The reaction to David Miranda’s detention is completely ridiculous

20 August 2013

11:58 AM

20 August 2013

11:58 AM

It may not have been the smartest move to detain David Miranda, the Brazilian partner of Guardian ‘journalist’ Glenn Greenwald, under the Terrorism Act.  But the explosion of righteous anger over the episode is ridiculous.

Starting with the outraged claim that Miranda was arrested only because of his connection with Greenwald. Wrong. Greenwald himself has previously told journalists that his partner assists him in his work. That present ‘work’ consists of engineering the leak of massive amounts of classified intelligence from a source – Edward Snowden – currently granted asylum in Moscow. Greenwald’s partner was travelling through London from a meeting using plane-tickets paid for by the Guardian and – it now transpires – appears to have been carrying files from Snowden. So all those ‘this could happen to any of us’ pieces are only really relevant if you happen to use your partner as a mule for industrial-scale sabotage against states you’re planning to travel to.


However, it seems to have become a variety of received wisdom that the rights we now enjoy should include the right to steal and publish vast amounts of secret intelligence that damages the intelligence-gathering abilities and thus the future national security of the UK and our allies. Crucially, it seems to be believed, if we exercise this right to steal we must also be entirely free from harassment by the countries we are targeting.  Perhaps in future this lovely set of presumptions will come to be known to as the new ‘Miranda rights’?

Like Julian Assange, Snowden, Greenwald et al fall into that class of person who when people ask, ‘who has the right to know’ answers ‘we do.’ In particular they think that they know better than any security service what should and should not be in the public domain and how best a country should carry out surveillance. Except they don’t. And it’s not their point anyway. None of these new ‘freedom of information’ campaigners are ‘journalists’ working for this or any high-minded goal. They are simple saboteurs with an increasingly clear and specific anti-Western agenda. It is wrong to say that they don’t care how hampered our intelligence services might be as a result. They do care. They want them to be hampered.

If you knew nothing else, you could sense this from Greenwald’s reaction to the Heathrow episode. Greenwald warned reporters that Britain would be ‘sorry’ for detaining his partner, and said:

‘I will be far more aggressive in my reporting from now. I am going to publish many more documents. I am going to publish things on England too. I have many documents on England’s spy system. I think they will be sorry for what they did.’

Does that sound like a journalist?  Or a saboteur with a very particular agenda?

Subscribe to The Spectator today for a quality of argument not found in any other publication. Get more Spectator for less – just £12 for 12 issues.

Show comments
  • joakim

    when US say jump you say how high??

  • Jeffrey Dowling

    How to Get your husband, Back after A Divorce or A Breakup

    My name is Isabella Williams from U.K, I have to give this miraculous testimony, which is so unbelievable until now. I had a problem with my Ex husband 5years ago, which lead to our break up. when he broke up with me, I was not my self again, i felt so empty inside me, my love and financial situation became worst, until a close friend of mine lucky told me about a spell caster who helped her in the same problem too his name is Dr Brave. I email Dr Brave the spell caster and i told him my problem and i did what he asked of me, to cut the long story short. Before i knew what was happening my husband gave me a call and told me that he was coming back to me in just 2days and was so happy to have him back to me. We have two kids together and we are happy with ourselves. Thanks to Dr Brave for saving my relationship and for also saving others own too. continue your good work, If you are interested to contact him and testify this blessings like me, the great spell caster email address is ( you are the best among all the spell caster online I hope you see my testimonies and also pray for my family too,


    the real “laugh” is that we are to believe that a Heathrow plod did this off his own back.

    • Jackthesmilingblack


  • RonWillison

    This viewpoint at best is uninformed. At worst insulting to those of us that really know what’s is afoot in America today. Treason from within and without. Keep drinking the coolaid.

    • global city


  • Cornelius Bonkers

    Sounds a bit like an enemy to me

  • Simon Morgan

    He, and the rest of these pseudo journalists, should be treated as traitors.

    Being a traitor meant something more, of course, 40 years ago. That was when people had some pride and honour.

    Now we have the like of Assange being called a ‘hero’. It’s a crying shame.

  • Mos bos

    Slightly naive to assume that the information which was so easily stolen by Snowden was unknown to Chinese, Russia and all other lovely countries. Give Easterners some credit, man.

  • Keith M

    George Blake must be watching with interest

  • brian2907

    Douglas Murray for PM!

  • Gareth

    Guardian worse than the Daily Mail…….
    Give me the Daily Mail any time, when it provokes the fascist left to getting their knickers in a twist it must be doing something good.

  • Colin A

    I find it absolutely fascinating that a magazine or a paper would defend the state going into a newspaper’s offices to destroy property, but with the state of media in this country I don’t find it particularly surprising.

