Snowden: NSA spied on Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch

[Larry the Cable Dude]

"He told council members: "The NSA has specifically targeted either leaders or staff members in a number of civil and non-governmental organisations … including domestically within the borders of the United States." Snowden did not reveal which groups the NSA had bugged.The assembly asked Snowden if the US spied on the "highly sensitive and confidential communications" of major rights bodies such as Amnesty and Human Rights Watch, as well as on similar smaller regional and national groups. He replied: "The answer is, without question, yes. Absolutely."

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/apr/08/edwards-snowden-us-government-spied-human-rights-workers

[riderinthestorm]

1. Well duh, of course we did. Because Amnesty and HRW are clearly terrorist organizations!

They needed to be spied on to keep America safe!111!!!!!

[mindwalker_i]

2. And they probably had boxes in their garages too

They are clear and present dangers to society.

[Aerows]

4. Heaven forbid

people join organizations because they value their civil rights. I mean surely anyone that values their civil rights too much is obviously dangerous to those in society that don't give a damn about civil rights.

That might impede upon someone making a profit, and profit, like free speech, is far better left into the hands of those that have the most money.

[Cryptoad]

3. Has Comrade Snowden

moved into his new beach house in Crimea ?

[Cali_Democrat]

8. OK This made me LOL. nt

[LanternWaste]

13. I imagine a politely worded query to the NSA would allay your sincere curiosity...

I imagine a politely worded query to the NSA would allay your sincere curiosity...

[sabrina 1]

19. Snowden could be at his original destination if the US had not forced him to remain in Russia.

Did you have a point you were trying to make?

[Thinkingabout]

29. On to this again, the US did not force him into Russia, he went willing

Because he had a US passport and has been charged with crimes in the US it is normal for the US to revoke his passport. Did you ever research why airlines would not allow him to board their flights?

[sabrina 1]

50. Charged with a crime is just that, allegations, nothing more. The criminals who have been exposed

time after time by various different Whistle Blowers are still not even CHARGED with anything. Funny, back when Bush was occupying the WH and another Whistle Blower exposed similar violations of the Constitution by the NSA, there was HERO WORSHIP for that Whistle Blower on Democratic Forums.

I remember it well, the outrage that our own Govt was spying on the American people. The outpourings of support for the Whistle Blower/s.

The sudden change regarding these Constitutional violations among a few on the left has been remarked on by numerous people.

The demands for charges against the actual CRIMINALS, certainly not the messengers, were loud and clear.

Now, suddenly for some on the left, it is the MESSENGER who is the criminal? What changed?

Not to mention that most of the previous Whistle Blowers were Republicans. They were PATRIOTS, said the Left, breaking with their party to courageously report to the people of the wrong doing of their own party leadership.

Stunning turn around isn't it?

The US Government wrongfully took Snowden's passport who is still innocent of any crime, unless YOU think that just having charges filed against you means you are GUILTY??? Surely we have not sunk to that level in this democracy of ours?

In doing so, the US Government is responsible for Snowden being in Russia.

There is no question about that fact no matter how hard anyone tries to deny it. He would NOT be in Russia were it not for the wrongful actions of this government.

The correct response to Snowden's leaks would have been to investigate the LEAKS. To treat him as a Whistle Blower, NOT a criminal. To investigate the crimes revealed in the leaks. Certainly NOT to rush to try to create the belief, which is failing anyhow, that HE is the criminal, while those who violated our Constitutional Rights, are 'innocent'.

Uneffingbelievable what we read here now sometimes.

[Thinkingabout]

51. You are right on unbelievable things posted, I never said he has received a guilty verdict.

I said he was charged, along with the charge revoking his passport was in order. It would seen he would have been advised of having his passport revoked but perhaps he was not. The rest of the story lies in why the airlines would not allow him to board their planes. If you researched this you would find the reason they do not allow someone to board their plane, do the research it will provide you some answers.

[sabrina 1]

56. My initial comment to which YOU responded, was directed to the person who implied that Snowden was

a 'commie' who went to Russia intentionally, a lie that has pervaded despite the fact that over and over again the lie has been refuted.

