Don't Miss This VERY Special Black Friday Offer
CNN Reporter Says the Quiet Part Out Loud About Afghans and the National...
Do Something About Prices, Republicans, Or You’re Going To Lose
Democrats Never Let a Crisis Go to Waste
Zohran Mamdani's Still Begging Working Class New Yorkers for Money
'Closed in Its Entirety:' President Trump Issues Warning About Venezuelan Airspace
Being Thankful Also After Thanksgiving
A Quick Bible Study Vol. 296: What the Bible Says About Gifts
Democrat Leadership is Sinister, Not Misguided
Texas Authorities Arrest Afghan Immigrant Accused of Posting Bomb Threat Online
Northwestern to Pay $75M, Enact Major Policy Reforms Under Federal Anti-Discrimination Dea...
Audio Company Harman to Pay $11.8M for Evading U.S. Duties on Chinese Aluminum...
State Department Pauses Afghan Passport Visas After D.C. Terrorist Shooting
Colombian National Sentenced to 60 Months for Laundering $1.2M in Drug Proceeds
Pregnancy Resource Centers Should Be Able to Operate Free From Government Intimidation
Tipsheet

Only One Percent of Snowden Leaks Published

The editor of the British publication The Guardian, which obtained and published leaked intelligence from former American NSA worker Edward Snowden, testified before Parliament that the newspaper only published 1% of Snowden's material.

Advertisement

The NSA scandal sparked what many believe is a much-needed discussion on post-9/11 security policy, but others accuse Snowden and media outlets like The Guardian of aiding terrorists and committing treason.

The editor, Alan Rusbridger, was compelled to defend The Guardian's actions before Parliament in a government move that was considered much more hawkish than the response in America or in other European countries.

Yet for many the debate has moved past the specific actions of the media. Just as opinions of Snowden evolved into a vigorous debate about privacy, the controversy surrounding The Guardian has become a question of press freedom versus national security.

Perhaps the most high-tension moment of the Parliament hearing came when a lawmaker questioned Rusbridger's love for his country. The Washington Post reports:

Earlier in the hearing, Labor lawmaker Keith Vaz questioned Rusbridger about testimony last month in which John Sawers, head of Britain’s Secret Intelligence Service, told lawmakers that the Guardian’s decision to publish had the country’s enemies “rubbing their hands with glee.” Vaz then bluntly asked Rusbridger, “Do you love this country?”

“I'm slightly surprised to be asked the question, but, yes, we are patriots, and one of the things we are patriotic about is the nature of democracy, the nature of a free press and the fact that one can, in this country, discuss and report these things,” Rusbridger responded.

Advertisement

Related:

EDWARD SNOWDEN

Nobody expected the bombshell when the editor explained only 1% of Snowden's files had been published. He reiterated that the newspaper was responsible with its information, saying:

"We have published I think 26 documents so far out of the 58,000 we've seen."

Despite Rusbridger's powerful testimony, the British government has not expressed a change in position. It is still investigating The Guardian to see if any national security laws were broken.

The full audio of the editor's testimony can be found here.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement