24 votes

Glenn Greenwald: detaining my partner was a failed attempt at intimidation

At 6:30 am this morning my time - 5:30 am on the East Coast of the US - I received a telephone call from someone who identified himself as a "security official at Heathrow airport." He told me that my partner, David Miranda, had been "detained" at the London airport "under Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act of 2000."

David had spent the last week in Berlin, where he stayed with Laura Poitras, the US filmmaker who has worked with me extensively on the NSA stories. A Brazilian citizen, he was returning to our home in Rio de Janeiro this morning on British Airways, flying first to London and then on to Rio. When he arrived in London this morning, he was detained.

At the time the "security official" called me, David had been detained for 3 hours. The security official told me that they had the right to detain him for up to 9 hours in order to question him, at which point they could either arrest and charge him or ask a court to extend the question time. The official - who refused to give his name but would only identify himself by his number: 203654 - said David was not allowed to have a lawyer present, nor would they allow me to talk to him.


Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Heathrow Detainee:

I was detained in Heathrow for 9 hours.. they put you in the basement of the airport with terribly bright florescent lights.. they took my phone and watch and there was no clock to be seen. 9 hours feels a lot longer when you are down there not knowing how much time has passed; pretty amazing (in a terrible sense) that they stuck me down there with my friends (at age 20) with 2 suspected Iraqi terrorists and an Indian man who was trying to move there to live with his daughter... Anyways I feel I can relate to this story in a sense. Obviously, I know I didn't get as intense questioning as Glenns partner..

proverbs 20:15
There is gold, and an abundance of jewels;
But the lips of knowledge are a more precious thing.

So, commenters below me

You're taking issue with the word "partner" being used in the context of a relationship between two people of the same gender? A group that's largely restricted in this country from either getting married or using the word "marriage" to describe their relationship and NOW'S the time to start getting upset about what words they're using instead?

Didn't upset me. I just thought it was and is a bit confusing...

also, is Mr. Miranda also Mr. Greenwald's journalism partner, or partner in any other vocation?

Defeat the panda-industrial complex

I am dusk icon. anagram me.

Greenwalds on fire!

A hard hitting article.

Amazing. The word 'partner' is now gay.


Defeat the panda-industrial complex

I am dusk icon. anagram me.

Seriously, who gives a crap?

Media members are under attack for bravely whistle-blowing against the NSA and we're nitpicking about linguistics?

I dunno about that

I'm hearing the word used for hetero spouses too. It's seems they want to neuter people altogether.

When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign: that the dunces are all in confederacy against him. ~J. Swift

I thought initially from the headline that they meant...

journalist partner, not romantic partner. Then I saw the picture, and then I saw in the article that they lived together. So I put 2 and 2 together and got 11.


Defeat the panda-industrial complex

I am dusk icon. anagram me.


I got 22

That's true. I didn't mean to

That's true. I didn't mean to be so hard-on the gays, below. (Heh). It is really the PC thought police using language imperialism to denude words of any content which makes them suspect.

Husband and wife, with their connotation of different s3x roles, is a grave a offender. The word s3x itself, implying something physical and immutable, not mere social construct amenable to change through education, also had to have its meaning surgically removed, or changed.

It is is of course much easier for words to be transformed than people, but if the language can be forced into narrow channels unnaturally (Heh), thought can often be made to follow.

At a minimum, thoughts will be unable to find expression if the words needed to express them have been removed from circulation.

I too wish the homosexual

I too wish the homosexual community would chill with the word-imperialism. If the goal is to be open and 'out,' you don't need euphemisms which colonize other words, then expel their rightful definitions from their lexigraphic territory. If you need a new word, by all means create one. But to take a perfectly good word that is already occupied by a peaceful definition, and violently push it off its spot is lexically unethical.

Having your partner

go through a place where he WOULD be detained, is a publicity stunt.

It just gets more silly every day

But just wait, he'll be releasing a real doozy soon. Just stay tuned. I'm sure it makes great television.