UK Gov't Forces Guardian To 'Destroy' Hard Drives With Snowden Info; Guardian Says Reporting Continues From NY

from the freedom-of-the-press? dept

Mon, Aug 19th 2013 4:01pm — Mike Masnick

Apparently, the UK government is now hellbent on demonstrating how broadly it will try (and fail) to censor the press these days. By now you've heard that the UK government detained David Miranda, Glenn Greenwald's partner, under an anti-terrorism law, all as a ruse to seize his electronic media and to intimidate Greenwald. In response, Guardian editor Alan Rusbridger has revealed some of the pressure he's received from the UK government for reporting on this story, leading to an absolutely ridiculous situation in which the UK equivalent of the NSA helped the Guardian destroy some physical hard drives for no reason other than that they didn't want anyone reporting on the leaked Snowden documents from within the UK. The impact on actual reporting, of course, was nil. First came the demands:

A little over two months ago I was contacted by a very senior government official claiming to represent the views of the prime minister. There followed two meetings in which he demanded the return or destruction of all the material we were working on. The tone was steely, if cordial, but there was an implicit threat that others within government and Whitehall favoured a far more draconian approach.

The mood toughened just over a month ago, when I received a phone call from the centre of government telling me: "You've had your fun. Now we want the stuff back." There followed further meetings with shadowy Whitehall figures. The demand was the same: hand the Snowden material back or destroy it. I explained that we could not research and report on this subject if we complied with this request. The man from Whitehall looked mystified. "You've had your debate. There's no need to write any more."

Got that last bit? You've had your debate. There's no need to write any more. That's not just obnoxious but it shows the way the intelligence folks are dealing with these revelations: "okay, let some people talk about a little bit, and then shut them up and let's get back to the spying." From there, things got even worse, with the UK government basically telling The Guardian they had no choice but to "destroy" the documents:

During one of these meetings I asked directly whether the government would move to close down the Guardian's reporting through a legal route – by going to court to force the surrender of the material on which we were working. The official confirmed that, in the absence of handover or destruction, this was indeed the government's intention. Prior restraint, near impossible in the US, was now explicitly and imminently on the table in the UK.

If anyone believes in freedom of the press, this should be incredibly important -- and the statements by the UK government should be offensive. The government flat out told the paper that it would basically shut down the publication if it didn't abide by the government's wishes to destroy key research for reporting and stop its continued efforts to report on these issues of immense importance to the public.

Of course, to anyone who's in touch with reality knows, banning the reporting of the subject in the UK is both stupid and meaningless. It's stupid because it's a "head in the sand" approach to things, which never works. Furthermore, it was only a matter of time until the details of this came out and the UK government was revealed for their thuggish police-state, free press-suppressing ways. And, it's meaningless because the world is global. The Guardian doesn't need to report on this stuff from the UK, especially since Greenwald is already based in Brazil.

I explained to the man from Whitehall about the nature of international collaborations and the way in which, these days, media organisations could take advantage of the most permissive legal environments. Bluntly, we did not have to do our reporting from London. Already most of the NSA stories were being reported and edited out of New York. And had it occurred to him that Greenwald lived in Brazil?

But, no matter to the government spooks. They demanded a destroyed hard drive, so a destroyed hard drive is what they got:

The man was unmoved. And so one of the more bizarre moments in the Guardian's long history occurred – with two GCHQ security experts overseeing the destruction of hard drives in the Guardian's basement just to make sure there was nothing in the mangled bits of metal which could possibly be of any interest to passing Chinese agents. "We can call off the black helicopters," joked one as we swept up the remains of a MacBook Pro.

