Does anyone have the original article link? There are several indications in the comments that it was changed by an HN editor.
Detaining my partner: a failed attempt at intimidation
141–150 of 463 posts
Re: Detaining my partner: a failed attempt at intimidation
#142Earlier quoted context omitted.
They were able to do two things: 1) Spend 9 hours pressing the guy in order to learn any details they are interested in. He was probably not prepared enough for that, most of people aren't. Apparently, in such an occasion you don't even have the "right to remain silent!" That is, Mr. David Miranda had no Miranda rights there. I guess they had a good laugh. 2) Get anything from the electronic devices. It's reasonable…
> That is, Mr. David Miranda had no Miranda rights there. I wasn't aware that Brazilian citizens detained in the UK had rights granted by the US.
Of course they never had. The goal was to point that it's not like in the movies. He can't demand the lawyer, he can't even stay silent. A lot of things to slip the tongue during the nine hours of interrogation. Being detained under terrorist laws, it must have occurred to him that they can even throw him in Guantanamo and claim legality. Intimidation, you bet!
Re: Detaining my partner: a failed attempt at intimidation
#143Earlier quoted context omitted.
Clerical for an hour, /maybe/. Not clerical for nine hours, that's planning.
You have an unwarranted amount of faith in bureaucratic competency.
Adam Curtis just 10 days ago published a good piece on bureaucratic competence within the UK intelligence community:
Re: Detaining my partner: a failed attempt at intimidation
#144Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is a tactical mistake because stuff like this will tip the scales into the direction of the general public caring about it without giving much of anything in return. It's mostly downside unless Greenwald & co did something dumb, and so far they don't strike me as dumb.
Really? If you talk with any of your non-tech friends about this topic, does a single one of them care? My money is on no. And in the unlikely case the answer is nonzero, the proffered solution is always to vote for "the other guy". It's naiveté at the highest level to think that any meaningful proportion of the electorate cares, and that a single thing will change. If anything, the State now has tacit permission to…
Snowden has been on the front page of the Huffington Post for months - just like this particular story is at just this moment. This submission was posted from The Guardian. Masses of people read these publications.
Astrophysicists, mathematicians, and scientists, for the most part, don't read Hacker News. But they do read the Huffington Post. Some of them even are so clever they made these microwaveable-beef taquitos that always come out crunchy that I'm just about to snack on. They don't care about issues that directly affect their freedoms and liberty? The masses are unwashed?
Re: Detaining my partner: a failed attempt at intimidation
#145Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't be shy - call it what it is - genocide.
People did not catch that joke. I think the issue was that you didn't go far enough. The internet has people who would say something like that and mean it. It wasn't absurd enough to be dismissed.
Thank you :)
I really don't know anything beyond genocide I could muster (we don't have a word for holocaust of entire humanity, do we?)
Re: Detaining my partner: a failed attempt at intimidation
#146Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
The very phrase "#N in the [official] playbook" suggests the existence of a structure of governing rules.
Re: Detaining my partner: a failed attempt at intimidation
#147Earlier 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.
we are in a serious democracy crisys right now all over the world, because the politics doesnt represent us anymore.. not now.. and dont thinks things changes that much only by "voting the other guy".
if people dont really pressure for a immediate change in laws, its a illusion that by exchanging parties in power they will change their behavior..
they had made us believe there were only 3 powers in democracy.. but the truth is there are only 1 real power.. and thats the one that comes from the people.. the other 3 ones, are just institutionalized..
its in times like these, people must show this power in action in a way that make the institutions fear the people power..
they made it in the french revolution, they made it in the arab spring.. they are making it here in brazil..
in brazil now they are just listening, and doing what they are told to.. dont know what will become of all of this.. but it is working..
people must stand.. its the only way against distopic and schizophrenic governments
Re: Detaining my partner: a failed attempt at intimidation
#148Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Rather than fascism per-se, actions like holding people without charge, perusing their personal belongings and papers without due process, and threatening families or associates, are the marks of totalitarianism. It exists on both the right and left ends of the political spectrum.
> It exists on both the right and left ends of the political spectrum.
Even though those are relatively exotic forms, compared to the one that exists in the middle of the political spectrum.
Re: Detaining my partner: a failed attempt at intimidation
#149Earlier quoted context omitted.
Obviously that depends on the mafia, and the era. Hard to make broad statements about "the" mafia.
The Sicilian Mafia are pretty vile human beings, by and large. Compare and contrast "detained 9 hours", which is a big violation of civil liberties on behalf of a government, with "dissolved an innocent child in acid", which is just sickening and inhuman. http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omicidio_di_Giuseppe_Di_Matteo Not to say at all that what the government did in this case was "not so bad", just that there is worse o…
On the US's murderous sanctions against Iraq (and nuking Japan, for that matter):
Lesley Stahl: "We have heard that half a million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?"
Madeleine Albright: "We think the price is worth it." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanctions_against_Iraq#Albright...)
Dissidents (those who Greenwald praises) point out that international politics runs on the mafia model. (Keeping in mind that the mafia is small and nation-states are large. https://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/11/03-2)
Re: Detaining my partner: a failed attempt at intimidation
#150It seems to me that a good line to draw regarding overreach by the government is to determine who or what they're efforts are protecting. Terrorism laws were sold to us as necessary to protect the people. More recently, it seems that the efforts of the government has been to protect itself FROM the people.