If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Reuters)   Cameron was behind the UK's detention of Miranda. Was the codename for this "Operation Save Beuller"?   (reuters.com) divider line 79
    More: Followup, child custody, GCHQ, Alan Rusbridger, press freedom, Home Secretary, Glenn Greenwald  
•       •       •

2860 clicks; posted to Main » on 21 Aug 2013 at 9:45 AM (48 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



79 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-08-21 08:11:35 AM
I guess it's pretty serious
 
2013-08-21 08:14:24 AM
He wasn't dying. He just couldn't think of anything better to do.
 
2013-08-21 08:26:26 AM
image.spreadshirt.com
 
2013-08-21 08:32:19 AM
I've just skimmed the article, but I think the claim wrt Cameron relates to the destruction of the Guardian hard drives some time ago - not Miranda's detention.
 
2013-08-21 08:35:47 AM
Having said that, which is just my reading of the article, I think it has already been reported that downing street had advance notice of the possibility of detaining miranda
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-08-21 08:36:21 AM

21-7-b: I've just skimmed the article, but I think the claim wrt Cameron relates to the destruction of the Guardian hard drives some time ago - not Miranda's detention.


That's what it looks like to me.  I wouldn't be surprised if he ordered the Miranda thing too, but the headline is a bit misleading.
 
2013-08-21 08:39:35 AM
1.bp.blogspot.com

Shocked!
 
2013-08-21 08:47:34 AM

21-7-b: Having said that, which is just my reading of the article, I think it has already been reported that downing street had advance notice of the possibility of detaining miranda


right but I believe this is more of "gave the order" and not "were aware they could pick him up"
 
2013-08-21 08:56:25 AM
Well that is the way of the master.
 
2013-08-21 09:07:58 AM

somedude210: 21-7-b: Having said that, which is just my reading of the article, I think it has already been reported that downing street had advance notice of the possibility of detaining miranda

right but I believe this is more of "gave the order" and not "were aware they could pick him up"


Was downing street informed that the officials could pick miranda up or that they intended to pick him up?

I don't know.

Was miranda placed on a watch-list beforehand, and if so, by whom?

Again, I don't know, but I wouldn't be surprised if there was a team coordinating an ongoing casefile seeking to address (what is) a breach of security - in fact I'd very strongly, to the point of certainty, assume there is more than one such team globally
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-08-21 09:11:01 AM

21-7-b: Again, I don't know, but I wouldn't be surprised if there was a team coordinating an ongoing casefile seeking to address (what is) a breach of security - in fact I'd very strongly, to the point of certainty, assume there is more than one such team globally


Of course there is.  I don't know who is responsible, but espionage and leaks are nothing new.  There is certainly some procedure for coordinating a response between countries.
 
2013-08-21 09:23:50 AM
When Miranda was in UK's land....let my Miranda goooooo
 
2013-08-21 09:25:44 AM
Was he ever read his rights?
 
2013-08-21 09:36:34 AM

21-7-b: I've just skimmed the article, but I think the claim wrt Cameron relates to the destruction of the Guardian hard drives some time ago - not Miranda's detention.


The Guardian destroyed the hard drives themselves. Straight from the horses mouth.
 
2013-08-21 09:36:47 AM
Only David Cameron could think that seizing a hard drive at the Guardian would stop the leaking, so this makes perfect sense.
 
2013-08-21 09:41:38 AM
Idiotically overconfident strongarm gesture that backfired making him look like a total ass?

This has Cameron written all over it.
 
2013-08-21 09:50:27 AM
i.imgur.com
 
2013-08-21 09:50:37 AM
You can't stop the signal!
 
2013-08-21 09:51:42 AM

basemetal: [image.spreadshirt.com image 280x280]


Welp, that's all I was looking for.
 
2013-08-21 09:53:21 AM
Be very afraid.
 
2013-08-21 09:53:26 AM

xanadian: Was he ever read his rights?


There are no Miranda rights in the UK.  That guy should really change his name.
 