    It seems that self-preservation is not high on the agenda for the journalists, if you can get one kick in on your ideological adversaries. I shall laugh when Theresa May breaks down the door of the Telegraph to get those MP expense account files, because of national security. Those were stolen too, and those impacted heavily on the functioning of Parliament. The state must protect itself, doesn’t it? And we can’t have journalists trafficking stolen property. That’s terrorism.

    Do you really want to defend a case where the state barges into a newsroom to take back files that a source has given you? Think about it. The precedent set here will affect you too because you allow the state to define what journalism is all about.

    But what do I know? It’s more important to get a kick in on the Guardian than to think. That’s probably why we have press baron’s in this country that dictate news reporting to ignore that which they don’t like and to push for things that aren’t empirically true.

  • Jackthesmilingblack

    Racism, homophobia, xenophobia, bigotry … Thought I was reading the Daily Telegraph for a moment.

  • Jackthesmilingblack

    You lie to the state you go to jail.
    The state lies to you, situation normal.

    • RBcritique

      That’s right, Jack. So it has ever been… and your point is ?

  • Jackthesmilingblack

    The Spectator, aka the Daily Telegraph.

    • edithgrove

      No-one will improve on one bright poster’s “Tatler with graphs”. Who was it? I’d like to embroider it somewhere.

  • Tom Tom

    Drug Cartels have few problems nor do Illegals. they simply buy Border Control

  • Tom Tom

    You must be next in line. After all you seem to favour destroying all
    trust in telecommunications in favour of a National Security State

  • Iain Hill

    Will May need to resign when the court strikes down this abuse of the law, of which she had prior knowledge?

    Industrial scale sabotage does not equal terrorism.

  • rupertstubbs

    As many people have pointed out, there are perfectly good laws that the police could have used if they suspected the Miranda was in possession of stolen property.

    The legitimate outrage over this incident is that it supports the fear that the police and – what were they thinking? – the Government will happily use the incredibly broad scope of anti-terrorism powers to save themselves to bother of actually having to find evidence of wrongdoing before banging any one of us up, without recourse to legal representation.

  • William Coggan

    Oh, that Congreve were with us today!

  • Greenslime

    Rule No1 – Conspiracy theorists always have something to hide.

    People like Rushbridger and Greenwald – or should we call them Snowball and Napolean – are working to a separate agenda. Miranda’s character is probably Pinkeye. They probably believe passionately the things they say and write. The funny thing is that if we lived in a world which was constructed to their design, it would require infinitely more surveillance than we currently suffer – because such a world was the old USSR and is the current Cuba and Belorussia. It requires constant monitoring to ensure that no-one has any more than the next person. That is the route to a true Animal Farm scenario. Toynbee can be Squealer. Ultimately we get to the stage where everyone is equal, just some are more equal than others!

    The naive and histrionic nature of some of the comments on the ‘Miranda Rights’ affair have been astonishing. The facts were misrepresented by the Guardian and spouted, unchecked, by their broadcasting arm, the BBC. Given what Pinkeye was carrying, it is worth wondering if this whole situation was not contrived? Transiting through the UK with the goodies when he could have gone by many other routes seems daft at best.

    How do they propose to stop the terrorists attacking us? Some will cite 9/11, 7/7, etc as an indication that we fail anyway. That is facile. The truth is that many attacks have been stopped due to the hard work of various agencies around the world. This is a complex problem; every manner of communication method, different languages and dialects some of which are very obscure, codes and other issues. What do the whingers propose we do to combat this? This faux outrage is nonsense. How would you feel if the terrorists were successfully attacking us on a daily or weekly basis.

    These terrorists have no care for their fellow human beings. They care only for their religion. And then, only the brand they follow – that is why they slaughter each other with gay abandon. Their savage, stone-age thinking causes them despise freedom and democracy. School for girls? Death! Drinking? Death! Adultery? Death! They despise us and everything we do or don’t do. They are happy to die killing us whether or not we are anything to do with their jihad – which of course we are, because we do not submit to Allah.

    The intelligence and security agencies are tasked with stopping them and keeping us safe. They have to start somewhere. They are criticised when they do and they are criticised when they don’t. In the first instance they are looking for unusual patterns and suspicious connections. If they find something, they investigate further. The contention that the agencies have the time to sift through every single one of the billions of emails, texts and calls made each day is simply insane. There has to be a reason for deeper inspection. Those that are tasked to conduct the work are relatively few in number and do not have the time or resources to waste time on anything but the task at hand. On our part, if we are doing nothing wrong, what have we got to worry about?

    According to Snowball and Napolean, no-one should be surveilled. Or, if they are we should tell everyone exactly what is being done. Then the criminals and terrorists can pick a route through the obstacles.

