Tuesday, August 20, 2013

British officials storm offices of the Guardian and smash hard drives containing information provided by Edward Snowden. Seriously?

Courtesy of the Chicago Tribune:

 The British authorities forced the Guardian newspaper to destroy material leaked by Edward Snowden, its editor has revealed, calling it a "pointless" move that would not prevent further reporting on U.S. and British surveillance programs. 

In a column on Tuesday, Alan Rusbridger said he had received a call from a government official a month ago who told him: "You've had your fun. Now we want the stuff back." 

The paper had been threatened with legal action if it did not comply. Later, two "security experts" from the secretive Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) had visited the paper's London offices and watched as computer hard drives containing Snowden material were reduced to mangled bits of metal. 

Asked by the BBC who he thought was behind those events, Rusbridger said he had "got the sense there was an active conversation" involving government departments, intelligence agencies and the prime minister's Downing Street office. 

Downing Street and GCHQ declined to comment. 

Rusbridger said the "bizarre" episode and the detention at London's Heathrow airport on Sunday of the partner of Guardian journalist Glenn Greenwald showed press freedom was under threat in Britain.

The detention of his partner by British officials has so angered Greenwald that he responded by saying this:

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. [...] They wanted to intimidate our journalism, to show that they have power and will not remain passive but will attack us more intensely if we continue publishing their secrets.

Greenwald has said in the past that only a portion of the Snowden documents have been released so far, it would seem that there might be some that Greenwald was not originally planning to release that might see the light of day in response to these actions.

Good job England!

I have to admit that I am at a loss as to understanding what in the hell the British government is thinking. They HAD to have known that destroying those hard drives would do nothing to stop the leaks, and that detaining Greenwald's partner would only piss him off.

All they have done is to play into the hands of those who are painting Snowden as a whistle blower and the governments attempting to silence him as Nazi like regimes trying to protect their egregious crimes against their citizens.

Perhaps Britain should have taken a page from the Americans who, instead of attacking Snowden or trying to keep the leaks from occurring, released documents confirming the existence of Area 51,  had the CIA admit that they were the masterminds behind Iran's 1953 coup, and had the President buy a new dog.

THAT is how you get a story off the front page.

30 comments:

  1. Anonymous12:47 PM

    I don't think that the Obamas bought a new dog because of Snowden! Get a grip, please. While the seizure of hard drives or whatever the Brits just did was not really very smart, what Snowden/Greenwald and their buddy Assange have been up to is just plain dangerous and highly illegal. The "Guardian" should have known better than to be a mouthpiece for them.

    Maybe it shows my age too much but people used to understand that some information was not meant to get circulated, that people doing essential spying in distant and obscure places should not be put at risk, that "loose lips sink ships." etc.
    Beaglemom

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous1:27 PM

      I agree with you, Beaglemom. It makes it hard to justify giving heavy prison sentences to Americans like Johnathan Pollard, who was spying for Israel, and Aldrich Ames, the CIA counter-intelligence officer convicted of spying for USSR and later Russia.

      Delete
  2. Anonymous1:02 PM

    This is a distraction from what is really going on.

    I mean, who is Glenn Greenwald to decide which particular documents should be released or not? Why is he so interested in embarrassing the British government or the US govt? Sounds rather self-serving, if nothing else and perhaps, although the word might sound offensive, a little bitchy of Greenwald.

    Either publish it or don't, Greenwald. But this cat and mouse nonsense is making you appear like another fame whore "journalist" who is now relevant only in her own mind and those of a few drooling, cousin-fucking creeps.

    You're supposed to be whistle-blowing, remember? You're turning a serious matter into another summer bus tour with the Palin miscreants.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous1:17 PM

    In addition to my comment at 12:47 pm, I am particularly irked that anyone would be disparaging of the Obamas because they got a second dog. It wasn't done to distract reporters from real news. That's what Glenn Greenwald and Assange and Snowden have been doing for too long already. I certainly hope that the statement, just made on this blog, that the Obama's acquisition of a second dog was related to the latest installment of the Greenwald nonsense was made in jest because it brought to mind the cruel GOP comments made about President Clinton's acquisition of a dog while he was in office, comments to the effect that it was done to deflect the impeachment stories then dominating the news.

