- Wed Aug 14, 2013 4:13 pm #329230
I'm really going off the guardian. I really should give them a piece of my mind.
Don't give me the Star Trek crap. it's too early in the morning.
Dave Lister, philosopher.
Dave Lister, philosopher.
This is the kind of mission creep that happens when you start handing out dubious generic powers to state bodies who are either not competent to interpret these laws or just use them to invent the charge sheet.Yvette Cooper said public support for the schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act could be undermined if there is a perception it is not being used for the right purposes. "Any suggestion that terror powers are being misused must be investigated and clarified urgently," she said. "The public support for these powers must not be endangered by a perception of misuse.
This strikes me as flimsy, to be honest. If Miranda really was carrying top-secret documents through Heathrow, why did the British authorities eventually send him on his way after a few hours? Where is the evidence to back this up? There's nothing in that article beyond speculation. As yet the British security services have said nothing about the contents of Miranda's computer equipment.Littlejohn's brain wrote:Then again there is this post
http://thedailybanter.com/2013/08/glenn ... documents/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Pretty much, yes. Isn't it most likely that all the juicy stuff is stored in the cloud anyway?youngian wrote:And as the article says its not 1972. What did they expect to find.
She needs to realise she is no longer relevant, not that she ever really has been. I met a couple from Corby on holiday who didn't particularly seem that left-wing, but their hatred for Mensch was palpable. They suggested that her rapid exit from the UK was down to a lot more than hubby's antics Stateside.youngian wrote:And as the article says its not 1972. What did they expect to find.
Bizarrely informed export on this case Louise Mensch has been gobbing off again-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p01fgm1h" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
She appears to know more than British MPs and journalists on this issue. Or a useful idiot parroting someones script.
Which makes it more strange why the BBC has invited on Newsnight and Fivelive to speak on the subject. It sounded like an audition for Fox News.canus insanus wrote: She needs to realise she is no longer relevant, not that she ever really has been.
What did Greenwald say about Assange?Littlejohn's brain wrote:There is this post on Greenwald
http://paulocanning.blogspot.co.uk/2013 ... nwald.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
It's worth noting that is the same Greenwald who made a prat of himself over Assange last year
One of the things that makes Wikileaks so worthless is that Assange does not believe in editorial control (more censorship by the man) which means checking and standing up the sources. As a consequence he develops a symbiotic relationship with security agencies and anyone else who wants to post disinformation.Real life spying, according to MI6 agents I've read, is more bland, actually boring, but we think differently because, as the brilliant film maker Adam Curtis puts it:
Journalists and spies concocted a strange dark world of treachery and deceit which bore very little relationship to what was really going on.
The "aura of secret knowledge", Curtis writes, is a con, a way of maintaining power. Which puts the journalist at the centre of the current imbroglio, Glenn Greenwald, in a whole different light, as does the fact that he seems to operate unmolested by fellow journalistic stars (more of that later).
Again Johnson’s catastrophic numbers are not[…]
Release this to raise money for the #NHS !!! ht[…]
Well, I just booed for Boris. And I feel fine. :D