    Wake up and smell the coffee. This battle will always be a trade off – some liberty for safety. If we don’t like the way it is being done, we get to change the driver every 5 years. Its not perfect but it is better than the world that Snowball and Napolean want to see. If you listen to them you had best prepare to start attending Friday prayers as part of your new lifestyle, because eventually that is what will happen.

  • RBcritique

    This is a complex case in which both sides risk peeling the onion until nothing remains. I think that Cohen makes a very pertinent and necessary case regarding erosion of our Rule of Law, but are Miranda/Greenwald really our Woodward/Bernstein, the selfless, modern-day patron saints of agit-prop Journalism ? Shouldn’t Murray be commended for resisting the vanity of lazy clamour towards soft-targeting our government-by-consensus which is not, after all, an abstraction, but the very real foundation of that Rule of Law ?

    There is – or at least was, until such agreement was overturned by fundamentally dishonest and inept New Labour legislation – a tacit understanding that while not perfect or ideal, we do try and make do by accepting some of the more unpleasant, harsh realities of governance.

    What will be the result of the current shock exposé ? More government imposition and less freedom.

  • TRAV1S

    I know it’s not the cold war, but this Miranda was a mule carrying stolen information at the Guardian’s expense. So what does he or the Guardian expect.

    • Mike Power

      I love the idea that so many people here (including the author) think that you need “mules” to carry digital information from one country to the next. It’s not cocaine, you know. It’s about as stupid and ignorant as the government thinking that destroying a couple of hard drives at the Guardian offices have eradicated the data. “Intelligence” services? What an oxymoron.

      • marcusirwin

        Well your obviously not Tech savvy , if i had important Digital information i would never send it by EMAIL or FTTP ect.

        I would keep it on a non connected device and manually transfer it.When that information becomes connected , GCHQ will find a way of Connecting to it, or reading the traffic when you send it.

        • Mike Power

          Oh dear. You are calling me out on my technical knowledge but use the term FTTP (Fibre To The Premises) when you obviously mean FTP (File Transfer Protocol). You clearly have little understanding of other means of secure data transfer. Your knowledge of encryption is clearly limited as well. You obviously haven’t heard of Silk Road, for instance, and your confidence in GCHQ being able to read all traffic is rather touching, but completely misplaced. The idea that GCHQ or anyone else can access all data from anywhere is utter nonsense which is one reason why the data mining going on by so called “intelligence” services is pointless. But then, as many of us have realised, it really has nothing to do with catching terrorists. It is surveillance of the population in general, plain and simple. Oh, and WHY all the CAPITALS in your POSTS?!

          • stearl33

            Oooh!!! scratch your eyes out!

          • marcusirwin

            My mistake on FTP

            Your rather large bigger mistake is that someone on Silk road can break 256 bit encryption .

            • Mike Power

              I would respond, but I don’t have a clue what you’re trying to say. If you could expand it a little so that your comment is intelligible I will do my best to answer.

  • edithgrove

    May I just say, on a more serious note, what a good looking lad Mr Miranda is. No wonder Greenwald took up residence in Brazil. Lucky the coppers that had to sit with him for nine hours.

    • Icebow

      As lovely a couple of co-inverts as one could wish to encounter, apart from Greenwald of course.
      If this had happened in America under corresponding law, would they have had to read him his Miranda rights?

  • usignuolo

    Hang on a minute, wasn’t the information illegally obtained by the UK and US governments in the first place? So the state (USA) collects private individuals’ data unlawfully. Edward Snowden, who sees it happening and his boss lying to Congress about it, turns whistleblower, and seeks asylum with the evidence. Then when he passes this information to interested journalists, the US and UK governments claim the journalists are trafficking information stolen from them. Whose information was it in the first place, if it was obtained illegally? I do not agree that this gives the governments rights over it.

    • Baron

      If Snowden were to make copies of the stuff, deposit them secretly with a number of law firms, get a couple of heavyweight ‘uman rights lawyers to represent him, then go public in the US rather than fleeing to Russia, Baron would have viewed him, and whatever followed, differently. If a court case ensued, we would have had had a chance to tweak the law, perhaps even replace it, to get at least some of those responsible for the wrongdoings punished.

      It would have been a close call risk, but if it worked he himself could have basked in the admiration of many. As it happens, he opted to right a wrong committing a wrong. It’s not kosher, the most likely outcome will be as RBcritique above fears for us, and years inside for him if the messiah’s people get him, and they will as they did Osama.

      And Murray’s right to be amazed. The way the left leaning, self righteous BBC, Guardian tossers have reacted to the treatment of the two theft assisting comrades, one would have thought the world is just about to stop spinning.

  • Alfred55

    A great cause of danger from terrorism is perhaps the absurd dilution supported whole-heartedly by the author of this piece. All seems a rather desperate attempt to add credibility to their support of the Iraq disaster.