Rusbridger notes that this was a particularly "pointless piece of symbolism that understood nothing about the digital age," but I'd go even further than that. The symbolism of brainless, impotent thuggery for the sake of pure bullying, rather than having any intended impact, says quite a lot about the UK government, the GCHQ, and how far behind the times they are. Rusbridger uses this horrifying story to note that the similar stealing of David Miranda's technology won't stop the reporting either -- but one hopes that it will lead people in the UK to rise up and speak out against such police-state intimidation tactics, and to demand serious reforms to protect basic freedoms and the value of investigative journalism.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: alan rusbridger, david miranda, free speech, freedom of the press, gchq, intimidation, uk, uk glenn greenwald
Companies: the guardian

89 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

That One Guy (profile), 19 Aug 2013 @ 4:06pm

Ah desperation...
I can only imagine that either it never occurred to the morons in the government that such a story would go public, or the US is putting serious pressure on the UK to stop the leaks by any means necessary, to such an extent that what promises to be an increasingly massive PR nightmare was seen as the 'easier' choice.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 20 Aug 2013 @ 3:37am
  
  Re: Ah desperation...
  Have you considered that GCHQ has been named in earlier leaks where they bugged the heck out of a convention? UK doesn't need US pressure. Most likely they are even more desperate to stop the stories from emerging, than NSA since GCHQ is doing far more conspicuous law-breaking.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Aug 2013 @ 4:09pm

And here I thought The Thick of It was a satire.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 19 Aug 2013 @ 11:51pm
  
  Re: The Thick of It
  Since you have been watching
  The Thick of It
  
  we recommend the following
  
  Yes Minister
  Yes Prime Minister
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - DOlz (profile), 20 Aug 2013 @ 12:42am
    
    Re: Re: The Thick of It
    May I also suggest "The Tall Blonde Man With One Black Shoe" (not the atrocious US remake with Tom Hanks)?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Groove Tiger (profile), 19 Aug 2013 @ 4:12pm

The files are IN the computer!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkwrIZQDt50
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Aug 2013 @ 4:25pm

General Alexander is out of control, and the UK spooks should remember they answer to PARLIAMENT not some nut job General, trying to cover his crimes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 20 Aug 2013 @ 12:00am
  
  Re:
  The UK parliament answer to the spooks by the sounds of it and certainly never listen to the public.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Aug 2013 @ 4:37pm

A moment of comic relief in an otherwise dull day
Truly a face-palm moment for the Whitehall techno-illiteratzi -- those misguided assclowns have mistaken the medium that contains the message for the message itself, and in the process created an entirely new, competence-related message that reflects upon them rather badly. I'm of two minds as to whether I should laugh or be appalled at such bumbling attempts at jackbooted thuggery.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hephaestus (profile), 19 Aug 2013 @ 4:39pm

Gut feel says, what has been reported so far, is the "lite" version of what is actually going on. I really think the UK and US are in for a serious crap storm, over the next few months as more details are exposed.

It makes one wonder how many other programs, as illegal as this, there are.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 19 Aug 2013 @ 5:32pm
  
  Re:
  I agree with Hephaestus. This is the lite version and the real damaging programs haven't been heard about yet. This is what the main concern is.
  
  This has all the hallmarks of the very stuff that turns politics into revolutions. Suddenly you find out your world isn't what you really thought it was cause there is now proof in front of your eyes that it is not.
  
  What is more worrying for politicians is this is how you get thrown out of office and for spying how budgets and programs get cut while limiting what can be done legally is changed.
  
  I think the shit storm is just starting and they are afraid, very afraid, that what they've been doing could likely come to light and there be hell to pay for it.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

out_of_the_blue, 19 Aug 2013 @ 4:43pm

Does this not say "limited hangout"?
"You've had your debate. There's no need to write any more." -- They wanted it out so even dolts will know that they're under constant surveillance, but not enough to make the people rise up and END this tyranny.

Only problem I have with this piece is that "thuggery" is too good a word to describe modern enforcers: implies some thought and finesse, but they're now just attack dogs that obey orders without question.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 19 Aug 2013 @ 9:45pm
  
  Re: Does this not say "limited hangout"?
  Whatever meds you took just before you posted this, keep taking them. It'll be better for everyone that way.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 20 Aug 2013 @ 12:07am
  
  Re: Does this not say "limited hangout"?
  Wow, just wow.
  
  Second time in as many weeks that I actually agree with OOTB.
  
