It is an unprecedented case. And it risks triggering an unprecedented threat to journalism. The UK police have repeatedly tried to obtain the passwords to the phones of the British independent journalist, Richard Medhurst, the first reporter arrested in London under Section 12: his analyses and comments on Israel’s bloodbath in Gaza – which Amnesty International has characterised as genocide – have been interpreted by the police as support for organisations banned from the UK, such as Hamas and Hezbollah.
The British journalists’ union, the NUJ, and the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) publicly condemned his arrest and the use of anti-terrorism laws against journalists “simply for carrying out their work”.
So this is basically the $5 wrench attack, but by the government
“The ultimate test of a society’s freedom is not how it treats its good, obedient, compliant citizens; it’s how it treats its dissidents.” - Glenn Greenwald
If you search his name, you’ll see exactly zero big news orgs covering this story. BBC, Reuters, AFP, every British newspaper, all notable by their absence. Why? This is A Story, right?
There are a few reasons this can happen.
Super Injunction (sometimes self applying). But these tend to be used for privacy issues.
Unverifiable sources (which is why jumping to assuming a gag order is sometimes premature)
And it’s possible that the major outlets are trying to prepare reports in a watertight way. Or that part of the story just hasn’t been proven/released yet.
According to the article the British Journalist Union condemned the arrest.
Medhurst openly supports Palestinian armed resistance. Which is probably why the big newspapers do not report on him.
I’d like one of these to be the reason, but I see no evidence to support it.
Super injunction - as you say, usually used for privacy issues, unlikely to apply here and if it is the case, then the other, smaller, news orgs covering the story would be in trouble.
Unverifiable sources - the IFJ is a rock solid source. Even if it weren’t, then this claim would assume that the news orgs that have published are all guilty of cowboy journalism.
Watertightness - for the Panama papers, yes. For this small story, no way. It’s A Story, and it’s the journalist’s job to get copy out as quickly as possible.
As I said I’d like it if any of these were the case and thanks for pointing them out as I certainly hadn’t thought of them when I wrote my comment, but I’m still just not seeing it. It seems like a decision has been made not to pursue this story, but I’m not jumping to conclusions as to why. It’s hard to keep the faith though, when there are zero major outlets reporting on it, which means that decision not to pursue has been made multiple times by multiple different editors. WTF
I dislike Richard Medhurst for a whole bunch of reasons.
Pro-Assad, pro use of child soldiers (as long as it’s the side he supports anyway), has expressed he wants to ethnically cleanse Israelis, is an avid supporter of China and denier of the Uighur genocide, is a contributor to and paid by PressTV (Iranian government owned news), is a contributer to and paid by Russia Today, believes NATO are the aggressors in the Russia-Ukraine war, etc.
There’s also allegations from two women that he groomed them while they were teenagers, but as this is unproven I will assume his innocence on that one.
I don’t think of this person as a journalist at all. He’s a hack. A hack that has shown support of more than one proscribed terrorist institutions.
But I do believe you should have a fundamental right to privacy and not having to give your passwords up. Failing to give up his password should result in no extra charges against him IMO.
Medhurst is not necessarily pro Assad, moreso anti Israel and US imperialism. A big motivation I heard him speak on was the Arab spring which was hijacked by the US to install dictatorships all over MENA.
And the assassination of Gadaffi which would bring so called freedom but served US interest and destroyed Libya.
He’s definitely pro-Assad. He’s consistently said sanctions against Assad-led Syria need to be lifted, lied about humanitarian aid from the west not being sent to Syria (it has), denied that Assad’s government used chemical weapons on their own citizens (they provably did), and said that Assad’s government was democratic (lol), secular (lol), and welcoming to all people (lol), whereas the new government is evil. He also said that in kicking out Assad they had chosen to become subservient to Israel and NATO – a position not only completely absurd and pro-Assad, but also dog-whistling the conspiracy theory that Jews are controlling the world.
Medhurst just looks to what western nations think and supports the opposite, regardless of whether they’re right or wrong. He’s a misinformation spreader literally paid by Russia and Iran (through his work for RT and PressTV). He’s no journalist. He’s a tankie.
But like I said, I do believe he should have the right to keep his password to himself if he desires. Doing so should lead to no extra charges.