  • NotYouNotSure

    “they think that they know better than any security service what should and should not be in the public domain”, this is the kind of quality “journalism” that one will find in the Chinese official media like Xinhua.

    Glenn Greenwald is a real journalist, he will be remembered for a long time into the future. The octogenarian fan club of Douglas Murray might say otherwise, but it is hard to see who will remember this author for his journalistic achievements or see any value in his opinion pieces. People remember Ellsberg, and the Watergate journalists, nobody remembers the apologists for the status quo.

    • David Lindsay

      Murray is a remarkable phenomenon.

      Based on nothing more than a Lower Second in English and a schoolboy biography of Oscar Wilde’s catamite, which he had been well enough connected to have published and time-rich enough to have written (because he knew that his connections guaranteed him an Oxbridge place, however undistinguished he turned out to be once he took it up), this advocate of the most extreme Zionism and neoconservatism burst onto the post-9/11 scene as a fully formed “expert” in his early twenties. He treated us to an execrable book on the neocons, which managed not to mention Trotskyism or Max Shachtman at all.

      In common with another current Spectator blogger, among numerous other people, his spectacular wrongness about the Iraq War has harmed him not one little bit, but the very reverse. It is still the people who were right who are effectively blacklisted. But that other current Spectator blogger has, as is clear from his treatment of the Miranda affair, seen the error of at least some of his ways. Murray has not even begun to do so. How long must our public discourse continue to endure him?

      • JohnCK

        Whilst I have no idea of Douglas Murray’s background, which is not really relevant to analyse what his blogs are about, I agree with him on this issue and profoundly disagree with him on quite a lot of others.
        David Lindsay does raise an interesting point, however, that seems pervasive throughout the print media: so-called experts, who have very little actual experience and knowledge but certainly can push it out. This reflects what happens in the previoous government and it seems in the current mish mash.

      • Baron

        David, the more pertinent question is ‘how long must our public discourse continue to endure you?’ This posting of yours is totally irrelevant to what we are talking about. Come on, put yourself together, young man.

        • David Lindsay

          I am older than Douglas Murray, not that that is saying very much.

          And I have never been on Question Time, even though my suits are better than his.

      • Tom Tom

        There are so many of these 30 year old “paid advocates” littering the media zone, like Tim Stanley. They are all cut-outs and barely credible. They do however show who is pulling their strings. Fortunately they are limited to a keyboard and rarely get out into the wild

        • David Lindsay

          Tim Stanley is quite a bit older than several other people on Telegraph Blogs, which last week had a schoolgirl extrapolating the whole of education policy from her own newly awarded A-level results.

          To be fair, it was Nile Gardiner and Janet Daley who announced that Mitt Romney had romped home. And Toby Young, who is also hardly in his twenties, was re-engaged there when the Sun on Sunday decided to replace him with Louise Mensch. Oh, the shame, the shame!

          • Shoe On Head

            cogent thoughts lindsay. tighter than louise mensch’s forehead.

      • Jackthesmilingblack

        I`ve long thought Douglas Murray is a vindictive piece of garbage.

        • David Lindsay

          Publication of his book on the tendency of pop stars and the like to say silly things about Islam was tastefully brought forward immediately after the death of Lee Rigby.

          That fact was heavily emphasised in the plugging of it on the website of Melanie Phillips’s publishing venture.

          A classy lot, these neocons.

        • Mike Power
        • Arturaski

          But I bet he isn’t.

      • Shoe On Head

        lacking knowledge or experience; green: check

        think-tank in guise of do-tank: check

        minor oxbridge college: check

        wrong on the big (BIG) questions (iraq): check

        armchair social anthropologist: check

        ambition of career politician: check

        minor gentry: check

        wore suit from aged 13: check (unforgivable)

        (Shoe on Head)

      • Arturaski

        ‘Advocate of the most extreme Zionism’.

        Go on then, give us an example.

        • David Lindsay

          Read anything that he has ever written.

          Or observe the fact that he was ever published, and continues to be.

          • Arturaski

            ‘…the most extreme Zionism’.

            As I say, give an example.

            • David Lindsay

              Ask him (indeed, he may consider himself asked by this comment) if he would be in favour of a memorial, such as is quietly being planned if we can raise the cash, commemorating the Palestine that from 1920 to 1948 existed as a country on the map, under the British Crown as a Commonwealth country
              with the Union Flag of its own, and thus a country under the Cross, until bombed out of existence by the founders of modern terrorism. Those did not relent, but if anything the very reverse, while the British Commonwealth was fighting the Third

              To British Palestine, and to those who fell in and for her, there is no monument anywhere in the world. That is nothing short of a national disgrace. But the matter is now in hand. What says Douglas Murray?

  • BarryNorton

    So do you speak for The Spectator as a whole in telling us that you’re blissfully impotent with respect to the role of journalists to question our government?

