Snowden's Lawyer Interrogated By UK Authorities At Heathrow Airport
from the not-a-one-off dept
One of the most chilling moments so far in the Snowden saga was when Glenn Greenwald's partner David Miranda was held and interrogated for nine hours at London's Heathrow airport by the UK authorities, in a series of moves worthy of a tinpot dictatorship. And in case you thought that was a one-off, they've done it again -- this time, to Jesselyn Radack, a lawyer who represents Snowden and has spoken on his behalf several times. Here's what happened, as described by Kevin Gosztola on his Firedoglake blog:
Jesselyn Radack told Firedoglake she was directed to a specific Heathrow Border Force agent. He "didn’t seem interested" in her passport. She was then subjected to "very hostile questioning."
After asking what she would be doing in London, and establishing that she would be meeting with Julian Assange at the Ecuadorian Embassy, the border agent moved on to other issues, and showed a surprising knowledge of her recent movements:
"Why have you gone to Russia twice in three months?" Radack said she had a client in the country. "Who?" She answered, "Edward Snowden."
The questions are clearly concerned with one topic -- whistleblowers -- and give the impression that the person asking the questions already knew the answers, but just wanted to put pressure on Radack:
"Who is Edward Snowden?" asked the agent. Radack said he is a whistleblower and an asylee. Then, the agent asked, "Who is Bradley Manning?" To this, she answered, "A whistleblower."
For whatever reason, the agent asked, "Where is he?" "In jail," Radack told the agent. (Now, she is known as Chelsea Manning.)
The agent said, "So he's a criminal?" Radack corrected the agent, "He's a political prisoner." The agent asked if she represented Manning and she said no. Then he followed up, "But you represent Snowden?" She replied, "Yes, I'm a human rights lawyer."She was "stone face cold" during the interrogation but afterward was shaking and in tears. "How did he know to bring up those names?"
This blatant attempt to intimidate Snowden's lawyer, who was informed that she was on an "inhibited persons list," comes in the wake of news that a US law firm was spied upon as it advised the Indonesian government in a trade dispute with Australia. It confirms that for the US and UK governments, nothing is exempt from their total surveillance, not even information traditionally covered by attorney-client privilege.
Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or identi.ca, and +glynmoody on Google+
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: david miranda, edward snowden, heathrow, jesselyn radack, uk
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
That said, she did admit to going to meet a wanted fugitive, may have been coming from another person who is probably on some wanted lists, and I'm not sure the extent to which legal privilege would cover a border stop for questions.
Harassment, though, isn't acceptable; if they wanted to arrest her, they should have done that, and been upfront about it. More likely, though, this is incompetence; she's on a list somewhere, flagged up Snowden and Assange (also, presumably on lists) so some border agent thought this might be interesting.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
"Because we can. You wanna make sumthin of it?"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Did you invent the toothbrush? I only ask because most of us would have called it a teethbrush.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Because it`s a written and actually existing law? Stop making up bullshit just to support Snowden.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
They stopped David Miranda not because they suspected he was a terrorist but rather because they wanted to know what info Snowden had and Miranda's documents would provide some of that information. They are still trying to find out all he has. Several attempts have been made to explain to the public they are aware of what he had and each time they have come away with egg on their faces and a new batch of embarrassing releases following.
No one can believe either the spy agencies and what they say, nor the apologists, nor their respective governments when it comes to legality, oversight, nor explanations. Nothing short of a full independent investigation with people outside the insiders will ever satisfy the pubic at this stage. Everything that has been put out has been lies and misdirections of the truth. It will take that to break through the cloak and dagger atmosphere of those agencies and determine just how far outside legality they have actually went. That they have broken many laws, both domestic and international goes without saying.
In the meantime, the longer it goes on, the worse it looks for these governments involved.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If you keep on idolizing libertarian assholes like Snowden and Greenwald
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: If you keep on idolizing libertarian assholes like Snowden and Greenwald
Snowden and Greenwald, profiteers?
