Detained Under Anti-Terrorism Laws - WTF?

[jshell]

So, what bright spark would have ordered this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-2375...

It's obviously nothing to do with terrorism and everythig to do with pressure from the US on the Snowden hunt. Do our police just play lap-dog to US whims? I mean, FFS, detaining a Guardian Journalists partner under anti-terror legislation and then asking nothing about terrorism related issues, but spending the time asking about Snowden...wasn't this guaranteed to be an own-goal and just lead to even more column inches?

And now Vaz is in on the act.

Are plod on here 'not in full awareness of the facts, so can't possibly comment', or are there some relevent opinions going round?

[Rovinghawk]

It is dangerous to know those who are right when those in power are wrong.

(Apologies to Voltaire)

[anonymous-user]

This really looks very scuzzy. So much for independent policing.

[singlecoil]

I think it is one of those situations where the media will say that the authorities have done them selves more harm than good, but where in fact none of it will make the slightest difference to anybody except the parties directly involved.

[DeadPrez]

singlecoil said:

I think it is one of those situations where the media will say that the authorities have done them selves more harm than good, but where in fact none of it will make the slightest difference to anybody except the parties directly involved.

But it does do the authorities (police) more harm. I, a police hater will hate them more and have more examples to justify my hate while for some that are on the fence this may be the incident that makes them swing to the "hate police" camp.

[Raify]

Pretty alarming rights they have under that legislation.

9 hour detention with no lawyer
No right to silence. (You break the law by keeping schtum)
They can pinch all your belongings.

[Rovinghawk]

DeadPrez said:

But it does do the authorities (police) more harm. I, a police hater will hate them more and have more examples to justify my hate while for some that are on the fence this may be the incident that makes them swing to the "hate police" camp.

Is it hate or is it disappointment/disillusionment?

[anonymous-user]

The legislation sucks, and is another example of our panicky abandonment of freedoms because of fear of some beardy idiots.

[Zeeky]

It's all for our own good. We should be grateful.

[Bill]

Breadvan72 said:

This really looks very scuzzy. So much for independent policing.

OTOH it's such an obvious and monumental own goal you have to wonder how much this has been embellished.

Hopefully the truth will out (and soemone will be torn a new one if necessary).

[singlecoil]

DeadPrez said:

singlecoil said:

I think it is one of those situations where the media will say that the authorities have done them selves more harm than good, but where in fact none of it will make the slightest difference to anybody except the parties directly involved.

But it does do the authorities (police) more harm. I, a police hater will hate them more and have more examples to justify my hate while for some that are on the fence this may be the incident that makes them swing to the "hate police" camp.

But what actual difference will your hatred make? There's all sorts of things I hate (or rather, used to hate), but they go on unaffected by my hatred. They've been doing it for so long that I can't really be bothered hating anything or anyone now, it's a waste of time and emotion.

[DeadPrez]

Rovinghawk said:

Is it hate or is it disappointment/disillusionment?

Hate is such is a strong word but disappointed/disillusioned doesnt convey my feelings appropriately.

Hate was definitely what I felt for the first few days/weeks after my most unfortunate encounter with the police. As time has passed I dont have the strong feelings of dislike anymore but I surely will never return to my police lover days.

[spitsfire]

The BiB aren't past using Terror legislation whenever it's convenient. There are videos up on Youtube of London Police trying to confiscate somebody's camera outside a station using Terrorism legislation. Same often applies to protests.

It's remarkably stupid of the police to use such powerful legislation in a way which seems so inappropriate (I'm presuming that the guy isn't a member of Al Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb or similar) and is obviously going to get publicity. It's even more stupid of the population to trust authorities with these powers and not expect them to be misused.

[Rovinghawk]

DeadPrez said:

Hate is such is a strong word but disappointed/disillusioned doesnt convey my feelings appropriately.

Might I suggest that the word you seek is contempt?

I feel that this case might add to that feeling for many people.

Doubtless someone will justify it sooner or later; I look forward to the explanation of why it was necessary.

[jshell]

Rovinghawk said:

Might I suggest that the word you seek is contempt?

I feel that this case might add to that feeling for many people.

Doubtless someoneSnowboy will justify it sooner or later; I look forward to the explanation of why it was necessary.

[spitsfire]

Rovinghawk said:

Doubtless someone will justify it sooner or later; I look forward to the explanation of why it was necessary.

They're just trying to help out our good friends across the pond. And we should remember that the US of A is on our side.

We all know the Americans would never ignore legal safeguards and the constitutional/human rights of those in a friendly nation. Obviously the Yanks wouldn't ever dream of spying on law-abiding citizens of an allied country. Oh, hang on.....

[Snowboy]

jshell said:

Rovinghawk said:

Might I suggest that the word you seek is contempt?

I feel that this case might add to that feeling for many people.

Doubtless someoneSnowboy will justify it sooner or later; I look forward to the explanation of why it was necessary.

I have no idea why it was done.
Possibly at some point we will find out.

Until then some people will use it to criticise the police, others (like myself) will try to say nothing until we know more.

Chances are sooner or later this thread will diverge from the specific OP and just become a generic anti police ant govt. rant anyway.
I may join at that point, it depends on my mood.

[Zigster]

I heard this on Radio 4 this morning. Surely there is something else going on here - it beggars belief that the facts are simply as have currently been reported?

A loud-mouthed and anti-establishment journalist's partner gets detained like this. What did the authorities think would happen afterwards?

If it really is just to ps off Glenn Greenwald because of his involvement in the wikileaks stuff (ETA: oops - Edward Snowden not Bradley Manning), I think this will backfire enormously on the UK Government.

Edited by Zigster on Monday 19th August 12:06

[singlecoil]

Zigster said:

I heard this on Radio 4 this morning. Surely there is something else going on here - it beggars belief that the facts are simply as have currently been reported?

A loud-mouthed and anti-establishment journalist's partner gets detained like this. What did the authorities think would happen afterwards?

If it really is just to ps off Glenn Greenwald because of his involvement in the wikileaks stuff (ETA: oops - Edward Snowden not Bradley Manning), I think this will backfire enormously on the UK Government.

Edited by Zigster on Monday 19th August 12:06

I think this is how the media will play it, but the media have a vastly over-inflated view of their own importance. There will be no backfire, the only thing that can adversely affect the government is a general election defeat, and when people are in the voting booths selecting their candidates, they won't be thinking about this episode, they will have more serious things on their minds.

[anonymous-user]

singlecoil said:

I think it is one of those situations where the media will say that the authorities have done them selves more harm than good, but where in fact none of it will make the slightest difference to anybody except the parties directly involved.

+1

After a couple of weeks no one will give a st apart from the people directly involved.