Snowden's destination was NOT Russia as that snide comment intended for people to believe. And each time I see that lie, I will correct it, no matter who likes it or not.

Regardless of anything, the TRUTH is he was NOT headed for Russia, he was on his way to S. America where he had been granted political asylum.

The FACT is that due to the wrongful actions of our Government whose first response should have been to treat him as a Whistle Blower, investigate the leaks, go after anyone who violated the Constitutional Rights of Americans, then decide if his breaking the law, which most Whistle Blowers must do in order to expose wrongdoing, meets the standard of the SC precedent on such cases, that the information he leaked was in the People's interest and superceded any laws. Only AFTER taking all those steps should charges, if ANY, have been filed against him.

Instead the Govt rescinded his passport, forcing him to stay in Russia where he did not want to be, despite the snide implication of the poster to whom I initially responded.

Nothing HE did caused him to be in Russia. He explained why he chose the route he did to get to his intended destination long ago.

The fact is, he is in Russia ONLY because of the actions of the US, who are particularly anti-Whistle Blowers unfortunately as we well know from the egregious treatment of the long line of Whistle Blowers who have risked everything since the Bush Gang began tearing apart our Constitution.

When I supported this President I was hoping for a huge change in the government's treatment of Whistle Blowers, hoping that the on going violations of our rights would end. I was wrong.

Ron Wyden is one of the few elected officials who has consistently warned us about the destruction of our rights by the NSA. He was not free to be specific, but warned us over and over again that 'if the American people knew what the NSA was up to, they would be very angry'. Snowden freed him to speak more openly about his fears for this democracy. The very fact that Snowden, NOT the crimianls, those who lie to Congress eg, Clapper, is the ONLY one who has been charged, does not bolster your defense of the actions of this Government wrt to Whistle Blowers, it only highlights all that is wrong with this ongoing outrageous persecution of Whistle Blowers while the actual criminals walk free.

[Thinkingabout]

66. Truth is very important. Who forced Snowden on the flight to Russia?

Was Snowden advised charges against him could result in his US passport being revoked? Again the airlines could have allowed him to board but airlines requires a valid passport to board their planes. This would be very good information. The facts is important, all of the facts, not just a portion of the facts. Traveling to anywhere in the world is not a right we have.

Why did he choose not to fly directly to S. America instead of Hong Kong?

[sabrina 1]

67. Truth is very important. I just gave you the facts, not just about Snowden, but about the

persecution of Whistle Blowers in the US since Bush began the destruction of the Consitutional Rights of Americans.

If you're not interested in the facts, that's find by me. But each time I hear the lie that Snowden was headed for Russia, I will correct it.

He explained why he chose the route he chose, long ago. Clearly you prefer to stand by your version of the 'facts'.

Ellsberg too was subjected to the same kind of smears and attacks. He is now recognized for his courage and love of his country.

His critics are merely a footnote, if that, in history as will all those who smeared and attacked the recent Whistle Blowers, Drake, Binney, Tice, Snowden et al.

Ellsberg fully supports Snowden's actions, and so do many others whose integrity and honesty are beyond question.

I know generally when I am on the right side of history by the company I find myself in.

[Thinkingabout]

73. Do you know why he was not allowed to board a plane in Russia?

[dionysus]

59. LEAVE EDDIE ALONE!!!1!!!1... nt

[sabrina 1]

63. Snowden was forced to remain in Russia due to the anti Whistle Blower atmosphere in the US

And each time I see the lie that he went there intentionally, I will correct it.

Your childish comment means nothing to me, but thanks for giving me another opportunity to correct the lie that this Whistle Blower went to Russia intentionally. I appreciate that.

[anneboleyn]

90. Comrades Snowden and Putin are drinking coronas on the beach...

[Purveyor]

5. kick. Thanks for posting. +1 eom

[Aerows]

6. I agree

excellent post.

[cheapdate]

7. Not sure that Snowden's strategy

of releasing his leaks a piece at a time, slowly and over time, is going to be as effective as he'd hoped in marshaling political and popular support at home.

