Live data from Hacker News

Snowden asylum still under review, stays in airport for now

rt.com

131–140 of 231 posts

Re: Snowden asylum still under review, stays in airport for now

#131
post #103
post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being president of a large country pretty much guarantees you've had to lie and cheat at least a little bit to get there. For one random example (not being a huge student of 21st century Russia), he promised Bush that he wasn't arming Saddam's troops. Turned out they were outfitted with a lot of Russian anti-tank and night vision gear when we got there.

Proof, please? Soviet-designed doesn't mean Russian. Soviet designs are in manufacturing all over the world, including countries much closer to Iraq.

http://www.boston.com/news/world/articles/2004/01/10/evidenc...

It's a he said, she said, of course.

Re: Snowden asylum still under review, stays in airport for now

#132
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I mean, Putin straight kills journalists." So does the United States of America. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0 The United States government wants to make an example out of Snowden. There's no way he would serve just two years in prison.

Would it stretch your moral intellect too far to identify a key distinction there? Namely, intent matters: The U.S., as far as anyone has demonstrated, does not set out to kill journalists because what they write is inconvenient.

The United States government traffics drugs such as heroin [1], has started wars under false pretenses to profit multi-national corporations [2] [3], backs death squads in Indonesia [4], tried to convince Martin Luther King Jr. to commit suicide [5], has conducted covert operations to dismantle and replace government structures across the world [6], has conducted experiments involving drugs like LSD on unwilling participants [7], is known to kidnap and torture people [8] [9], intercepts phone calls in the United States and collects every piece of information they can disregarding the constitution [10] [11] [12], performs drone strikes that kill innocent civilians [13], and kills American citizens without due process [14] [15]. Do you honestly believe they haven't killed any vocal opponents including journalists? If so, that is massively dangerous thinking.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Politics_of_Heroin_in_South...

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War

[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_war

[4] http://www.democracynow.org/2013/7/19/the_act_of_killing_new...

[5] http://news.firedoglake.com/2013/01/21/the-fbi-wrote-a-lette...

[6] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covert_United_States_foreign_re...

[7] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_MKUltra

[8] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torture_and_the_United_States

[9] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_el-Masri

[10] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A

[11] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECHELON

[12] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM

[13] http://dirtywars.org

[14] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki

[15] http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/23/us/us-acknowledges-killing...

Edit: Saw another comment and did some more digging. Found a great article which I'll quote some of. You can find a link to it below.

"On April 8, 2003, during the US-led invasion of Iraq, Al Jazeera correspondent Tareq Ayoub was killed when a US warplane bombed Al Jazeera's headquarters in Baghdad."

"Disturbingly, more journalists were murdered in targeted killings in Iraq than died in combat-related circumstances, according to the group Committee to Protect Journalists."

""Between 2003 and 2010 more than 30 Iraqi journalists were detained and held in prisons in Iraq by the Americans," she explained. "All of these journalists were arbitrarily arrested by the Americans, just as they continue to be arrested by the Iraqi government today.""

http://www.aljazeera.com/humanrights/2013/04/201348120278145...

Re: Snowden asylum still under review, stays in airport for now

#134
post #59

It seems he accepted Putin's terms to not release anymore information. I wonder if that means no more information coming out, period, or that since most/all of the information is now with third parties that it's their responsibility. I doubt Putin likes being disrespected with loopholes and technicalities, but I more-so doubt that Snowden would halt the revelations altogether for the sake of his own safety. I suspect…

My guess is Putin requested this to placate the US rather than out of concern. Yesterday the US and Russia both announced they'd be arming opposing sides in Syria, so placating the US might not be as big a priority now.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/us-russia-simultaneously-annou...

Re: Snowden asylum still under review, stays in airport for now

#135
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think He'll be getting any FSB (new KGB) protection. They most likely control him now.

I think I'd rather do 2 years at Club Fed in the US than be under FSB control in Russia. I mean, Putin straight kills journalists.

2 years for alleged treason and endangering the lives of Americans? Some how I think not.

Re: Snowden asylum still under review, stays in airport for now

#136
post #30

I wonder if his next target is Wladiwostok. It seems less complicated to get to Latin America from there, if he still wants to.

It's much more complicated to get to LatAm from Vladivostok than an Aeroflot flight from Moscow. I think there's simply no direct flights - it's not an airline hub.

Re: Snowden asylum still under review, stays in airport for now

#137
post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Putin is a man of his word :-)

I'm always amazed how the public opinion of putin ranges from "evil dictator" to "clever politician".

Isn't it the same for every politician?

Re: Snowden asylum still under review, stays in airport for now

#138
post #13

Well I think this is more to do with Russia thumbing it's nose at the US rather than protecting an individual from tyranny. But fair play to Snowden, it's good news for him. But If I were Snowden, I'd be quietly sneaking out of Russia very soon lest the political winds change and he suddenly finds he's a very valuable pawn in a very dangerous game that he can't win.

Probably. But can any one name one trust-able perfect country that would give a Snowden type asylum purely on principle, rather than for political reasons? I'll be honest, Im struggling to think of one.

>can any one name one [...] perfect country

No.

Re: Snowden asylum still under review, stays in airport for now

#139
post #121
post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

because https://twitter.com/ChapmanAnna/status/352480982101798913 :)

Is it me, or does anyone else think that the really surreal thing here is not that Anna Chapman "proposed" to Snowden on twitter but that Chapman is even on twitter in the first place?

Why not, she is now a celebrity in Russia that is hosting a TV show and works as a model. As such it would seem natural to me that she is using social media.

What is surreal to me is that a spy turned into a celebrity in the first place.

Re: Snowden asylum still under review, stays in airport for now

#140

So a few questions here: 1. Will he get KGB (or whatever the current equivalent is in Russia) protection? 2. Is this allowing him to leave just being done to make it easier for the US spooks to snatch him up? 3. Where does he go next? And how does he get there?

I don't think He'll be getting any FSB (new KGB) protection. They most likely control him now.

Why?

He is no threat to Russia or Putin what so ever. All the information he has is out or in the hands of others. On top of that, Putin is hardly likely to do anything to him apart from send him to the US as some sort of present, since the worlds media will be watching.

Seem to me a lot of this FSB ownership stuff is prejudiced (pre-judged) scare mongering, and simply designed to undermine Snowden and his actions.

I see no reason for the FSB to "control" Snowden at all. Monitor, of course, but who wouldn't? Even if the UK gave him asylum, we'd monitor his whereabouts.

Post reply on HN