  • David Lindsay

    The David Miranda story brings home the fact that we do have an elected Head of State, it is just that he is elected in America and not in Britain.

    Another remote microstate left over from the Middle Ages and forgotten by the world is in a similar position. In succession to the Kings of France, the President of the French Republic is also a Co-Prince of Andorra.

    The other is the Bishop of Urgell, and there is in fact a very long history of a Prince-Bishop on these shores. The position of Bishop of Durham, for it was he, is currently vacant.

    Let the appointment be made with the provision that the appointee shall enjoy the same powers in the United Kingdom as are enjoyed by the President of the United States.

    • Arturaski

      The ‘elected Head of State is American’ cliche. Te he.

      Americans are rubbish and the British (but really the English) are rubbish and the West is rubbish and Israel (which we’ll always try to call Zionists, but really mean Jews, but we’re not anti-semitic because when so accused will say the Jews should have learnt from the death camps and that proves we’re wise and compassionate and not hateful and crass) is rubbish. And they’re all to blame for everything bad that happens. And we’ll invert every value they uphold in an astonishing trick by which Britain is a police state, but Iraq under Sadam is never, ever mentioned.

      Te he.

      • David Lindsay

        Better out than in?

        Time for bed, I think.

  • Maturecheese

    I think revealing intelligence secrets to our competitors and our potential enemies is something that should come under close scrutiny by the state. It is naive to think otherwise.

    • djbethell

      Thing is today you are the competitor and the potential enemy to those who want to own your information. Wake up!

      • Arturaski

        That’s paranoia and conspiracy theorist material. Mr Cheese is making a reasonable claim.

        Do you want to replace the current security services with new ones (and how would you go about that?) or do you just want to do away with them altogether?

  • doctorseraphicus

    Well said, Douglas.

  • Charles White

    You’re so right, Mr Greyhound! The BBC and the Guardian are not for intelligent people like us. Extreme left wing media producing ‘rust bucket garbage’ as you so eloquently put it. Clearly, we need more airport surveillance of citizens, not less, and more airport detentions of dangerous journalists. There are real dangers if too many people are encouraged to hold government to account or to think for themselves. How we need sharp thinkers like you in politics, Mr Greyhound. I’d certainly vote for you.

    • Baron

      Charles, witty to a point, we certainly don’t need more of taking shoes at airports, intercepting everyone’s calls and other freedoms of all curtailing stuff, we need a different approach like profiling, homing on those most likely to cause us harm, targeting. The thing is, we aren’t likely to get anything better doing Snowdens.

  • The_greyhound

    Perhaps the furore is simply because the Guardian and Greengrass are so thick that they just couldn’t believe that the authorities would spot their mule going through the airport.

    It’s curious that unlike this essentially ‘staged’ media event, the Grauniad pays little attention to the civil war in Syria (the most important story in the world today?) only because there are so many competing murderous anti-democratic nutters, it doesn’t know which to support.

    Of more note is the way the idiot BBC is loyally pretending that any of this Rustbucket garbage is actually news.

    • HookesLaw


  • JB20005

    The episodes of Mr. Miranda, Edward Snowden, and Bradley Manning should also be instructive for any idealistic naifs who want to work with Julian Assange and Glenn Greenwald.

    If someone gets caught holding the bag, it’s going to be you.

  • Austin Barry

    “I will be far more aggressive in my reporting from now. I am going to publish many more documents. I am going to publish things on England too. I have many documents on England’s spy system. I think they will be sorry for what they did.’

    Never has Michael Winner’s ‘Calm down, dear’ injunction seemed more appropriate.

  • Jupiter

    The cops should have shot him, like they did with that other Brazilian chap.

    • Iain Hill


    • Jackthesmilingblack

      And my comments are deleted.

      • Jupiter

        It was a joke

  • Druth

    What’s the problem. Don’t these Guardianistas realise that every lefty utopia turns into Police State. Or isn’t this the ‘right sort of Police State’.

  • JB20005

    I was unaware that foreign nationals had the right to traffic stolen materials or other contraband through Heathrow.

    The drug cartels will be thrilled.

  • marcusirwin

    You steal someone’s information , then start to show it to the world , the people you stole it from try and get it back , you then threaten to show more of the information in revenge.

    Sounds like Terrorism to me .

    Greenwald seems to be trying to milk this to enlarge his Ego , and the Guardian is going all self hating and David Ike.

    But there is some truth in the story , is there enough safe guards that the government cant use this information against law abiding people , but this has now been lost in self Grandiose journalism and score settling to increase the Guardians web traffic.

    The Guardian now officially worse than the Daily Mail

    • Jambo25

      This is one of those cases where you want both sides to lose.

    • stephen rothbart

      “The Guardian now officially worse than the Daily Mail”


      Where have you been?