[Aerows]

9. I think it has been extremely effective

People keep talking about the NSA, and it's no longer possibly to sweep it under the rug. You already have the Senate griping about the surveillance state with the CIA, and they are also complaining about the NSA. The longer it lingers in the minds of the body politic, the worse it is for the NSA, CIA and any other intelligence organization that attempts to subvert the privacy rights of their citizens.

Every time Snowden makes a release, it makes the CIA, the DIA, the NSA and the other alphabet soup organizations a heck of a lot more nervous about what might come out, and makes them repeatedly tell lies only to have them be proven as falsehoods. It's very good for the citizens when those in government get nervous. That's the beauty of how he has done it. They come on TV, say "No this doesn't happen" and then next week, they are proven liars.

I love it when arrogance gets hoisted on its own petard.

[Jackpine Radical]

30. Dump a thousand examples of outrageous behavior all at once, and the press will

maybe report on 3 of them, and you'll have a 3-day media circus, after which the whole thing will be forgotten.

Parade those stories one at a time, and the enormity of the outrages will begin to sink in.

The slow release is the only way to effectively make the whole thing stick in the public awareness.

[Aerows]

31. Precisely

and I think that is what pisses of "Pro-NSA, CIA, rah rah" folks the most. It has seeped into the consciousness of Americans, and they can't stand transparency.

[Larry the Cable Dude]

10. The spacing between Snowden's leaks vs. NSA spying on those organizations

Is the former really a bigger concern to you than the latter? I am confident that you will at some point tell us whether you think spying on these entities is right or wrong.

[Aerows]

11. Of course it is to some

because, "I don't care what they did ... shut up!".

And Snowden doesn't and they keep going on and on and on, and it scares the shit out of the spook organizations because they don't like anything to do with having light shone upon their activities. Which is exactly why they need enough light to drive the cockroaches away and have the real, law-abiding intelligence personnel be the only ones left in said organizations.

[cheapdate]

12. It's wrong. Is his strategy effective?

He risks irrelevance. He risks acquiring pariah status so that even politicians fighting against the surveillance state, such as Ron Wyden or Sheldon Whitehouse, are damaged by his activities. He risks alienating the public and pushing opinion in the opposite direction. He risks becoming associated with enemies of the nation and becoming a toxic political liability.

Do you sense a groundswell of public opinion growing as a result of the way he's going about this? That is, are the ranks growing among people who weren't already disposed toward a negative perspective on surveillance? Has the construction and operation of any of the vast network of "fusion centers" been impeded in any way? Has the ideological split in the Robert's court changed in any way?

[go west young man]

17. I'm pretty sure that he's not too worried about "becoming a political liability"....

the CIA is obviously not happy about any leak. Their normal strategy in regards to information that maybe defamatory to them is to distort, obfuscate, not comment or to offer an alternative. They like it when it disappears into the memory hole quickly. That's why Snowdon "is effective"...they have to go into constant defensive repair mode. Anyone who has paid attention to Snowdon, Assange or any persecuted whistleblowers as of late, realizes that slow leaking is easily the most effective method.

[cheapdate]

22. Maybe so, but of course anyone who's been paying attention has been aware

that the NSA has been indiscriminately intercepting massive amounts of private communications since 2005. They've been aware of the legislative actions authorizing more, not less, surveillance; the court actions that have almost entirely favored the NSA programs; and the massive and unchecked growth of the surveillance infrastructure that continues unabated as we speak.

Snowden's litany of abuses are by and large very real. What we need to be hearing are the powerful and compelling arguments for why Americans should care.

[Aerows]

33. It is effective as hell

which puts the rah rah NSA crowd on notice that there will be more, it will do more damage, and the unreined surveillance state won't continue as it has. Unfettered access to everything and everybody is going to come to an end due to public pressure.

Gripe about it, try to make light of it, call everyone that supports it unpatriotic, but guess what? The shitball has just started rolling down the hill and it isn't headed towards the folks that were spied upon.

[Jackpine Radical]

35. Snowden needs to come home & face the music

so he can be silenced once and for all.

