Guardian

The paper which hates Britain? Guardian leaks ‘worst blow to British intel ever’


The title doesn’t represent the hyperbole of a partisan commentator, but the sober warnings of Sir David Omand, the former head of GCHQ (the UK’s counterpart to the NSA) and homeland security adviser to 10 Downing St. 

The theft and leak of tens of thousands of top-secret NSA files by Edward Snowden, procured by Glenn Greenwald and published by the Guardian, Oman said, “eclipses the Cambridge spy ring as the most catastrophic loss suffered by British intelligence” in history. He added that ‘The Guardian and others in possession of Mr Snowden’s leaked files had gone on to publish information that was invaluable to foreign spies, terrorists and criminal networks’.

But, that’s not all.

Andrew Parker, the head of MI5 argued in a speech on Tuesday that Snowden’s leaks caused huge ‘harm’ to the capability of Britain’s intelligence services, and became a ‘guide books’ for terrorists who could use the information to evade law enforcement and serves as “the gift they need to evade us and strike at will”.  Parker further said that the publication of the leaks by the Guardian had done ‘enormous damage to Britain’s ability to thwart al-Qaeda’.

Oliver Robbins, Britain’s deputy national security advisor said Snowden’s revelations, published by the Guardian, could lead “directly to widespread loss of life” and “threaten the internal stability of the UK”.

Even (Liberal Democrat) Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg said yesterday that The Guardian has published “technical information”, from Edward Snowden which is likely of “immensely interest” to “people who want to do us harm“. 

Additionally, as anyone following Louise Mensch’s Twitter feed today would know, the Guardian’s hubris was to such a degree that they’ve even “fearlessly report[ed] on the personal sports teams, lives, sexuality and private conversations of British agents working at GCHQ.”  Further, Mensch hasn’t yet gotten a reply to the question she asked the Guardian in an email yesterday responding their request for an interview. Mensch asked if she’d be allowed to ask whether “files identifying our intelligence agents at GCHQ to the New York Times and trafficked them around the world?”

Meanwhile British police are still investigating an attempt by Glenn Greenwald’s partner, David Miranda, to take encrypted files containing an additional 58,000 classified documents out of Britain in August on a flight paid for by the Guardian. Indeed, Greenwald’s response to Miranda’s detention speaks volumes about his motivation for facilitating the intelligence leaks and his lack of concern about the consequences for US and British national security.

“I will be far more aggressive in my reporting from now…I have many documents on England’s spy system. I think they will be sorry for what they did.”

It’s remarkable that any true journalist who respected his profession, and possessed even an ounce of loyalty to the democracies which afford him such historically exceptional political freedoms, would ever utter such an ugly, vindictive threat.

Of course, anyone who follows our blog would understand that such behavior is part of a larger pattern for Greenwald, a commentator who is evidently so hostile to his own country that he passionately defended the al-Qaeda operative (Anwar al-Awlaki) who incited Islamist sympathizers in the US to murder their fellow Americans.

The focus of this blog is of course to monitor the Guardian for antisemitism and the assault on Israel’s legitimacy, but it’s vital to understand the broader ideology which inspires the anti-Zionism we are constantly documenting.  Glenn Greenwald, as with his fellow political travelers at the Guardian, is not a mere “progressive” commentator (yet alone a “journalist) but, rather, a radical activist inspired by an “anti-imperialist” ideology which holds his own country and its democratic allies in contempt, and advances propaganda which amplifies the message of our enemies.

The Guardian’s editor Alan Rusbridger, typifying the vitriol directed against the West by many within the leftist intelligentsia, in defending his paper’s right to publish classified documents, referred to George Orwell’s book ‘1984’ and argued that US and British intelligence gathering went “beyond Orwell’s imagination”. However, Orwell understood the advantages of even flawed democracies over totalitarian regimes and realized the danger of an intellectual elite which doesn’t understand such stark moral differences.

In 1945, Orwell published “Notes on Nationalism” which argued that within the leftist intelligentsia there is “a derisive and mildly hostile attitude towards Britain [that] is more or less compulsory”, and that that, to such intellectuals, political outrage is inevitably directed not towards truly totalitarian regimes, but “almost entirely against Britain and the United States.” 

The Guardian’s role in nurturing indifference towards its own country’s national security – a political orientation John Stuart Mill characterized as a “decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling” – should rightly be seen as a genuine threat to the Western political values to which true liberals remain loyal.

Guardian editors and contributors may not hate Britain, but their activism certainly serves to aid and abet those who do. 

58 replies »

  1. Why all the Twitter updates (on the right) from Louise Mensch, btw? They, at least, have nothing to do with Israel or anti-Semitism.

    In fact, what does this article have to do with CiFW’s stated mission?

  2. Wow! What hostile foreign power would bother to finance a spy ring when they have The Guardian on their side, doing the same work and more of it?

  3. Pretz
    Don’t play the faux naive . You understand full well the absolute connect . The Guardian is a far left scurrilous rag which attacks and undermines the very security of a sovereign democratic state . It’s none too keen on Israel either .

