Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Detaining my partner: a failed attempt at intimidation

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 463 posts

Re: Detaining my partner: a failed attempt at intimidation

#31

Post by noonespecial »

mythz wrote: post #25
danenania wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, we aren't powerless. That's why these people are so relentless in their intimidation and pursuit of more power. If they thought we were powerless, they wouldn't bother. They are afraid, and they should be. The tide can turn quickly.

I don't think the ability to dispense fear and intimidation around the world at will is a show of fear. Our biggest hope is this becomes a national issue for the next election so we at least have the opportunity to elect the leader who respects our constitutional rights the most.

And which one will that be? The "democrat" or the "republican"?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTJ0qYR6YFo

Re: Detaining my partner: a failed attempt at intimidation

#32

Post by nthj »

noonespecial wrote: post #31
mythz wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the ability to dispense fear and intimidation around the world at will is a show of fear. Our biggest hope is this becomes a national issue for the next election so we at least have the opportunity to elect the leader who respects our constitutional rights the most.

And which one will that be? The "democrat" or the "republican"? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTJ0qYR6YFo

The primaries.

Re: Detaining my partner: a failed attempt at intimidation

#34

Post by rolux »

grey-area wrote: post #22

The salient quote from Greenwald's article on this: They completely abused their own terrorism law for reasons having nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism: a potent reminder of how often governments lie when they claim that they need powers to stop "the terrorists", and how dangerous it is to vest unchecked power with political officials in its name. [1] This is a great example of why we should treat terrorism lik…

> they were used on a relative of someone nothing to do with terrorism purely for the purpose of intimidation

Intimidation is the purpose of anti-terrorism legislation. This is not an abuse of some exceptional powers -- it's their most common use.

Re: Detaining my partner: a failed attempt at intimidation

#35

Post by ams6110 »

rolux wrote: post #18
throwaway_yy2Di wrote: post #12

Greenwald just posted his own account: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/18/david-m... At 6:30 am this morning my time - 5:30 am on the East Coast of the US - I received a telephone call from someone who identified himself as a "security official at Heathrow airport." He told me that my partner, David Miranda, had been "detained" at the London airport "under Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act of 2000." D…

Quote: "Even the Mafia had ethical rules against targeting the family members of people they feel threatened by."

Come again? I thought threatening one's family was #1 in the mafia playbook.

Re: Detaining my partner: a failed attempt at intimidation

#36

Post by LoganCale »

akg_67 wrote: post #33

I guess Greenwald, his family and friends are now on terrorist watch list. I wonder how soon Guardian will be dubbed Terrorist Organization. More and more, it appears western governments are following the policy of if you criticize us, you are terrorist.

And as those governments do that, they lose all remaining legitimacy.

Re: Detaining my partner: a failed attempt at intimidation

#37

Post by omonra »

rorrr2 wrote: post #29
omonra wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't be shy - call it what it is - genocide.

faschism = An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. Which fits the situation. Your genocide reference, an attempt to trivialize the above statement, doesn't even make sense.

You have to accept that not everything happening in the world you dislike qualifies for fascism, genocide or equivalence to Hitler.

Overusing these labels dilutes their 'brand', and then you don't have appropriate adjectives for real cases of fascism or genocide.

Re: Detaining my partner: a failed attempt at intimidation

#39

Post by Karunamon »

rhizome wrote: post #10
ferdo wrote: post #9

> Miranda was then released without charge, but officials confiscated electronics equipment including his mobile phone, laptop, camera, memory sticks, DVDs and games consoles. Thievery and intimidation are good indicators of who and what we're dealing with.

As IRC has taught us for two decades, there are probably few things more antagonistic than a butthurt pirate.

What are you on about?

Re: Detaining my partner: a failed attempt at intimidation

#40

Post by mythz »

noonespecial wrote: post #31
mythz wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the ability to dispense fear and intimidation around the world at will is a show of fear. Our biggest hope is this becomes a national issue for the next election so we at least have the opportunity to elect the leader who respects our constitutional rights the most.

And which one will that be? The "democrat" or the "republican"? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTJ0qYR6YFo

Not clear yet, if its a national issue each side can make their position known and back it up with planned reforms.

The one thing that is clear is that we shouldn't expect change under an Obama administration.

Post reply on HN