    Today I feel especially sensitive on this subject because our beloved dog has just died and I recall how devastated President Clinton was when his dog was hit by a car and killed. Frankly I'm so sick of the Assange/Greenwald/Snowden spying idiocy. These guys deserve to spend decades in prison because of their pranks which have endangered lives.
    Beaglemom

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous1:33 PM

      Sorry to hear about your dog. Our two dogs are like family, so I can only imagine your anguish.

      Another Dog Lover

      Delete
    2. Anonymous1:47 PM

      This has been mid-reported, according to the Guardian. The guardian's editors destroyed the drives themselves on July 20th. This was reported by Julian Borger, The Guardian's Diplomatic Editor about a half hour ago.

      Sorry I don't have a link I can put here, but here is the title of the article at theguardian.com---
      NSA files: why the Guardian in Lonfon destroyed hard drives of leaked files
      by Julian Borger

      Delete
    3. Anonymous4:02 PM

      P.S. I hate this fucking iPhone. But an iPad won't fit in my pocket. Sigh.

      Delete
  4. A. J. Billings1:22 PM

    Regardless of the ethical and legal aspects of the Snowden debacle, it should be obvious to even the slowest British cop that those hard drives won't contain the only copy of the data

    Ask any IT person what the 1st rule is for any important data or documents, especially something as explosively important as Swowden's stuff

    BACK IT UP!!

    If I was running IT for the Guardian, I'd have that stuff double 512 AES encrypted on hidden partitions on drives stored in two other countries, , encrypted copies in the cloud under anonymous accounts, and sacrificial drives in the office in case someone wants to "confiscate" everything.

    Do those cops think digital stuff can't be duplicated in mere minutes or hours?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous1:32 PM

      I'm confident that Scotland Yard knows full well that these hard drives aren't the only copies. However, they will be incriminating evidence in any trial against Greenwald, and will perhaps reveal communications with other sources (including foreign sources) not yet known to the public or the authorities. At this point, it's very difficult to know whether this mares' nest ends with only Greenwald and Snowden.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous3:24 PM

      I totally agree with your assessment here.

      Delete
  5. Anonymous1:23 PM

    Tongue in cheek.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous1:45 PM

    The parts in the Guardian picture are not MacBook Pro parts, it's pieces of an ancient PC.
    Jeez...they really do think the rest of the world is as stupid as the tinfoil crowd.
    Plus, this happened more than a month ago, why is this story surfacing now pretending to be related to Miranda's detention at Heathrow?

    idiots, all of them...

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anonymous1:58 PM

    This is bullshit.
    Read this. It's from the always truthful, Bob Cesca;

    http://thedailybanter.com/2013/08/the-guardians-shocking-claim-we-were-forced-to-smash-our-computers-while-government-goons-observed/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=the-guardians-shocking-claim-we-were-forced-to-smash-our-computers-while-government-goons-observed

    mary b

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous1:59 PM

    Miranda was detained because he was carrying Stolen, Secret Documents.


    mary b

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous4:08 PM

      And not because he's Greenwald's boy toy. Miranda is not a journalist, so why would he have any immunity in one of our allies from detention for being in possession of stolen documents? It's almost like GG is wanting to start a flame war just to be flaming. I think GG is blowing hot air, but there's no whistle in sight.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous4:20 PM

      From wiki:
      in 2002 Greenwald was offered the partnership in a consulting company, Master Notions Inc., by his friend, Jason Buchtel. The pornographic website Hairy Jocks, owned by Peter Haas, was a client of Master Notions. Greenwald and Buchtel agreed to help Haas's site in return for 50% of the profits. A legal disagreement with Haas ensued over the profits from his site, and the establishment of a competing website, Hairy Studs, by Buchtel and Greenwald. The case was resolved in 2004.[21]

