Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Secret US flight flew over Scottish airspace to capture Snowden

thenational.scot

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 244 posts

Re: Secret US flight flew over Scottish airspace to capture Snowden

#131

Post by tomjen3 »

tptacek wrote: post #45
halviti wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me I could really care less what the plane was used for in the past. A plane flying from anywhere that doesn't file a flight plan is just plain wrong, especially when it crosses foreign airspace.

Why do you assume that the UK (and all the other European countries this plane flew over) weren't involved in coordinating this flight?

There was some talk about a similar plane (the same one?) having received a landing permit in Copenhagen. Much of the content of the emails that would confirm this were redacted, but the parties involved (ie metadata, ironically enough) weren't and they were several rungs above the ladder over those who would normally have to approve landing permits.

Re: Secret US flight flew over Scottish airspace to capture Snowden

#132

Post by PavlovsCat »

grandalf wrote: post #120

If it weren't for the mistreatment of Bradley Manning, I'd consider US Government attempts to capture Snowden somewhat reasonable. If (in hindsight) there had been any high level response acknowledging the inappropriateness of any of the revealed programs, and attempting to fix or impose accountability measures on covert programs, I'd feel reassured that the bad behavior evidenced by the leaked information was an ano…

> A principled president

This is a bit off-topic, but I saw something today I couldn't help but think of when I saw that phrase. Even though Hillary Clinton is not every president and may be have been too defeatist (or too obedient) when she said this, my "point" is basically, if even going up against hundreds of millions of dollars seems "out of the question", well, what about the really nasty and actually powerful orgs?

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/bernie-sanders-hillary...

> They got their meeting at the White House that month, and the two doctors laid out the case for single-payer to the first lady. “She said, ‘You make a convincing case, but is there any force on the face of the earth that could counter the hundreds of millions of the dollars the insurance industry would spend fighting that?’” recalled Himmelstein. “And I said, “How about the president of the United States actually leading the American people?’ and she said, ‘Tell me something real.’ ”

A principled population, now that would be something :)

Re: Secret US flight flew over Scottish airspace to capture Snowden

#133

Post by tomjen3 »

tptacek wrote: post #58
vidarh wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That may very well be true. But in the absence of a publicly known flight plan, involving a plane that in the past has been used in a program that involved all kinds of human rights abuses, it seems worth assuming it is worth asking questions about.

Can you help me understand what it is about a specific piece of equipment having in the past been used for human rights abuse that makes it unsuitable for any future use? It would be one thing if the CIA had operated the flight, but this plane is known to have been transferred to the DOJ long before the flight to extradite Snowden.

They may have officially transferred the plane, but do you really think that means the CIA would have to stop operating it? I mean it is totally possible that they did, but I could see an equally possible scenario where they just "transfered" it for political cover.

Re: Secret US flight flew over Scottish airspace to capture Snowden

#134

Post by ceejayoz »

strictnein wrote: post #87
ceejayoz wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't have to be an infosec master. According to Snowden, he didn't take the files with him to Russia in the first place. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/18/world/snowden-says-he-took...

Because Russia wouldn't dare go after the materials if they weren't physically in Russia, right? The SVR operates outside of Russia, which is why I mentioned them. You really believe they weren't on him right away in Hong Kong, and they haven't gone after whatever materials he passed on to journalists? Come on.

Let's take that a step further, though.

The scaremongering over Snowden somehow giving Russia/China these documents is absurd for precisely the reason you cite - their intelligence agencies operate all over the world.

Does anyone genuinely believe that with security so lax at NSA etc. to allow a Snowden-style leak that Russia/China haven't had spies with similar access levels in place for years now?

Re: Secret US flight flew over Scottish airspace to capture Snowden

#135

Post by Natsu »

tptacek wrote: post #22

The craft was used in controversial US ‘rendition’ missions This is apparently true, but misleading. The specific plane we're discussing was used by the CIA, but by this point had been transferred to DOJ for some time. It's also misleading to use the word "rendition" as a shorthand for "extraordinary rendition" (which is itself newspeak for "kidnapping"). "Rendition" itself is simply the process of effectuating extra…

> Either way, the implication that Snowden was targeted for extrajudicial kidnapping isn't supported by any evidence presented so far.

We have the downing of President Evo Morales' plane as evidence in support of that. You can read a more full explanation of that here:

http://www.democracynow.org/2015/9/15/julian_assange_us_spyi...

