Hacker News Reader

Comment by mtgx | Hacker News Reader

Another interesting turn of events. It seems Russia is considering asylum for Snowden:

The head of the foreign affairs committee in Russia's State Duma, or lower house of parliament, predicted "hysteria in the United States," if Russia were to agree to shelter Mr. Snowden, whom he likened to controversial WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.

“Having promised Snowden refuge, Moscow is taking up the defense of those persecuted for political reasons. There will be hysteria in the United States,” Alexei Pushkov wrote on Twitter. “In listening to phone calls and tacking Internet activity, U.S. intelligence agencies have violated the laws of their own country. In this sense, Snowden—like Assange—is a human-rights activist.”

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142412788732463430457853...

Note: You can search the URL in Google to get the full story)

View on HN

Week ago, criminal case against vkontakte.ru's founder Pavel Durov was closed stating that he didn't intent to hit road police officer by a car after traffic jam halted his fleeing.

He did or he didn't, the rumor now is that FSB doesn't need classified intelligence committee hearings to access vkontakte.ru data now.

I can believe that, even more after they started requesting mobile phone numbers to login into vk.com. Since I refuse to give my number I cannot access or remove my profile.

What about Google Voice or a localized alternative for a virtual phone number? Worst case - burner phone.

Another thing to keep in mind: even if you "delete" your profile, given the situation there's zero guarantee that all copies of the data will be destroyed.

And why do you think that FSB ever had an impediment to getting that data?

Of course they do. The thing is that Snowden's status makes him a huge asset for every foreign power out there. Who knows where he will go. The US government would be smart to give him immunity to prosecution for this act (and merely take away his security clearance) just to keep that from happening.

He would be insane to accept something like that. What would stop them from just saying "oh, we had our fingers crossed" once he was back in the US?

Not really. Make sure it is an official assurance by the US government. Make sure that the press gets copies. Then return to the US. I don't think they can prosecute after giving official assurance not to in exchange for his return. Maybe even demand that they make the offer in a press conference by the Attorney General. My understanding is that such might actually be thrown out of court.

>I don't think they can prosecute after giving official assurance not to in exchange for his return.

Why not? If they then arrested him, what would we do about it? Nothing. And, of course, they could always just use some nonsense charge if they want to pretend they were following their own made up rules.

We grow up wanting to believe that rules, constitutions and so on are firm, solid entities we can depend on, but it's all just an illusion. It's no more real than those in power allow it to be.

I'm sure they could find something to arrest him for afterward if they liked, or find an ally to request extradition. Presumably nobody's going to give him immunity against future crimes, and I doubt extradition treaties even allow that.

But doesn't this go the other way too? I mean if he makes it worth the while of a foreign state to stay, they have tremendous power over him and can basically hold that over his head forever.

I think the fact that the US is now a country that people seek political asylum _from_ is going to globally change people's perspective on the country.

Its not, because Snowden isn't the first person to seek asylum from the US.

If he's given a presidential pardon, and that is then rescinded, presidential pardons don't exist any more [1]. The only question is then, is he really worth it?

[1] In case that's not clear, consider: who would trust them?

And who cares if pardons don't "exist" anymore? Presidents can still give them and jails will still let people out who get them. They can apply the rules how ever they like. Selective application of rules has been the norm for some time now.

Notoriety still provides some protection and the illusion of things being consistent is still important. More likely if they want to go that far, they will look for something else unrelated to charge him with, like wire fraud or something.

That could be deterred by a threat to leak more, but then that becomes a dangerous game for both sides.

Or be "dissapeared"

Russia! Land of the free, home of the brave..?

Well, politics. And public approval. Nothing new really.

Oh, the irony.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com