Sure seems an odd and incongruous means to an end.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: If you keep on idolizing libertarian assholes like Snowden and Greenwald
http://www.thepeoplesview.net/p/search.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: If you keep on idolizing libertarian assholes like Snowden and Greenwald
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: If you keep on idolizing libertarian assholes like Snowden and Greenwald
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: If you keep on idolizing libertarian assholes like Snowden and Greenwald
Empty to me, too. You just linked to the search form.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: If you keep on idolizing libertarian assholes like Snowden and Greenwald
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: If you keep on idolizing libertarian assholes like Snowden and Greenwald
He railed against the Bush administration for their civil liberties record just as much as he does against the Obama administration. Just like the line from The Who song, "... meet the new boss, same as the old boss."
"... libertarian assholes..." indeed. FFS, he gave the keynote at the annual Socialism Conference in Chicago in 2013.
So, tear down the man w/ ad hominem attacks instead of addressing the issues.. because any politician who doesn't address the issues deserves what's coming to them in the upcoming election... regardless of party.
Let me be bipartisan and say, to bad we don't have a chance of losing Feinstein (D) this election cycle but at least we have a chance of losing Mike Rogers (R).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: If you keep on idolizing libertarian assholes like Snowden and Greenwald
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: If you keep on idolizing libertarian assholes like Snowden and Greenwald
That's something I agree with. What the hell does the Democrats and the organized portions of the Left in the US even stand for anymore? The whole place has been hollowed out and sold to the highest bidder and instead of "Change we can believe in" we get the same rat-fucking (to use your word) DINOs selling us out.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: If you keep on idolizing libertarian assholes like Snowden and Greenwald
I certainly believe those last three words.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
These bulk data collection spy programs, will always be used to suppress dissidents, blackmail politicians, and to perform industrial espionage.
These are simply the facts of the matter. Proven true by the past, and also right now in the present.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How are they blind that they have become worse than those they claim to protect us from.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
They got away so far and expect to get away with it in the future. They consider themselves above the law, untouchable, indestructible. They don't care about their official duties, they just care about power. Power they should never have been allowed to wield in the first place.
These people are criminally insane, the worst sociopaths you can imagine.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
http://torrentfreak.com/when-did-we-become-the-ones-we-werent-110204/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This...is not a positive comparison.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
it seems to me to be getting extremely scary and i can see a big falling out between the UK and the EU in the very not too distant future! Cameron wants to make sure he knows whose balls are hanging what side, or he could easily be losing his!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
There are no puppets or puppateers
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
We're far beyond the concept of free now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This just goes to show
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"He's a gourmet chef whose food I can't live without."
"No, he's a traitor to the US government!"
"Why were you asking me questions you already had the answers to?"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Source; went through lawyer training (well some of it).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Maybe Snowden needs a tougher lawyer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Only a complete and utter fool would stay within reach of the US after exposing their illegal and quasi-legal actions to the public that they'd been spying on and lying to, the fact that Snowden didn't stick around has nothing to do with 'avoiding the consequences of his actions', and everything to do with 'staying away from a government that has shown no hesitation in lashing out against those that expose their actions'.
No matter how much you sling around the insults, I'm glad to say, the cat's out of the bag, and your precious spy agencies, and those that support them, have been exposed as the corrupt, power-hungry scum that they are, and each new and additional article on their actions makes it all the more clear.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
BTW, asswipe, they`re not `my` precious spy agencies, but thanks for being a libertarian emoprog fool and idiot with no sense of history other than what happened to them yesterday all of the same.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
A comment that lists several examples:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130725/16280123948/government-argues-bradley-manning-was -anarchist-as-case-closes.shtml#c450
BTW, asswipe, they`re not `my` precious spy agencies, but thanks for being a libertarian emoprog fool and idiot with no sense of history other than what happened to them yesterday all of the same.
