http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/j ... tleblowers

I agree wholeheartedly. Just look at where we are now - an ability to listen live to any mobile phone or landline call, the interception and recording of millions of video chats without any link to criminal activity at all, the wiretapping of the entire internet... We wouldn't have known about any of this except for Snowden, and both the UK and US governments have did their best both now and in the past to silence whistleblowers and others. It has to stop; we don't like it when an NHS trust or other public institution tries to silence those who would speak out, we shouldn't tolerate it when the entire world is becoming a dystopian nightmare. I really wish that was overstating it...

Lol

Yeah, let's have a US style first amendment to the British Constitution - that card game really needs an amendment.

Seriously, the reason the Snowden affair has gained so much traction in the USA is because Americans have their first amendment - enshrined in their bill of rights is the freedom of speech, religion and expression without fear of persecution; and then they finally get proof that their own government is gathering private/personal information for the purposes of flaunting the first amendment.

America is a great idea - it just doesn't work how they believe it should.

Why the [LIFTED] would we want to adopt a false security blanket? Nothing will abate the depredations of the UK government on it's own people, least of all a flawed system that patently fails to flourish in it's home soil.

Everything the Americans get from the First Amendment, we already have with the Human Rights Act. Typical American.

Constitutions that are practically impossible to radically alter are an Enlightenment solution to problems of that era. The net result is a set of laws that must be continually re-interpreted by a Supreme Court of judges whose personal political convictions matter far too much because they are appointees of a parliament who must trust them to interpret old rules favourably under chancing circumstances.

To be fair to Wales, he was only agreeing with Rusbridger, who in turn was just channeling that large section of the Guardian reading intelligentsia who think there are really very simple solutions for everything, so long as you have the imagination to squint and force all your problems to be equally simple.

Well, freedom of the press is also part of the first amendment, whereas ours can be silenced by a (legally) non-enforceable request that is almost never ignored by our press.

I'm not suggesting their system is better, because history is littered with attempts by the US gov to sidestep the FOTP clause, but they did at least have it written into law.

Again, nice idea. Shame about the execution.