I just know I'm gonna need this--------->

[randome]

14. It's not even a 'leak'. It's just Snowden talking.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]You have to play the game to find out why you're playing the game. -Existenz[/center][/font][hr]

[ProSense]

16. This is good:

At times assembly members struggled to follow Snowden's rapid, sometimes technical delivery. At one point the session's chairperson begged him to slow down, so the translators could catch up.

It's "Snowden talking" shit.

Did you know he got an award for "truth telling"?

What a friggin joke.

LOL!

[Aerows]

42. You are just talking

as though you know a thimble full of information Edward Snowden has. Minimize all that you like, but the ball is rolling. It's not going to be pretty when it arrives at it's destination. The Surveillance state has been shrouded in secrecy and allowed to operate with impunity for too long.

Far too long. Every revelation strips the NSA, the CIA and every other organization of credibility and as actors in good faith. There are plenty that act in good faith, and I hope that for the sake of the organizations they work for, which actually do good things, expose the bad actors that are lower than street thugs.

[ProSense]

15. He has no friggin strategy but to continue saying shit. I mean,

Snowden said he did not believe the NSA was engaged in "nightmare scenarios", such as the active compilation of a list of homosexuals "to round them up and send them into camps". But he said that the infrastructure allowing this to happen had been built. The NSA, its allies, authoritarian governments and even private organisations could all abuse this technology, he said, adding that mass surveillance was a "global problem". It led to "less liberal and safe societies", he told the council.

...absurd shit seems to just come out of his mouth.

[JI7]

23. reminds me of those anti census idiots

[sabrina 1]

27. It is 'shit' I agree with you there. It is 'shit' to think that we live in a country where

citizens engaging in perfectly legal and necessary activities are being spied on. It's WAY past time to end these practices by passing laws against them. They ARE illegal, under our Constitution, but unfortunately the 'rule of law' has been abandoned and it may require NEW laws to reestablish the rights of the people here in THIS country, and forget about traveling with our WMDs around the world claiming to be establishing rights we no longer have here, in other nations. Not very successfully either.

[sabrina 1]

20. On the contrary, it has been extremely effective. And airc, some of the same people, not you as I

don't recall your position on Manning's leaks eg, who criticized the 'document dumping' as they called those leaks, are now taking the opposite position, 'Snowden should have done what we already said was a bad idea when someone else did it'.

The reason for the way they are doing it is partially to review the documents before just putting them out there.

And to make sure that people are not so overwhelmed they can't focus on the important material and just dismiss the whole issue.

The very fact that President Obama appointed a panel to look into the most controversial part of the leaks, the 'collection and storage' of the private communications of ALL Americans, clearly a 4th Amendment violation, then acted on the findings of that panel by proposing ending that practice, is proof of how effective the method of informing the people has been.

[cheapdate]

24. Why should Americans care?

[sabrina 1]

26. Why should Americans care about what?

[cheapdate]

32. Why should Americans care about the NSA surveillance programs?

[Aerows]

34. Are you wearing hipboots?

Because it looks like shit has just got started, and it isn't going to be pretty for pro-surveillance state types.

Shining light on surveillance activities scares the shit out of intelligence operations, because they KNOW the ugly (and illegal) things they have done.

[sabrina 1]

38. Is that a serious question? Or are you being sarcastic?

[cheapdate]

41. Completely serious.

[Aerows]

44. Please

You already know that the shit is rolling downhill. Climb out of it, or be buried in it (figuratively, of course).

[sabrina 1]

45. Are you familiar with the US Constitution by any chance?

Did you know that the Bush Administration trashed the US Constitution while occupying the WH? Did you know that every elected official in the US and all of our Military Personnel take an oath that requires them to do only one thing, to 'defend and protect the Constitution of the US from all enemies, both foreign and domestic'?

Did you know that most Americans support that oath for what I would think would be 'obvious reasons'.

I find your question to be extremely odd, assuming you are an American citizen. Assuming also that you were aware of the assault on the Constitution by the Bush gang of war criminals.

Assuming you believe in the rule of law. Including that 'no one is above the law' in a democracy.

Americans in general actually do believe that elected officials and our military personnel should take that oath they swear to, very seriously.

Perhaps you believe the oath should be dispensed with?? Bush eg, found the Constitution to be very inconvenient, a sort of barrier to his and his criminal administration's goals.

[cheapdate]

74. What the f$#k is "odd" about challenging you

to produce a compelling argument for why Americans should care about NSA surveillance and the growth of the surveillance state?

If I wasn't already convinced of the illegality and insidiousness of these developments, I doubt your symbolic appeal to oaths and former president George W. Bush would push me over the line.

Leaving aside all of these spurious remarks, your argument becomes simply "because it's unlawful" -- which you could have simply stated plainly without all of the passive-aggressive bullshit.

[sabrina 1]

75. You did not 'challenge' me, your 'enigmatic' question could be taken only way, to dismiss

the concerns of the American people regarding living in an oppressive state subjected to mass spying by their own government.

If that was not the intention of your question, you did a poor job of expressing exactly what you were trying to say.

Next time just say whatever it is you want to say.

Sorry to burden you with the facts regarding WHY the American people find living in a surveillance state, being spied on by their own government, to be disturbing at the very least, AND in violation of the law of the land.

You asked, I answered.

[cheapdate]

88. "Why should Americans care about the NSA surveillance programs?"

Last edited Fri Apr 11, 2014, 09:19 AM - Edit history (1)

The question was hardly "enigmatic". It means exactly what is says. A more thoughtful and less confrontational person might view it as an invitation to present arguments in favor of limiting the power of the government to spy on its citizens. That was in fact the sole purpose of the question -- to hear the arguments that matter in defense of democracy and civil liberty.

I reject your specious claim that the "only" way to understand my question is as an attempt to "dismiss the concerns of the American people". Your claim that my asking for people to express their concerns is an act of dismissing those concerns is patently and self-evidently ludicrous.

I've relied upon DU for many years to learn and to hear insightful and compelling arguments that informed my opinions about politics and society. I still do.

[U4ikLefty]

95. BS...you refuse to answer your own question.

Even though you are "already convinced of the illegality and insidiousness of these developments"...suuure!!!

Your intent is obvious & when called out, you start with the swearing.

Weak.

[cheapdate]

96. Oh my! What keen powers of perception you have!

Keep after 'em tiger!

[U4ikLefty]

101. Nah, just able to detect obvious BS.

[cheapdate]

102. Incredible. Tell me, how could you tell I was lying?

Some people might call you an a%$hole. What would you say to them?

(on edit : Note to alerters. My "adversary" here led with his version of the brilliant "You lie!" argument right from the start. Sometimes I have neither the time, patience, nor the desire to engage in a process of discovery with this kind or crap.)

[brush]

77. The drip-drip release over time is to prolong his 15 minutes

It's really not about him anymore. He's a defector living in Russia. The story now is about the NSA violating 4th Amendment rights of citizens here.

His detailing of international covert operations is a whole other can of worms that isn't often delved into in these Snowden threads.

[cheapdate]

83. There are probably ten posts about Edward Snowden

for every one post about the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the ACLU,the Center for Constitutional Rights, elected officials such as Ron Wyden and Sheldon Whitehouse, and all of the many other people and groups fighting against the encroachments and abuses of the government and the NSA.

http://projects.propublica.org/graphics/surveillance-suits

I agree with you. It's not all about Edward Snowden anymore. I have doubts about the effectiveness of Snowden's continuing actions and whether he's gone beyond the point of diminishing returns in proceeding as he is.

Meanwhile, half the Snowden posts on DU only use him as a bludgeon to fuel thoughtless, divisive arguments that have little to do with making real progress.

[brush]

85. Agreed. So many drip-drip-drip releases make him look . . .

like he's saying, "don't forget me. Look I'm still relevant, remember what I did."

[anneboleyn]

91. Exactly. Seems like classic narcissism, really. "look at me!" "Look at meeeeeee!"

[SidDithers]

18. He's just like Paul Revere...nt

Sid

[sabrina 1]

21. Absolutely, that he is. And President Obama has reacted to the news he has brought to the American

people by creating a panel to look into the NSA practice of massive spying on the people, against the 4th Amendment of the Constitution, and now has acted on the findings of that panel by proposing an end to that egregious and illegal practice.

The people also have reacted to the threat exposed by Snowden. Not surprisingly Americans actually do value their Civil Rights.

[msanthrope]

53. With thumbdrives!!!! nt

[Savannahmann]

25. I'm not surprised.

Remember it was the French Intelligence Service that sank the Greenpeace ship Rainbow Warrior.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinking_of_the_Rainbow_Warrior

So why would we be surprised that the same intelligence services of supposedly democratic nations are spying on people who want to end torture?

[BeyondGeography]

28. Not to worry, snowfans, the biggest revelations are yet to come

http://mashable.com/2014/03/18/edward-snowden-ted-2014/

Really, they are.

[Aerows]

36. The NSA fans

are pissing in their pants because they already know that, and are trying to head it off at the pass.

[sabrina 1]

39. Not to worry, Surveillance State fans, it will take time to finally hold the

criminals who have violated the US Constitution, accountable for their crimes. But there is no statute of limitations on crimes against the US Constitution so there is that ...

[Larry the Cable Dude]

43. You imply that so far none of the leaks has been big

Nsa apologists love to pretend that.

[LittleBlue]

40. We shouldn't be defenseless against the threat of the Amnesty Intl and HRW

Bloodthirsty terrorists, those two. Thank fuck the NSA is protecting us.

[sabrina 1]

46. Don't forget Quakers and Librarians!

Very dangerous people who absolutely need to be surveilled!

[Aerows]

47. And quiet people

that run computer networks. They might run something that an NSA person might need or harbor a grudge against.

It pisses me off that sys admins were deliberately targeted. The NSA is like a pack of jackals (and forgive me for insulting jackals) that seeks to take down any entity for the purpose of their EGO. Not for security, but their blatant EGOTISTICAL purpose.

If your ego is so fucking fragile that you have to harass a sys admin, you are not much of a human being, and they admitted to doing this.

[Aerows]

48. K&R n/t

[Zorra]

49. Well, duh! It's their job to protect the 1% from democracy. nt

[G_j]

78. +1000

[pragmatic_dem]

52. the spying apologists are kissing the butt of our police state...

they think that by defending it, they won't ever become a victim of it. Like the conservative who puts a police association sticker next to his license plate, thinking it won't get them pulled over for reckless driving.

With a prison system bulging at the seams with the the poor, pay-to-play justice for the most affluent, and a media and political culture captured by billionaire corporate oligarchs, the last fucking thing we need is a Democratic Party kissing the butts of NSA.

In fact, the only ones who can afford to defend spying, are the ones whose livelihood depends on it.

[Jefferson23]

54. Always been so afraid HRW and Amnesty might know deep shit about us so we have to

spy on them..they might have something on us for torturing people.

This is what we have been reduced to.

[pragmatic_dem]

55. NSA is spying on groups like this because if one of these people

should ever decide to run for political office, or investigate corruption, etc NSA and CIA will be there to torpedo them.

Something a Goldman Sachs or Citi or AIG executive who steals a billion dollars from retirees by defrauding them out of their pension funds will never have to worry about.

[ucrdem]

57. Of course, he didn't name either and he provided no evidence whatsoever of anything.

[dionysus]

60. doesn't matter, people are still willing to hurl themselves in front of a proverbial train to save

him.

[pragmatic_dem]

61. The assembly asked Snowden if the US spied on...Amnesty and Human Rights Watch, He replied:

The assembly asked Snowden if the US spied on the "highly sensitive and confidential communications" of major rights bodies such as Amnesty and Human Rights Watch, as well as on similar smaller regional and national groups. He replied: "The answer is, without question, yes.

[ucrdem]

62. Did the Assembly also ask if they'd marry a rich man?

Because for the answer they got they might as well have.

[pragmatic_dem]

64. your apology is not accepted. nt

[ucrdem]

65. Russian fortune tellers went out with dirigibles. nt

[ucrdem]

58. Next up: The Amazing Snowden gets in touch with lost loved ones

for a small fee. Good news is guaranteed.