  As the previous commenter said, whatever meds they have you on, keep taking them!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 20 Aug 2013 @ 9:29am
    
    Re: Re: Does this not say "limited hangout"?
    Scary when you feel he might deserve an insightful vote
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Howard (profile), 21 Aug 2013 @ 5:25am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Does this not say "limited hangout"?
      Just to offset the pavlovian reports ;)
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Aug 2013 @ 4:44pm

How do they know that the drives that were destroyed contained the files they wanted destroyed, and were the only copies in London? Have they not heard of off site backups?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 19 Aug 2013 @ 5:25pm
  
  Re:
  They were specifically aware that there were copies elsewhere but still felt the need to have the drives destroyed to be able to say to the US that no reporting of Snowden leaks were happening in the UK.
  
  It's like an abused wife trying to keep her abusive partner happy, and just as pointless.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 20 Aug 2013 @ 12:07am
    
    Re: Re:
    To put it bluntly, the USG are literally that stupid!
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- The Real Michael, 20 Aug 2013 @ 5:09am
  
  Re:
  Not only do they still have the data backed up, probably in various locations, but Snowden definitely has all of it as well. So in the end, all that the UK government proved is that they're extremists who will sink to any low, even threatening the press, in order to cover up nefarious activity.
  
  At this point, the only difference between governments and terrorists is that the latter violates people's rights with impunity.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Calvin (profile), 20 Aug 2013 @ 9:34am
    
    Re: Re:
    'At this point, the only difference between governments and terrorists is that the latter violates people's rights with impunity.'
    
    Didn't you mean to say former rather than latter?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - The Real Michael, 21 Aug 2013 @ 5:13am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Whoops, sorry. Yeah, the former.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - That One Guy (profile), 20 Aug 2013 @ 10:59am
    
    Re: Re:
    At this point, the only difference between governments and terrorists is that the latter violates people's rights with impunity.
    
    Yeah, until I see some high ranking officials in jail or at least in court over the actions that have been exposed and brought to light, I'm going to have to say that both groups are able to act with impunity.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - The Real Michael, 21 Aug 2013 @ 5:16am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      It was an error on my part. But you're right either way.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Vic, 19 Aug 2013 @ 4:45pm

And CryptoStorm still "... believes:

Spooks aren't dumb -- far from it."?

I don't know man, judging by their friends - not so far...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Aug 2013 @ 4:47pm

If the HM government orders them shut down, they could simply defy and keep operating in defiance of any shutdown order.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 19 Aug 2013 @ 5:14pm
  
  Re:
  It would have been interesting to see what sort of backlash a major UK newspaper being shutdown would actually cause....
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ruby, 19 Aug 2013 @ 4:53pm

"The government flat out told the paper that it would basically shut down the publication if it didn't abide by the government's wishes"

Someone needs to tell the government that if they've nothing to hide, they've nothing to fear.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Peter Voveris (profile), 19 Aug 2013 @ 5:01pm
  
  Re:
  That only applies if the government wants to spy on you.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Aug 2013 @ 4:57pm

"You've had your debate. There's no need to write any more."
Jesus, that sounded like a line spewed by a Hollywood B-movie card-carrying villain. They are not even trying anymore. If this was fiction, I would be asking "Who writes this crap?"

Not to mention that this hard-drive destroying plot is only a small step up from "Computer Equals Monitor" - in this case, hard disk equals data.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nastybutler77 (profile), 19 Aug 2013 @ 4:59pm

And, it's meaningless because the world is global.

A more profound sentance has never been uttered...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Aug 2013 @ 5:08pm

Rusbridger notes that this was a particularly "pointless piece of symbolism that understood nothing about the digital age,"

Except that it is absolutely NOT a pointless piece of symbolism. It is all about control at this point, and ANY form of acquiescence is a tacit admission of willingness to give up our freedoms.

As I pointed out somewhere in a story a few days ago in a story about Lavabit shutting down and that larger companies like Google, Yahoo, and Microsoft didn't always have the luxury of making a moral stand: morality and ethics are NOT luxuries. You either have them, and are willing to face whatever consequences result from those choices or you do not.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- The Real Michael, 20 Aug 2013 @ 5:28am
  
  Re:
  Bravo. Either you take a stand for liberty and justice or you cower in fear and complacency while the state stomps all over your rights. It is the hallmark of the totalitarian state to use threats, intimidation and even violence in an attempt to keep everyone in check. If the populace refuses to submit to force, the state is powerless, because all governing bodies derive power from the people -- or more specifically, their obedience.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - jeh, 20 Aug 2013 @ 9:26am
    
    Re: Re:
    Just imagine if Google took a stand, if they even blacked out their services for one day in protest of the NSA. It'd send ripples the world over that no one could ignore. To bad they haven't got the man pellets to do it.
    