Not 'your' spy agencies, and yet you're apparently taking it personal when people question them, right...
Also, I just have to ask, do you honestly think swearing and throwing out such laughable insults make your argument seem stronger? Because I don't know about you, but when someone starts slinging around personal attack and swearing at the person they're talking to, I don't assume it means they have a solid argument, I assume it means they have no argument, and are trying to cover for the lack by attacking the other person.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Why do you believe this nonsense? Are you aware that this makes the left no better than the right?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
You throw around this phrase "Obama Derangement Syndrome"... I do not think it means what you think it means.
Let me put it another way: by so casually throwing around that phrase you make it sound like the choice is either you support the lawlessness of the USG and the National Security State just because there is a Democrat in office or you're an ignorant, talk-radio-listening, ditto-head conservative?
Make yourself clear. From your other posts it just seems like you're taking all this criticism of the government as a personal affront against the President, who you have the utmost faith in, and you're trying to make this about the perceived political views of the people bringing this information to light. Do you have no capacity for nuance?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Why should he do that? And anyway, he can't; the US revoked his passport. He can't leave Russia now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I bet if you were accused of serious crap, especially in another country by some government, you wouldn't be any more 'manful' either. So stop whining about your sour grapes that Snowden actually has a pair and did some good for the world.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Arrest someone, and they have rights, there are limits as to what they can do to you, and there are records about the incident. However, if you just 'question' someone... heck, 'forget' to do the paperwork, or record it, and the event 'never happened'.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rights at the border
This lawyer needs to realize that her clients are mostly "enemy of the state" types, and there is substantial risk that the lawyer may also be a go between, not only representing her clients but also carrying documents one to the other. In fact, based on her connection to Snowden, "chelsea", and meeting up with Assange you can bet it's a pretty good chance that she is being used in ways for these people to communicate. The questions at the border basically were about the reasons she was coming to the UK, and who she represented.
Honestly, she is lucky she got in at all. It would be very easy for the border agents to deny her entry, saying that Assange was not "in the country" but rather in Equador (technically, the embassy is their territory) and sent her back from where she came.
If she is going to represent disloyal people, she needs to understand that she is in for a very rough ride - and potentially even getting banned from entering the country.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Rights at the border
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
idiots
This was a stupid move for the US & UK (you know they at least discussed this). I hope to see the UK, if not also the US, on trial for this. That should be sufficiently embarrassing to make at least Congress think twice about letting it continue & hopefully light a fire under them to speed up the process to stop it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Get him all that's due him
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Get him all that's due him
Umm...care to elaborate on this "risk" you speak of?
Thus far, the only harm I've seen come from the Snowden revelations is to the credibility of the US government and the other Five Eye nations.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Get him all that's due him
So I guess unlike Snowden, you don't believe in the Constitution.
I did not have a choice when he put me at risk
How exactly did he put you at risk?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Get him all that's due him
How do you determine if he is one?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Get him all that's due him
That one ought to stump him.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Get him all that's due him
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Get him all that's due him
Sorry, but I cannot mark as funny if you answer yes to either of these questions:
a) Are you an American?
b) Are you a politician?
Willy answer these questions. Well, will he?
P.S. While there are a handful of regular posters who don't think, nasch is not one of them, but, welcome to the club!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Get him all that's due him
And you wonder why people say it would have been a stupid idea for him to stick around and 'accept the consequences of his actions'...
Considering more and more 'patriots' such as yourselves seem to be advocating no trial, just mob 'justice' for anyone who makes the USG look bad by exposing their actions, whistleblowers would have to be suicidally stupid to willingly put themselves within reach of people like you, because even if 99% of you are just full of hot air, all it takes is one person with a gun who decides to 'deal' with the 'traitor', and they're either eating lead, or imprisoned under the guise of 'protective custody'.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Get him all that's due him
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Get him all that's due him
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Get him all that's due him
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Get him all that's due him
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]