    • BarryNorton

      “Try and get it back” – your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

    • usignuolo

      So the UK and US governments collected information about me secretly and unlawfully and lied about it. Who is the thief here?

      • Baron

        If Baron were to steal a gold watch from a man who stole it from a shop before, the police were to try to recover the watch, explain the difference between the legal position of the original thief and Baron if the police were to catch both, please.

    • djbethell

      The information is stolen from you!!!

  • Bert3000

    What’s ridiculous is the pack of lies we have been fed to justify the removal of the most basic of freedoms. The detention of David Miranda was pure terrorism. The Home Secretary responsible should resign and the police officers responsible should be dismissed on their way to prison.

    • JohnPReid

      Wrongful arrest, has never carried a person sentence,wrongful doesnt even mean wrong to do it,it means that as no one was prosecuted it didn’t result in the right outcome

      • Bert3000

        Kidnapping and false imprisonment carries a prison sentence. As does assault which would be a reasonable charge in this case. Given that they are almost certain to have taken hold of him, battery would do as well.

        Put it this way – if I’d done it, I’d be looking at several years in prison.

    • David Lindsay

      With May and Hague out of the running after this Miranda business, who is going to be Prime Minister at Christmas, three months into the first trial of Andy Coulson and Rebekah Brooks, and with Cameron therefore either in custody or in exile?

    • Mac

      You’re happy of course to have someone carrying around data which COULD (and that’s the point) contain information which, if released, may endanger the lives of those paid to keep you safe? If anyone other than an apparent paid mule who is the partner of a Guardian ‘journalist’ was detained in these circumstances, let’s be honest; you wouldn’t have seen a note about it anywhere.
      It’s true that the liberal left scream the loudest and therefore get heard far more than anyone else. Kudos to them for that; the silent majority really need to learn some lessons! The supreme arrogance of these people is breath-taking however. For some reason a Guardian ‘journalist’ and his apparent paid mule are beyond the law. The quicker they are disabused of this notion the better.
      Oh and if I were the guy arrested, I would dump said partner quicker than you can say ‘…call Michael Mansfield’ for not having the balls to go himself.

  • stanedeid

    Westminster paranoia continues to increase.Any Scottish pro-independence traveller going abroad would be well advised to avoid London airports.

    • Luke G

      You obviously havent travelled much out of the uk- British border guards give less bullshit than pretty much everyone else on earth. Or are you feeling a targeted minority, poor you

    • The_greyhound

      “.Any Scottish pro-independence traveller going abroad would be well advised to avoid London airports”

      Indeed. And the few people that feel that way will be sure to heed your advice.

  • willshome

    The “outrage” is about the rule of law which is supposed to be our greatest pride as a democracy. The law enacted by Parliament was strictly related to terrorism, not to any action the Executive of this or any more powerful nation finds irksome. If you don’t understand the importance of the persecution of the friends and family of journalists for doing their job, then I don’t understand what you’re doing here.

    • tjamesjones

      Read the article.

  • John King

    The trouble with the state is that it doesn’t get out very much. All locked down and worrying about terrorism makes it hysterical. In the Miranda case it’s tried to extend anti-terrorism legislation, intended to help catch people engaged in terrorism, to somebody who isn’t a terrorist. Possibly he might be a thief, but that should be covered by quite ordinary laws. Can’t say I’m in favour of the state deciding it will extend the provisions of one law to cover situations it wasn’t meant to cover. Our elected representatives are meant to be the lawmakers, not hysterical bureaucrats. If they start getting away with doing that there’s no saying what these errant functionaries of government will feel able to get away with next. The action of whistleblowers tells us they’re already getting away with quite a lot of illegal activity. Not really a suprise, I know, but they should be curbed all the same. I’m rather grateful that whistleblowers reveal the arrogance and hysteria of the state. It gives all of us a chance to reign it back.

    • HookesLaw

      And hide in Russia. Tells us all we need to know. Nothing wrong with arresting traitors.

      • APPete

        So having angered the government of the United States, tell me in which of their allied countries should he have sought safety? Where would he have been safe from being simply kidnapped off the street and bundled into a waiting aircraft for a bit of ‘enhanced interrogation’?

      • MacTurk

        How is he a traitor?

        Any citizen has the duty to dissent, especially in the face of such a egregious exercise in driving a truck through the notion of privacy or legality.

    • Iain Hill

      you must include May among the hysterical!

  • redwood05090

    Manning, Greenwald, & partners are a bunch of urban terrorists!
    The arrogance is incredible, they cannot imagine
    that because they got a gay president they could end up
    behind bars? Funny, the prosecution
    is asking 60 years for the British born traitor. he will be
    the second longest serving inmate in Fort Leavenworth!
    Greenwald better watch his steps, I would not be surprised
    if he got arrested upon landing in the USA.

