Brazilian Journalist Detained By UK Border Police For Reading A Book About ISIS
from the don't-judge-a-book-by-its-cover dept
Just last week, we reported on how a British human rights activist was held at London’s Heathrow airport by UK border police, and risked prison for failing to hand over his passwords. Now we learn from the Independent about a Brazilian journalist, Diogo Bercito, who was detained at Manchester airport for reading a book during his flight there:
He was reading The Isis Apocalypse, by former adviser to the US State Department on terrorism issues Will McCants. It explores the ideology of the terrorist organisation and is often used as a reference for journalists and researchers.
That seems a perfectly reasonable thing for a journalist to be reading in order to understand the background to the Manchester attack, which Bercito had been sent to cover for his employer, the Folha de São Paulo newspaper. But it was apparently enough for the border police to pull him in for questioning. His passport and press credentials were taken away, and he waited for an hour before he was interviewed. The police officers then explained exactly why Bercito had been singled out for special attention: another passenger on his flight had felt “uncomfortable” about his choice of reading matter.
To be fair, you can’t really blame the Manchester border police for following up on that complaint, given the terrorist attack that had taken place in the city just 24 hours before. But it’s a sad reflection of the effectiveness of the authorities’ scaremongering that some members of the public feel the need to report someone because he or she was reading about ISIS. What next: reporting people to the police for watching TV reports about terrorism?
After a few questions, Bercito was allowed to continue with his journey, with the friendly warning not to read his book in public — in case other, similarly-nervous people thought he was a terrorist — as well as a less-friendly threat:
Mr Brecito said they then returned his passport to him, but warned that “if they wanted, they could keep him for a long time”.
And they’re right — as David Miranda discovered the hard way.
Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or identi.ca, and +glynmoody on Google+
Filed Under: diogo bercito, heathrow, reading, terrorism act
Comments on “Brazilian Journalist Detained By UK Border Police For Reading A Book About ISIS”
Headline writing....
Headline: Police Terrorize those trying to Stop Terrorism!
Re: Headline writing....
How about “Security forces overcompensate for their massive failure from 24 hours earlier”
I feel “uncomfortable” about visiting the UK, should I inform them of such so that they can “interview” themselves?
Terrorism – 1
Freedom – 0
god damn it
I think they’re just bitter over losing their empire and now any influence what-so-ever.
Re: god damn it
Yeah… they’re in such deep denial some twerp even mooted a trade deal with Poland. Poland is in the EU so good luck with that…
Still one step ahead...
.. so they can now arrest me for what I’m reading…
Thank God they can’t yet arrest me for what I’m *thinking*
Re: Still one step ahead...
I hear brain-scanning tech has been getting a lot better in recent years.
Re: Still one step ahead...
sooooo what are you thinking?
Just asking for an agent…. errr friend
Re: Still one step ahead...
To have the wrong thoughts is called a hate crime.
Re: Re: Still one step ahead...
No. To have “wrong” thoughts, is called “thought crime” and is considered a form of “precrime”. I.e. You’ve not committed a crime, but because you are thinking of things associated with crime, we are going to preemptively charge you with a crime and lock you away.
Such BS is not a part of any real democracy. Then again, the world seems hellbent on returning to authoritarian regimes to appease a dead man, so I’d imagine it’s only a matter of time before we get thought scanners installed everywhere.
Re: Re: Re: Still one step ahead...
Close, but not quite.
To have "wrong" thoughts is indeed called "thought crime", but it is not "pre-crime" or "thinking of things associated with crime".
"Thought crime" is the idea that having certain thoughts is itself a crime. It’s not "you’re thinking about murder, and murder is a crime, so we’re going to arrest you"; it’s "you’re thinking that the Supreme Leader might not be perfect, and thinking that the Supreme Leader is not perfect is a crime, so we’re going to arrest you".
Re: Still one step ahead...
Actually they can. And they’ve arrested people for it before.
Yes, people have been arrested in the UK for their facial expressions, which according to the police there are a good way to tell what someone is thinking.
Re: Re: Still one step ahead...
Illegal facial expressions – that’s a good one. Is it a real law or do they just make up shit over there too?
Re: Re: Still one step ahead...
Citation?
Sorry, I’ve not heard of that one.
Re: Still one step ahead...
I think you’re thinking about ISIS, which is making me uncomfortable, so I’m going to alert the authorities.
