In Latest Vindication of Snowden, Court Rules UK Mass Surveillance Illegal

[99th_Monkey]

In Latest Vindication of Snowden, Court Rules UK Mass Surveillance Illegal
by Nadia Prupis, staff writer * Friday, February 06, 2015 * Common Dreams

'We must not allow agencies to continue justifying mass surveillance programmes
using secret interpretations of secret laws,' said Privacy International director Eric King.

In the latest vindication of NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden, a U.K. ruled on Friday that the British government violated human rights law by failing to safeguard some aspects of its intelligence-sharing operations until December 2014.

The Investigatory Powers Tribunal found that the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) accessed information obtained by the National Security Agency (NSA) without sufficient oversight, violating Articles 8 and 10 of the European convention on human rights. According to Reuters, "The tribunal's concern, addressed in the new ruling, was that until details of how GCHQ and the NSA shared data were made public in the course of the court proceedings, the legal safeguards provided by British law were being side-stepped."

The Guardian adds, "The ruling appears to suggest that aspects of the operations were illegal for at least seven years—between 2007, when the Prism intercept [program] was introduced, and 2014."

Article 8 guarantees the right to privacy; Article 10 protects free expression.

"For far too long, intelligence agencies like GCHQ and NSA have acted like they are above the law," said Eric King, deputy director of Privacy International, one of the human rights groups that brought the case to the IPT. "Today’s decision confirms to the public what many have said all along—over the past decade, GCHQ and the NSA have been engaged in an illegal mass surveillance sharing program that has affected millions of people around the world."

The New York Times reports:

Although privacy campaigners claimed the decision as a victory, many experts said the British and American intelligence agencies would continue to share information obtained with electronic surveillance, even if they had to slightly alter their techniques to comply with human rights law.

Named in the decision (pdf) were the NSA's controversial PRISM program, which whistleblower Edward Snowden revealed in 2013 as the invasive spying operations being conducted on U.S. citizens.
http://www.commondreams.org/news/2015/02/06/latest-vindication-snowden-court-rules-uk-mass-surveillance-illegal

[Autumn]

1. If only we had something like a court here.

Rec

[99th_Monkey]

9. Indeed. +200 nt

[billhicks76]

21. It's All About Drugs and Money Here

There never was a big terrorism threat. It was was about rebranding the failed and unpopular Drug War Bush Sr pushed down our throats beginning in the mid 70s and amped up in 1986.

[wildbilln864]

43. It's about G.O.D.!

Guns,
Oil, &
Drugs!

[ButchT]

95. All of the story

Need to tell all of the story: The court ruled the program was illegal because the court hadn't been informed. But it also ruled that, now that it's been informed, the program is now legal.

[misterhighwasted]

2. K&R [phone]

[Maedhros]

3. Wow. The UK's checks-and-balances appear to be at least minimally intact.

Wish that were the case in the U.S..

[truedelphi]

4. And just wait until the near future when America's

Cities and suburbs are patrolled by drones. (A recent Smithsonian publication on "Space" suggests that drone patrol cars could very easily replace 1 Adam 12!)

[Maedhros]

14. "Wrong thinking is punishable."

"Right thinking will be as quickly rewarded. You will find it an effective combination"

[mwooldri]

16. They're intact - and quite solid.

The judiciary doesn't have all the political schenanigans that exists here - judges aren't elected, and although the Lord Chancellor (a cabinet minister) is involved it is more of a "rubber stamp" role as an independent body makes the selections.

I'd dare say the media works better too.

[Maedhros]

17. RE: the media...

Working better than the U.S. media is setting the bar really, REALLY low...

[uhnope]

40. Report Indicates Snowden/Greenwald Lied About Key Claims

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/08/09/1229963/-Report-Indicates-Snowden-Greenwald-Lied-About-Key-Claims

[m-lekktor]

41. the people in the comments section of that anti snowden hit piece on KOS

sufficiently shredded that guys argument, imo.

Dem Party/Obama loyalists are always attempting to trash whistleblowers who make their "team" look bad. If Bush or another republican were president they would be singing a different tune. nobody with half a fucking brain is fooled.

Just saw Citizenfour documentary about Snowden, highly recommended.

