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

Snowden asylum still under review, stays in airport for now

rt.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 231 posts

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

#161

Post by popee »

pvnick wrote: 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…

You are not material for politician -> good thing :-) But don't be naive, they say lot of gibberish. Only thing that matters is interest.

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

#162

Post by ambientwhsiper »

1gor wrote: post #145
alexakarpov wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't agree more (Russian here). In Russia it's all about putting up a show of anti-americanism, because that's what the voters like (the one thing that brings back memories of relative security of late Soviet days). Think Osama bin Laden granting asylum to Snowden in some remote Taliban camp.

Think Osama bin Laden granting asylum to Snowden in some remote Taliban camp. Strange, I am Russian and have been living in Russia for 5 years now (and before that for 20 years in the UK and Holland). And I cannot agree with your Taliban analogy even remotely. Actually, life in Russia today in some ways feels more free than in Europe. For example you don't need to be politically correct (self-censoring) when expressi…

Right. In Russia you can pretty much insult anyone as much as you like. Just hope they don't have a traumatic handgun on them.

Give me a break. Nobody moves back to Russia, because they are free to smoke at the pubs there.

I was also born in Russia and 3 years ago, I spent a year there. It is just as shit country as it has always been. Nothing changed. It's got some new paint on the facade.

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

#163

Post by teleological »

hannibal5 wrote: post #125

I just want to point out that if Snowden would have been spying for Russia or China, he would not have any these problems. Countries don't return people who spy for them. His knowledge is very likely still valuable and he could turn into traitor any day and Russia would take good care of him. He would get money, pension, citizenship and nice Datcha to live in. He is this predicament because he has not given up his pr…

The notion that defectors are lavishly rewarded -- a notion that Snowden encouraged in his comment about palaces and petting a phoenix -- is at odds with the historical record. Consider Kim Philby. After the act of defection has been milked for propaganda, the defector is dispatched to guarded obscurity.

It's hard to know what's really happening between Snowden and his hosts. The notion that Russia's hands are legally tied and that Snowden is just hanging out at the airport as a logistically challenged but ultimately free agent is absurd, but it's understandable why Russia is staging that diplomatic farce.

As for Snowden's role, if he has valuable knowledge and he has not "given up his principles" -- so much the worse for him. He'll get a chance to reconsider the boast that he "cannot be coerced into revealing that information, even under torture." It could have already happened, with the bit about resisting torture ghost-written by amused interrogators.

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

#164

Post by wavesounds »

pvnick wrote: 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…

I think that 'no more information' is just a temporary thing until he gets out of Russia into a country where he has asylum.

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

#165

Post by twoodfin »

falk wrote: post #132
twoodfin wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 part…

Do you honestly believe they haven't killed any vocal opponents including journalists?

I certainly won't believe it until you give me a name of a journalist who was killed because the U.S. government didn't like his or her reporting. A giant wall of links to such 'evidence' as the Wikipedia page on the Iraq war doesn't impress me, nor does your later link, from which you decided to pull a quote about "targeted killings" without bothering to figure out that the people doing the "targeting" weren't Americans.

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

#166

Post by twoodfin »

_ak wrote: post #113
twoodfin wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 U.S., as far as anyone has demonstrated, does not set out to kill journalists because what they write is inconvenient. I remember that prior to the invasion of Iraq, the US said that any journalist that is not embedded with US troops is fair game. That does sound like they didn't mind killing journalists they don't control. This attitude also clearly shows in the bombing of the Al Jazeera offices in Baghdad, Bu…

I remember that prior to the invasion of Iraq, the US said that any journalist that is not embedded with US troops is fair game. That does sound like they didn't mind killing journalists they don't control.

The quote you're likely thinking of was from then-Pentagon spokeswoman Victoria Clarke literally as Baghdad was falling:

Pentagon spokeswoman Clarke said of Baghdad on Tuesday, "It is not a safe place. You should not be there." [1]

Whether journalists thought it would be a good idea to hang out in Baghdad while it was under coalition assault, the Bush administration clearly thought that would be an unsafe thing to do. That doesn't mean they "didn't mind killing journalists they don't control" or that they claimed anything about journalists being "fair game".

[1] http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Baghdad-closer-to-collaps...

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

#167

Post by twoodfin »

rada wrote: post #115
twoodfin wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

New York Times media correspondent David Carr: “If you add up the pulling of news organization phone records (The Associated Press), the tracking of individual reporters (Fox News), and the effort by the current administration to go after sources (seven instances and counting in which a government official has been criminally charged with leaking classified information to the news media), suggesting that there is a w…

Now you've moved the goal posts from claims the U.S. "straight kills journalists" to some chilling effects from a variety of leak prosecutions. One can think the latter are a bad thing without drawing a parallel to regimes that murder journalists they don't like!

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

#168

Post by znowi »

hobbes wrote: post #104
pvnick wrote: 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…

It's quite possible Snowden has already passed on all his information to other parties. There's no need for Snowden to be the messenger any more.

Which is the right thing to do. Perhaps then people start paying more attention to the leaks instead of the messenger.

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

#169

Post by ambientwhsiper »

rfctr wrote: post #93
ihsw wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly, imagine how the situation would've played out if Snowden were gay (or a woman).

Let me think... it would be... the same?

Let me think... you're a fucking idiot. There.

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

#170

Post by andreypopp »

Mc_Big_G wrote: post #150
mjolk wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you provide proof to otherwise? I'd imagine you've done proper research on the topic of Putin's honesty due to the flippant response.

He's a politician.

Basically, he's a politician ;-)
Post reply on HN