Re: Secret US flight flew over Scottish airspace to capture Snowden

#136

Post by ksk »

finid wrote: post #109
mcculley wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most Americans don't understand what he did, in my experience. That is, I'm an American and I work with technology and from conversations with fellow Americans who don't work with technology, they have formed an impression based on media sound bites.

Isn't that how those who get their news from MSM get mislead, disinformed and brainwashed? The MSM just trot out "experts" who have been instructed to repeat key phrases designed to obscure the truth. Gullible viewers and listeners just soak it all in. That's how, even today, a significant percentage of Americans still believe that Saddam had something to do with 9/11.

Its rather unfair to call them gullible. I'd say most people are "brainwashed" when it comes to things outside their immediate area of work/knowledge/expertise. Certainly geopolitical issues evoke a strong emotional response because of their direct link to human suffering, but even looking at nutrition or fitness or accounting or car maintenance or what have you, its all a mess ! Yes, even tech people aren't as objective as we like to think we are. Some topics bring out the similar religious fervor - UNIX vs Windows, iOS vs Android, Open Source vs Proprietary, etc. We have our own conspiracy nuts too - Blaming MS for everything, reading evil intentions into normal business decisions, etc.

Re: Secret US flight flew over Scottish airspace to capture Snowden

#137

Post by grandalf »

PavlovsCat wrote: post #132
grandalf wrote: post #120

If it weren't for the mistreatment of Bradley Manning, I'd consider US Government attempts to capture Snowden somewhat reasonable. If (in hindsight) there had been any high level response acknowledging the inappropriateness of any of the revealed programs, and attempting to fix or impose accountability measures on covert programs, I'd feel reassured that the bad behavior evidenced by the leaked information was an ano…

> A principled president This is a bit off-topic, but I saw something today I couldn't help but think of when I saw that phrase. Even though Hillary Clinton is not every president and may be have been too defeatist (or too obedient) when she said this, my "point" is basically, if even going up against hundreds of millions of dollars seems "out of the question", well, what about the really nasty and actually powerful…

This is a valid point.

I think the most reasonable way to understand public apathy is through the lens of Chomsky's "manufacturing consent". We all consent to whatever government policies we don't oppose, and powerful interests tend to have a large role in shaping the media message about what matters and what is worth being complacent about vs outraged.

We should all regard all institutions with some degree of skepticism, but unfortunately a lot of information slips through the cracks due to our limits on attention and information processing. The net effect is that most Americans accept at face value whatever explanation our leaders offer.

It's just not necessarily going to benefit the average person to dig deeper looking for truth, and it's far more pleasant to just get on board with the powerful interest group and feel the psychological benefits of group cohesion and being on the "winning" side.

Re: Secret US flight flew over Scottish airspace to capture Snowden

#138

Post by TomorrowRich »

tptacek wrote: post #61
Zigurd wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would be having it both ways: Tptacek claims this isn't kidnapping because the plane is a DoJ asset, at least nominally. So it would not need DoD secrecy.

I think I'm saying it isn't kidnapping because there is no evidence at all of an attempt to kidnap Snowden.

This is a story about Snowden on HackerNews, your facts and logic are of no interest here.

Re: Secret US flight flew over Scottish airspace to capture Snowden

#139

Post by tptacek »

jccc wrote: post #125
tptacek wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand that (believe me; get RT'd by him sometime and see what happens to your mentions). But add up everything he's said publicly and you still don't have a complete picture of what he had, who he gave it to, and who got what. I'm not suggesting that anything nefarious happened. I do not think Snowden is an FSB operative. I think he grabbed a giant tranche of documents, few of which he actually read, and hande…

It's not crazy to think that the USG might want to relieve Snowden of that role. The argument has been made that a crucial difference between Snowden and other recent whistleblowers is his relative freedom to participate in ongoing conversations and inspire potential future whistleblowers. Is it crazy to think that the USG might want to relieve Snowden of that role?

No, it isn't, but that's not the question this part of the thread is asking. Rather, it's asking "isn't Snowden harmless to the USG?"

Re: Secret US flight flew over Scottish airspace to capture Snowden

#140

Post by tptacek »

jonlucc wrote: post #128
tptacek wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ZILLIONS of randos. That guy has some engaged followers.

Mostly positive though? I wondered if you meant that you were being bashed for being related.

No, it was a warm retweet. I do a lot of crypto work.
Post reply on HN