[uhnope]

42. Can you show me the comments you are referring to? I didn't see any shredding

Last edited Fri Feb 6, 2015, 09:26 PM - Edit history (1)

[grasswire]

61. oh just stop

fer cryin' out loud

[zeemike]

72. And that assumes they are actually party loyalist...for the Dems.

I don't think there is any doubt that the GOP loyalist are above covert work.
But we can never know by what they say, only by what they do.

[Duval]

91. I'm a Democrat, I like Obama and I support Whistleblowers. nt

[truedelphi]

5. Thank you for posting this important British advance.

A big big K & R.

[lovuian]

6. K&R

What about our courts?

[99th_Monkey]

24. Yah, what about our courts ...

... they've been mostly hijacked by 1%ers. See Citizens United

[rhett o rick]

7. Ok, ok, once again people are totally misunderstanding the vilification of the Snowman.

Yes the NSA/CIA Deep State are spying on all of us to keep us safe from, er from, well ok so I don't know what from but I trust they do. But it's for our own good. And everything was just fine when we were wallowing in our ignorant bliss. Now that the Snowman had to go and expose the naked emperor (pun intended, sorry), it will take another two martinis to get back into my stateful bliss, er blissful state. And the same goes for Greenberg. Or wald, you know the uppity journalist.

[LiberalLovinLug]

12. You're missing the sarcasm tag

There are those that would take that post at face value.

I'm surprised that so far the small band of the usual frightened authoritarian suspects have yet to grace us with their presence.

[rhett o rick]

13. Sorry about that. I think that danged Manny the Third Way rubbed off on me. nm

[sibelian]

103. I think they have begun to realise that their presence is actually counterproductive.

It perpetuates the thread, and does little more than that.

[WillyT]

8. K & R !!!

[Fred Sanders]

18. Judicial independence in America was sacrificed on the altar of partisan politics long ago.

You reap what you sow, and the UK and Canada's independent and impartial judiciary are reaping some good harvests lately while the American model of not giving a fuck about judicial independence produces barren fields.

"Judicial independence" is not just an Ivory Tower concept.

[Ichingcarpenter]

10. the court

the court that oversees the GCHQ ruled against the UK intelligence services for the first time in its controversial 15 year history


.In the short, two-page ruling, the Investigatory Powers Tribunal declares that, before December 2014 “the regime governing the soliciting, receiving, storing and transmitting by the UK authorities of private communications of individuals in the UK, which have been obtained by the US authorities” under the NSA’s PRISM and UPSTREAM (collection from fibre-optic cable) programmes breached Articles 8 and 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

The IPT does not apply any sort of sanction to GCHQ for operating illegally for more than a decade.

A previous judgment in December had declared that, due to disclosures made during the case, GCHQ’s arrangements should be regarded as legal from December 2014 onwards. Those newly-disclosed secret policies are extremely permissive, showing that UK agencies can receive or request bulk data from foreign intelligence agencies, including the NSA, without a warrant whenever it would “not be technically feasible” for them to acquire the information themselves with a UK warrant.

In their post announcing today’s judgement, Privacy International have confirmed that they will appeal the court’s earlier opinion from December 2014 at the European Court of Human Rights. The European Court has already granted a rare priority status to two other challenges to UK surveillance laws.

Of course, without Edward Snowden’s actions, we would not know about PRISM, the NSA’s various Special Source Collection programmes or, indeed, GCHQ’s Tempora programme, which the IPT also refused to rule against in December 2014. As Eric King of Privacy International has said today, the new IPT judgment is a “vindication” of his actions. It also shows that, without Edward Snowden’s intervention, GCHQ would have been allowed to act unlawfully and in violation of the human rights of UK citizens indefinitely.


https://edwardsnowden.com/2015/02/06/uk-court-rules-that-gchq-nsa-intelligence-sharing-is-illegal/

[BeanMusical]

11. Kick and R.

[rhett o rick]

15. We don't need no stikin' court to tell us that the Constitution says that mass

surveillance is illegal, THE F'N CONSTITUTION SAYS IT ALREADY.

The problem in the good ole USofA is that some here are so comfortable in their status quo denial bubbles that they willingly give up their Constitutional rights for the promise (a very weak promise at that) of security. These people will tell you they are intelligent liberals and that whistle-blowers should be lynched.

