Secret US flight flew over Scottish airspace to capture Snowden • Hacker News Board

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

#51

Post by ptaipale » Wed, Feb 03, 2016, 4:22 PM UTC

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…

> And this particular headline is pretty silly. Scotland is part of the United Kingdom

I guess this headline is because The National (Scotland) is a Scottish national newspaper that might ride any horse if they see it as helping Scottish independence from the UK.

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

#52

Post by tjohns » Wed, Feb 03, 2016, 4:22 PM UTC

halviti wrote: post #41

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…

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.

Pilots are usually not required to file a flight plan for VFR (visual) flight. It's an extremely common occurrence.

(Yes, things get a little more complicated when crossing boarders... but I just wanted to point out that it's not such a crazy thing to do.)

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

#53

Post by tptacek » Wed, Feb 03, 2016, 4:22 PM UTC

ptaipale wrote: post #51

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…

> And this particular headline is pretty silly. Scotland is part of the United Kingdom I guess this headline is because The National (Scotland) is a Scottish national newspaper that might ride any horse if they see it as helping Scottish independence from the UK.

Well, now I like the article more. :)

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

#54

Post by vidarh » Wed, Feb 03, 2016, 4:22 PM UTC

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?

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.

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

#55

Post by vidarh » Wed, Feb 03, 2016, 4:25 PM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #46

wavefunction wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see why you quibble over the use of 'rendition,' then turn around and minimize the generally understood. If he was just being extradited via official and lawful process, shouldn't that be the term, rather than apparently grabbed via secret flights and skullduggery? You also can't say what the intentions of the US government were regarding bringing Snowden back to US soil, and even if that were the case it doe…

So if I understand this comment correctly, you're suggesting that the DOJ was going to fly Snowden to CPD Homan Square?

He is suggesting that there's less and less reason to presume that US law enforcement intend to act lawfully.

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

#56

Post by Zigurd » Wed, Feb 03, 2016, 4:26 PM UTC

raverbashing wrote: post #48

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.

The quote is "claim the flight, travelling well above the standard aviation height at 45,000 feet and without a filed flight plan" If it flew below FL660 it should be inside controlled airspace, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airspace_class#United_Kingdom However the flight plan might have been filled through defense channels rather than civilian ones https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_plan

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.

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

#57

Post by GordonS » Wed, Feb 03, 2016, 4:26 PM UTC

wavefunction wrote: post #28

doe88 wrote: post #5

Not going to be scrambling jets to get a 29-year-old hacker. -- Obama 6/27/13 http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/06/27/19166043-obama... He's true though, it wasn't jets.

Well, it's likely it was a jet airplane as the altitude of the flight was 45,000. I suppose in this usage it was implied to be fighter-jets.

Ah, yes, but 'jet' in the singular - Obama had said 'jets' in the plural!

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

#58

Post by tptacek » Wed, Feb 03, 2016, 4:27 PM UTC

vidarh wrote: post #54

tptacek wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

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.

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

#59

Post by mc32 » Wed, Feb 03, 2016, 4:27 PM UTC

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…

Choosing Scotland over the more usual U.K. or British, is peculiar. It's like saying a Russian aircraft violated Alaskan airspace rather than US airspace. This choice is possibly indicative of other subsurface politics.

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

#60

Post by scrollaway » Wed, Feb 03, 2016, 4:27 PM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #40

TeMPOraL wrote: post #8

One thing I don't understand - why would the US care? Why expend resources on trying to capture Snowden? He's basically harmless at this point - he's passed all the information he had to few journalists (which would be a better target now) and there's no way anyone will ever let him near anything more secret than grandma's cookies recipe. Besides petty vengeance, what's the point?

First, we don't know that Snowden is harmless, even now. Most of what we know about Snowden comes from media stories, all of which are operating on incomplete information. More importantly, back in 2013, we --- including the USG --- knew far less than we know now. (The question of whether Snowden is "harmless" is separable from the question of whether his actions are defensible or justified .)

Snowden has been far more independently active since his asylum. He even maintains a twitter account. It's not like his entire life is filtered through the media.