[bobduca]

80. "Comedy" as interpreted by the BOG

This thread is an NSA Apologist Ignore-List Goldmine!

[randome]

82. Funny how those of us who question Snowden don't 'brag' about our ignore lists.

The anger and need for 'revenge' does not come from my end of the block.

Perhaps you should question your faith in Snowden a little more. It seems to be weighing on you.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]The truth doesn’t always set you free.
Sometimes it builds a bigger cage around the one you’re already in.[/center][/font][hr]

[bobduca]

84. thanks for the advice, hyper-partisan.

Your safe haven for NSA Apologia just got safer. I can't see your replies anymore under "My Posts".

[randome]

86. You may not see this but...

...I have never advocated for the NSA nor for 'hyper-partisanship'. I see Snowden a little differently than you, that's all.

Okay, a lot differently.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Treat your body like a machine. Your mind like a castle.[/center][/font][hr]

[anneboleyn]

92. I snorted water. +1,000,000

Snowden and that housewives psychic from Long Island (must say Long Island with very thick Long Island accent) could do a world tour. Well outside the US --I suppose, primarily in China and Russia.

[ucrdem]

100. Step right up . . .

when the five-hundred-dollar world tour tix go on sale I know who will be standing in line to buy them. . .

[DCBob]

107. +1

[JEB]

68. What kind of American attacks the messenger

bearing ugly truths about our country?

[TheKentuckian]

69. Idiotic traitors to our values and self determination. Sell out slaves and wannabe overseers.

Foolish partisan loyalists devoid of scruples.

Haters of democracy.

Turnkey slavers.

Dim fuckwits.

Evil pieces of shit with the same wicked motivations as the dumpster fires across the aisle.

Brainless, soulless automatons of Wagon circling.

Plain old fools.

Propaganda slurpers.

The willfully blind and ignorant.

Silly ass servile robots, having their programming play out.

Fucking liars.

Fascists.

[JEB]

70. Exactly what I was thinking.

Especially the last one: Fascists.

[TheKentuckian]

71. Right on. These folks are enemies not friends with disagreements on tactics as they often espouse.

Fucking brownshirts.

[JEB]

72. Or paid pitiful pawns in political games.

[anneboleyn]

94. EXACTLY! (and excellent alliteration I might add)

[bobduca]

81. Cowards all

[VanillaRhapsody]

76. Next up Snowden claims the moon is made of green cheese...

and certain DU'ers line up to defend it!

[G_j]

79. I could have told you that

at least the chances are probably 99.9% that they have, are, and will be in the future.

[Calista241]

87. Isn't the goal to spy on everybody?

I kinda doubt they even had to work all that hard to do it.

[ucrdem]

89. It appears that Larry has left the building.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=313428&sub=trans

[SidDithers]

93. Again...nt

Sid

[ucrdem]

97. He had so much to tell us, too.

Every snowball thread is precious.

[Cali_Democrat]

105. Oh he'll be back

You can bet on it.

The right wing Snowdenwald fans are relentless....

...like cockroaches...

[JI7]

98. he should have been banned after the comment about illegals lining up for obamacare

right wing piece of shit

[ucrdem]

99. The name is a clue.

I hadn't heard of his namesake until I was on one of the DU juries that let him skate (can't find it a.t.m.) and misanthrope I think mentioned the comedian in another post. A 30-second Google search relieved any inclination I might have had to leave. I must not be the only one who'd never heard of Larry the Cable guy though because he was here 10 days without a single hide.

[Cali_Democrat]

103. ROFL. nt

[Bobbie Jo]

104. Wow

Didn't see that coming.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4771124

[ucrdem]

106. Yep that's the post I was thinking of.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4768707

I think it was another now-PPRed guy whose jury I was on, not Larry's, but as soon I saw that post I knew the story. It's good that juries go easy on newbies I suppose but at this point I can spot a Paul partisan on the first post. But that in itself isn't cause to alert and they have to really step in it to get a hide.

[Bobbie Jo]

108. Looking at the subthread

several others spotted him too.

Go figure.