[Maedhros]

19. Our problem on this site is that ANY criticism of problematic governmental behavior

is seen as a potential criticism of Obama himself - AND WE CAN'T HAVE THAT! Therefore, the only option available to the Ostensibly Liberal Authoritarian is to vehemently deny all wrongdoing, praise the President and attack the messenger. Besides, Constitutional abuse isn't really abuse because reasons.

[sabrina 1]

25. It's a strange phenomenon, the way that happens. Just criticize Bush holdovers eg, Gates, and the

next thing you know is you are descended upon for 'hating Obama'.

And the real irony is, those same people will accuse YOU of being a 'Snowden Groupie'.

Lol, sometimes I think someone could create a great comedy routine just be reading here.

[Maedhros]

34. It would be funny, were it not so absolutely sad. [n/t]

[rhett o rick]

59. I see it as an authoritarian behavior. It's much easier to trust the decisions of the

authoritarian leader than try to figure out the issue on your own. Pres Obama says fracking is the "bridge to a new energy future" therefore, the hell with the poor slobs that get their drinking water ruined, let's trust Pres Obama.

But trouble makers like the Snowman try to expose the nakedness of the Emperor, and therefore they must be dealt with harshly. The hell with being liberal with an open mind.

[rhett o rick]

60. Yes, you said it very well. nm

[woo me with science]

47. Thank you.

[pa28]

20. Every day Snowden is made to wait for clemency the administration looks more ridiculous.

Time to let him come home. Time to commit to legal accountability for the NSA and their contractors.

[cstanleytech]

22. Uh huh, I'll support clemency for Snowden the same day that I support it for Cheney.

Or in other words both should be going before a judge and jury imo.

[sabrina 1]

26. So what War Crimes did Snowden commit? Torture, burn civilians to death with WP? I'm at a loss as

to any similarity to the two.

Snowden did a service to his country.

Cheney is responsible for massive war crimes, hardly a service to THIS country. Though obviously a service to some pretty powerful people or he would have been in chains a decade ago.

[cstanleytech]

28. sabrina dont play coy.

You know very well he broke the law regarding the handling of classified information which is different than war crimes which is what cheney committed.

[sabrina 1]

31. I'm not playing coy. You made a comparison between a dangerous, lying War Criminal and a

Whistle Blower. In order to expose government malfeasance, especially when the Govt. has already persecuted other Whistle Blowers, see Blake eg, and Binney among others, who have taken advantage of what they thought were protections for Whistle Blowers, going through the proper channels etc, it is necessary, see Elsberg and the SC Decision, for a Whistle Blower to circumvent the law in order to get the information to the people.

The SC already set a precedent on the 'law' in cases like this. They ruled that the public's right to know supercedes the law.

There is simply no comparison between ANY Whistle Blower and Dick Cheney, who I was happy to learn does live in fear of being prosecuted for War Crimes. He should, and should be thanking his lucky stars we no longer live in a civilized democracy, for now.

[cstanleytech]

33. Negative the comparison is about two criminals both of whom have their supporters

but they are both still criminals.

[Vincardog]

48. When a law is detrimental to the liberties and freedoms of people it does not have to be followed

[cstanleytech]

50. So Cheney breaking the law and authorizing torture should be ignored your saying because

to enforce it would detrimental to the liberties and freedoms of people??

[Vincardog]

52. No. You are saying that. Cheney is a war criminal, he should be at the world court. Do you even

Read the responses you get or are you too busy putting words into other people's mouths?

[cstanleytech]

54. Those where some of your own words though.

If you want pick and choose what laws to enforce though fine thats great but I am of the opinion that both of them broke the law and both should be put on trial.
I'm not saying snowden should life in prison for it though which is is I believe the maximum he could get rather I could see 5 years....maybe 10.
Cheney on the other should be locked for life but again thats just my opinion.

[Vincardog]

55. Have you always been an authoritarian?

[cstanleytech]

56. Ok...................plonk.

[Vincardog]

57. authoritarian |əˌTHôriˈte(ə)rēən, ôˌTHär-| adjective favoring or enforcing strict obedience to autho

authoritarian |əˌTHôriˈte(ə rēən, ôˌTHär-| adjective
favoring or enforcing strict obedience to authority, especially that of the government, at the expense of personal freedom: the transition from an authoritarian to a democratic regime.
• showing a lack of concern for the wishes or opinions of others; domineering; dictatorial: he had an authoritarian and at times belligerent manner.