2013-08-21 09:56:51 AM

Diogenes: xanadian: Was he ever read his rights?

There are no Miranda rights in the UK.  That guy should really change his name.


Well for fairly obvious reasons they aren't called Miranda rights but there's a similar legal construct.


"You do not have to say anything, but it may harm your defence if you do not mention, when questioned, something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence. "
 
2013-08-21 09:57:09 AM
To me the most telling and frightening bit is the govt official saying to the Guardian "you've had your fun. Now we want our stuff back."

That's a pretty breathtaking mentality. Completely dismisses the fifth estate- and public awareness- as mere childishness. You've had your fun, now let the handful of grown-ups who run things get back to work.

I know. Hardly a new mindset. But the brazenness of it is, I think; to actually say that... to the editor of a major newspaper... and just expect it to work.
 
2013-08-21 09:58:00 AM
Can't wait to here "I'm not a crook!" with a brit accent.

www.voraciousrationalist.com
 
2013-08-21 10:00:04 AM

Tigger: Well for fairly obvious reasons they aren't called Miranda rights but there's a similar legal construct.


I think...think...you may have missed the joke.
 
2013-08-21 10:03:06 AM

brimed03: To me the most telling and frightening bit is the govt official saying to the Guardian "you've had your fun. Now we want our stuff back."

That's a pretty breathtaking mentality. Completely dismisses the fifth estate- and public awareness- as mere childishness. You've had your fun, now let the handful of grown-ups who run things get back to work.

I know. Hardly a new mindset. But the brazenness of it is, I think; to actually say that... to the editor of a major newspaper... and just expect it to work.


The press is the fourth estate.  The fifth estate is what lets you avoid having to explain the bad things you did in court.
 
2013-08-21 10:05:25 AM

Tigger: Diogenes: xanadian: Was he ever read his rights?

There are no Miranda rights in the UK.  That guy should really change his name.

Well for fairly obvious reasons they aren't called Miranda rights but there's a similar legal construct.


"You do not have to say anything, but it may harm your defence if you do not mention, when questioned, something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence. "


That seems like a pretty big difference.
 
d23 [TotalFark]
2013-08-21 10:06:43 AM
I see the way things are in their country...
 
2013-08-21 10:08:20 AM
p3.no

It's the High Jump for Sir Harry Pierce this time, The Cousins won't stand for it!
 
2013-08-21 10:09:19 AM

Sticky Hands: Tigger: Diogenes: xanadian: Was he ever read his rights?

There are no Miranda rights in the UK.  That guy should really change his name.

Well for fairly obvious reasons they aren't called Miranda rights but there's a similar legal construct.


"You do not have to say anything, but it may harm your defence if you do not mention, when questioned, something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence. "

That seems like a pretty big difference.


"it may" is a weasle word that has no legal weight. The jury decides what does and doesn't harm your defence.
 
2013-08-21 10:11:20 AM
The sources named the official as Heywood, who is Cameron's most senior policy adviser. "The prime minister asked the Cabinet Secretary to deal with this matter, that's true," one source told Reuters.

I wonder what Gene Masseth has to say about all of this.
 
2013-08-21 10:12:34 AM

OtherLittleGuy: You can't stop the signal!


Hurray!! Leaving satisfied.
 
2013-08-21 10:15:19 AM

Diogenes: Tigger: Well for fairly obvious reasons they aren't called Miranda rights but there's a similar legal construct.

I think...think...you may have missed the joke.


It's early and I'm attuned to "ZOMG THERE ARE NO RIGHTS IN EUROPE" or some such shiat.

apologies
 
2013-08-21 10:15:59 AM

Tigger: Well for fairly obvious reasons they aren't called Miranda rights but there's a similar legal construct.


"You do not have to say anything, but it may harm your defence if you do not mention, when questioned, something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence. "


This doesn't apply for the super special "police can hold you for nine hours without arresting you and without giving you a lawyer if they claim it's relevant to a terrierist investigation" detention.
 
2013-08-21 10:16:49 AM

Tigger: Diogenes: xanadian: Was he ever read his rights?

