator" as some kind of force of nature, generating wealth from endeavour and sheer force of will, like some pioneer in a virgin forest (a clearing in the woods comes to mind).  I suppose it feels more heroic and uplifting than the reality.

 

So they end up being massively dependent on vast amounts of state expenditure on infrastructure, legal systems, security and repression (and especially in the US, bribing legislators to ensure it gets spent in the way they want) while opposing forms of state spending which would benefit poorer people.  Do they really not see the contradiction, when they go on about wanting a smaller state?

[Risso]

...and if anyone wonders "Why is this UK story in a thread about US surveillance?", the answer is that the harassment was carried out at the behest of the US.  That is what our government has sunk to, arse-kissing foreign autocrats in return for trivial favours and a bit of "intelligence".  Maybe a weekend in Disneyland and a GM burger as a treat.  This is a subversion of the law for political purpose, and Cameron and May should be hauled up in front of the courts to answer for it.

 

Hopefully this is one of those cases that will snowball and lead to lots of embarrassing questions to answer.

[Jon]

 

...and if anyone wonders "Why is this UK story in a thread about US surveillance?", the answer is that the harassment was carried out at the behest of the US.  That is what our government has sunk to, arse-kissing foreign autocrats in return for trivial favours and a bit of "intelligence".  Maybe a weekend in Disneyland and a GM burger as a treat.  This is a subversion of the law for political purpose, and Cameron and May should be hauled up in front of the courts to answer for it.

 

Hopefully this is one of those cases that will snowball and lead to lots of embarrassing questions to answer.

 

I would definitely think that May has got her hands dirty with this one. IMO this is defnitely a resignation/sacking affair, if May's involvement can be ascertained ....

[Kiwivillan]

...

Edited August 19, 2013 by Kiwivillan

[leviramsey]

...

I'll have to call a friend at Ft. Mead before responding.

[maqroll]

 

...and if anyone wonders "Why is this UK story in a thread about US surveillance?", the answer is that the harassment was carried out at the behest of the US.  That is what our government has sunk to, arse-kissing foreign autocrats in return for trivial favours and a bit of "intelligence".  Maybe a weekend in Disneyland and a GM burger as a treat.  This is a subversion of the law for political purpose, and Cameron and May should be hauled up in front of the courts to answer for it.

 

Hopefully this is one of those cases that will snowball and lead to lots of embarrassing questions to answer.

 

Nah, it'll get buried. 

[CrackpotForeigner]

There's a petition here:

 

https://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/ukhomeoffice-theresa-may-review-the-use-of-schedule-7-of-terrorism-act#share

 

for what it's worth.

[Awol]

 

 

...and if anyone wonders "Why is this UK story in a thread about US surveillance?", the answer is that the harassment was carried out at the behest of the US.  That is what our government has sunk to, arse-kissing foreign autocrats in return for trivial favours and a bit of "intelligence".  Maybe a weekend in Disneyland and a GM burger as a treat.  This is a subversion of the law for political purpose, and Cameron and May should be hauled up in front of the courts to answer for it.

 

Hopefully this is one of those cases that will snowball and lead to lots of embarrassing questions to answer.

 

I would definitely think that May has got her hands dirty with this one. IMO this is defnitely a resignation/sacking affair, if May's involvement can be ascertained ....

 

This decision will have been taken waaaaay above that trout's head.  How the f*** are the UK, US and other going to lecture old Vlad on his treatment of journalists when we are behaving (or have become) like some tinpot dictatorship? It's not just Anglo countries either. France, Austria, Spain, Germany (lets just say for ease, the EU) are also up to their nuts in this, as evidenced by the attempts to ban flights that might carry Snowden through their airspace.

 

We are seeing now the harvest of the anti-terror laws passed under Blair that we were assured would only be used to target the "bad people". Well here's the proof. If you are journalist, you sleep with a journalist or maybe just sit and have and brew with a journalist, you are now fair game to be treated as an enemy of the state.

 

This isn't about Labour or the Tories who are equally culpable as mouth pieces for the powerful, this about "them" and where you as a citizen sit in the hierarchy of a corporate state.  Mussolini would have been proud.

[snowychap]

We are seeing now the harvest of the anti-terror laws passed under Blair that we were assured would only be used to target the "bad people".

And this is the kind of thing that people ought to bear in mind when they are keen to give the government the benefit of the doubt on internet blocking proposals or some of the stuff in the new antisocial behaviour bill (like the Public Spaces Protection Orders or the increased police dispersal powers).

[maqroll]

 

This decision will have been taken waaaaay above that trout's head.  How the f*** are the UK, US and other going to lecture old Vlad on his treatment of journalists when we are behaving (or have become) like some tinpot dictatorship? It's not just Anglo countries either. France, Austria, Spain, Germany (lets just say for ease, the EU) are also up to their nuts in this, as evidenced by the attempts to ban flights that might carry Snowden through their airspace.

 

We are seeing now the harvest of the anti-terror laws passed under Blair that we were assured would only be used to target the "bad people". Well here's the proof. If you are journalist, you sleep with a journalist or maybe just sit and have and brew with a journalist, you are now fair game to be treated as an enemy of the state.

 

This isn't about Labour or the Tories who are equally culpable as mouth pieces for the powerful, this about "them" and where you as a citizen sit in the hierarchy of a corporate state.  Mussolini would have been proud.

 

Well said

Edited August 19, 2013 by maqroll

[maqroll]

I wouldn't be surprised if Glenn Greenwald ends up dead at the rate this is going. He's issued a direct challenge to The U.K. now, and I reckon they will not be particularly amused by it.

[CVByrne]

This is what happens when you are a war mongering country like the US, UK or Russia. Say what you want about Germanys past but since their total defeat in WW2 they have held the moral high ground over the victors. 

 

I unquestionably view and respect German government more than I do any of the other 3. 

[Tegis]

UK Govt. Destroyed Journalists’ Hard Drives In Failed Attempt To Stop NSA Story

The plot thickens. British authorities reportedly destroyed hard drives in an attempt to stop the Guardian from disseminating stories about classified mass-surveillance projects. Guardian Editor Alan Rusbridger details how security experts from British intelligence agency, GCHQ, told him that the Guardian would have to either hand over their information or have their hard drives destroyed.

The revelation is especially damaging to British authorities after yesterday’s international incident, where they detained David Miranda, the partner of Guardian journalist Glenn Greenwald, in London’s Heathrow airport and confiscated his laptop and camera.

The story has an aura of dark humor, as the agents apparently didn’t understand that the Guardian could report on places outside of London and that a destroyed hard drive won’t stop information from getting out.

LOL

Stupid is a scary trait