    • attacks and undermines the very security of a sovereign democratic state

      That’s just Tory talk. When you think your own government is overstepping the mark, you blow the whistle. It’s called investigative journalism.

      • I’m all for investigative journalism provided it stays within decent and lawful limits. No journalist has the right to endanger even one person’s life. the Guardian, Assange, Snowden et al clearly couldn’t give a fart whether one or 1000 British citizens are blown up on trains, buses, or lecture halls. It is acting as an accessory to murder. What else is it? This isn’t a game, yet even some commentators here don’t get what it really is and what part they play in it in real life. When a bomb kills your family, will you really boast that it was worth it just so we could uncover what our government agencies get up to? What a compensation that would be.

        • Thank you, Professor, I’m with you 100%. We need to keep saying this is a deadly serious matter.

        • And it’s not just British citizens who’ve been endangered. There’s plenty of Afghanis (for example) whose lives were put in jeopardy by Assange and his group.

          • Belarussian dissidents too – dobbed in to Lukashenka’s KGB by Assange and his buddy Israel Shamir.

            And those are the people we know about. Who knows how many lives have been destroyed globally by Wikileaks?

            • Snowden and Assange are no heroes, and Greenwald too.
              They have blood on their hands.
              They know it full well but they do not care cause the blood spilled belonged to people who were willing to stand up for Tirany and cooperate with the US.

          • cba: “There’s plenty of Afghanis…whose lives were put in jeopardy by Assange and his group.”

            Correct, but do you really think rustbucket cares two hoots about them?
            Between them and he’s next Christmas bonus we both know what the so called “Socialist” will choose.

            They are all try to be red on paper, but their blood is a shade of blue.

            Pretzelberg, this is where investigative journalism goes wrong.
            We do not live in some part of Stalinist Russia where one needed to undermine the state in order to bring about a change in policies via a coup.
            We are in a healthy Western state.
            The rules put in place to keep it safe and stable.
            The Guardian travelers pretend they care about freedom fighters and those 3rd world country people but in effect they’ll fry them and cause further havoc in their countries so long as it put the US, Israel and the West in a bad light or help sell their papers.

        • the Guardian, Assange, Snowden et al clearly couldn’t give a fart whether one or 1000 British citizens are blown up on trains, buses, or lecture halls.

          There are no grounds to make that claim.

          It is acting as an accessory to murder.

          Oh please. Now you’re just getting silly.

          • So Pretzel. Now you know better than the security adviser to the UK government. Please. Think before you post.

            • MacEoin is “the security adviser to the UK government”?

              What’s more, one who says “the Guardian, Assange, Snowden et al clearly couldn’t give a fart whether one or 1000 British citizens are blown up … It is acting as an accessory to murder”!!!

              Please. Think before you post.

      • Pretz. There is a very clear distinction between whistleblowing and public disclosure of state secrets. The Guardian could have printed an article saying it had come into possession of material that evidences allegedly questionable behaviour and tactics used by the UK/US security services, but it chose to go much further, by publishing the details and documents themselves, thereby directly weakening the ability of those agencies to protect civilian lives and potentially endangering those lives (and those of agents).

        That is not “whistleblowing”, that isat best negligence or even malice, bordering on treason.

  4. The Guardian’s role in nurturing indifference towards its own country’s national security

    This kind of talk again shows CiFW’s bias on non-Israel issues. Perhaps the Guardian simply wishes to see a different approach to national security?

    • ” Perhaps the Guardian simply wishes to see a different approach to national security?”

      pretzelberg it is not the business of a declining newspaper to decide on the approach the UK should take to its national security. Further if that declining newspaper does not like the approach of the UK it is definitely not for them to endanger the security of the UK. I would sooner accept the judgement of MI5 and GCHQ over ‘The Guardian’

      By the way pretzelberg it is not the business of those who have left the UK to decide on the approach taken to national security in the UK either.
      When you live here, work here and pay your taxes here, you have a right to an opinion. Otherwise your opinion has no validity whatsoever so take it and shove it!

      • When you live here, work here and pay your taxes here, you have a right to an opinion. Otherwise your opinion has no validity whatsoever so take it and shove it!

        So I take it you’ll never comment on any Israel-related CiFwatch article ever again?

        Some (Fritz Wunderlich, Harvey and CiFwatch themselves) would say that also includes this very article!

        A shame you’re going, Gerald, because I find a lot of your views OK.

        • pretzelberg I’m happy to see that you agree that your opinions on the approach to national security in the UK have no validity.
          If your head wasn’t stuck firmly up your own arse you might notice that I refrain from passing an opinion on how Israel approaches its national security.
          The only time I would consider giving an opinion about any other country’s approach to national security is when that country’s actions have an effect on this country, or when we are facing the same ‘problem’ for example the Iranian regime and of course Islamist terrorism.

          • I’m happy to see that you agree that your opinions on the approach to national security in the UK have no validity.