There are no Miranda rights in the UK.  That guy should really change his name.

Well for fairly obvious reasons they aren't called Miranda rights but there's a similar legal construct.


"You do not have to say anything, but it may harm your defence if you do not mention, when questioned, something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence. "


I don't believe the authorities have to say this during a Schedule seven detention. In fact, not answering questions fully could result in prosecution. This is the most horrifying piece of power that I think a democratized and free society should let its police have.
 
2013-08-21 10:17:49 AM

Tigger


"You do not have to say anything, but it may harm your defence if you do not mention, when questioned, something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence. "


I learned that by watching 'Hot Fuzz'. True story.
 
2013-08-21 10:21:10 AM
Dammit, subby, it's BUELLER.
 
2013-08-21 10:22:04 AM
Can't stop terrorists, so they had to show how tough they are and beat up journalists.
When they aren't shooting journalists from helicopters, then getting pissed for being called on it.
Real tough guys, real tough... on truth tellers.

Can't stop a real terrorist, though.

Farktwits.
 
2013-08-21 10:22:38 AM
Beuller?
islestalk.com
 
2013-08-21 10:26:23 AM

xanadian: Was he ever read his rights?



He would probably of been cautioned.    However due to the location being technically international waters it wouldn't of been the usual caution that is used in the UK and serves roughly the same function as Miranda; to inform a person under arrest what their rights are.

If you're in the UK and plod says this to you:

" I am arresting you [for whatever] you do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence "

Your first, last and only statement is:  I would like to speak to a solicitor.  As you've just been officially nicked.
 
2013-08-21 10:26:30 AM
So was the Guardian forced to destroy the hard drives or did they make the decision on their own ? It's now been reported as both and I'm confused.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-08-21 10:28:39 AM

shastacola: So was the Guardian forced to destroy the hard drives or did they make the decision on their own ? It's now been reported as both and I'm confused.


MI5 people told them it had to be done so they did it.  Probably cheaper than paying for a Solicitor.
 
2013-08-21 10:28:49 AM
Cameron,

www.gnorb.net
 
2013-08-21 10:31:43 AM

vudukungfu: Can't stop a real terrorist, though.


Real terrorists use nail bombs stuffed in to bins, 4t wagons loaded with fertilizer and diesel and similar weapons.   It's actually quite hard to stop someone tossing a pipe stuffed with explosives and ball bearings in to a bin and quietly walking away.

Which is why on train stations and towns/cities you won't find any actual bins; those you do find will usually be isolated from the shops and such that are nearby.

It's more about trying to stop people entering the country illegally and most if not all terrorists entering a country have valid travel documents.
 
2013-08-21 10:38:35 AM

Cybernetic: Dammit, subby, it's BUELLER.


Though, technically, it should really be Operation Save Ferris.
 
2013-08-21 10:38:46 AM

basemetal: [image.spreadshirt.com image 280x280]


They all just stopped doing everything.
 
2013-08-21 10:38:55 AM
img822.imageshack.us
 
d23 [TotalFark]
2013-08-21 10:41:55 AM
s11.postimg.org
 
2013-08-21 10:42:49 AM
This is in no way shameful or disgusting.
 
2013-08-21 10:43:07 AM
Pray for Oberon
 
2013-08-21 10:44:40 AM
It's just because he thought Miranda was going to cause death. Whose death?

1.bp.blogspot.com

EVERYBODY'S!
 
2013-08-21 10:47:48 AM

d23: [s11.postimg.org image 640x399]


He didn't lie.  I'm pretty sure the wholesale destruction of the NHS and a mad dash to sell privatisation to the public doesn't count as "cut".   It's more "vicious stabbing to death and pissing on the corpse".   I honestly don't think there is a group of the general public that cnut hasn't managed to piss off to some degree.

Which whilst not the expected outcome is and of itself actually quite impressive I don't think even nuLabour managed it in all those years.

/Maggie would be proud of him.
 