[sabrina 1]

78. Well if you think Whistle Blowers = War Criminals I suppose it makes to YOU!

I asked you who Snowden had murdered, and explained the SC ruling regarding any laws a Whistle Blower may break, when the People's Right to Know' is at stake.

Considering that Ellsberg among other experts on this topic agree that Snowden falls under the category of the SC Ruling, you are simply as wrong as you could be on this.

[cstanleytech]

94. Arggg is it really to hard for you to admit that Snowden broke the law? Is it?

[TheKentuckian]

106. He who loves law but hates justice is a fool

[cstanleytech]

109. No man is above the law and no man is below it

nor do we ask any man's permission when we ask him to obey it. Obedience to the law is demanded as a right; not asked as a favor.

[LittleBlue]

77. When I see posts like that

it makes me more and more indifferent to politics.

Equating Cheney to Snowden... yeah DU has reached a disgraceful milestone. It's becoming painfully apparent that much of the outrage at Bush's crimes had less to do with principles and more to do with the letter underneath his name.

No principled person would compare Cheney's direct hand in hundreds of thousands of deaths with Snowden's leak. No principled person would put them in the same sentence.

[sabrina 1]

80. I know. For years, DU was a safe haven from the garbage posted on

Right Wing forums. I used to go to some of the mixed forums to show that they did not represent all of America and spent years refuting their insanity.

I never thought I would find myself doing the same thing on DU. But you are correct, DU has reached such a milestone and that is the reason why so many Liberals have moved on to other venues.

I still think though, that wherever it surfaces it needs to be exposed and corrected.

Otherwise it becomes the norm, without challenge. Which used to be DU's role as a whole.

[treestar]

85. You expect everyone on DU to support Eddie's actions?

Really?

What other litmus tests must be met?

[GummyBearz]

88. DU

has "supporting democrats" as a litmus test for members. I'd also suggest not being a racist, a homophobe, or a sexist to be met as good general DU litmus tests. And yes, supporting people who bring light to government authoritarianism in our own country is not such a bad litmus test either.

I'll add some more after lunch, let others add more to the list in the mean time.

[treestar]

97. So if we don't believe Comrade Eddie did any such thing

but simply dumped a lot of documents out there and let other countries have access to them, we deserve to be kicked off DU?

[GummyBearz]

99. Not kicked off

Just openly mocked

[treestar]

100. Well I think it should be openly mocked

when people say things like that, but I don't want posts hidden.

[sabrina 1]

92. I do not expect to see a Whistle Blower compared to a War Criminal on a Democratic site.

I saw plenty of that on FR back when Bush was going after Whistle Blowers and DU was supporting them.

Funny you should ask that question though. It wasn't even a question when Binney and Blake eg, among others, were being persecuted for Whistle Blowing. Or Tice, we were united in their defense.

So no, on today's DU, I do not expect what was the norm during the Bush era.

[treestar]

98. Those are your conclusions

That Comrade Eddie is a "whistleblower" is your conclusion. You expect all liberals to agree with that conclusion about that person.

You expect agreement on your analysis of those cases, or the person is not a liberal and shouldn't be on DU. That's a bit odd.

Had Eddie violated the law during the Bush administration, it would have been the same. It is absurd to expect total transparency. That would be total transparency for enemies, too. Or mildly annoying countries like Russia.

[pa28]

37. People like Ed Snowden expose the crimes authorized by People like Dick Cheney.

Yet Dick Cheney roams free and Ed Snowden is forced to seek political asylum.

Sorry, but your comparison just seems too fallacy laden.

[cstanleytech]

39. Considering you support Snowden I will give your opinion the same consideration

I would give to those who think Cheney shouldnt be prosecuted.

[MrMickeysMom]

44. And considering that is your rationale for no consideration...

the polite thing to say at this point is, "your ideology is showing".

[cstanleytech]

46. You are right my ideology of people who break the law should be prosecuted is showing just

like your ideology of its ok to break a law if its something I support is.

[MrMickeysMom]

68. I think you should take back what you said…

Ideology, for those of us who have it, is a system that the ends justify the means, not the belief that breaking the law is okay. As for either of these traits, you have no idea whatsoever of what I believe in. You could ask me, but that would be thoughtful.

[Broward]

74. And those that violate the Constitution?

How should they be dealt with?