    • Wiaruz

      Now I know why Greenwald lives in Rio. Difficult place from which to extradite people. Ask Ronnie Biggs.

    • Mike Power

      Manning gets 35 years. He should have led a massacre of 400 men, women, children and infants, making sure the women were gang-raped first and mutilated afterwards. The only person prosecuted for the Mai Lai massacre served just 3 and a half years house arrest. Funny old world, ain’t it?

  • Chris Smith

    We live in an increasingly authoritarian police state. Get out while you still can.

    • willshome

      Where to?

    • Oedipus Rex

      Where to? Russia? China? Sweden? Saudi Arabia?

      Please advise me now – I’d love to find the open minded paradise that requires no self-defense with security. I’m all ears.

      • Jackthesmilingblack

        Let me give you a hint.
        Jack, Japan Alps

    • Luke G

      Exactly why Britain may or may not be going to the dogs- Chris you exemplify the very nadir of Western Humanity, weak spined and slimy, willing an end to our civilization by shutting your eyes and curling up and receding into a dark and dingy place from the middle ages

    • Jambo25

      Hysterical nonsense.

    • The_greyhound

      Tuscany is a preferred destination for the bien pensant classes.

    • Mike

      Goodbye then, Chris.

    • GUBU

      Indeed. Just remember to close the door on your way out….

    • Arturaski

      ‘We live in an increasingly authoritarian police state’.

      No we don’t. No part of that is true. Which reasonable critic of civil liberties in this country would look at our police operations and security services and think – without being insane – that they were a bit like China’s or North Korea’s?

      Someone should be sounding a loud claxon and sending for the nurse.

  • albertcooper

    Poofs always get their knickers in a twist ! its their feminine side

    • HillofBeans

      Mmm… 8 upvotes for a homophobic troll.

      Bravo Spectator readers, how about some racial comments next?

      I mean, he’s a bit brown this Miranda guy – maybe he really is a terrorist

      • Mike

        That’s right use one moron’s comment and tar us all with the same brush; label us homophobic/racist and then ignore the salient points raised in the actual article.

        • Iain Hill

          Sad to say, the level of debate (I am being kind) suggests civil liberties are dead in the Yookay. Time to break it up!

      • FrankS

        Oooh, bold!

      • JackyTreehorn

        Hooray! the first “wacist” shout in the comments, well done.

      • Darnell Jackson

        Victim watch.

    • djbethell

      Wow! And you accomplished such vileness in the new century. You must be so proud.

      • albertcooper

        I am not a vile person and don,t think my post was vile in anyway,just “a camp” statement,of the obvious !

        • djbethell

          “I am not a vile person and don,t think my post was vile in anyway,just “a camp” statement,of the obvious !”

          I rest my case.

          • albertcooper

            I suspected your post to be camp one !

            • djbethell

              How sad to be so let down.

              • albertcooper

                What do you mean “let down” ? I don,t feel let down ! unless I,ve missed something !

  • TenPillocksInARoom

    It sounds more like a mouthy journalist who has been caught out and knows it.

    Also, and this is not intended in quite the incendiary way that it might be perceived, but for those of you against immigration, Islamism and so forth, would it not be in your advantage for security arrangements not to work as well?

    You keep on warning of the dangers of present policy, but good security means that we don’t really see those dangers on a day-to-day basis, which makes your message rather difficult to get across.

    Should you then be supporting Greenwald? Should prophets of doom be in favour of havoc, which will reveal the truth? Or is the truth that most people are pretty decent and most things will work out, at least in our own country?

    As I said, meant in genuine interest, not as a troll comment …

    • mightymark

      Not really – as someone who indeed keeps warning of the dangers I’d rather continue to have the difficulty of convincing people than seeing them killed. Actually its only the “intellectuals” with whom one has a problem. Last week I stood at security at Stanstead where people who statistically could not have been mostly “intellectuals” patiently went through the tedious business of taking off their belts, bagging up their toiletries and what not.

      The real point is that the danger of terrorism has probably diminished. It hasn’t however been through wishful thinking but through hard work by the security services whose work might well have been harmed by the Assanges and Snowdens. A simple question for the doubters – do you honestly believe that 9/11 was intended to be a”one off”? Why should intelligent men (and they were) give their lives for a single mere spectacular from which they must have known the US would easily recover (if not he broken hearrted survivors of the dead – who probably didn’t figure in their calculations). It must have been intended that 9/11 would be followed by increasingly bloody successors. Well it was, but in each case, they was DEcreasingly spectacular – until we reached the point where atrocious as it was, the “best” they could manage was the murder of a single unfortunate soldier in Woolwich. So the animus remains but the potential to impact has been reduced. Now I might be kidding my self – a huge conflagration could occur next week or this – but I’d say that the “luck we have had given the continued animus can only have been down to painstaking work by the security services. No other explanation makes sense – unless I suppose, you are an “intellectual”.