E: I know Lemmy has a serious tankie problem, but come on. Support of Assad too? Really, Lemmy? Sometimes you’re worse than Reddit.
None of that has anything to do with the case at hand though, and I don’t understand why you would bring it up. This bad law is being abused and just because you don’t like the person being targeted in this specific instance, it will just be a matter of time before it’s used to target journalists that you like.
I understand that ultimately argued against what the government is doing to him, but I think all the other information you posted (with no sources at all by the way) is not relevant at all and just a pointless distraction.
I was agreeing with the sentiment that privacy is paramount. On this instance, I’m literally on his side, despite him being a pro-Russia/Assad/China tankie. A political persuasion that I find utterly evil and repulsive.
The point of bringing it up was that even if you don’t like someone or what they stand for, they should still have rights, such as the right to privacy. To me it’s inalienable.
“including a highly secure phone with a Graphene operating system”
Wow, what an endorsement.
Section 12 of the Terrorism Act 2000 criminalises anyone who “invites support for a proscribed organisation” or “expresses an opinion or belief that is supportive” of such a group. Those arrested under the section say the threshold is so low that individuals could be arrested with no intention of doing anything they are charged with.
https://www.declassifieduk.org/free-speech-threatened-as-journalists-treated-like-terrorists/
This law seems so broad, that it could be used to arrest anyone they want.
How does “expresses an opinion or belief that is supportive” work? If Hamas is in support of rescueing puppies and I am in support of rescueing puppies, does that make me a terrorist in the UK?
This law seems so broad, that it could be used to arrest anyone they want.
that is very likely the point. the UK has been trying to crank down hard on the “troublemakers” with rather general laws recently. another example being section 7 of the public order act. or really just the public order act as a whole
UK as a country hates its citizens
As someone from a dictatorship I seriously can’t stress the importance of fighting this case and others like it. These people are trying to steal democracy from you, so hold on for dear life and do not let go. It’ll be too late if you wait until there’s a secret police arresting people for criticizing the state.
❤️ I hope you and your family are well.
Where can I donate to their legal fund?
Richard has a Patreon and direct donation button. However this is a general donation and not solely for legal funds.
Thank you
Fitting that someone with your username would comment on this story.
Because he’s correct?
This is clear abuse of power and the officers detaining him should face false imprisonment charges.
As I prepare to watch the US slip into authoritarianism it pains me to see that, in some ways, the UK is already there.
I don’t know man, I’m not sure I trust that scarf.
“I forgot it”
Nowadays you have a duress password on Graphene. So you just claim “i forgot it” and then sadly sob out the duress password when they throw a fit.
Wouldn’t they just immediately realize you’ve only given them the duress password?
Also, they will have imaged the phone already before attempting to unlock it, so the “delete all data” feature would be pretty pointless.
Good point. Best to use the duress password when you believe you are in danger.
Regarding imaging, also good point, but Graphene is considered safe BFU and is supposed to disable the USB port while locked.
I would assume state actors have the ability to read out your storage without needing the USB port. Even hardware security chips like secure enclave or TPM I consider to be likely compromised/backdoored by state actors.
This information comes from Celebrite’s claimings. https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/112462756293586146
I’ve always wanted to be able to have different pin logins on android. Log in 1 is all my shit, log in 2 is a dummy login with shit to show authorities. Log in 3 could be my porn log in.
Another option I would like is a password which deletes all data and bricks the phone.
That’s basically the duress password in graphene os. It deletes all data and e-sims but keeps the os installed
Thanks, good to know.
Seems like 3 should be 2. Cops can’t stand sexuality. They’ll cry and give it back.
Straight to jail
Works if you’re Dick Cheney or Eric Adams
So only if you’re a member of the plutocratic dictatorship?
Platinum card level or above
It’s cool how some zionist piece of shit downvotes people who take his side. But pieces of shit exist, so oh well.
How loyal is our supreme court to the govt? I know it’s not-partisan but they do seem to mostly be old Oxbridge men (=tories?).
I didn’t remember much about this guy when I clicked on this post, but some soy losers were arguing with me in the comments and I came back and checked his yt channel. https://youtu.be/N51xmP-EwSU
So yea, I don’t give a fuck about this guy. If he is so impressed by terrorists he can go fight with them. He thinks they are winning so it should be an easy choice for him.
