H/T to Chris for linking to this from the Mail:
- BBC downplays MI5 chief’s scathing condemnation of The Guardian
- Newsnight editor is former Guardian executive Ian Katz
- ‘They appear to be protecting Left-wing friends’ – Tory MP
The BBC were certainly looking at it throughout today…Though Humphrys (08:10) looked to have finally come down on the side of the Guardian I felt…’and that’s the point…we didn’t know about it until we read it in the Guardian’….and just re-listened….the Guardian’s Henry Porter says it isn’t the Guardian’s fault…it’s the fault of the NSA for having ‘leaked’ the information.
Rusbridger, interviewed on World at One gave a laughable excuse (another one) and was allowed to get away with brushing aside Andrew Parker’s assessment……It causes enormous damage to make public the reach and limits of GCHQ techniques. Such information hands the advantage to the terrorists. It is the gift they need to evade us and strike at will. Unfashionable as it might seem, that is why we must keep secrets secret, and why not doing so causes such harm.
He claimed he was justified in publishing such damaging material because…well, it might be OK for the security services to be gathering so much data now in a democracy…but…if Robert Mugabe were to take over…..
He was claiming that in future these techniques might be abused should we somehow become a dictatorship and Britain turn into a police state.
The logic fails for me on that one…if we turn into a police state what the Guardian thinks will be irrelevant…more so than now….can’t see a British Stasi asking Rusbridger’s permission to carry out surveillance…..and such techniques, with proper oversight…would work to prevent such an eventuality.
He also dodged the main accusation that he has allowed terrorists to analyse the security service’s techniques and technology and thereby adapt their own tactics to avoid detection.
So let’s be clear…Rusbridger admits that there is no abuse now. The threat is one for a future scenario where we have become a police state.
On the basis of that crystal ball gazing he publishes information that is highly damaging to national interests and aids terrorists putting the public at risk.
The Mail publishes a claim that Marxists are a danger to Britain and the Left goes ballistic, the Guardian publishes information that helps terrorists…..and the BBC is smoothing things over.