    The sad thing is, these leaks are already hurting their business. Have they really got so much to loose? If they took that stand though, it'd probably go a long way to repair their reputation with the world. Long term, it'd be a great move.
    
    Do no evil, right? So why don't they show it? They may not commit the crimes, but they, and other large tech companies, allow it to happen without so much protest. What protest they give is only skin deep, if even that.
    
    The telecommunication companies though, trash. Vile and despicable. If the leaks didn't show that, surely their business practices have. They're hotly anti-consumer. If there wasn't regulations in place, they'd run wild pilfering the wallets of people the world over. I'm sure they'd trade their customer's souls if it meant they could get a little extra cash in their bank accounts. Teamed up with the NSA, it seems they're already on their way to putting that deal into place.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 20 Aug 2013 @ 4:38pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Everybody knows that Google is evil and that's why I stopped using its services.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Aug 2013 @ 5:10pm

Wow. The Snowden leaks, Greenwald's reporting, the lies to the public by government officials, and now these thuggish actions by British agents make me feel like I've stumbled into an alternate time line of existence. If nothing else the last few months have crushed my naive belief that the contemporary world has learned at all from historical transgressions on human rights and civil liberties.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Aug 2013 @ 5:12pm

Names please
The Guardian should name every single person who comes along and threatens them. That way all their neighbors will know just what thugs are living on their block.

Seriously, did the UK learn nothing from WWII & the Cold War?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 19 Aug 2013 @ 5:20pm
  
  Re: Names please
  Better question: did the UK learn nothing from all the revolutions it lost?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Aug 2013 @ 5:19pm

This is 2+2=5 for the electronic age. It matters not that it is incorrect, only that it is accepted.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Aug 2013 @ 5:28pm

GCHQ is cracking under pressure from their pimps at the NSA. I believe the illegal theft of David Miranda personal property, is due to the NSA trying to figure out what documents Edward Snowden downloaded.

The NSA most likely would like to know about these documents, in order to be able to lie in public without having the truth thrown back in their face shortly afterwards.

I hope Greenwald hired or is consulting with a cryptographic expert. I hope he realizes that user passwords are the weak link during the encryption process. Not the encryption ciphers themselves.

I hope he's using at least 128 character long passwords. If not longer. Plus using a proper mixture of upper and lower case characters, plus special characters and numbers.

In other words, the only secure password is one you cannot remember.

Otherwise the NSA will crack his passwords like a hot knife through butter.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Aug 2013 @ 5:35pm

I look that if all this gets covered up by the evidence coming up missing that some foreign power is likely to kill Snowden knowing the US will be blamed for it and the data dump will be released. At that point there is no covering up the evidence anymore.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
FM Hilton, 19 Aug 2013 @ 5:41pm

The hard drives contained nothing.
Pure symbolism, on the part of the Guardian, because even if those poor mangled hard drives contained anything, it would have been impossible for anyone to get anything from them. I would guess that the Guardian, knowing the next step, probably had them wiped clean and thoroughly. A good solid magnet usually does the trick.

Stupid government. They should have gotten a court order demanding the hard drives intact so they could have read them..but no, must destroy the beast! Must kill the technology that created it!

Elsewhere, people are laughing: "I guess we showed them! We still have the information!"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- John Fenderson (profile), 20 Aug 2013 @ 9:14am
  
  Re: The hard drives contained nothing.
  A good solid magnet usually does the trick.
  
  Not so well as you might think, actually...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Aug 2013 @ 5:47pm

Threatening to shut down newspapers that report on government corruption is a futile, archaic act of tyranny.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Zakida Paul (profile), 19 Aug 2013 @ 5:51pm

This is getting fucking ridiculous now. The UK gets more and more like Iran/Syria/North Korea every day and yet they have the audacity to go on and on about the various violations in those countries.

We need to get these corrupt and incompetent politicians out ASAP and vote in someone truly liberal who feels strongly about freedom of the press and the right to privacy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Calvin (profile), 20 Aug 2013 @ 9:40am
  
  Re:
  But that's the problem isn't it, all we have to choose from are career politicians, bought and paid for by some lobbying group.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Aug 2013 @ 5:58pm

Bond, James Bond
So much for Spies and Secret agents as Heroes.

All these years you identify with the secret agents being the good guy and fighting evil around the world and now we're finding out that THEY are the evil ones and we are the ones they want to destroy. This is the freedom that our men and women in the military are dying for?

Talk about betrayal...No more Bond movies for me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 20 Aug 2013 @ 12:27am
  
  Re: Bond, James Bond
  Even worse, they are incompetent beyond belief. Or maybe that makes it slightly less bad, not sure.
  
  http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/posts/BUGGER
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- The Real Michael, 20 Aug 2013 @ 5:39am
  
  Re: Bond, James Bond
  Oh, it's much worse than that. Here in the US, all over network television they have shows which glorify law enforcement. They love to depict the state and federal agencies as benevolent heroes, involved in extreme situations so fictitious, yet presented as if common occurrance, that are beyond absurd. Because as we all know, every criminal just so happens to be a terror mastermind who's plotting against the state. The idea is obviously to hammer it into the public psyche that the state is always good and that our country is crawling with terrorists.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Aug 2013 @ 6:50pm

I'm confused - why didn't the Guardian say, "You've had your debate, see you in court"?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 20 Aug 2013 @ 12:17am
  
  Re:
  Its easier to humour the uk 'Intelligence' agency by saying, "Hey look all our info is on this single laptop. Come over and smash it up if you like!"
  
  It must have been tough to keep a straight face whilst they were breaking it up.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Disgusted, 19 Aug 2013 @ 7:13pm

Follow The Money
All of these programs, the spying, the data interception and things like the new NSA storage farm in Utah, cost a ton of money for hardware, facilities and personnel. Who pays for it? It's not just the UK and the US. It's world wide. More importantly, who gets the contracts and the money? How much are we talking about? Hundreds of Millions? Billions? Trillions? Of course they don't want this revealed. It's gonna end up costing them a bundle if it gets shut down, so a (very) small percentage of it goes back to the politicians who approve funding. Everyone has their hands out, and no one wants to lose out on the gold rush.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Arioch (profile), 19 Aug 2013 @ 7:29pm

The idiotic thuggery astounds me.
Take my laptop and smash the hard drive?
I have no sensitive information, but I have multiple backups of my music, videos, programs and documents.
The loss of my laptop hard drive would be inconvenient, but there is nothing there that can't be restored.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Aug 2013 @ 7:45pm

this seems too over the Top
Are they trying to distract the attention away from the US?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Aug 2013 @ 8:48pm

And this would be why the First Amendment specifically guarantees freedom of the press in addition to freedom of speech. I'm slightly surprised the UK does not seem to have equivalent protects by this point.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- The Real Michael, 20 Aug 2013 @ 5:43am
  
  Re:
  Do you honestly believe that had the data been given to an American-based news outlet that the government wouldn't have stormed their offices IMMEDIATELY under the magical, all-justifying pretense of "National Security"?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 20 Aug 2013 @ 6:28am
    
    Re: Re:
    Good Golly, where do you get your education? Why should any government allow a news media outlet to possess information illegally leaked and at the very least containing sensitive data if not outright detrimental to national security? You are going to trust the media to fire back upon the real enemies of the US and her Allies should they ever launch an all out attack on the people of the free world?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Lord_Unseen, 20 Aug 2013 @ 8:02am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      I think you and I have different definitions of "free world". My definition sure doesn't include a government that can decide what we're allowed or not allowed to talk about.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 20 Aug 2013 @ 8:44am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Nice to see David able to take time out from his busy schedule to post here...
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 20 Aug 2013 @ 8:46am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        that's PM David...
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Aug 2013 @ 8:53pm

wtfff? Its like everything that's happening is only getting worse. But kudos to the tons of copies that were made. Did the spooks really think one copy existed?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
antymat, 19 Aug 2013 @ 10:10pm

Baaaa, baaaa
"Baaa, baaa" - this is all they'll do.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Aug 2013 @ 11:37pm

"You've had your fun. Now we want the stuff back."

Yes I'm sure he's having tons of fun on reporting on wide scale abuse that will ensure 2013 will be considered one of the darkest years in American history.

So whoever made that call I can say this -
You assholes have forever tarnished American pride.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 20 Aug 2013 @ 6:58am
  
  Re:
  You've had your fun. Now we want the stuff back
  
  This quote confuses me. The data is from the USA, right? Why is the UK saying they want it 'back'?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Aug 2013 @ 11:48pm

And this is why Wikileaks is so important

http://gigaom.com/2013/08/19/still-wondering-why-we-need-a-stateless-media-entity-like- wikileaks-this-is-why/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Aug 2013 @ 11:56pm

Superinjunction / Pointy-Haired Bosses of Whitehall
It is entirely possible that the Guardian did contest the issue in court, lost, and is legally prohibited from reporting about their loss. Alternatively, they may have decided that allowing the UK security forces to play games would (a) have no effect on their reporting and (b) get the pointy-haired bosses of Whitehall to leave the Guardian alone.

PS: "Pointy-Haired Bosses of Whitehall" might be a pretty good name for a band.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 20 Aug 2013 @ 6:44am
  
  Re: Superinjunction / Pointy-Haired Bosses of Whitehall
  Keep on smoking whatever you're smoking.. This news agency, if they are in fact a real news agency, had classified data that was obtained through illegal means of a leak by a traitor of the people who couldn't possible know the limits of damage to the free world he caused, much less contain it. Now, do you want to rely on the Guardian for your national security?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - That One Guy (profile), 20 Aug 2013 @ 11:22am
    
    Re: Re: Superinjunction / Pointy-Haired Bosses of Whitehall
    As opposed to the ever so trustworthy government? Damn right I'd trust them more, I'd trust a random person on the street with information like that more than the government because the government is not trustworthy, something they have proven time and time again, especially recently, with all the lies they've been caught out on.
    
    You might want to make sure your autocorrect is working too, it seems to have problems with 'whistleblower'/'hero', changing the words to 'traitor'. The only people hurt by the leaks are the criminals violating laws and then lying about it to the public, Snowden's actions have shown him to be anything but a 'traitor of the people'.
    
    Also I do so love the ever so blatant ad-hom of 'If they are in fact a real news agency', nothing like trying to discredit your opponent by insinuations of untrustworthiness and a lack of credibility. Had you done even the basest level of research, you'd know that the newspaper in question is close to two centuries old, and is currently the second most popular newspaper in the UK online.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
John Smith, 20 Aug 2013 @ 1:06am

I hope he made countless online copies of the drives before they were destroyed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Aug 2013 @ 1:57am

apart from the obvious, one extremely important comment that is made, shows exactly the sort of country the UK has become and exactly what the present government thinks of the laws and of the people. the 'police-state intimidation tactics' shows how far the UK has sunk. it has fallen from being a country that valued freedom and privacy to one that is falling in behind the USA, following the same degrading route and the same treatment of it's citizens. the problem is that no one cares about it until it lands on their doorstep. the UK citizen always thinks it is happening to someone else, somewhere else. eventually, when it dawns on then how close it is and how serious it is, that is the time to be very wary. that is the time when the people are at their most dangerous and their least forgiving!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 20 Aug 2013 @ 7:04am
  
  Re:
  The enemies of the free world are militant and ruthless. They will stop at nothing to skewer you and me, roast us up over a fire and throw some livers on the bbq.
  
  Sure it sucks that you can't hardly have a friendly conversation with the proactive police anymore being civilian, but the days of Barney Fife are sadly over in this modern dangerous world. The friendly cop walking the beat in his local neighborhood is a nostalgic reminiscent era gone by. It is a neccessary evil to have the police forces in this mode because of the enemy within our borders is really within our borders. Rock Solid Warriors are what this world needs, fighting for the good side. What side are you on? The lines have already been drawn.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - That One Guy (profile), 20 Aug 2013 @ 11:29am
    
    Re: Re:
    'skewer you and me' 'roast us up'...
    
    Wait a tic, are you the individual that was commenting on an earlier article, posting such camp-fire level horror stories about the 'big bad men coming to kill you'?
    