2013-08-21 10:51:25 AM

shastacola: So was the Guardian forced to destroy the hard drives or did they make the decision on their own ? It's now been reported as both and I'm confused.


The head of the Guardian was on NPR last night, and basically said destroying the hard drives was a compromise to avoid a legal fight. He acknowledged that, since The Guardian does work in many different countries, this was a completely ineffective action, but seemed to satisfy the higher ups.
 
2013-08-21 10:51:33 AM
I wanted to say "The Queen made me do it" but my staff pointed out that pub crawling gay bars wasn't the political image an evil Tory PM could profit from right now.


www.rawstory.com
 
d23 [TotalFark]
2013-08-21 10:53:28 AM

I Havent Killed Anybody Since 1984: He acknowledged that, since The Guardian does work in many different countries, this was a completely ineffective action, but seemed to satisfy the higher ups.


Once again, my belief that the people running every organization across the globe (governmental, corporate, whatever) are idiots.
 
d23 [TotalFark]
2013-08-21 10:54:26 AM

d23: I Havent Killed Anybody Since 1984: He acknowledged that, since The Guardian does work in many different countries, this was a completely ineffective action, but seemed to satisfy the higher ups.

Once again, my belief that the people running every organization across the globe (governmental, corporate, whatever) are idiots.


and so am I apparently as I can't complete a thought.
 
2013-08-21 10:59:20 AM

Vaneshi: d23: [s11.postimg.org image 640x399]

He didn't lie.  I'm pretty sure the wholesale destruction of the NHS and a mad dash to sell privatisation to the public doesn't count as "cut".   It's more "vicious stabbing to death and pissing on the corpse".   I honestly don't think there is a group of the general public that cnut hasn't managed to piss off to some degree.

Which whilst not the expected outcome is and of itself actually quite impressive I don't think even nuLabour managed it in all those years.

/Maggie would be proud of him.


He spent a lot of time with the American right. He seems determined to emulate every single bad policy idea they ever had.

He should probably be burnt alive.
 
2013-08-21 11:01:32 AM

Tigger: He spent a lot of time with the American right. He seems determined to emulate every single bad policy idea they ever had.

He should probably be burnt alive.


The American right (and half of his own party) want to burn him alive for allowing the homogays to get married.
 
2013-08-21 11:05:25 AM

Copper Spork: Tigger: He spent a lot of time with the American right. He seems determined to emulate every single bad policy idea they ever had.

He should probably be burnt alive.

The American right (and half of his own party) want to burn him alive for allowing the homogays to get married.


I will give the right honorable shiatcock for austerity and theft credit for doing the right thing on this. Though it's important to note that the UK right doesn't have to get into bed with batshiat crazy religious conservatives because only 1-2% of the British population attend religious services. This means he can easily make concessions in this area while continuing to facefark the country to the point where even the IMF says he's going to far.
 
2013-08-21 11:07:34 AM
They didn't even tell him he had the right to remain silent?
 
2013-08-21 11:13:35 AM

farkingatwork: They didn't even tell him he had the right to remain silent?


It's the UK, they don't have that right.  Once apprehended by the police, an arrestee is legally compelled to perform a dramatic reenactment of King Lear.
 
2013-08-21 11:27:41 AM

vpb: 21-7-b: Again, I don't know, but I wouldn't be surprised if there was a team coordinating an ongoing casefile seeking to address (what is) a breach of security - in fact I'd very strongly, to the point of certainty, assume there is more than one such team globally

Of course there is.  I don't know who is responsible, but espionage and leaks are nothing new.  There is certainly some procedure for coordinating a response between countries.




I remember when such talk was honest to goodness, straight up tinfoil hat territory.
 
2013-08-21 11:34:07 AM

farkingatwork: They didn't even tell him he had the right to remain silent?


You have the right to remain silent but anything you later rely on in court may be used against you.  Basically if you don't tell plod anything either way and start doing a song & dance in front of the beak... they'll use the fact you didn't tell them anything against you (i.e. Perverting the course of justice, interfering with a police officer executing his legal duty, wasting police time, etc.).