[Cryptoad]

23. Has Snowden moved into

his new Beach House?

[Dopers_Greed]

27. Ah, a little late, but DU's fascism-supporters are finally here

I was surprised they didn't get the first comment.

[Maedhros]

35. Like Anti-Vaxxers, the Anti-Civil-Rights people

are really, really hard to take. I think I've got most of them on my ignore list.

It makes DU a much more enjoyable place to visit, without having to endure the authoritarian posturing.

[Warren Stupidity]

69. It would be so much easier if they were all the same people.

Instead we have these overlapped sets of idiocracy.

[treestar]

86. you find it hard to take unless people are in lockstep

how ironic.

Seriously, we have to support every person who violates the laws Eddie violated, and demand they be let go without even a trial?

I mean, you're not even demanding the repeal of those laws. Just that they never be enforced. And that we have zero national security, everything exposed.

[msanthrope]

53. We were having fun in the 50 Shades and SI Swimsuit threads. Comrade Eddie

can wait.....he ain't going anywhere.

[riderinthestorm]

66. Lol. Spinning away... K+R

Avoiding real substantive legal debate .... As usual

[treestar]

84. Failing to go along with Eddie is fascism

and authoritarianism. Yeah, we know that.

[msanthrope]

93. And Stasi. You know...now that Snowden has been vindicated,

why doesn't he come home and face his trial? Surely, he'd win.

[treestar]

96. And this is only the "latest" vindication

He could surely get to the UK now, since they realize he was right. He can visit Julian.

[2banon]

29. K&R !

[randome]

30. Are they still conflating PRISM with mass surveillance?

Astonishing they can't read and appreciate technical details.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]

[MrMickeysMom]

45. UK security agency GCHQ gaining information from world's biggest internet firms through US-run Prism

I fail to see how this differs from mass surveillance, but that's because I read for meaning.

The UK's electronic eavesdropping and security agency, GCHQ, has been secretly gathering intelligence from the world's biggest internet companies through a covertly run operation set up by America's top spy agency, documents obtained by the Guardian reveal.

The documents show that GCHQ, based in Cheltenham, has had access to the system since at least June 2010, and generated 197 intelligence reports from it last year.

The US-run programme, called Prism, would appear to allow GCHQ to circumvent the formal legal process required to seek personal material such as emails, photos and videos from an internet company based outside the UK.

The use of Prism raises ethical and legal issues about such direct access to potentially millions of internet users, as well as questions about which British ministers knew of the programme.

Ref: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/jun/07/uk-gathering-secret-intelligence-nsa-prism

[99th_Monkey]

49. +1000 nt

[randome]

76. Because PRISM represents a secure FTP server, not a mass collection station.

How else would you expect information (obtained through warrants, so far as we know and with Google, Microsoft, etc. all saying that is so) be transferred elsewhere: by mail?
[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]

[MrMickeysMom]

83. So, by your logic, it's okay if we are monitored, as long as it's a secure FTP server...

… and admittedly unknown to you, you trust that due process is in place for our private information.

So… Nothing to worry about


Go back to sleep America… You are free of the right to privacy, because you are secure, as far as you know.

[randome]

89. It is a secure FTP server where data is placed that is obtained via warrant.

Then the data is transmitted to whatever law enforcement agency it is intended for. That's what Google, Microsoft, Facebook, everybody says happens.

Arguing against mass surveillance is understandable but PRISM is not that.
[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]

[MrMickeysMom]

90. Do you hear yourself right now?

"Arguing against mass surveillance is understandable but PRISM is not that…" even though there is evidence to the contrary. I guess we'll all have to wait until more countries weigh in on this minor detail.

[Rex]

105. Well in all fairness

That poster never saw an agency like the NSA that they did not love and NEVER have a single complaint about.

It is the main reason I can't take that one seriously.

[MrMickeysMom]

107. Yeah…

What the hell was I thinking about, anyway?

[hootinholler]

102. No no! It's more like this...

Well, according to some...

[uhnope]

32. No hero worship or bias in "Common Dreams" articles, nosiree...

lol what a joke

[Andy823]

38. Yep,

Just like there is no bias or hero worship from any of the Greenwad Snowden fans here on DU.

[99th_Monkey]

51. Standing with someone who has put their entire life on the line so that We the People

actually KNOW wtf is really going on with the rise of the Surveilance &
Police State in the USA, is nothing to be ashamed about.

