"If you've done nothing wrong" & section 7

[Pabmusic]

I've been detained lawfully at Heathrow, on more than one occasion, for over two hours. No one brought me so much as a cup of tea or offered any reason for the detention

And I think that's disgusting. It's a very old right that people who are held by the authorities should be told why. Statutes like this one water that right down so that it becomes homeopathic.

[Tony Halstead]

I've been detained lawfully at Heathrow, on more than one occasion, for over two hours. No one brought me so much as a cup of tea or offered any reason for the detention

Why do you believe that your detentions ( more than one) were 'lawful'?

[An_Inspector_Calls]

(#210) I have no idea.

(#212) Yes, it was at immigration control and there were thousands of us.

[Mr Pee]

From this week's "Private Eye" :-

1 Detention of Guardian journalist's partner, described by paper as a "profound escalation of attacks on journalism."

120 Arrests so far of tabloid journalists and sources in raids on family homes which followed Guardian phone-hacking revelations.

[Tony Halstead]

I have no idea.

But you said ( wrote)

I've been detained lawfully at Heathrow

!

Sorry, I've only just seen your message #213.

[Pabmusic]

From this week's "Private Eye" :-

1 Detention of Guardian journalist's partner, described by paper as a "profound escalation of attacks on journalism."

120 Arrests so far of tabloid journalists and sources in raids on family homes which followed Guardian phone-hacking revelations.

And?

[Mr Pee]

And?

Isn't it obvious?

[Richard Barrett]

And two dozen or so MPs, including six cabinet ministers, resigned or stepped down in the wake of the Telegraph's reporting of fraudulent expense claims. This is something healthy journalism is supposed to do: expose dishonesty and abuse among those in positions of power and influence. The Guardian's exposure of phone-hacking wasn't an attack on journalism, but an attack on shady and illegal muck-raking practices. Mr Pee is perhaps unaware of the difference.

[ahinton]

And two dozen or so MPs, including six cabinet ministers, resigned or stepped down in the wake of the Telegraph's reporting of fraudulent expense claims. This is something healthy journalism is supposed to do: expose dishonesty and abuse among those in positions of power and influence. The Guardian's exposure of phone-hacking wasn't an attack on journalism, but an attack on shady and illegal muck-raking practices. Mr Pee is perhaps unaware of the difference.

Is anyone with a shred of intelligence genuinely unaware of that difference? Or might those who appear to be so be merely pretending, for some reason best known only to themselves?

[Pabmusic]

Isn't it obvious?

Not really (and I love Private Eye). It's a classic example of comparing two things that aren't comparable - a bad analogy. The fact that various journalists (and MPs, as Richard Barrett points out) have had to resign, or whatever, because of phone hacking, tells us nothing about the truth or otherwise of the Miranda affair. The fact that The Guardian was the newspaper in both cases is irrelevant.

You are not - surely? - suggesting, because various journalists have been caught "with their fingers in the till" and exposed by The Guardian, that because Miranda might have done something wrong, The Guardian should keep quiet about it?

[amateur51]

Not really (and I love Private Eye). It's a classic example of comparing two things that aren't comparable - a bad analogy. The fact that various journalists (and MPs, as Richard Barrett points out) have had to resign, or whatever, because of phone hacking, tells us nothing about the truth or otherwise of the Miranda affair. The fact that The Guardian was the newspaper in both cases is irrelevant.

You are not - surely? - suggesting, because various journalists have been caught "with their fingers in the till" and exposed by The Guardian, that because Miranda might have done something wrong, The Guardian should keep quiet about it?

Stand-by for Mr Pee's standard and tedious "hey guy, lighten up, it's only a bit of fun" defence

[Pabmusic]

Stand-by for Mr Pee's standard and tedious "hey guy, lighten up, it's only a bit of fun" defence

Great pity I'm an asubtle literalist, then.

[Mr Pee]

Stand-by for Mr Pee's standard and tedious "hey guy, lighten up, it's only a bit of fun" defence

It's not a bit of fun, and if you think that is my standard defence, then you have been paying even less attention to my posts than I thought. Your standard and tedious response, however, is typical.

Still, at least you didn't start quoting the house rules again.

PE is highlighting the hypocrisy of the Grauniad getting its knickers in a twist over one journalists's partner being temporarily and lawfully detained at Heathrow airport, for good reason, and the fact that its own journalism has itself resulted in the most sustained attack on press freedom that we have seen for some time.

[Bryn]

It's not a bit of fun, and if you think that is my standard defence, then you have been paying even less attention to my posts than I thought. Your standard and tedious response, however, is typical.

Still, at least you didn't start quoting the house rules again.

PE is highlighting the hypocrisy of the Grauniad getting its knickers in a twist over one journalists's partner being temporarily and lawfully detained at Heathrow airport, for good reason, and the fact that its own journalism has itself resulted in the most sustained attack on press freedom that we have seen for some time.

So now we know. Pee is in favour of the criminal activity of phone hacking.

[Flosshilde]

(#212) Yes, it was at immigration control and there were thousands of us.

Not quiter the same thing as Miranda's detention, then.