This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25205846

The article has changed 7 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Only 1% of Snowden files published - Guardian editor Only 1% of Snowden files published - Guardian editor
(35 minutes later)
Only 1% of files leaked by former US intelligence analyst Edward Snowden have been published by the Guardian newspaper, its editor has told MPs.Only 1% of files leaked by former US intelligence analyst Edward Snowden have been published by the Guardian newspaper, its editor has told MPs.
But Alan Rusbridger told the Home Affairs Select Committee that the Guardian was not a "rogue newspaper".But Alan Rusbridger told the Home Affairs Select Committee that the Guardian was not a "rogue newspaper".
He insisted the paper's journalists were "patriots" and patriotic about democracy and a free press.He insisted the paper's journalists were "patriots" and patriotic about democracy and a free press.
He said senior officials in Whitehall and the US administration had told the paper "no damage" had been caused.He said senior officials in Whitehall and the US administration had told the paper "no damage" had been caused.
Last month intelligence chiefs used their appearance before the committee to criticise the Guardian, suggesting it had endangered national security . Last month intelligence chiefs used their appearance before a different committee to criticise the Guardian, suggesting it had endangered national security .
But Mr Rusbridger said their accusations were "very vague and not rooted in specific stories".But Mr Rusbridger said their accusations were "very vague and not rooted in specific stories".
'Selective judgements'
"There are different views about this," he said. "It's impossible to assess because no one has given me specific evidence.""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."
Mr Rusbridger said he was not in a position to answer a question by Conservative MP Michael Ellis about whether he had broken the Terrorism Act by sharing information listing the names of security officials abroad with other newspapers.Mr Rusbridger said he was not in a position to answer a question by Conservative MP Michael Ellis about whether he had broken the Terrorism Act by sharing information listing the names of security officials abroad with other newspapers.
He said the Guardian had "made very selective judgments"' about what to publish and had not revealed the names of any officials. The Guardian editor said the paper had "made very selective judgments"' about what to publish and had not revealed the names of any officials.
Asked by committee chairman Keith Vaz if the files not published were in a secure place, Mr Rusbridger said "I believe that to be true". He said the files taken by Mr Snowden, a former contractor with the National Security Agency were in four locations - with The Guardian and the Washington Post newspapers, as well as in Rio de Janeiro and Germany.
He said editors of "leading" newspapers had also decided to publish details in the NSA files.
Asked by committee chairman Keith Vaz if the files that had not been published were in a secure place, Mr Rusbridger said: "I believe that to be true."