    Seriously, we're grown men and women here, such sad attempts at fear-mongering is going to do nothing more than get a laugh out of those reading your comments.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - John Fenderson (profile), 20 Aug 2013 @ 2:28pm
    
    Re: Re:
    It is a neccessary evil to have the police forces in this mode because of the enemy within our borders is really within our borders.
    
    Unless there is some proof otherwise, this must be classified as unmitigated bullshit.
    
    Are there evil people on the loose? Absolutely. But that's not some kind of new thing. What's new is that the police have become the military.
    
    What side are you on?
    
    I am on the side of what's right. I am on the side of the people. I fear that this isn't the same side as many law enforcement agencies.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Andrew D. Todd, 20 Aug 2013 @ 2:34am

Memories of the English Civil War
One of the set-pieces of English school-history, their equivalent of _The Signing of the Declaration of Independence_ or _Washington Crossing the Delaware_, is the picture of Charles I invading the houses of parliament, with his troops, seeking to arrest five members of parliament. Not finding the members, Charles asks of Speaker Lenthall where they are. Lenthall replies, "May it please your Majesty, I have neither eyes to see nor tongue to speak in this place but as the House is pleased to direct me, whose servant I am here".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Lenthall
http://www.parliament.uk/business/publicati ons/parliamentary-archives/archives-highlights/archives-speakerlenthall/

Look at the picture. ("Speaker Lenthall Asserting the Privileges of the Commons Against Charles I when the Attempt was made to Seize the Five Members." by Charles West Cope, 1866). The picture is of course somewhat a-historical, like all school-history, produced at a time, two hundred years after the fact, when compulsory education and progressively universal suffrage were being instituted. Note the arrogant sneering face. As it developed, Charles' future led to the Battle of Naseby, and to a scaffold outside Whitehall.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Naseby

Of course, what the Guardian is doing is deliberately entrapping Prime Minister David Cameron to re-enact the role of Charles, to let all men know that he thinks he is King of England. King David the First! All hail, David the First! But of course he will find his Cromwell in time. I grant that David Cameron has a certain animal cunning, but he is really a rather stupid man.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 20 Aug 2013 @ 7:32am
  
  Re: Memories of the English Civil War
  "Great" Britain doesn't stand a chance if the entire population's view of their leaders is as derogating as this commentor's view. Not saying one shouldn't have the right to his or her opinion(s), but sounds like this guy is picking a fight in the school yard.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - That One Guy (profile), 20 Aug 2013 @ 11:34am
    
    Re: Re: Memories of the English Civil War
    Well if the government would stop doing such contemptible/illegal actions, getting caught, and then trying to lie their way out of it, maybe people would see them in a better light.
    
    Just a thought anyway.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ninja (profile), 20 Aug 2013 @ 3:32am

Ah I remember when they used to criticize Hugo Ch�vez and the likes.. The sheer irony.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Aug 2013 @ 4:01am

One thing for sure!
If the Guardian releases any more documents from this 'set' they are screwed.

They no doubt would have had to convince the security that were the only copies, and if that was a lie, that in itself is a crime.

So if the Guardian releases any more of the documents, they are screwed and have lied.

So it's stopped the Guardian from releasing any further documents leaked to them by Snowden.

Right or wrong, it's effective !
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 20 Aug 2013 @ 7:42am
  
  Re: One thing for sure!
  Not sure if you read the article or not, but they tried to explain that they didn't have the only copies.
  
  So, one thing IS for sure, you don't comprehend what you read.
  
  So ineffective, it hurts.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 20 Aug 2013 @ 9:36am
    
    Re: Re: One thing for sure!
    Does it really matter if those are the only copies?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- DP, 20 Aug 2013 @ 1:39pm
  
  Re: One thing for sure!
  Get some other organisation to release them. "What? Other back-up copies exist elsewhere?...I'm sure I don't know how that came to be."
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lisa Simeone, 20 Aug 2013 @ 4:22am

Fascism 101
It's not just people in the UK who need to "rise up and speak out against such police-state intimidation tactics, and to demand serious reforms to protect basic freedoms and the value of investigative journalism." It's Americans, too.