      The Internal Revenue Service and New York City and state have open judgments and liens against Greenwald dating from his law practice. The New York County Clerk’s office shows Greenwald has $126,000 in open judgments and liens, though Greenwald said he believes he paid those. The Internal Revenue Service has an $85,000 lien against him. In 2013 Greenwald said "We’re negotiating over payment plans." [22]

      Delete
  9. Anonymous2:39 PM

    Ted Cruz is Canadian and has to renounce his citizenship and tea parties are bending over backwards to try and justify why it's okay.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Anonymous2:45 PM

    The Koch Brothers Cato Institute funds this Greenwald guy. Allegedly. That makes anything he says, does, writes, reports or whistle blows suspicious to me. Follow the money.

    TexasMel

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous3:26 PM

      TexasMel, where did you get this alleged information from? Please cite source URL.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous8:14 PM

      I suck at linking but I did see when I did a Google search using the criteria "Cato Institute Funding Glen Greenwald," it come right up.

      Texas

      Delete
  11. Anonymous2:49 PM

    How many posters here would be pro-NSA if Bush/Cheney were still in the WH?

    Answer: none.

    By the same token, Sarah Palin would be pro-NSA.

    Congratulations on - just like Sarah - basing your "convictions" on who happens to be in the White House.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Anonymous2:52 PM

    Seems fake to me.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Anonymous3:25 PM

    Why does being a relative of Glenn Greenwald place you above the law?

    Should being a relative of Glenn Greenwald place you above the law? I ask the question because this morning many people are arguing Greenwald’s partner David Miranda should, in effect, enjoy immunity from investigation solely because his spouse writes very lengthy articles for The Guardian.

    When I first heard Miranda had been detained at Heathrow for nine hours under anti-terror legislation I thought it was a disgrace. I assumed, as did others, that it was an act of petty vengeance and intimidation aimed at the man who had become a very large thorn in the side of the UK and US governments through his publication of information supplied by former NSA employee Edward Snowden.

    But as the Miranda story has unfolded, it’s also started to unravel. First we were told that Miranda was not merely a disinterested observer to the Snowden saga but a journalist himself, who was working with Greenwald on the story. What’s more, The Guardian had paid for his plane ticket, and at the time of his arrest he had been in the process of carrying potentially sensitive information to Greenwald from one of Greenwald’s contacts, the film maker Laura Poitras.

    But then it became clear Miranda was not actually a journalist at all. What’s more, he wasn’t even that clear what it was he was carrying for his partner. “I don't have a role,” he told the Guardian. “I don't look at documents. I don't even know if it was documents that I was carrying. It could have been for the movie that Laura is working on.”

    So, far from being a professional journalist working on a one of the most sensitive stories on the globe, Miranda was really just some bloke carrying something through customs for a mate. Which brings us to the first big issue. Presumably, Miranda was asked – as we all are at security – “have you been asked to carry anything for anyone else?” To which, if he was being honest, he should have replied: “Yes. But I don’t know what it is. Could be to do with a film. Could be highly classified national security files. Can’t be sure.”

    But let’s assume he didn’t.

    more...

    ...When we all heard he had been arrested, we all thought “That’s a disgrace, why should someone be arrested simply because his partner works for The Guardian?” But that goes the other way as well. Why should David Miranda be allowed to happily saunter around carrying Britain’s most sensitive secrets simply because Glenn Greenwald is his spouse? Are we seriously saying the phrase “I’m with Greenwald” should now act as an international get-out-of-jail-free card?

    It’s clear David Miranda wasn’t stopped because he was Glenn Greenwald’s partner. He was stopped because he was suspected of carrying classified information highly detrimental to the UK national interest. And if we don’t stop people because of that, who do we stop?