      • TenPillocksInARoom

        No, my question was intended to be open-ended, and that’s a good, reassuring and very civilised answer. I’m not sure I follow your point about intellectuals, though. I don’t really have enough knowledge or insight to fit the description myself, but I know a few who do, and some of them are unusually sensitive to and horrified by this type of violence – it seems a bit sweeping to say that they are all rotten.

        • mightymark

          Maybe you need tor read the Guardian comment columns more!

          • TenPillocksInARoom

            Point taken, and no I do not need to do so, I have already read enough of them for a lifetime!

    • mightymark

      Not really – as someone who indeed keeps warning of the dangers I’d rather continue to have the difficulty of convincing people than seeing them killed. Actually its only the “intellectuals” with whom one has a problem. Last week I stood at security at Stanstead where people who statistically could not have been mostly “intellectuals” patiently went through the tedious business of taking off their belts, bagging up their toiletries and what not.

      The real point is that the danger of terrorism has probably diminished. It hasn’t however been through wishful thinking but through hard work by the security services whose work might well have been harmed by the Assanges and Snowdens. A simple question for the doubters – do you honestly believe that 9/11 was intended to be a”one off”? Why should intelligent men (and they were) give their lives for a single mere spectacular from which they must have known the US would easily recover (if not he broken hearrted survivors of the dead – who probably didn’t figure in their calculations). It must have been intended that 9/11 would be followed by increasingly bloody successors. Well it was, but in each case, they was DEcreasingly spectacular – until we reached the point where atrocious as it was, the “best” they could manage was the murder of a single unfortunate soldier in Woolwich. So the animus remains but the potential to impact has been reduced. Now I might be kidding my self – a huge conflagration could occur next week or this – but I’d say that the “luck we have had given the continued animus can only have been down to painstaking work by the security services. No other explanation makes sense – unless I suppose, you are an “intellectual”.

  • polina

    Greenwald should be on his way to Sheremetyevo now

  • Mr Grumpy

    As a Scot by birth I can’t get over the Guardian employing someone who thinks the UK and England are synonymous. C.P. Scott must be rotating.

    • The Elderking

      THATS what its all about !

  • HillofBeans

    Douglas K Murray…

    “a saboteur with a very particular agenda?”

    Is this a subconscious self-referential remark?

    • Luke G

      Self referential- Douglas Murray, a slightly pompous genius and the only one here willing to open his eyes and shout out to protect real values in our quickly sinking civilization.

      • HillofBeans

        Careful with your praise. Geniuses are thin on the ground these days. Someone might accuse you of being a fanboy…

      • David Lindsay

        “Genius”? He just happens to be too rich ever to have needed to work, and therefore able to put himself around literary and political London.

        Backed up by the sinister forces of American neoconservatism (rejected at the ballot box in its own country) and the secular Israeli Far Right (not supported by most Israelis).

        Proving, it must be said, that money, and even Eton and Oxford, cannot buy class. If he had that, then he would never associate with such people.

        • Luke G

          I believe you should read his book on neoconservatism- it is well argued and demonstrates that the ‘sinister’ ideology is actually followed by many many more people than one would have first thought.

          Also your view on money is slightly misguided and seems to be more misplaced jealousy that Murray has the luck to be able to follow his chosen career without the worries of money. I come from a poor area of London and a middle class family: The fact that Mr Murray may or may not have wealth is irrelevant to his sane politics- I see many rich individuals on all sides of the political spectrum. I would love my children to have the opportunity to get a good education at Eton- the fact is it seems to be one of the only places in Britain where you wont get watered down rubbish force fed to your children. Something that Diane Abbot et al. know well.
          (Having gone to several good and bad state-schools, i can tell you your thinly veiled attack on privilege and elitism betrays a lack of understanding to how Britain has been destroyed brick by solid-brick, by repeatedly failed center-left policies)

          On whether you are right about Israel- well a recent trip there and to the Palestinian territories have led me to be quite mistrustful of the black and white vision we get from over here.

          • David Lindsay

            I believe you should read his book on neoconservatism

            I have, and it is rubbish on a purely factual level.

            • Arturaski

              But you do sound jealous. About him being rich, that is.

              Is he? I don’t know.

              • David Lindsay

                He is. Very. But that does not in itself bother me.

                It is the way that he appeared out of nowhere at an extremely early age and with no qualification beyond his social connections

                And even more the way that he is still here a decade after having been spectacularly wrong on the defining issue of his generation. Why are the people who supported the Iraq War still given the time of day?

        • Mos bos

          not so sure about that one – is he really so rich in his own right? he looks like a ‘hired gun’ to me – someone has to pay for his lunch.