We've done the same thuggish things the Brits have. Just ask Laura Poitras. Or Jacob Applebaum. Or David House. Or any number of other American citizens who've been detained at the border, trying to re-enter their own country, and who've been harassed (oops, I mean "interrogated") for hours, and their property stolen (oops, "confiscated") and destroyed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nigflot blarny quando floon, 20 Aug 2013 @ 5:00am

The world of V for Vendetta coming true right before our eyes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Real Michael, 20 Aug 2013 @ 5:48am

Rogue states such as North Korea and Iran must be having a good laugh right about now. For all the talking down our governments did of their regimes, ours doesn't act much different.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Aug 2013 @ 6:07am

A Good Ally
Of course, to anyone who's in touch with reality knows, banning the reporting of the subject in the UK is both stupid and meaningless. It's stupid because it's a "head in the sand" approach..

Imagine for a moment that half the world didn't hate the US Government and that all the world didn't fear or mistrust it whether or not justifiably. Imagine that the US was kinder and gentler in its approach to its sovereignty and world relations. Imagine that the governments around the world were not adversarily trying to gain every possible advantage in its quest to survive against its tremendous power.

It would still be most reassuring to see this action of the eradication of these hard-drives which might contain data in which an adversary could gain some edge over the US and its allies. This coming from the UK, and believing its with no illicit mistrust with its intentions or motivations seems to be very reasonable in all reality. Since when does anyone or any government rely on news gathering and reporting agencies nowadays for containing and safeguarding its national security?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Shon Gale, 20 Aug 2013 @ 7:30am

I have never believed the press was free from interference. It has been bought and paid for ever since Hearst. If you got the money they got the time. The great whore of Babylon is the so called Free Press.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jasmine Charter, 20 Aug 2013 @ 8:17am

UK Government... Meet...
UK Government, may I introduce the Streisand effect...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
th (profile), 20 Aug 2013 @ 8:21am

Uk has always had preemptive powers over press
THe UK has always maintained preemptive powers over the press as a matter of law. I remember something about Princess Diana was going to be printed and the govt. was able to prevent its publication in the UK while at the same time in the US, some TV something involving Elizabeth Taylor was going to air and she was unable to stop it or sue until after it had aired. The two cases were contrasted in the media and used to illustrate the difference between the UK's system and our own.

What the UK can do to publishers really rubs us the wrong way and the first time you hear about it, it's shocking. just the way it is there. Fully agreed that the reaction was counter productive wrt to whatever the UK was trying to achieve.

The degree of hamfistedness that's been displayed by the authorities surprises me. You expect that they expect that one day they'll have to deal with exactly this leak- revealing the degree to which they capture and process internet traffic. It now seems as if they thought such a leak could just never happen and have been caught completely flatfooted and dumbfounded.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
PROM3THEUS, 22 Aug 2013 @ 1:39pm

They could have resisted and taken it to court, instead they gave it up like cowards.
The thing that angers me the most about all of this is that the Guardian conceded. They should have took them to bat, told them to go fuck themselves, and then let them take them to court and have it out in the high court. That's where things like this have a chance to influence the law, and that is where 'freedom of the press' first came from; people refusing to back down, copping the charges, appealing the charges, and winning.

If you're too scared to cop the charges you can NEVER appeal the charge to argue against the statute. The Guardian should definitely have instead published every single document in an encrypted file on every website they own and told the government if they don't back off they'll leak the password.

When you are dealing with governments that have gone corrupt you are dealing with their top end security and intelligence professionals. If you're not on your A-game and know how to play the game right back with them, nor know how to use security blankets, employ the use of kites, or double agent by having an agent of the company pretend to turn informer while playing the intelligence department then you're useless as tits on a bull frankly.

Instead of doing any of that--being things that would change the law in the UK, protect journalists across the Commonwealth from abuse of power of corrupt governments, and force the world to start stepping up and reining our governments in before they become completely totalitarian (and it seems that's getting closer every day)--they decided to be cowards and let them smash their hardware. They didn't even call into question the instructions themselves, or publish an article of "MI5; do you guys even USE computers?" humiliating them for thinking physically damaging hardware alters data or destroys data.

Instead they just bent over, grabbed their ankles, and took it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]