The editor of British newspaper the Guardian told members of British parliament that it has published only 1% of the documents it has received from NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden.
Alan Rusbridger stressed to the Home Affairs Select Committee that the Guardian, which was one of the first two publications to publish Snowden’s initial leaks, is not a “rogue newspaper,” the BBC reports.
Rusbridger insisted that his journalists are “patriots” who are simply very passionate about democracy and freedom of the press.
He even said that the Obama administration had told him that “no damage” had been caused by the Guardian’s publishing of Snowden’s classified government documents.
Various British intelligence chiefs accused the Guardian of endangering national security last month.
But when asked about these accusations, Risbridger said they were “very vague and not rooted in specific stories.”
“There are different views about this,” he said. “It’s impossible to assess because no one has given me specific evidence.”
He added: “There are countries – and they are not generally democracies — where the press are not free to write about this and where the security services do tell editors what to write.”
“That’s not the country we live in, in Britain, and it’s one of the things we love about the country.”
When asked whether he had broken Britain’s Terrorism Act by sharing information containing the names of security officials with other newspapers located overseas, the editor said his paper had “made very selective judgments” about what to publish and was careful not to reveal the names of any officials.
Rusbridger said that to his knowledge, the files obtained by Snowden were given to four newspapers: The Guardian, the Washington Post and two unnamed publications in Brazil and Germany.
Committee chairman Keith Vaz then asked Rusbridger if the unpublished files were in a secure place, to which the editor replied: “I believe that to be true.”