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100231711/why-does-being-a-relative-of-glenn-greenwald-place-you-above-the-law/

    ReplyDelete
  14. Anonymous3:26 PM

    Glenn Greenwald, Super Villain: The UK Is Going to Be Sorry

    Greenfinger

    Glenn Greenwald is in a fine rage today, spewing threats at Britain to publish even more damaging documents: Glenn Greenwald to Publish UK Secrets After Britain Detains Partner.

    http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/42416_Glenn_Greenwald_Super_Villain-_The_UK_Is_Going_to_Be_Sorry

    Is the NSA Out of Control? What Does the Data Say?

    It says no.

    A great article by David Gerwitz with some much-needed perspective on what the numbers really tell us about NSA surveillance: Data-Driven Analysis Debunks Claims That NSA Is Out of Control (Special Report).

    http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/42419_Is_the_NSA_Out_of_Control_What_Does_the_Data_Say

    The Pro-NSA Case the Administration Isn’t Making

    Missed opportunity

    Here’s a good piece on the NSA internal audit published by the Washington Post and what it really shows us, by Benjamin Wittes: NSA Spying Defense: The Case the Administration Isn’t Making.

    Wittes actually makes many of the same points about the document that I have previously:

    NSA Uncovered and Corrected More Than 3000 Cases of Unauthorized Access Per Year
    Feinstein: No Evidence of Intentional NSA Abuse of Authority

    In these two posts I argued that the NSA Oversight & Compliance document actually shows the opposite of the overheated Washington Post portrayal — it contains no evidence whatsoever of deliberate wrongdoing, only errors.

    The most common incidents reported were “roaming” cases in which a valid foreign target uses a foreign cell phone while inside the US. The next most common incidents were simple typos by analysts entering database queries with fallible human fingers. The remaining incidents are mostly errors of one kind or another. But there is not a single case in the report of deliberate malicious activity.

    http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/42418_The_Pro-NSA_Case_the_Administration_Isnt_Making

    ReplyDelete
  15. Anonymous3:40 PM

    Ron Paul, John Birch Society President to Speak at Anti-Semitic Conference

    The guy Julian Assange thinks is America’s “only hope” will address a radical antisemitic group

    Today we have news that Julian Assange’s idol, Ron Paul, will be joining the president of the John Birch Society to address one of the most virulent antisemitic groups in North America: Ron Paul, Birch President to Speak at Anti-Semitic Conference.

    'Beyond the obvious, what do a far-right Italian politician, the president of the John Birch Society and former U.S. Rep. Ron Paul have in common?

    In early September, the men are all scheduled to speak - along with a lengthy list of archconservative clergy, lawyers and academics - at a conference in Canada sponsored by the Fatima Center, part of the “radical traditionalist Catholic” movement, perhaps the single largest group of hard-core anti-Semites in North America...'

    ...Julian Assange isn’t the only high profile extreme libertarian to admire Ron Paul; here’s a video of Ron Paul’s recent interview with our old pal Glenn Greenwald:

    http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/42421_Ron_Paul_John_Birch_Society_President_to_Speak_at_Anti-Semitic_Conference

    ReplyDelete
  16. Anonymous3:41 PM

    The Guardian’s Editor: We Voluntarily Smashed Our Computers

    http://thedailybanter.com/2013/08/the-guardians-shocking-claim-we-were-forced-to-smash-our-computers-while-government-goons-observed/

    ReplyDelete
  17. Anonymous4:44 PM

    US doesn't know what Snowden took, sources say

    More than two months after documents leaked by former contractor Edward Snowden first began appearing in the news media, the National Security Agency still doesn’t know the full extent of what he took, according to intelligence community sources, and is “overwhelmed” trying to assess the damage.

    Officials, including NSA director Keith Alexander, have assured the public that the government knows the scope of the damage, but two separate sources briefed on the matter told NBC News that the NSA has been unable to determine the full extent of the data he removed.

    Sources said authorities believe the trove of unreleased materials includes details of data collection by U.S. allies, including the U.K., Canada, Australia and New Zealand. These English-speaking allies, known along with the U.S. as the "Five Eyes," are critical to U.S. intelligence efforts.

    Snowden was working for Booz Allen Hamilton in Hawaii as a contractor for the NSA before he flew to Hong Kong in May 2013. Documents that he had leaked then became the basis of a series of articles by Guardian journalist Glenn Greenwald and Barton Gellman of the Washington Post about the extent of the NSA’s monitoring of electronic communications. Greenwald has told reporters that Snowden has leaked him and Laura Poitras, a documentary filmmaker, thousands of documents -- all of which have since been encrypted -- and that the encoded files have been shared with others...

    http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/08/20/20108770-us-doesnt-know-what-snowden-took-sources-say?lite

    ReplyDelete
  18. Anonymous6:12 PM

    Immediately following Anderson Cooper’s highly-charged interview with The Guardian’s Glenn Greenwald and his partner David Miranda over Miranda’s recent 9 hour detention at London’s Heathrow Airport, CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin came on to offer his own take on the matter. Toobin proceeded to describe Miranda as nothing more than a “mule” taking something unknown from one airport to another.


    Saying he thought British authorities were completely “justified” in detaining Miranda, Toobin said, “I don’t want to be unkind, but he was a mule,” adding, “our prisons are full of drug mules.” Toobin added, “Glenn’s view is as long as one of the two people on either end of that transaction was a journalist, he can take anything he wants.”

    Cooper pressed Toobin on his assertions, asking if it was really lawful for Miranda to be detained under the Terrorism Act. Toobin argued that if Miranda were carrying NSA secrets, then it could be considered legitimate under that law. “If terrorist know how we surveil their cell phone calls, how we surveil their texts,” he said, “that could be useful for terrorists.”

    http://www.mediaite.com/tv/jeffrey-toobin-compares-greenwalds-partner-to-a-drug-mule-in-fiery-cnn-debate/

    Glenn Greenwald and Partner Speak Out:

    The Guardian’s Glenn Greenwald and his partner David Miranda gave their first major interview to CNN’s Anderson Cooper Tuesday night since Miranda was detained by British authorities at Heathrow Airport over the weekend under the Terrorism Act. Miranda described how “afraid” he was during his 9 hour detention and Greenwald said he believes the British government will “come to regret what they have done.”

    http://www.mediaite.com/tv/glenn-greenwald-and-partner-speak-out-journalism-is-not-a-crime-and-its-not-terrorism/

    ReplyDelete
  19. Declaration of interest - I'm British. In looking at anything this in the UK, you need to bear a couple of point in mind - first, the Home Office and Mr Plod (generic name for our police) are actually quite stupid and will do things like detain David Miranda, thinking they've been clever; second the Home Office and the police are essentially authoritarian and will disregard civil liberties, court orders and the like if it suits them and until they get caught. I suspect that someone high in the Metropolitan police in connivance with the Home Office thought to earn brownie points from your loons by using the Blair legislation to get at all these nasty lefties and to seize what was coming next from Glenn Greenwald.

    They blew it by their stupidity and have now exposed what the secret state has been up to. Incidentally terrorism in the UK includes exposing what the government is up to and might be embarrassed by.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I listened to Rusbridger's account on NPR yesterday and was struck by how he twice reminded the interviewer that listeners in the US might not understand how differently our two countries define things like freedom of speech, freedom of the press, unreasonable search & seizure, etc. It's true -- Americans take that stuff for granted, and it basically doesn't exist over in the UK. They're not just our cousins who speak a little differently and insert the letter "u" into a lot of words -- their entire governmental and societal system represents something that the first emigrants to the New World understood as being WRONG and worked over a few generations to change, going so far as to ultimately codify in the Constitution. I wish more people understood this. Using our two governments for comparison purposes might re-invigorate the average American's understanding of why it's so IMPORTANT TO PROTECT these safeguards and not just give them lip service, as so many conservative judges [cough]Scalia[cough], politicians and police administrators seem to be doing in this very scary century.

    ReplyDelete

Don't feed the trolls!
It just goes directly to their thighs.