David Miranda's Detention Makes Plain the 'Threat to Democracy'
(O Globo, Brazil)
"Snowden may have committed a crime. Greenwald, however, is
a reporter, i.e.: the messenger. According to legislation in a good majority of
- if not all - democracies, Greenwald committed no crime. His husband, who
didn’t even participate in the interview, much less so. The Cuban government
pressures family members to threaten those it pursues. The Chinese government does
the same. Now we can put Britain's government on that list."
David Miranda, partner of investigative reporter Glenn Greenwald, after being released by British agents. His detention appears to have brought to a head a titanic battle between the Fourth Estate and the national security state: one, desperate to show the truth of government misdeeds, and the other, intent on protecting a combinatioin of itself and the nations they are sworn to protect.
By detaining
David Miranda for nine hours, the British government descended to the level of
Cuba, Russia and Iran
There
is something profoundly shocking about the nine-hour detention of Carioca [Rio
resident] David Miranda at Heathrow Airport, near London, on Sunday. Legally,
the British police have the power to detain those suspected of involvement with
terrorism for this amount of time without judicial authorization, and without needing
to explain. David Miranda, the husband of reporter Glenn Greenwald, who has
been reporting on the invasive U.S. espionage system in The Guardian and here at O Globo, was not detained on suspicion of terrorist
involvement. He was detained in order to intimidate his husband. It is not
uncommon for a state to use its enormous power to pressure individuals. In
quasi-democracies like Chavez’ Venezuela and Putin's Russia, which have gone through
countless gaping dictatorships, this happens all the time. However, when it is
the British government crossing that line, it shows that the spirit of
totalitarianism is spreading.
Greenwald
interviewed former CIA and NSA employee Edward
Snowden, revealing the sophisticated system that allows for the monitoring of the
Internet. Snowden, an American citizen, committed a crime. Perhaps he fits the category
of “whistleblower,” which refers to a person who releases classified
information to which the public lacks access. That is something only the
country’s justice system can decide.
The
reaction of the American government was violent. It intervened to prevent countries
from granting Snowden refuge. When it suspected that Bolivian President Evo Morales was carrying him on his plane, it forced the aircraft
to land by maneuvering Spain and Portugal to deny the aircraft the right to
overfly their airspace. At a minimum, it is uncustomary to so crassly treat a
head of state. When Russian President Vladimir Putin granted Snowden temporary
asylum, Obama canceled a meeting. In diplomatic language, that is an extreme
gesture, even more so if we take into account that the U.S. and Russia are the world's
leading nuclear powers, from whom self-restraint is expected.
Snowden
revealed very little. Nor, moreover, is it now possible to understand how the
U.S. espionage system works. Perhaps Washington believes he knows more and may
reveal other details to foreign nations. Or perhaps there is another reason:
they want to make an example of him. The fact is that, justifiable or not, Washington's
reaction to the leak appears to have no bounds.
Liberty
was born in the West. It is a cultural invention of ours. Freedom from state
oppression began in 1215, in England precisely, when a group of barons imposed on
King John the Magna Carta - a document that removed his Majesty’s right to impose,
among other things, arbitrary arrest. The American Revolution,
which created the first modern democracy already packed with liberal Enlightenment thinkers,
is a direct descendent of that English document. And it was precisely on
English soil that on Sunday, David was detained because the British government
wanted to send a message. According to The
Guardian, the U.S. had been informed that the detention would occur. It
isn't clear whether there was any encouragement.
Posted By Worldmeets.US
In
the United Kingdom, the press reacted with indignation. Snowden may have
committed a crime. Greenwald, however, is a reporter, i.e.: the messenger.
According to legislation in a good majority of - if not all - democracies, Greenwald
committed no crime. His husband, who didn’t even participate in the interview,
much less so. The Cuban government pressures family members to threaten those it
pursues. The Chinese government does the same. Now we can put Britain's
government on that list.
The
United Kingdom is not a dictatorship. The quality of its democracy, however,
will be known in the coming days and weeks. Parliament will question David
Cameron’s office. Someone attached to the police will have to explain. The
legislation that allows this type of abuse could be reviewed. There will be
movement and reaction. In a state under law, abuses occur. But they do not go
unpunished. That's the difference.
Meanwhile
in the U.S., each new revelation shows just how many American laws have been
broken by the NSA. This is a sad time.