            Strange. I did nothing of the kind!

            If your head wasn’t stuck firmly up your own arse

            Gosh. Touched a nerve, have I?

            you might notice that I refrain from passing an opinion on how Israel approaches its national security.

            Oh please. That’s just nonsense.

            And @ those usual mental midgets supporting Gezza: you are aware that you have no right to an opinion on any country’s internal politics other than your own?
            At least that should mean a lot less shit and bigotry BTL here!

            Or are you – like Gezza – just a bunch of hypocrites?

    • In my day, handing over secret files to enemy agents was known as treason, and treason was severely punished. At one point by death. Then by long gaol sentences. Why has no-one charged The Guardian with high treason, along with Assange and Snowden. Nobody has the right to work towards legal change by putting other people’s lives in danger or by actually causing their deaths.

      • They haven’t been charged because the sad fact is, that in the current PC climate, they would be acquitted and the accusers would become the accused. Especially by the BBC. The UK government can’t even get terrorist suspects extradited without being blocked by the courts (UK or European).
        The Guardian knows this well.

  5. Really . Is that what you think this is? A Tory whine rather than the most serious breach of security this country , the USA and the West has ever faced and giving a head start to our nations enemies in their endless determination to commit terrorist atrocities .
    It s funny how it always seems to those from the far left willing to undermine the very foundations of a democratic society by such acts of espionage and how these acts are always championed by far left rags such as the Guardian .

    • So you wouldn’t be at all upset if GCHQ and NSA also monitored those who opposed British and US policy towards Israel and its settlement programme? For instance, those who say that Israel has every right to build in Judea and Samaria?

      • In fact they do, accordingly to the guidelines of the Obama administration. And we know about.
        So what?

        • I’m glad to know that our government is tracking terrorists. And I’m glad to live in a society where investigative journalists and whistleblowers can uncover this. If not, we’d be like East Germany.
          And given his use of the term far left, I’m kinda guessing that Harvey is of the other, diametrically opposed persuasion and he’s being listened to, too. I doubt he’s happy about that.

          • Only a complete idiot can imagine himself to be in East Germany under this circumstances denigrating the victims of this totalitaran state depending on the Sovietunion.
            It is a truly ambivalent situation to defend open society by clandestine services, and some of the services get nuts by this contradiction, but the main issue are the people who get paranoid by not understanding this need of protection, but living on that protection.

    • From downplaying the Nazis ( in fact not The Guardian, but referring to the inherited mentality), the soviet danger to downplaying the Islamist danger.
      Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.

  6. The News of the World was shut down for phone tapping and rightly so . The Guardian should follow suit in double quick time .

        • So you – and the idiots supporting your posts – have no problem with your blatant hypocrisy?

          Priceless.

          • Thanks for the flowers, but to illuminate you, towelhead has nothing to do with antisemitism.

                • Why are you obfuscating?

                  FYI: anti-Muslim bigotry certainly does have some common ground with anti-Semitism.

                  It seems that you – and the mental midgets lapping up the “towelhead” references – would probably deny anti-Muslim prejudice even exists!

                  Doh.

                • I see, when I described the dominant fashion of the Islamist theocracy in Iran as towelheaded you obfuscated that with some sort of anti-muslim prejudice. Well, i won`t defend religious fascists in your place.

  7. I can hear you and the various bloggers at cifwatch marching the streets of Britain with their jackboots protecting Britain against the imminent threat Britain faces.

    • Supersonic hearing aids…
      The only one wearing jackboots is you (Nat).
      Oh, btw, you might want to take the left boot out of your arse, it’s been lodged there for quite some time.
      Take it out so you can breath.

  8. David Aaronovitch interviews Alan Rusbridger on BBC’s Analysis Radio programme (go to webiste listen or download).
    The arrogance of AR is breathtaking. No doubts that he and his paper are the most fit and proper custodians of national secrets, far fitter that say, an independent parliamentary committee (as in US). And no hint of the role the G has played in actively attempting to access said secrets (sponsoring GG and boyfriend’s flight).

    DA is on top form, pointing out how any media is keen to reveal all secrets, however damaging to others, except their own.

  9. The ironies come thick and fast.
    Guardian on-line readers’ three main candidates for the Nobel Peace Prize were Assange, Snowden and Rowhani.
    Assange has called Rusbridger and the Guardian part of the global Jewish conspiracy,
    Snowden, as it happens, is far-right ‘libertarian’ small-government supporter of Ron Paul,
    whilst Rowhani would hang most of the Guardian male staff for being atheist and/or gay and stone the female staff for adultery.
    Funny old world.

    • Since when did logic or consistency have anything to do with this? See the BDS campaigns supported by bodies such as some gay groups, unions, feminists, Jews and “human rights” organisations, all of whom have perfect liberty in Israel, and would be severely persecuted or put to death in the Islamist paradises they support.

  10. One wonders what The Guardian is actually guarding. Seems like they’re helping the enemy over the ramparts.