Slashdot Mirror

This story links to the BBC which also appears to be very uncritical of the UK government press freedom violations these days. A much better news source would be the new real investigative reporting at The Intercept:

On the UK’s Equating of Journalism With Terrorism

UK Court: David Miranda Detention Legal Under Terrorism Law

Actually, both of those articles claim the UK court ruled that the journalistic activities David Miranda was indirectly involved with "equate" to terrorism. “I’m of course not happy that a court has formally said that I was a legitimate terrorism suspect..." quotes one of those two articles.

The UK court did not rule that way if you read the judgment. In fact, it explicitly states it did not make such a distinction. The court ruled that the law in question doesn't say that the government can detain people it suspects of being terrorists, it actually says the government can detain people who have any connection with such activity to determine if they are or are not involved. The court explicitly ruled that the law was not constructed to detain people who provide "probable cause" in the criminal sense, because the detainment is not specifically targeted at criminals or even suspected criminals directly. Its designed to provide the government with a tool to investigate people who might be, and for whom there doesn't necessarily exist criminally sufficient probable cause for search.

The UK court also ruled that while the statute refers to "terrorist activity" it actually explicitly defines the term for the purposes of the law, irrespective of what people consider "terrorist activity" to be, and the court was required to follow that definition. For the purposes of that statute only, "terrorist activity" is any activity that:

“(1) In this Act ‘terrorism’ means the use or threat of action where— (a) the action falls within subsection (2), (b) the use or threat is designed to influence the government or an international governmental organisation or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and (c) the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, racial or ideological cause. (2) Action falls within this subsection if it— (a) involves serious violence against a person, (b) involves serious damage to property, (c) endangers a person’s life, other than that of the person committing the action, (d) creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public, or (e) is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.”

Basically, its any act or threat of an act intended to influence a government or governments, involves serious property damage or mortal danger of some specific serious nature, and is intended to advance a political agenda. Notice the law doesn't specifically say you have to threaten to kill someone or kill someone. It actually says you have to act or threaten to act in such a way that death or damage is a consequence of that act. The court itself noted that the law appears extremely broad in its definition, but it wasn't being asked to rule on whether the law was overbroad.

The court ultimately ruled that the government had a legitimate reason to believe that David Miranda was involved with people who were at the time acting or threatening to act in a manner which was designed to influence a government and forward a political agenda, and those acts had the potential to cause death or serious property damage. All those appear true on their face, and thus the law states the detainment was legal. The law doesn't say David Miranda is a terrorist or was involved with terrorist

Could this news be related to the latest Snowden leak showing anyone just visiting the Pirate Bay website will have their IP address recorded in real time, and are open game for spy agencies to hack their computers... I wonder...

The government entry in the “Manhunting Timeline” adds Iceland to the list of Western nations that were pressured, and suggests that the push to prosecute Assange is part of a broader campaign. The effort, it explains, “exemplifies the start of an international effort to focus the legal element of national power upon non-state actor Assange, and the human network that supports WikiLeaks.” The entry does not specify how broadly the government defines that “human network,” which could potentially include thousands of volunteers, donors and journalists, as well as people who simply spoke out in defense of WikiLeaks.

No surprise there.

When NSA officials are asked in the document if WikiLeaks or Pirate Bay could be designated as “malicious foreign actors,”

Especially when it involves foreigners.

No longer true, and American just visiting investigative reporting websites means you will be spied on these days (check out the real time tracking pictures of website visitors by the GHCQ). No wonder we plunged to 46th place on press freedoms...

This story links to the BBC which also appears to be very uncritical of the UK government press freedom violations these days. A much better news source would be the new real investigative reporting at The Intercept:

On the UK’s Equating of Journalism With Terrorism

UK Court: David Miranda Detention Legal Under Terrorism Law

Especially when it involves foreigners.

No longer true, and American just visiting investigative reporting websites means you will be spied on these days (check out the real time tracking pictures of website visitors by the GHCQ). No wonder we plunged to 46th place on press freedoms...

This story links to the BBC which also appears to be very uncritical of the UK government press freedom violations these days. A much better news source would be the new real investigative reporting at The Intercept:

On the UK’s Equating of Journalism With Terrorism

UK Court: David Miranda Detention Legal Under Terrorism Law

Especially when it involves foreigners.

No longer true, and American just visiting investigative reporting websites means you will be spied on these days (check out the real time tracking pictures of website visitors by the GHCQ). No wonder we plunged to 46th place on press freedoms...

This story links to the BBC which also appears to be very uncritical of the UK government press freedom violations these days. A much better news source would be the new real investigative reporting at The Intercept:

On the UK’s Equating of Journalism With Terrorism

UK Court: David Miranda Detention Legal Under Terrorism Law

It's all about the metadata:

The NSA’s Secret Role in the U.S. Assassination Program