Which is why, just like in America, irrespective of innocence or guilt the first, last and only words out of your mouth should be a request for legal counsel (i.e. I want to see the duty solicitor) and then you shut the hell up until it arrives.  Once you do that plod will put you in a cell and wait until that person shows up.
 
2013-08-21 11:36:28 AM

farkingatwork: They didn't even tell him he had the right to remain silent?


Forgot to mention.  That this, if the reporting is correct took place in what is technically neutral territory (international waters,  etc.) so he only had whatever rights international treaties allow for; which doesn't include silence or legal counsel.
 
2013-08-21 11:47:51 AM

shastacola: So was the Guardian forced to destroy the hard drives or did they make the decision on their own ? It's now been reported as both and I'm confused.


They were given this choice: Destroy them with government goons watching, or hand them over. They destroyed them.
 
2013-08-21 11:49:53 AM

farkingatwork: They didn't even tell him he had the right to remain silent?


On a schedule seven detention, he doesn't. he doesn't have the right to a lawyer, and he can be charged if he doesn't answer questions or provide the passwords to all electronic media he owns. Guaranteed in the nine hours MI5 accessed every single piece of information he has access to, including the newspaper's, as he likely has access to Guardian servers.

Britain really is becoming a police state.
 
2013-08-21 11:49:55 AM

Vaneshi: xanadian: Was he ever read his rights?


He would probably of been cautioned.    However due to the location being technically international waters it wouldn't of been the usual caution that is used in the UK and serves roughly the same function as Miranda; to inform a person under arrest what their rights are.

If you're in the UK and plod says this to you:

" I am arresting you [for whatever] you do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence "

Your first, last and only statement is:  I would like to speak to a solicitor.  As you've just been officially nicked.


Your first, last and only statement should be "You'll never take me alive copper". This should, of course, be said in a Cockney accent, regardless of where you are.
 
2013-08-21 12:16:42 PM
For me, the targeting of Miranda as a way to send a message is the most disturbing part of this whole Snowden affair. Targeting the family members of journalists is the kind of thing that I'd always been told was what Soviet-style totalitarian police states did. I can see a case for the NSA surveillance--not that I buy the argument, but when we reach the point of threatening the family members of the person reporting on the surveillance, there is no justification that can be made.
 
2013-08-21 12:33:28 PM

I'm no expert but...: Vaneshi: xanadian: Was he ever read his rights?


He would probably of been cautioned.    However due to the location being technically international waters it wouldn't of been the usual caution that is used in the UK and serves roughly the same function as Miranda; to inform a person under arrest what their rights are.

If you're in the UK and plod says this to you:

" I am arresting you [for whatever] you do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence "

Your first, last and only statement is:  I would like to speak to a solicitor.  As you've just been officially nicked.

Your first, last and only statement should be "You'll never take me alive copper". This should, of course, be said in a Cockney accent, regardless of where you are.


Pew pew! Pew!
 
2013-08-21 01:02:54 PM

toraque: farkingatwork: They didn't even tell him he had the right to remain silent?

It's the UK, they don't have that right.  Once apprehended by the police, an arrestee is legally compelled to perform a dramatic reenactment of King Lear.


I was being sarcastic, as his name is Miranda.

/whoosh
 
2013-08-21 01:03:55 PM
Snowdon is not guilty of espionage. Espionage is when you spy for a hostile power or agency. It's like insider trading--the hostile power and agency benefits from inside information.

The pages of the Guardian are insufficiently private to constitute grounds for a charge of espionage.

Snowdon is a whistle-blower. There is no evidence of animus against his employers--ultimately, you.

Spies don't give the general public government information that ostensibly belongs to them any way. They sell it.

Snowdon is not a spy. He is a benefactor of the American people and the rest of us, even if his information is somewhat stale to anybody remotely intelligent or a "conspiracy theorist".