On the contrary, every time someone tries besmirch by name-calling (hero-worship)
or distract by "killing the messenger (Common Dreams); it only shows
Snowden's detractors true colors (who they really are 'serving').

[uhnope]

62. inflating someone like that when in fact he didn't take a stand...he hid in totalitarian regimes

like China and Russia whose surveillance practices don't even compare to the US, they are so much worse. And he did it after exaggerating and lying about the issue in the first place. That's what I'm talking about.

I mean, it's obvious you want the USA to be a police state, so you can be righteous about it. Unless you can tell me I'm wrong--do you care about actual police states around the world, or are you just invested in complaining about the USA?

[99th_Monkey]

65. I prefer to let each nations own people decide for themselves

hopefully in a democratic manner, what kind of state they have; which tends me
towards the "non-interventionist" side of the spectrum.

I DO happen to be a citizen of THIS nation, so have no qualms about participating
in shaping it's future, however I can do that, towards a more peaceful and democratic
future for all citizens.

Snowden's contribution to doing just that was/is epic IMHO. no apologies here.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

36. But..but..the NSA is protecting us...from..from..knowing what our transparent government does!!

[Ramses]

58. Rec this thread

Exposing war criminals and their enablers is always a good thing.

[grasswire]

64. yes yes

Let the light shine. Follow the truth wherever it leads.

[840high]

67. yes

[ucrdem]

63. Unless Verizon crossed the pond at some point

I'm not seeing a Snowball connection here.

[JEB]

70. All this illegal spying needs to cease.

K&R. Thanks for posting.

[Buzz Clik]

71. There is no "vindication" for his actions.

Snowden knowingly broke a lot of laws and ran from the country to escape the impending and inevitable punishment.

A lot of good things resulted from his criminal actions, but there will be no vindication.

[whereisjustice]

73. Since Obama won't hold CIA and NSA accountable, someone else must. Democrats lack courage of

their convictions. The US policy of citizen surveillance is a danger to progress, peace and stability. Given the apologists and security concern trolls defending the CIA and NSA programs of torture and surveillance, you'd think we are all Republicans now.

[ND-Dem]

75. it sounds like a victory in name only, not one that is going to change practices much.

many experts said the British and American intelligence agencies would continue to share information obtained with electronic surveillance, even if they had to slightly alter their techniques to comply with human rights law.

[daredtowork]

79. Edward Snowden is my hero

I can't say it enough.

I know there is a group at DU who regard him as a criminal. But I think he's a hero just because he was able to survive the "machine" that goes into effect to destroy whistleblowers. I was disappointed that Obama didn't recognized or himself point out that machine - the media smears, the government lies and cover-ups. I believe Snowden would be in the US today if there were ways for whistleblowers and leakers to make things known without having to martyr themselves to their cause.

Every whistleblower that gets punished for what they did in the United States is a testimonial that Snowden made the right choices.

And again, I wish Obama would acknowledge that and that he would take another look at protections for whistleblowers because of that.

What Snowden actually achieved, in terms of the ramifications of his leaks, is secondary to all that for me.

Terrific news about the inroads against mass surveillance, though!

[Savannahmann]

81. The group on DU who consider him a Hero are only angry because the President is a Democrat

There would have been a Parade and the most outspoken Snowden opponent here would have driven the float in the parade honoring him if the President had been a Republican. But thou shall not make a Democrat look bad is the only Commandment they understand.

If Snowden had come forward while Bush was in office, you and I wouldn't be worthy of throwing confetti during the parade.

[daredtowork]

82. That's probably the gist of it

I voted for Obama, and I'm still a Democrat. But I don't hesitate to criticize him. He's done next to nothing to help people at the lowest end of the poverty scale - there have been as many take-aways for people living by "means-tested" benefits as you might have seen under a Republican.

[whereisjustice]

104. Bingo. Just shows you how shallow and immature they are, incapable of working for common good. They

put themselves above the best interests of the US.

[99th_Monkey]

87. +100 nt

[woo me with science]

101. To the Greatest Page.

The corporate totalitarian state.

Thank you, Edward Snowden, for revealing these grave crimes of governments against all of us.

[MrMickeysMom]

108. K&R…

I'm sick to death of trying to make sense on behalf of those who don't see this anymore…