Wednesday, 21 August 2013

David Miranda: Can't Happen Here!

At 6:30 am this morning my time - 5:30 am on the East Coast of the US - I received a telephone call from someone who identified himself as a "security official at Heathrow airport." He told me that my partner, David Miranda, had been "detained" at the London airport "under Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act of 2000."

David had spent the last week in Berlin, where he stayed with Laura Poitras, the US filmmaker who has worked with me extensively on the NSA stories. A Brazilian citizen, he was returning to our home in Rio de Janeiro this morning on British Airways, flying first to London and then on to Rio. When he arrived in London this morning, he was detained.

At the time the "security official" called me, David had been detained for 3 hours. The security official told me that they had the right to detain him for up to 9 hours in order to question him, at which point they could either arrest and charge him or ask a court to extend the question time. The official - who refused to give his name but would only identify himself by his number: 203654 - said David was not allowed to have a lawyer present, nor would they allow me to talk to him.

I immediately contacted the Guardian, which sent lawyers to the airport, as well various Brazilian officials I know. Within the hour, several senior Brazilian officials were engaged and expressing indignation over what was being done. The Guardian has the full story here.

Glenn Greenwald writing in Monday's Guardian.

Yesterday's Guardian ran an interview with David.
The Guardian's slightly gone to town on this - the talented Mr GG is one of their own, of course - but it's been the biggest news story of the week so far.
Chilling stuff - and a story involving a clear breach of the human rights of a gay man, whose only "crime" is being the boyfriend of an investigative journalist; Amnesty are on to it.
One wonders if the gay media's coverage would have been different if David Miranda had been detained illegally by the Russian authorities?
Pink News haven't covered it at all, for shame.
Anyway, I've organised a protest outside the British Embassy in Moscow for this Saturday - please join me.
Update: Textbook stuff from Richard Littlejohn in Friday's Daily Mail:

One might have hoped that the Guardian would extend the same support to Jim Davidson as they have to their own man.
But while Miranda has the right credentials — gay, fashionably Brazilian, Left-wing, anti-American, anti-British — Jimbo [Jim Davidson] ticks all the wrong boxes.
He’s a serial heterosexual, fiercely patriotric, works tirelessly for military charities, tells the ‘wrong’ kind of jokes and, horror or horrors, was a cheerleader for Mrs Thatcher and the Tories.
So, even if he isn’t guilty, as far as the Guardian is concerned it serves him right. His kind aren’t entitled to ‘human rights’.
Meanwhile, Jimmy Savile remains dead.

If anyone has the faintest idea what that last line means, can they please get in touch?


  1. I know I shouldn't make light of this but I wouldn't mind being detained for nine hours with Mr Miranda

  2. You wouldn't think Glenn was the type who'd have a hot Brazilian boyfriend, would you?

  3. That's not what happened >

    These Guardian stories always fall apart, there's a 24hour rule.

    I go into at length here how the left should question and the dangers in falling for Greenwald and his fanboys.

    1. That top article is full of inaccuracies that Greenwald himself has corrected. For instance, the Guardian lawyers were not allowed to speak to Miranda nor were they given any information about his detention.
      As far as not being allowed a lawyer, he was given a list of approved lawyers he could speak to, but quite reasonably he wanted his own lawyer present, not those approved by the people who were detaining him.
      If they suspected him of holding stolen material, why didn't they arrest him?

    2. Also, why is that site's Chelsea Manning piece titled "Bradley Manning's Sexual Transformation"?
      Transitioning one's gender is hardly a sexual matter, is it?
      I've never heard of the site before, but based on those two articles, it doesn't look like somewhere one should put too much faith in.

  4. That Littlejohn piece is so full of holes it's pathetic, even for him.
    The anger about Miranda was that the police/government have abused their powers and used them to go after someone for whom those powers were clearly not intended.
    Jim Davidson was accused of a serious crime and was investigated for it. The two are completely unrelated, so why Littlecunt draws a comparison is incredibly opportunistic: just to trot out his pathetic "straight people are so victimised" canard.