She may want a drink with those words

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • GastonJ
    V.I.P. Member
    • Dec 2009
    • 5505

    #1

    She may want a drink with those words

    Home Secretary Theresa May has defended the police's use of anti-terror laws to hold and question David Miranda, the partner of a Guardian journalist.
    She said it "was right" if police thought that Mr Miranda was holding information useful to terrorists.
    But former Lord Chancellor Lord Falconer said it was not what the powers were meant for.
    Mr Miranda is the partner of Glenn Greenwald, who has been reporting on US and British surveillance programmes.
    He was held for nine hours at Heathrow Airport on Sunday and said his interrogators threatened he could go to prison if he did not co-operate.
    Brazilian national Mr Miranda, 28, was detained under schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000 as he travelled from Berlin to Rio de Janeiro, where he lives with Mr Greenwald.
    The law allows police to hold someone for up to nine hours for questioning about whether they have been involved with acts of terrorism.

    Mrs May told BBC Radio 4's World At One programme: "If the police believe someone has in their possession highly sensitive stolen information that could help terrorists that could lead to a loss of life, it is right the police should act.

    BBC News - David Miranda detention: Police right to act, says May

    I hope the government realise that they have only damaged themselves in this one. Mrs May seems to have the habit of attempting to put the boot in and it always lands in her own mouth.

    But Lord Falconer, who helped to bring in the anti-terror legislation, said: "It does look like the wrong powers were used. Schedule 7 of the terrorism act is to be used... to discover whether somebody is a terrorist."If you know the person is not a terrorist, that power is not open to you." He said the justification given by the home secretary "doesn't look right". And Lord Carlisle, the government's former terror watchdog, said whoever made the decision to use the law must be held to account.
    She may want a drink and some laxatives with that one by the time it's over. Worst thing is if he sues and wins it will be the taxpayer who ends up paying for the governments mistake.

    Even the Russsians are taking the p**s now:

    Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich was also critical. "The measures taken by the British authorities towards the Guardian newspaper are out of tune with the British side's statements on commitments to universal standards of human rights, including the area of mass media, protecting the rights of journalists, and private life," he said.
    How long before China pipes up and asks whether the UK is a secretive and not so free state which abuses the rights of individuals?
    My master plan is to live forever..... going to plan so far
    Despite the cost of living, it's still very popular.
    No good deed goes unpunished....

  • Meat-Head
    V.I.P. Member
    • Oct 2009
    • 32000

    #2
    *CONFUSED*

    If he had been posting on INFERIOR forums & not DK then fine, but is there a link to the nine hour long thread?

    Was it like our own 'count to a million' thread or the 3 word story?

    sigpicWas Banned For Being Certifiably Insane and Stupid

    Comment

    • bobwill
      DK Veteran
      • May 2009
      • 525

      #3
      Not the first time this act have been used when it should not have been



      Over 600 held under terror act at Labour conference





      MORE than 600 people were detained under the Terrorism Act during the Labour party conference, it was reported yesterday.
      Anti-Iraq war protesters, anti-Blairite OAPs and conference delegates were all detained by police under legislation that was designed to combat violent fanatics and bombers - even though none of them was suspected of terrorist links. None of those detained under Section 44 stop-and-search rules in the 2000 Terrorism Act was arrested and no-one was charged under the terrorism laws.
      Walter Wolfgang, an 82-year-old Jewish refugee from Nazi Germany, was thrown out of the conference hall by Labour heavies after heckling the Foreign Secretary, Jack Straw.
      When he tried to get back in, he was detained under Section 44 and questioned by police. The party later apologised.
      But the Home Office has refused to apologise for heavy-handed tactics used at this year's conference.
      A spokesman insisted: "Stop and search under Section 44 is an important tool in the on-going fight against terrorism.
      "The powers help to deter terrorist activity by creating a hostile environment for terrorists."
      He added that the justification for authorising the use of the powers was "intelligence-led and based on an assessment of the threat against the UK."

      Comment

      • Meat-Head
        V.I.P. Member
        • Oct 2009
        • 32000

        #4
        Originally posted by bobwill
        Walter Wolfgang, an 82-year-old Jewish refugee from Nazi Germany, was thrown out of the conference hall by Labour heavies after heckling the Foreign Secretary, Jack Straw.
        ."
        OK, but what did he say, something bad, or just sdvertisnf an INFERIOR forum?

        sigpicWas Banned For Being Certifiably Insane and Stupid

        Comment

        Working...