THE LAST DITCH An Englishman returned after twenty years abroad blogs about liberty in Britain
An answer to my question
Emerging from behind the skirting boards...

In which I praise the editor of The Guardian

David Miranda, schedule 7 and the danger that all reporters now face | Alan Rusbridger | Comment is free | The Guardian.

Well said, Mr Rusbridger. I hope that your article will be seen as final proof that civil liberties are not a Right vs Left issue. I would love to see the Left back on side. The likes of John Mortimer, a lifelong Labour man, used to be far more reliable on liberty in the pre-Blair days than many on the Right.

Sadly, given time, your article is more likely to provide final proof that the Left has the same feeble grasp on the law of unintended consequences as it does on the law of supply and demand. All limitations on free speech are to be resisted and - where possible - rolled back, so you might like to rein in your journalists' daily output of new demands to restrict it.

As a footnote, I am pleased to see that "professional status" doesn't matter any more, now that a "Fleet Street irregular" has been intimidated at Heathrow Airport. Journalists are, like policemen, people doing for money what all of us should do as a civic duty. Now you have grasped that, I look forward to an end to Guardian journalists sneering at bloggers from their imagined dizzy heights. 

In a civilised world, the validity of a person's views or actions has nothing to do with their status. Grasp that one, and not only will The Guardian's predeliction for ad hominem come to an end, but you will also be looking for a lot of new material to replace your coverage of the national victimhood poker tournament.


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


They are all linked, yes. This is the first story for ages that presents an opportunity for civil libertarians to promote their views to an apathetic public through the very media that lazy, thoughtless voters rely upon to form what passes for their opinions. When the Guardian protests, its broadcast counterparts at the BBC will join in. I don't like passing through airports either. They give us a temporary taste of the society our governments are trying to shape - entirely free of legal protections, we are liable to be abused physically and otherwise and any protest is denounced as disloyalty to the benevolent state or support for its (largely imaginary, but very useful) enemies.

james higham

Sadly, given time, your article is more likely to provide final proof that the Left has the same feeble grasp on the law of unintended consequences as it does on the law of supply and demand.

And that's called present era reality.


Hard to know which post to respond to of the recent three or four, because they are all linked in my opinion.

Government, whether USA or UK has grown arrogant, it is actively ignoring the constitution, bill of rights in the USA and magna carta and subsequent laws that define Brit "freedoms" in the UK. The government needs to be a little bit scared of its population, Obama is very scared after his ridiculous gun-banning exercise blew up in his face and gun sales soared.

I do not know if Snowden, Manning or Anonymous are patriots or traitors, but since they are doing damage to what are in my estimation illegitimate governments I tend to support them for the present.

Rusbridger is correct when he discusses location of newspaper HQ's and given the dire financial situation of the Guardian it is easy to assume he is seriously looking at relocating outside yUK to avoid the horrendous costs of operating there, while also gaining freedom to operate under the freedom of speech rights enshrined in the US bill of rights and constitution.

Personally, this Miranda story just bolsters my beliefs that I do not need to visit yUK, I do not need a celphone and if I never see an airport again that would be quite fine by me.


The Guardian hasn't just played with fire, it's fanned the flames while attacking any who point out the danger.

And now it's been singed, it's crying?

Pathetic, no different to the school bully getting a taste of his own medicine.

It's not interested in freedom of the press. Not even slightly. It's only interested in itself.

The comments to this entry are closed.