But wait, if I complain that you’re thinking about ISIS, that means I’m thinking about ISIS also. The authorities will arrest me too!
But then when the arrest me, they’ll be thinking about ISIS also, so they’ll have to be arrested!
I wonder how the police would treat it if I complained about someone reading the xtian bible? (Many xtians -do- make me nervous.)
Re: Re:
Just tell them the passenger was reading a book about Allah (technically correct since both Christianity and Islam worship the same god just by a different name, and they disagree on the number of prophets).
“What next: reporting people to the police for watching TV reports about terrorism?”
The dumb thing is that we could do with a lot less of people watching TV reports about terrorism. If people weren’t watching TV reports about it, many people wouldn’t even know terrorism is much of thing at all (which it isn’t since it’s actually quite rare). And we’d have a lot less fearful populace.
Re: Re:
You refer to the terrorism perpetrated by individuals in foreign lands, what about the terrorism perpetrated by our own people upon our people? That doesn’t count?
Re: Re: Re:
Re-read what I wrote. I didn’t refer to any particular kind of terrorism.
Any actual knowledge
The problem here is that any actual knowledge about ISIS/islam is really adangerous to those whose entire strategy is based on a delusion.
Re: Any actual knowledge
The old saying, “know thy enemy.” is only for those who are actively fighting an enemy.. all others must rely on what you are told by them.. apparently.
Re: Re: Any actual knowledge
Sadly the people in charge of the active fighters don’t have a clus – although one would hope that the grassroots ones are better informed.
Our prime ministers policies make me feel very uncomfortable, does that mean I can get the police to arrest and question her?
Re: Re:
Apparently the laws that apply to the press and to the upper echelons don’t apply to us peons.
Humans are nuts.
Yes, yes I can. It was a stupid complaint and a stupid thing to follow up on, and I don’t really give a damn if the monkeys were scared that day.
Re: Re:
IIRC, there have been incidents of people being detained for complaints about them speaking a “suspicious sounding” language.
Blame the police
Of course I can blame them, and do. Whether to detain a person based on their choice of reading material is entirely their decision, and unless it’s a how-to guide on terrorism they should know it’s unreasonable. Being able to act rationally in crazy circumstances is a major part of their job.
The real problem is that he was reading a book about ISIS while being brown.
"If we were more bored, your day would have been REALLY bad..."
Mr Brecito said they then returned his passport to him, but warned that "if they wanted, they could keep him for a long time".
Pity, they were doing so well until that point(other than making him wait an hour before getting to him).
Get complaint, do simple investigation to see if there’s any validity to it, see that there’s none and let him go on his way. That they just couldn’t resist not leaving him with a threat like that rather torpedoes the whole ‘professional conduct’ thing and has me suspecting that it was dumb luck on his part that he got out unscathed.
The fact that that is not an empty threat just makes it worse.
Another reason to wipe your device before going through British customs, so they cannot find out what kinds of E-books you are reading. Since E-books are DRM-protected, wiping the phone will make them unrecoverable, since they would not be able to decipher any DRM-protected data once your device has been wiped.
journalists = terrorists
freedom = terrorist plot
the people = terrorists until proved innocent
the Internet = terrorist infrastructure
/s
Making the UK strong!
Since we all know ignorance is strength there.
Isis Audio
An audiobook company in the UK. I get paranoid about the government checking me out whenever I look at their website. (They have the audiobook rights to two of my favourite authors).
They hate us for our freedom to read anything we want.
Terrorists always make certain to display things that might cause them an issue. This is known as “going dark”.
Not real smart to flip switches and call attention to yourself like that is it unless you’re looking for trouble with the good guys? What do people expect, they are suspiicious of everything nowadays.
Really?
Perhaps this bloke should’ve read this as an e-book, on his phone, making it next to impossible for anyone to clearly see what he was reading? The bloke looked “Hispanic” or “non-white” and so, that made him appear to perhaps be Middle Eastern, because let’s be honest, if this had been a Donald Trump appearing bloke reading the same book, there would not have been an issue with his reading material and thus, no problem with the authorities?
Really?
Perhaps this bloke should’ve read this as an e-book, on his phone, making it next to impossible for anyone to clearly see what he was reading? The bloke looked “Hispanic” or “non-white” and so, that made him appear to perhaps be Middle Eastern, because let’s be honest, if this had been a Donald Trump appearing bloke reading the same book, there would not have been an issue with his reading material and thus, no problem with the authorities?