In this case, conspiracy theorist must be used in the original sense of somebody who believes what the leakers and whistle-blowers are telling us rather than the cover stories of the Government agencies implicated in wrong-doing. The term was invented to discredit people who didn't buy into the Warren Commission Report. In other words, nearly everybody except hardcore right-wing Republican stooges.

There are "conspiracy theorists" in both senses of the word, but it is not always easy to distinguish between them. Nonetheless, some "conspiracy theories" are in the highly probable category, while others are so dumb they might be cover stories concocted by Government agencies deep in the muddy-wuddy.
 
2013-08-21 01:29:23 PM

farkingatwork: toraque: farkingatwork: They didn't even tell him he had the right to remain silent?

It's the UK, they don't have that right.  Once apprehended by the police, an arrestee is legally compelled to perform a dramatic reenactment of King Lear.

I was being sarcastic, as his name is Miranda.

/whoosh


Yes. Your joke had already been made four or five times by that point.  I was trying to salvage it with something even dumber.
 
2013-08-21 01:45:18 PM

Vaneshi: You have the right to remain silent but anything you later rely on in court may be used against you.


If we are interested in this particular case, under the extraordinary powers misused against him he had no right to remain silent, access to an attorney, or access to officials from his nation's consulate.

He was not even given access to a translator so he could speak in his native Portuguese and be sure that he even understood the questions properly.
 
2013-08-21 01:48:44 PM

toraque: farkingatwork: They didn't even tell him he had the right to remain silent?

It's the UK, they don't have that right.  Once apprehended by the police, an arrestee is legally compelled to perform a dramatic reenactment of King Lear.


I thought it was the H.M.S. Pinafore.
 
2013-08-21 02:06:48 PM

BullBearMS: Vaneshi: You have the right to remain silent but anything you later rely on in court may be used against you.

If we are interested in this particular case, under the extraordinary powers misused against him he had no right to remain silent, access to an attorney, or access to officials from his nation's consulate.

He was not even given access to a translator so he could speak in his native Portuguese and be sure that he even understood the questions properly.


Well, sure. Because terrorism.
 
2013-08-21 02:19:32 PM

Evil High Priest: BullBearMS: Vaneshi: You have the right to remain silent but anything you later rely on in court may be used against you.

If we are interested in this particular case, under the extraordinary powers misused against him he had no right to remain silent, access to an attorney, or access to officials from his nation's consulate.

He was not even given access to a translator so he could speak in his native Portuguese and be sure that he even understood the questions properly.

Well, sure. Because terrorism.


Because journalism, apparently.

Just as in the US, where the author of the Patriot Act has stepped forward to say that it is a complete lie when Obama claims the law enables what has been done with it, the guy behind Britain's Terror Act has stepped forward to cry bullshiat.

The Metropolitan police had no legal basis to detain David Miranda under the Terrorism Act 2000, Tony Blair's former lord chancellor has claimed.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton, who helped introduce the bill in the House of Lords, said that the act makes clear that police can only detain someone to assess whether they are involved in the commission, preparation or instigation of terrorism.

Falconer told the Guardian: "I am very clear that this does not apply, either on its terms or in its spirit, to Mr Miranda."
 
2013-08-21 03:06:48 PM

Lochsteppe: brimed03:  Completely dismisses the fifth estate-


The press is the fourth estate.  The fifth estate is what lets you avoid having to explain the bad things you did in court.


Damnit.  Mixing up my fourth estates and fifth columns.  Clearly I'd suck at Civ5.
 
2013-08-21 05:38:56 PM

BullBearMS: Vaneshi: You have the right to remain silent but anything you later rely on in court may be used against you.

If we are interested in this particular case, under the extraordinary powers misused against him he had no right to remain silent, access to an attorney, or access to officials from his nation's consulate.



I actually put that in several times already in to this thread.  He was in international territory as well.
 
2013-08-21 09:31:27 PM

Lochsteppe: The fifth estate is what lets you avoid having to explain the bad things you did in court.


No that's the Fifth Amendment.

The Fifth Estate is the blogosphere/independent internet journalists, and a movie about Julian Assange.
 
Displayed 79 of 79 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report